Agenda item

To consider the Police and Crime Commissioner’s draft refreshed ‘Making Kent Safer’ Police and Crime Plan; proposed precept for 2023/24; and supporting financial information. 

1.    The Panel received a report which detailed the Commissioner’s refreshed ‘Making Kent Safer’ Police and Crime Plan and proposal to increase the policing precept in 2023/24 to £243.15 for an average Band D property, which represented an increase of £15 per year, or 6.57%, on the 2022/23 precept.

2.    The Commissioner introduced his refreshed Police and Crime Plan. He informed the Panel that his seven priorities for Kent Police, to: work with residents, communities and businesses to prevent crime and antisocial behaviour; tackle violence against women and girls; protect people from exploitation and abuse; combat organised crime and county lines; be visible and responsive to the needs of communities; prevent road danger and support Vision Zero; and protect young people and provide opportunities, remained unchanged. He noted that the priorities remained relevant and continued to have broad public support. It was explained that the minor amendments to the Plan took account of new national policing requirements. Concerning the results of his Annual Policing Survey, the Commissioner noted that the number of respondents was consistent with previous years, that 52% of respondents stated they were in favour of paying more council tax to support policing, and committed to closely monitor victim satisfaction, including through the new victim support contract which would commence in April 2023 and include an independent victim satisfaction survey. He compared crime statistics for 2022 with pre-pandemic (2018) performance, highlighting an 8% fall in crime. In relation to the tackling of county lines, he noted that previous precept increases had allowed for the formation of a dedicated team which had greatly reduced the number of active county lines in Kent from a high of 82 in July 2020 to below 40. The success of the mini cadet and senior cadet programme across the county were highlighted. The challenges for the coming year were addressed and included Force Control Room service levels and responding to the findings of the HMICFRS PEEL report.

3.    The Commissioner explained his precept proposal, confirming the proposed increase for 2023/24. He thanked the Panel for its engagement and assured Members that the requested level of information, especially on pressures and how funds would be spent to address performance challenges, were detailed in the report. He stated that an underspend was expected for the 2022/23 financial year and that the general reserve would remain at 3% of the net revenue budget, in line with the Chief Financial Officer’s general contingency strategy. The progress of building and digital transformation projects were addressed, with it noted that many of the former were on track to be finished by the end of the financial year and that the later had been completed. The successful funding bids made and monies received over the previous year, including Safer Streets funding, were highlighted. In relation to police officer recruitment, he assured Members that the force was on track to meet its March 2023 target, with February 2023 planned to be the largest intake on record. Regarding cost pressures he explained that they stood at £34m and taking account of the level of reserves presented a significant challenge with a £14.1m funding gap predicted. He added that no additional funding had been promised by government to support long term staff and officers costs related to the Police Uplift Programme and that there was no flexibility on police numbers for coming year. The Panel were told that the core funding grant from government had increased by £700,000, which would not measurably alleviate the anticipated cost pressures for the coming year. Members’ attention was drawn to the savings plan contained in Appendix C to the report. It was noted that anticipated funding gaps were not unique to Kent, with Sussex Police, among others, forecasting a £17m gap. The Commissioner reassured the Panel that all savings would be handled sensitively. He explained that the impact of savings on the public, service and staff would be his three focuses when reviewing savings proposals. He concluded by drawing Members’ attention to the expenditure on the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, which remained at 0.4% of the policing budget, whilst delivering additional responsibilities.

4.    Members thanked the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for their budget briefings to the Panel in November 2022 and January 2023.

5.    The Panel reiterated its support for the Commissioner’s continued inclusion of ‘tackling violence against women and girls’ as a priority within his Police and Crime Plan.

6.    A Member asked that the late-night levy, which the Home Office were consulting on, be investigated as way of increasing the force’s income.

7.    The Panel recognised that the current funding formula continued to adversely impact Kent and that government’s funding settlement for 2023/24 was disappointing. Following the Panel’s comments, the Commissioner stated that Kent Police was the 6^th lowest funded force per head of population and in the lower quartile of precepts nationally. It was noted that an increase in the policing precept was required to compensate for a lack of national funding. He added that there had been a series of successes in securing Special Grant Funding, including during the EU Exit transition period, and informed Members that he had written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in November 2022 ahead of the comprehensive spending review.

8.    Responding to comments from the Panel, the Commissioner stated that granting PCCs a General Powers of Competence, as part of the Home Office’s Police and Crime Commissioner Review, would provide additional options for revenue generation.

9.    The Commissioner agreed to provide a comprehensive update to the Panel on the neighbourhood policing review, at the appropriate time. He noted that it was not currently appropriate as staff consultation had recently concluded and the final proposal was still in development. 

10.In response to a question from a Member, the Commissioner explained that a significant reduction in the number of Section 136 detentions had saved Kent Police considerable resources. He informed the Panel that Kent alongside Humberside were considered the leading forces nationally, in terms of handling mental health.

11.Following a question from a Member, the Commissioner committed to continue pursuing and vocally campaigning for further and fairer funding for Kent Police. It was noted that a considerable funding discrepancy between Kent and London remained, which did not fully take account of the spill over of crime from the capital.

12.A Member highlighted victim dissatisfaction with Kent Police, which stood at 49.4%, as indicated in the results of the Commissioner’s Annual Policing Survey. The Commissioner noted that insufficient follow up contact, Crown Prosecution Service not charging as well as undesired outcomes were the most consistent causes for dissatisfaction. He emphasised the importance of empowering victims through the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime, in order to ensure full compliance. He provided further reassurance that he would hold the Chief Constable to account for the treatment of victims and pledged to improve victim satisfaction.

13.The Chair reminded the Commissioner of the Panel’s disappointment at the poor performance highlighted by the HMICFRS PEEL report into Kent Police and asked him whether he was confident that the Chief Constable would have sufficient resources to regain strong performance. The Commissioner assured the Panel that he was confident that the Chief Constable would have sufficient resources to deliver the required improvements, subject to the approval of his precept proposal.

14.Following a question from a Member on the value of the predicted underspend and resilience of reserves, the Commissioner confirmed that a £1.5m underspend was anticipated and would be used to offset costs in the forthcoming financial year. Regarding reserves, he confirmed that he had maintained a position of preserving a general reserve equivalent to 3% of annual expenditure, which stood at £20.9m. He noted the importance of a general reserve of that size in the event of unforeseen circumstances, including large scale investigations and crises. Concerning the risk reserve he explained that it functioned to cover insurance costs, whilst the capital reserve related to budgeted projects.

RESOLVED that the proposed refreshed Police and Crime Plan and Precept be approved.