Policing London Business Plan 2012-15

Report: 7a
Date: 24 November 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report contains a summary of the points raised during the discussion of the Business Plan at the joint meeting of the Strategic and Operational Policing and Finance and Resources Committees held on 17 November 2011.

A. Recommendation

That members note the report in conjunction with the report by the Director of Resources and the Treasurer.

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. At the joint meeting of the Strategic and Operational Policing and Finance and Resources Committees held on 17 November 2011 members considered the report on the MPA/MPS Policing London Business Plan 2012-15 before it was submitted to Full Authority for approval and submission to the Mayor. Set out below is a summary of the points raised during the discussion which members may find useful.

Appendix 1 Draft Policing London Business Plan

2. Members had no specific comments on the Business Plan. It was agreed that any concerns could be submitted to the Director of Resources via Jane Owen, Head of Policing Planning and Performance Improvement or Annabel Adams, Deputy Treasurer on the financial points, before the meeting of the Full Authority so that they could be addressed.

Appendix 2 –the Supporting Financial Information

Process

3. Members commented that the notification of the Mayoral priorities as contained in the additional Guidance had only been received on the 27 October 2011 which seemed to be rather late in the budget planning process.

Budget gap

4. Members drew attention to the fact that it had not been possible at this stage to prepare a budget submission which closed the budget gap for 2012/13 and subsequent years. There was concern that the gap seemed to be very large and it was unrealistic in the present economic climate to expect that there would be an increase in income streams sufficient to bridge the gap.

5. In response the Director of Resources reminded members that it was still a relatively early stage of the budget setting process. There had been gaps in previous years at this stage of the process and it had always been possible to achieve a balanced budget for the first year of the plan. There was every expectation that a balanced budget position for 2012/13 would be achieved. There was clearly a lot of work required to address the position going forward to 2013/14 and beyond.

Budget pressures

6. It was noted that one of the budget pressures for 2012/13 was the cost of policing the Diamond Jubilee celebrations. The view was expressed that the full cost should not have to be met from the MPA/MPS budget and it was noted that discussions were ongoing with the Home Office regarding additional funding to cover these costs.

Police officer numbers

7. Several members commented that there had clearly been a very strong steer from the Mayor in his Guidance regarding the police officer numbers he would wish to see and this had been reflected in the budget planning. However, members queried whether the Mayor has the powers to make the final decision on officer numbers. The Director of Resources stated that the final decision on the actual number of officers would, as it always has been, be made by the Commissioner in liaison with the Authority (or successor) based on a number of considerations including operational requirements and the funding provision.

8. Several members said that whilst police officer numbers were important, especially in the year of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, there were fears that the numbers which the Mayor would like to see could only be achieved, as seemed to be acknowledged in the report, by a further reduction in the number of police staff and Police Community Support Officers. Members asked whether this would be the best way to deliver an effective and efficient police service overall? Concerns were raised that whilst this would ensure police officer numbers were maintained, it would lead to reduction in number of police staff. This could result in police officers carrying out police staff functions.

Conclusion

9. In summing up the discussion the Chair of the meeting said that members clearly had some concerns on the Business Plan. It was agreed therefore that the Business Plan be noted at that stage and referred to the full Authority for further consideration.

C. Other organisational & community implications

Equality Impact

1. There are no race and diversity impact issues directly arising from this report.

Met Forward

2. There are no direct implications for the delivery of Met Forward arising from this report

Financial Implications

3. There are no financial implications directly arising from this report.

Legal Implications

4 These are addressed in the report by the Commissioner and Treasurer

Environmental Implications

5 These are addressed in the report by the Commissioner and Treasurer

Risk Implications

6 These are addressed in the report by the Commissioner and Treasurer

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: John Crompton, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback