Full Authority endorses RAF Project Board recommendations

92/01
11 December 2001

At the meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on Monday 10 December 2001, Members agreed that Option 4 should be adopted for the implementation of the new Resource Allocation Formula (RAF). This was the option recommended by the RAF Project Board.

Following the meeting, Lord Graham Tope, Chair of the Project Board, said:

"Our bottom line has always been that no boroughs should lose any officers.

"We are adamant that the process should be fair to all boroughs and Option 4, taking the borough's best strength between 31 March 2001 and 31 October 2001 as the number to which the RAF should be applied, seemed to be the most equitable system. It also endorses the 'no losers' criterion.

"I would like to thank all those stakeholders who were part of our consultation process and everyone who took part in open and balanced debate on 21 November at Westminster Central Hall, when more than 20 boroughs expressed their views ."

Toby Harris, Chair of the MPA said:

"Since April of this year, every borough has seen an increase in police officer numbers. No borough will lose officers as a result of this process and some boroughs will see a substantial increase in officer numbers over the next year.

"The RAF is an enormous advance on any previous system. Its construction has been a public mechanism, open and transparent and the Project Board has incorporated changes during the consultation period.

"However, the MPA will ensure that attention is given to the sensitivity of the formula to minor adjustments and its robustness over time."

A fundamental review of the formula began in February 2001, steered by a joint MPA/MPS Project Board. Over the following months the Project Board has overseen the research and development work undertaken by a number of working groups, including several Borough Commanders.

The consultation process began with a questionnaire being sent to local authorities, London MPs, MPA members and Borough Commanders. Two workshops were held, in April for MPA members and in September for GLA and MPA members. Consultation culminated in an open seminar held at Central Hall, Westminster on Wednesday 21 November attended by MPA and GLA members, London MPs, CPCGs, local authority Crime and Disorder Partners, Borough Commanders and staff associations. At this, full details of proposed options were provided.

Additionally the 'Commissioner's Judgment' will be applied to Lambeth, Greenwich and Newham as a result of exceptional operational factors currently existing in those boroughs. The 'Capital City' factor, where inner London boroughs have specific responsibilities due to their location, will be applied to Westminster, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, Southwark , Camden and Lambeth.

The Full Authority agreed that the new RAF should be implemented as soon as possible.

Notes to editors

1. Since the last meeting of the Authority, there have been developments to the formula including adjustments to both the need and demand components. These were based on the views of the overview panel and feedback from boroughs. This further round of consultation culminated in an open seminar held at Central Hall, Westminster on Wednesday 21 November that was attended by MPA members, GLA members, London MPs, PCCGs, local authority crime & disorder partners, police borough commanders and staff associations. Full details of this proposed formula were provided to all invitees.

2. At the seminar members of the Project Board were asked a range of questions about the formula and its proposed implementation for next year. More than 20 boroughs expressed their views in an open and balanced debate.

3. As a result of the discussion at the seminar, the Project Board convened on 22 November to consider the key issues raised and what should form the basis of its final recommendation to the Authority. The decisions can be broken down into two elements; what should be the baseline date against which the allocations are based, and what boroughs should be given further consideration for additional posts under capital city allowance or Commissioner's judgement.

4. There was much discussion at the seminar about the most appropriate option given the Project Board's stated intention that no borough should lose officers against existing strengths. The Project Board circulated three potential options to seminar delegates as part of the consultation process. These options were based on;

• actual borough strengths as at the end of June 2001
• forecast borough strengths as at the end of December 2001, and
• budgeted workforce targets for March 2002

5. The significance of the baseline date is to define what should constitute existing strength. The earlier the date chosen, the less growth in officers is required to implement the result. All the three circulated options are based upon a given point in time. A further suggestion that emerged during the debate was for a 'high tide' option based on each borough's best strength between March 2001 and October 2001.

6. The Board felt that this option was preferable to any of the three circulated options for the following reasons;

• it endorses the "no losers" criterion
• it avoids the application of arbitrary baselines at selected times when boroughs could have recently imported or exported significant numbers of police officers
• Using the BWT as the baseline has no obvious logic since it is based on the discredited existing formula and contains significant amounts of management judgment. It would also mean negligible application of RAF 2002 in the short term, and at least 4-5 years before full implementation could be achieved

7. Full details of the impact across boroughs of the Project Board recommendation can be found in the table at Appendix 1.

8. The second element for the Project Board to consider was whether any borough should receive additional posts under Commissioner's judgement or the capital city allowance. The Commissioner's judgement is exercised for those boroughs faced with exceptional operational requirements that are not captured by the formula, and are reviewed after 12 months. The capital city allowance is a more permanent recognition of the extra resourcing requirements that fall upon central London boroughs.

9. After some consideration the Project Board decided to apply the following Commissioner's judgements;

• Lambeth – 72 posts in recognition of its current demand and crime levels far exceeding those indicated by the need component of the formula. The Board considered that it is imperative that the BOCU receive an adequate number of police officers to combat these increased crime levels. This allocation is predicated on the basis of an investigation into the police and partnership's performance in the borough. The basis for this investigation will be the recently completed HMI inspection of the BOCU which is due to be published shortly
• Greenwich – 25 posts in recognition of the requirement to provide full time security patrols at Belmarsh Prison
• Newham – 20 posts in recognition of the need to supply security patrols at City Airport

10. The Project Board also decided that it was appropriate that Camden should be allocated an additional 20 posts under capital city allowance in recognition of its similar environment and characteristics to the other central London boroughs.

11. The outcome of these decisions around Commissioner's judgement and capital city allowance and the net impact across all the boroughs is set out in the table at Appendix 2.

12. The Project Board's recommended option requires a 'top up' of 275 officers over and above the current target of 17,585 on boroughs by March 2002 in order to ensure that there are no losers against the best strength. In other words, each borough will receive its RAF allocation or the best strength figure, whichever is the higher.

13. The outcomes for boroughs using the September 2001, December 2001 and March 2002 baselines, incorporating the Project Board revisions outlined above, are set out in the summary table at Appendix 3.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback