Agenda item

6.1  Alan Rainford, Chief Finance and Commissioning Officer, presented a report detailing the Police and Crime Commissioner’s 2015/16 budget.

He drew attention to the following issues:-

-          £9.6M reduction in Government funding compared to 2014/15 but still the requirement to make sufficient budget provision (£8M) for the effect of price inflation, pay awards and the planned resources required to address the heightened emphasis given to Protecting Vulnerable People

-          £17.4M had had to be found to balance the 2015/16 budget – made up of a combination of savings and additional income

-          Net revenue budget of £240M of which 85% represented employees costs

-          Increased collaboration working – strategic partnership formed with Humberside Police to deliver services particular support and back office services

-          £27.4M Capital Programme 2015/16 comprised of 3 key elements:

Ensuring equipment was replaced at the most efficient time in its lifetime in line with the agreed Asset Management Strategy, Information Systems Strategy and Vehicle Fleet Strategy

Ensuring the estate was fit for purpose and sustainable and developed in accordance with the Commissioner’s Accommodation Strategy

Supporting and investing in new technology which would allow the Force to deliver a better service at reduced cost

-          £11M of Reserves utilised to support the investment in Capital schemes for the 2015/16 budget

-          Cost of legacy issues – an assumption had been made when determining the budget and precept for 2015/16 that all costs associated with the Hillsborough inquests would be offset by Home Office Special Grant.  There remained a risk that the level of Special Grant may fall well below the level of expenditure incurred and the available reserves may not be sufficient to meet the cost

-          Reserves could not be allowed to fall below £5M

-          The budget would be updated to reflect the emergency budget and the Spending Review when it was released later in the year

6.2  Discussion ensued on the report with the following raised/clarified:-

·           The Chief Constable’s budget did receive contributions from other funding sources but any awards of funding had to be agreed by the Police and Crime Commissioner

·           Letters were being drafted to the lawyers and the Home Office explaining South Yorkshire Police’s position with regard to the costs of the Hillsborough inquests and the position going forward

·           The Home Office Circular set out in broad terms provision of financial assistance to those officers involved in legal proceedings.  However, the Home Office had not envisaged anything of the size of the Hillsborough inquests.  The Circular gave the presumption in favour of financial assistance to those officers involved in legal proceedings until they were seen to have acted in bad faith or unreasonable judgement in their duties.  At no point did the Circular define what “reasonable costs” were in terms of financial assistance and guidance had been sought from the Home Office on what was reasonable e.g. hourly rate, types of costs.  A recommendation from the cost review commissioned by the Commissioner’s Office was that the Home Office Circular was not fit for purpose and suggested that they might want to amend it to make clear what “reasonable costs” meant

·           A large proportion of the Capital Programme was going into IT schemes which produced short term savings

·           Although South Yorkshire Police was not alone in facing financial pressures, its situation was more critical given the legacy issues.  It was not known what it meant for the Police Force but, if there was less funding, it may be that certain services had to be stopped altogether or done more efficiently

6.3 Action:  That the OPCC submit quarterly budget updates highlighting any budget pressures.  First report to the September meeting

6.4 Action:  That the OPCC include business planning around the Capital Programme in the next budget update