Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Mark Boleat and Alderman Ian Luder.

There were none.

To note the Board’s Terms of Reference as follows:

To be responsible for:

a.  Overseeing the force’s national responsibilities for economic crime and fraud having regard to the strategic policing requirement in this area;

b.  monitoring government, and other external agencies’ policies and actions relating to economic crime; and,

c.   Making recommendations to the Police Committee in matters relating to economic crime.

The Board’s Terms of Reference were noted as follows:

                   To be responsible for:

                   a. Overseeing the force’s national responsibilities for economic crime and fraud having regard to the strategic policing requirement in this area;

                   b. monitoring government, and other external agencies’ policies and actions relating to economic crime; and,

                   c. Making recommendations to the Police Committee in matters relating to economic crime.

          The ability of the Board to co-opt an individual was discussed, with the Chairman commenting that he was keen to co-opt from within the Court of Common Council given the Court's role as the police authority for the City of London Police area. Members were supportive of the Chairman's suggestion and confident that an appropriate individual could be identified given the wealth of experience and expertise on the Court. The Commissioner suggested that a Member of the Finance Committee or someone with a strong financial background might be appropriate given where the Force was currently positioned with major projects such as the Fraud Academy, and the Chairman asked Members to think about the matter and let him know informally of any suggestions for consideration.

          RECEIVED.

Presentation of the Commissioner.

With this initial meeting of the Board intended as a ‘scene-setting’ one, the Commissioner gave a short presentation outlining the background to the Force’s role and achievements as the National Lead for Economic Crime, putting the current operations and future plans in to context and setting out the key performance areas for the Economic Crime Directorate.

The Commissioner advised that he was currently in the process of redesigning the performance framework for the Economic Crime Directorate and would like to present this to future meetings in order to gain Members' assistance in fleshing out the proposals. Members stressed the need for more work to be done in clearly demonstrating the value of the ECD and the full scale of fraud prevented and assets recovered. It was also asked that, following the creation of the performance framework, an Economic Crime Performance Indicators report come to meetings of the Board as a standard item.

RECEIVED.

Report of the Commissioner (copy attached).

Members received a report of the Commissioner providing a brief outline of the national policing landscape and an update on the Force’s position as the Lead Force for Economic Crime.

The issue of Home Office funding for the implementation of regional fraud teams was discussed, with the Chairman suggesting that, following formal confirmation of their funding, it would be appropriate for him to join the Commissioner when he met with representatives from the financial services sector to discuss funding. The Commissioner took on board the Chairman’s comments and undertook to share his negotiating strategy with the Chairman and the Chairman of the Policy & Resources Committee.

          RECEIVED.

Report of the Commissioner (copy attached).

Members received a report of the Commissioner explaining the rationale and history of the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau, setting out its current functions and activities, funding position, and outlining the planned future steps to develop the role of the Bureau.

          The Commissioner made the point that the NFIB was more reliant on external funding and work was undertaken with many other agencies to maximise its usefulness. With this in mind, a recent grant of £2million over two years to fund the establishment of the NFIB as the cybercrime reporting centre was highly valuable.

          RECEIVED.

Report of the Commissioner (copy attached).

Members received a report of the Commissioner setting out the current position in respect of the proposed Fraud Training Academy and providing an update of work undertaken to date.

          The Commissioner advised that work was on-going with consultants in an effort to find how best to package the City of London Police brand to maximise income whilst at the same time minimising any potential risk. An options paper would of course be produced and presented to the Board before going elsewhere in order to obtain the guidance of Members, particularly with regard to the business element of the proposal.  The Chairman commented that a breakdown of costs would be useful, highlighting the Force’s expenses so far in producing the plans, who the competition are and what they were charging, and so on. Members also expressed a desire for any paper to cover the risk and reputational exposure and what work would be done to mitigate this, and were keen to know if the Force had liaised with any external agencies offering similar courses, such as the FBI in an effort to learn from their experiences. The Chairman suggested that the circulation of an executive document at least ten days before the next meeting would be useful, if possible.

          The Chairman also asked that additional copies of the draft prospectus which had been tabled be produced and circulated to all Members of the Police Committee for information.

RECEIVED.

There were no questions.

Next Meeting

Whilst it was noted that there was a meeting of the Board scheduled for October, the Chairman suggested that it might be appropriate to hold an additional meeting in September given the volume of important work currently progressing. The Chairman accordingly asked the Town Clerk to arrange this, with the rising of the Police Committee on Friday 14 September suggested as a suitable time.

MOTION: That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

          Item No.                                                                       Exempt Paragraphs

                   #                                                                                                      #

RESOLVED--That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involved the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

            Item No.                                                                     Exempt Paragraphs

                             11                                                                                     4

There were no questions.

There were no urgent items.