Agenda and draft minutes

There were no apologies for absence; however, the Town Clerk noted that Tijs Broeke would be leaving the meeting at 3.00pm.

The Chairman welcomed members to the third meeting of the Committee that year.

There were no declarations.

To receive the amended Terms of Reference of the Performance and Resource Management Committee which have been updated at the Committee’s request.

Members considered the Committee’s updated terms of reference and the Chairman proposed that the word ‘usually’ be inserted under ‘Frequency of Meetings’ after ‘shall’ and before ‘meet’. Members unanimously agreed this insertion.

RESOLVED, that the updated terms of reference be received as amended.

To consider the public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 16 October 2020.

RESOLVED, that the public minutes and non-public summary of the meeting held on 16 October 2020 be approved.

MATTERS ARISING

A member sought further information in relation to a previous query regarding pay parity within the Force. The Assistant Commissioner advised that officers were paid according to service bands, per rank, and that for specialist areas pay was equivalent to those bands. For a highly specialised area, such as firearms officers, pay incentives were available to assist with retention. Pay parity in other specialist areas, such as economic crime, was based around length of service and progression through rank, rather than specialist pay/incentives.

Joint report of the Town Clerk and Commissioner.

Members considered a joint report of the Town Clerk and Commissioner regarding references and the following points were made.

15/2020/P – Policing Plan Performance

·         A provisional date for the member workshop on Policing Plan measures to enable members to understand better the governance and compliance assessments underpinning the reporting made to Committee had been scheduled for November 2020, and it was proposed that an additional workshop take place in January 2021. The Assistant Commissioner requested that consideration be given to an alternative date than the one proposed for November 2020, however, given that it involved a conflict with another meeting.

RESOLVED, that the report be received.

Report of the Commissioner.

Members considered a report of the Commissioner regarding Q2 Capital and Revenue Monitoring and the following points were made.

·         The Chief Operating and Chief Financial Officer (COFO) noted that the report set out a good degree of confidence that all savings targets would be achieved, with a £5m underspend projected. This was due to the Force receiving more Home Office funding than had been anticipated for recruitment, and as well as the Force generating more income than had been forecast. At present, the figures within the report were the COFO’s best assessment and it was anticipated there would not be much more movement by year-end.

·         The COFO noted that in relation to the savings tracker at Table 3 (p23) the main risk was in relation to the National Enabling Programme (NEP) as a result of the delay nationally in rolling out the programme.

·         The COFO advised that the CT Grant had also been identified as a risk although the Home Office funding in terms of income recovery had helped offset this.

·         The COFO concluded by advising that the format of the report would be revised for future iterations given that in its current form it had become unwieldy with the amount of narrative likely to impede clarity. The final section would be truncated, again in order to streamline and aid transparency.

·         In response to a comment welcoming the news that the Asset Recovery item was four times above target, the COFO advised that this spend was ring-fenced as per the guidelines for the Asset Recovery Incentivisation Scheme (ARIS) under the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA) and would be utilised for crime reduction. There had been a shortfall in terms of additional income for provision of international training, which in an average year would be sizeable; however, funding had been received

Report of the Commissioner.

Members considered a report of the Commissioner regarding Policing Plan 2020-23 – Performance against measures for end Q2 for the year 2020/21 and the following points were made.

·         The Assistant Commissioner reported that the Force was rated first in the country for crime detection, news which was welcomed by members. One measure requiring action in relation to Counter Terrorism was the decrease in the amount of hostile reconnaissance reports; however the Assistant Commissioner advised that this was as a result of footfall in the City having significantly reduced since the outset of Covid-19 which could not have been avoided.

·         In relation to neighbourhood policing, a member queried to what extent the Force was involved with some measures, such as road safety. In response the Assistant Commissioner advised that the Force had a statutory duty to enforce the law in relation to road safety, including safeguarding the vulnerable.

·         A member asked whether the reduction in footfall within the City had provided an opportunity to increase efforts in relation to prevention of crime. In response, the Assistant Commissioner replied that there remained a prominent focus on offender management and repeat offending, with several recent good results.

·         A question was put in relation to partnership working, with clarification sought as to how effectiveness was assessed with reference to City of London and Metropolitan Police working partnership. The Assistant Commissioner responded and explained that the Force worked in partnership with the Metropolitan Police and the British Transport Police on public order management; with the Metropolitan Police on a London-wide basis to manage sex offenders and violent offenders; and with the Metropolitan Police and the NHS on mental health issues. Given the range of partnerships, any one, single, standard of measurement could not be applied, however, CoLP Head of Governance and Assurance explained that this

Report of the Commissioner.

Members considered a Human Resources (HR) monitoring report of the Director of Human Resources and the following points were made.

·         The Assistant HR Director noted that there had been a significant uplift in the intake of probationers, with a further 16 probationers taking up their role from 20 November 2020. Members heard that the numbers of women and BAME recruits had also increased.

·         A member commented on the positive feedback in relation to the culture at the City of London Police, which was welcomed, but expressed concern at the high level of transfers (approximately 50%) and enquired as to whether exit interviews were carried out. In response, the Assistant HR Director advised that police officers frequently changed roles, which was supported within the Force given that this facilitated the building of a wide range of skills and expertise. This benefitted officers in terms of their personal development as well as the Force overall. Exit interviews were routinely conducted and changes to the process in recent years meant that these were now conducted by a member of a staff network rather than line management.

·         The same member asked why the statistics gathered from those who would be considered part of the group of those with protected characteristics were low. The Assistant HR Director, in response, advised that it had been explained to officers why the information was requested, how it would be used and that line managers were not able to access this information. This had helped to raise the level of information returned, although the number of responses remained lower than was desirable. It was noted that this was a voluntary return, rather than statutory.

·         A query was put seeking clarification of the role of the Chief Superintendent - Welfare Lead. The Assistant Commissioner advised that this was a proactive

Report of the Commissioner.

Members considered a Human Resources (HR) monitoring report of the Director of Human Resources and the following points were made.

·         The Assistant HR Director noted that there had been a significant uplift in the intake of probationers, with a further 16 probationers taking up their role from 20 November 2020. Members heard that the numbers of women and BAME recruits had also increased.

·         A member commented on the positive feedback in relation to the culture at the City of London Police, which was welcomed, but expressed concern at the high level of transfers (approximately 50%) and enquired as to whether exit interviews were carried out. In response, the Assistant HR Director advised that police officers frequently changed roles, which was supported within the Force given that this facilitated the building of a wide range of skills and expertise. This benefitted officers in terms of their personal development as well as the Force overall. Exit interviews were routinely conducted and changes to the process in recent years meant that these were now conducted by a member of a staff network rather than line management.

·         The same member asked why the statistics gathered from those who would be considered part of the group of those with protected characteristics were low. The Assistant HR Director, in response, advised that it had been explained to officers why the information was requested, how it would be used and that line managers were not able to access this information. This had helped to raise the level of information returned, although the number of responses remained lower than was desirable. It was noted that this was a voluntary return, rather than statutory.

·         A query was put seeking clarification of the role of the Chief Superintendent - Welfare Lead. The Assistant Commissioner advised that this was a proactive

There were no questions.

There was no other public business.

MOTION - That under Section 100(A) 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 I of the Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

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

To consider the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2020.

RESOLVED, that the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2020 be approved.

Joint report of the Town Clerk and Commissioner.

Members considered a joint report of the Town Clerk and Commissioner regarding non-public references.

Members considered a report of the Head of Police Authority Finance.

An oral update from the Commissioner.

Members heard an oral report of the Commissioner regarding the Transform Programme: Update on Implementation and Efficiencies.

Report of the Commissioner.

Non-public appendix to be read in conjunction with agenda item 9.

A non-public appendix was considered in conjunction with the discussion under item 9 (above).

Report of the Commissioner.

Members considered a report of the Commissioner on the Improvement Plan.

There were no questions.

There was no other business in non-public session.