APPENDIX 21
Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Northern Ireland Policing Board
RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FROM THE COMMITTEE FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
I write in response to your letter of 28 January
in which you raised a number of additional queries. The following
information will I hope be of assistance.
BELFAST DPPAs the
Committee will be aware, Belfast DPP has four sub-groups which
align with the four DCUs within the Belfast City Council area.
As currently constituted, the sub-groups have one
function—to bring the views of the community in relation
to policing to the District Commander.
Each sub-group must have a minimum of six members,
drawn from total membership of 19 for the DPP as a whole. This
results in all members serving on the main DPP, and at least one
sub-group; in addition some members sit on two sub-groups. This
is a significant demand on the time and commitment of the 19 DPP
members.
The demand on DPP members' time is paralleled by
the demand on police officers' time, where senior police officers
attend both the sub-group meeetings and the meetings of the main
DPP. This is proving to be a very significant demand on the available
time of the senior police officers within the District.
The "new legislation" referred to by the
Vice-Chairman was paragraph 19 and Schedule 1 of the Police (Northern
Ireland) Act 2003 enacted, but not commenced, which relate to
the working of the Belfast DPP. This legislation makes provision
for a new structure with the Belfast City Council area. Under
this new legislation there will be additional DPP members which
will enable the four sub-groups to be resourced to a level that
would allow them to carry out their duties without undue pressure
on time or undue commitment.
Until such time as these clauses in the 2003 Act
are commenced, the Board is working with the PSNI and Belfast
DPP to establish how best the current structures may be operated
in the interim. However, under current legislation there remains
the major constraint that 19 Members have to resource the meetings
of the main DPP and of the four sub-groups.
The structure as envisaged in the Police (Northern
Ireland) Act 2003 which effectively creates a fully functional
DPP for each DCU, similar to what exists in all other DCU and
Council areas, is an acceptable model. The division of responsibility
between the main DPP and each of the sub-groups needs to reflect
where responsibility lies, but also take account of the fact that
the DCU/sub-group boundaries exist within a unified council area.
The ability for Belfast DPP to have an overview of policing within
the entire council area while delegating responsibility to the
operational area is a welcome aspect of these clauses in the 2003
Act.
EXPENDITUREIn planning
the recruitment and appointment programme for the Independent
Members of the DPPs in 2002-03. The Board took advice from the
NIO's Central Purchasing Unit (CPU). CPU are the specialist group
who will advise on the most effective procurement process for
a public body to follow. In the context of the appointment of
independent members CPU were involved in discussion with the Board
as to how best value or value for money could be established throughout
the appointment project.
Following discussion with the NIO and with Council
Chief Executives, an early decision was taken to appoint consultants
to manage the advertising, recruitment and selection phase of
the project. The details of this have, as indicated, been provided
to the Committee.
With regard to the Board not being notified of the
SR 2004 allocation, and why the position for 2005-06 remains unclear,
the Board has now received its SR 2004 allocations for the periods
2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. NIO informed the Board on 21 January
2005 of its allocations. There has been no formal indication by
NIO as to why the allocations were only made available in January
2005.
COMPLAINTS POLICYThere
is no provision within the Board's Complaints Policy for appeals
or for further stages of the complaints process outwith the Board.
When asked at the hearing the Chief Executive responded that the
"opportunity" exists for a complainant to take their
complaint to the Secretary of State. This comment was made in
the context that it was the Secretary of State who appointed Board
Members and that there is logic in a complaint about the Board
going to the authority which appointed the board. However, this
is not formally set out in our policy.
9 February 2005
| 
