Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-38)
JANET BIRKIN
AND RICHARD
CROMPTON
30 NOVEMBER 2009
Q1 Chairman: A warm welcome
to Janet Birkin, Chair of the East Midlands Police Authorities
Joint Committee, and Richard Crompton who, I think, acts as the
chief officer of the group but is also the Chief Constable of
Lincolnshire. Thanks for coming here. We were originally scheduled
to meet in Loughborough, but for a variety of reasons, that wasn't
possible. So it's good of you to come here at short notice.
This is perhaps an appropriate meeting, because I
know, Richard and Janet, that you and colleagues in the East Midlands
have been concerned about the funding levels of police authorities
in the East Midlands for a long time. This is our first evidence
session for an inquiry that, in broad and basic terms, asks, "Does
the East Midlands get its fair share of resources?" So let's
start with that. Tell us what the position is with the police
in the East Midlands.
Richard Crompton: Thank you. The
basis of our argument here today is really that, no, we don't
receive the funding we should receive in the East Midlands in
policing terms, despite the fact that we absolutely accept that
there has been an increase in police funding right across the
UK, and we have seen some of that increase within the East Midlands.
The funding formula, which is currently used to decide how the
national pot for police funding is apportioned across the 43 forces,
is subject to a dampening mechanism. In the East Midlands, all
five of the constituent forces lose out as a result of that dampening
formula. Were the funding formula to be implemented to its full
extent, we would actually receive 6.8% more in our budgets and
be able to afford something in the region of 518 additional police
officers as a result.
Q2 Chairman: But you just mentioned
all five forces. Tell me about Northamptonshire, because I thought
it was in a slightly more advantageous position than the other
four.
Richard Crompton: It is true to
say, sir, that Northamptonshire currently does lose out through
the dampening to the tune of, I think, £0.6 million, which,
in comparison to the other four forces and authorities, is a much
smaller amount. It is equally true to say that it has been in
and out, either side of the line, so to speak, during the years;
but, collectively, of course, we rely upon one another working
collaboratively, and Northamptonshire certainly feels the impact
of that as well.
Q3 Chairman: I think I saw
last week the provisional allocation for next year—I did
not read it as thoroughly as I might—but it is subject to
damping again.
Richard Crompton: That is correct,
sir, yes.
Chairman: Can you just fill that
in a bit?
Richard Crompton: The dampening
mechanism was introduced really to ensure that all forces and
authorities across the country received as a minimum an increase
year on year of 2.5%. So I suppose that from our point of view,
in a fairly strange way, a funding formula was decided about six
years ago on the basis that national funding was not apportioned
according to need and risk, but it was then immediately dampened
to ensure stability, which I can understand. However, unlike other
public authorities, that stability has been maintained through
the dampening mechanism, and the funding formula has not been
allowed to be implemented at a staged rate.
Janet Birkin: Perhaps I could
add something to that by saying that we recognise in the East
Midlands that although there is the floor of 2.5%, this year we
received 3.1%, and next year we will receive 3%. So we recognise
that the Government have some recognition of the challenges we
face; but clearly when we should be receiving an additional 6.8%,
it is not sufficient to address the risks that face the East Midlands.
I am sure that you will all remember that in the "Closing
the Gap" report by Denis O'Connor, we were seen as the Government
region that had the highest risk.
Q4 Chairman: So, Janet, what's
to be done about it?
Janet Birkin: Well, what would
be the best thing to happen is clearly that the funding formula
was fully implemented, and as I am sure that you are aware, that
was one of the recommendations from Sir Ronnie Flanagan's latest
review—that there was some movement towards implementing
the funding formula fully. From our perspective, we fully recognise
that it would be very difficult to do that in a single sweep.
There is some disappointment that the Government have chosen not
to show an element of phasing in the funding formula over the
three-year CSR period, which, of course, they have done in other
key local public services. At this moment in time, we do not see
that there has been any recognition to do that, but that for us
would be a significant improvement to our current situation and
would address much of the gap we already have.
Q5 Chairman: Why is that?
I know that you've been on the case for a long time. What's the
Home Office saying to you?
Janet Birkin: I think the Home
Office—I am sure, working in conjunction with the CLG—is
saying to us that it recognises the issue. In fact, I can say
personally that when we have been to see the Policing Minister,
he has been very aware and supportive of the challenges we face.
Chairman: Supportive, but not
giving you the cash.
Janet Birkin: Exactly, and actions
speak louder than words, do they not? However, having said that,
I believe they probably feel that they want stability and realise
that if the funding formula was implemented in full, it would
mean that there would be authorities and forces who would lose
out. But equally, it would be fair to say that there are officials
who have used the words, "They would want to treat all their
children fairly." At the moment, we don't feel we are, because
we have been losing out for a number of years.
Q6 Chairman: Richard, you
said at the beginning that you'd had extra resources. The figures
we've got are an extra £256 million, or a 27% real-terms
increase, between 1997-98 and 2009-10, but you've still got a
deficit. What would you use that money for?
Richard Crompton: First of all,
if I may say how the additional money has been used, of course,
we've used it to invest in neighbourhood policing. We've used
it to invest in protective services across the region. If the
funding formula, however, were to be implemented to its full extent
and we received the extra £34.2 million that we would receive
as a consequence, that, as I said, would give us resources to
the tune of 514 extra police officers. Undoubtedly, there would
be a considerable call on those additional officers to fill some
of the protective services gaps that were identified by Her Majesty's
Inspectorate of Constabulary, in the review both in 2005 and 2008.
In Derbyshire, for example, there are over 70 organised crime
groups that have been recognised and mapped by that force. They
are involved in things such as homicide, gun crime, knife crime
and the supply of class A drugs. The simple fact is that the force
is not in a position to properly address all those organised crime
groups because it simply does not have sufficient resource, and
the same could be said to a greater or lesser extent for all other
forces in the East Midlands.
Q7 Chairman: If you got up
to your funding formula at the appropriate level, would you be
happy with that, or would you still be knocking on the door?
Richard Crompton: It would be
a strange chief constable who said they absolutely have enough,
but recognising the realities that we all face, it would make
a very significant difference. It is true to say, however, that
we have identified and costed additional risk within the East
Midlands region, to the tune of an additional £22 million.
So although the implementation in full of the funding formula
would assist greatly and make a very real difference, I still
would not be able to put my hand on my heart and tell you that
we were absolutely fully funded to meet the risks that we currently
face. But, as I say, I think that all chiefs and chairs of authorities
recognise the difficult economic situation that everybody is in.
Q8 Chairman: Let me just ask
you a couple of other things and then we will turn to Judy. First
of all, Lincolnshire is the lowest funded force?
Richard Crompton: Yes, we are.
Q9 Chairman: How has that
come about?
Richard Crompton: I think you
have to look back historically. Over the years, Lincolnshire has
always been—for as long as people can remember—a low,
or the lowest, funded force within the country. That is partly
due to the fact that, as I hope we have made clear in our evidence
to you, we are funded at the lowest level in terms of the grant
that is shared out across all forces.
It is also true to say that in Lincolnshire,
during the years when some authorities were introducing relatively
high levels of council tax to raise additional funding, for a
range of reasons the police authority in Lincolnshire chose not
to do so. However, that situation no longer pertains. You may
recall that two years ago, following the authority's seeking a
very significant increase in the precept, we were capped but we
were capped at 26%, which I think recognised the severe difficulties
we were in at that point. So there are a range of historic reasons
that have brought us to the position we are in today.
Q10 Chairman: Both of you
have a long-standing and outstanding record of working in the
public services and you will read the political runes as well
as I do—probably better than I do. Everybody tells me we
are about to move into a range of austerity—when it happens,
how deep it will be and for how long remains to be seen. However,
wouldn't it be better to get you up to a fairer funding formula
in a time when there were increased resources rather than in the
period we now look as though we're going into, where the rate
of increase might be very limited or might even decrease?
Janet Birkin: Could I start our
response with a point of clarity? We do not have an issue with
the funding formula. You mentioned a fairer funding formula. We
sit quite comfortably with the revised formula. Our real argument
is about the fact that it has not been implemented and about the
whole of the damping mechanism; it seems to be a little cloudy
as to how that mechanism is arrived at.
Q11 Chairman: It is easier
to look after your children, to use your phrase Janet, if you
have some money in your pocket than when you haven't any money
in your pocket. I suspect that we are moving towards that spectrum.
Janet Birkin: Yes, and we are
very mindful of that. Going back to the point that Richard made,
there has been underfunding for many years across the East Midlands.
In fact, if I just bring that alive by talking about Derbyshire
as an example for one second, when the funding formula was reviewed
it gave us an additional £11 million in grant. To date, we
lose £5 million year on year of that grant that we have not
seen. So we recognise that. It has meant that from an efficiency
point of view, the region has had to show considerable efficiencies,
which means that when we move into the more austere times it is
much more difficult to make the efficiencies that are required.
That is particularly challenging for us, because one has to recognise
that efficiency is all about maintaining services. We don't want
to cut services, which is ultimately where we could be.
Could you just repeat the question?
Chairman: If you are going to
get to the required level, it is easier to do it in a time of
affluence, rather than austerity.
Janet Birkin: Yes, so the point
I wanted to raise there is that we would really agree with that.
The point is that we have to balance the setting of our budget
with a capping regime that has been brought in by Government.
Four of the five force authorities in the East Midlands have suffered
through the capping regime in the last five years—Derbyshire
being the latest this year. Although we were not capped, we were
nominated, and we do feel there is an element of unfairness there,
when we are trying to play our part, particularly when we had
done so much consultation with the community, who wanted us to
be brought up to a level that was equitable with our neighbours
and could address the risks, particularly when we had support
from cross-party MPs and particularly when, as an authority, we
did not want to go into conflict with the Government. The budget
and precept we set did fit within the previous capping guidelines.
So it gives us additional challenges for all those reasons.
Q12 Chairman: We've talked
a lot about Derbyshire and Lincolnshire, for understandable reasons,
but I'll be in big trouble back home if I don't mention Nottinghamshire.
They are in the same position, aren't they?
Richard Crompton: Yes, indeed,
they are. You will have to forgive me for referring to my note
here. The failure to implement the funding formula to its fullest
extent, as I have explained, has lost the region £57 million.
In Nottinghamshire, their share of that equates to 211 additional
police officers. You have made the point about Northamptonshire,
and you are absolutely correct that they are at the balancing
point in this debate, but the other four forces in the East Midlands
lose considerably from that failure to implement the funding formula.
Q13 Chairman: Can you give
us the Leicestershire figure as well?
Richard Crompton: Yes, I can.
Q14 Judy Mallaber: What was
the amount they were short in Nottinghamshire, in millions of
pounds?
Richard Crompton: The cash amount?
Judy Mallaber: I am sure it is
in here somewhere. You said the figure for Derbyshire was £11
million. What is the equivalent for Nottinghamshire?
Richard Crompton: For Nottinghamshire
the figure is £7.6 million. In Derbyshire they could have
afforded 139 additional officers, and in Leicestershire, 86. In
Lincolnshire, my own force, the number is 69, and as I said, in
Nottingham it is 211. In Northamptonshire it is nine officers.
Q15 Judy Mallaber: I'm going
to go over some of these questions in a little more detail to
make sure, for the purposes of our report, that we are absolutely
clear. Going back to the police funding formula itself—though
we know the problem is the implementation—I was slightly
unsure because you said you would obviously live with that quite
happily, but you also said that you had identified an additional
£22 million risk. Was that the wish list on top of the current
funding formula? I wasn't quite clear whether that was in addition.
Richard Crompton: I wouldn't describe
it as a wish list, but all forces within the region, as you would
expect, have done a lot of work to try to assess the risk that
the people we serve face in each of those constituent forces.
We do that in a number of ways, but one of the most significant
ways, of course, is by mapping organised criminals and their activities
within the region. These are only estimates, but the estimate
within the total East Midlands region is that we would have to
spend an additional £22 million on top of that which we currently
lose out from in relation to the funding formula to properly meet
that risk.
Janet Birkin: To add to what Richard
has said, for forces and authorities it is the case that when
that strategic risk assessment has been completed, the genie is
out of the bottle. It is about knowing the unfunded risk that
we have to balance and that the chief constable has to balance
in all his or her decision-making processes.
Q16 Judy Mallaber: I come
back to the funding formula without that £22 million. If
we were to get it, do you think that that is fair, as between
different regions? Do you have any complaint about the balance
between regions?
Richard Crompton: The balance
between regions is frankly quite stark. Our region is in the lower
half.
Q17 Judy Mallaber: I meant
on the formula, not on the implementation of the formula. If we
had the formula, although obviously everybody would be able to
identify more money that we desperately need, would you feel that
it was fair as between regions?
Richard Crompton: As Janet has
said, no formula is perfect. We could always argue about some
of its manifestations but, yes, in general terms everyone in the
East Midlands is content that the formula itself is sound and,
were it to be properly implemented, we would feel we were getting
a fair share of the nation's resource that is being put to policing.
Q18 Judy Mallaber: Have you
been able to influence the formula when it has been drawn up?
Janet Birkin: No. Well, let me
clarify that, Judy. When we knew that there were to be changes
to the formula, there was consultation to which all authorities
could contribute. We feel that the decision taken at the time
with the actual funding formula that we have now would be seen
to be fair. It feels about right for us.
Even if we had the additional £19 million—which
would go some way, as Richard has pointed out—we have to
remember that we have a £17 million budget deficit across
the East Midlands. We have also the £22 million of unfunded
risk, and we would have some difficult decisions to make about
where the money would be spent, because we would also want to
think about how we could invest in collaboration for some more
longer-term savings. We can only spend the money once. As for
the point you were alluding to, Judy, when you asked whether we
would see that fair across other regions, we have lost out for
a significant number of years.
I shall give you a comparison from region to
region. We all see much of it with regard to levels of officers.
We have the lowest number of officers. We have 24.6 police officers
to deal with 1,000 crimes across the region compared with the
North-East that would have 36.3 officers to deal with 1,000 crimes.
In police officer measurements, we are significantly disadvantaged.
Q19 Judy Mallaber: I am trying
to identify the particular different aspects involved. Does the
funding formula itself adapt? I know that we are not getting it
implemented, which is our first problem, but is it adapted to
take account of changes? If so, how regularly does it take account
of, for example, population changes, which is obviously an issue
for us in the East Midlands?
Richard Crompton: We smile because
it does, but only years after the event. For example, our current
funding is based on the mid-year population for 2004. As you will
all know, the East Midlands is a rapidly growing region. Northamptonshire
and Lincolnshire are the number two and three fastest growing
counties in the country. We have grown hugely since 2004, but
the funding formula is linked to the population estimates that
existed at that time. My understanding is that, when we go to
the next CSR, it will be based on the population estimates for
2008; none the less there will still be a considerable lag. Our
argument is that it would be possible to inject some additional
flexibility into the apportionment through the formula based on
the annual estimates of population through the Office for National
Statistics, but that is not done.
Janet Birkin: Adding to that point,
I am sure that the CLG would say that, even based on the 2004
population statistics, it will make some proportionate changes
to it; but clearly, once the CSR has been set, those are the population
figures that would be used. If we are talking about the East Midlands
where there is a significant increase—plus 11% is expected
by 2016—the demands of an ever-growing population are not
adjusted for. It continues, and is not dampened like the formula.
The demand for policing increases with an increase in population,
and the formula, because of damping, stays the same.
Q20 Judy Mallaber: Are there
any other particular features of our region that should be taken
into account, but you feel maybe aren't?
Richard Crompton: Yes, I believe
there are, as we've made clear—for example, the policing
grant disadvantages in the East Midlands. Of course, there are
other sources of funding as well. Specifically, I am thinking
of the Crime Fighting Fund, the Neighbourhood Policing Fund and
the capital allocations that are made each year. When you look
at each of those funds, again, we are significantly disadvantaged.
In relation to the Crime Fighting Fund, Lincolnshire police receive
the lowest level per capita of any force in the country,
and the region is, I think, the fourth most disadvantaged in the
country.
Q21 Judy Mallaber: How is
the funding for the Crime Fighting Fund determined? How is that
grant determined? What do they take into account?
Richard Crompton: I am not sure
we can answer that question today, if you will forgive me.
Judy Mallaber: It would be helpful, because
for us just to talk about the funding formula and not specific
grants, we need to be accurate.
Richard Crompton: We could certainly
supply the Committee with that detail.
Janet Birkin: It would be fair
to say, wouldn't it, Richard, that the Crime Fighting Fund was
set up specifically for forces to meet set police officer numbers?
Richard Crompton: Yes, indeed.
Janet Birkin: That has only recently
been relaxed to a degree to allow an element of work force modernisation
and changes in the work force mix, but any further additional
information, we can let you have.
Q22 Judy Mallaber: Richard,
which are the other grants again?
Richard Crompton: If I may, in
relation to the Neighbourhood Policing Fund, Derbyshire is the
lowest funded force of all, and we are the second-lowest funded
region in relation to that. It continues in relation to capital
grants—we are the third lowest region.
Q23 Judy Mallaber: Can I hold
you off about the Neighbourhood Policing Fund? To what extent
is Derbyshire underfunded because the authority and the chief
constable at the time did not want to apply for PCSOs, or is that
not relevant?
Janet Birkin: I think that, in
truth, it isn't relevant, and I don't say that in any defensive
way at all. At the time, the police authority and the chief constable,
because of our very low number of police officers, felt that money
was better funded in officers rather than PCSOs. Of course, the
Government brought in their 75% funding on PCSOs. Our numbers
would be comparable with neighbouring forces, had the final tranche
of PCSOs been allowed, but the Government withdrew that, which
is one of the reasons why we are the lowest funded.
Q24 Judy Mallaber: So Derbyshire
didn't start at a lower base because of that original decision?
Janet Birkin: Yes, which we felt
was the right decision at the time.
Q25 Judy Mallaber: And the
other fund you were about to go on to?
Richard Crompton: The final fund
is capital allocation. Again, the East Midlands received the third
lowest level per capita across the nine regions in the country.
Q26 Judy Mallaber: It would
be helpful to have a few more details about how they determine
those, and where we fit in into that. Otherwise we are not doing
the full picture.
You mentioned the CSR. We don't yet know what
the arrangements are for the next one. What effect has that delay
had in terms of how you are planning to use and allocate resources?
Janet Birkin: We really welcome
the fact that we have a three-year CSR period, because it means
that our planning and budgetary decisions are much better informed.
However, as we've said earlier, we were disappointed that, at
the same time, there wasn't the opportunity, or the Government
didn't take the decision, to phase out the damping and the floor.
One of the issues caused by having a late response on the new
CSR period and if our grant funding is cut back, which is anticipated,
as was said earlier by the Chairman, because of the current economic
climate—much of our costings will be around staffing at
80%—will be that clearly, police officer numbers will have
to reduce. That is the only way that we can make quick changes
to our budget, whereas if we had a longer lead-in time, maybe
that would not be affected in quite the same way.
Q27 Judy Mallaber: I don't
know much about the police allocation formula working group. Can
you tell me what it is, how effective it is, whether we have East
Midlands representatives on it and which bits of this process
it has a part to play in?
Janet Birkin: The police allocation
funding formula group is part of the CLG. It works closely with
the Home Office through Michael Romberg's area. It is a group
that is re-looking at the funding formula. We did not know that
group existed until we invited Michael Romberg up to the region,
together with Karen Sussex who works on that group. We had a constructive
and productive conversation with them. We have never been invited
to sit on that group. That will be done at a national level, I
would imagine through ACPO and the APA. However, we were invited
to submit our evidence to that group, which we will do by the
end of this year. I believe they anticipate coming to a decision
by the middle of next year.
Q28 Judy Mallaber: Are police
forces and authorities consulted on the damping arrangements and
their impact, or do they just come out from on high and you have
no say until after the event, when you are complaining about it?
Janet Birkin: To use your words,
Judy, it comes from on high. There is no consultation whatsoever.
Whereas there is a fairly transparent process with regard to the
funding formula, there is none of that with regard to the damping
issue.
Q29 Judy Mallaber: Just a
final question about the impact. You have said how many extra
police officers we could have. You talked about some elements
of risk. You gave Derbyshire as an example and the number of gangs.
What are the main areas of potential risk that you would identify
as a result of the formula not being implemented?
Richard Crompton: It is best answered
in this way. I have drawn attention, through my comments in relation
to organised crime, to one of the more dangerous elements of the
risk that we carry, but you will also appreciate that we have,
for example, to work in relation to the management of dangerous
offenders and sex offenders. We have to work in the area of child
exploitation. All of these things are either risks or emerging
risks within the East Midlands. Janet has also drawn attention
to the ratio of officers per crime. The amount spent in our region
compared with other regions does not compare favourably in relation
to each crime. At the neighbourhood level, we also see the results
of the year-on-year failure to implement the funding formula in
fewer officers at that level and a propensity among the forces
to remove officers from the neighbourhood level in order to fill
some of the gaps at the serious and organised end of the criminality
that we have to combat. So it is an across-the-board impact that
is felt within the region as a result of our funding difficulties.
Q30 Sir Peter Soulsby: You
tell us that, as a result of the funding that you have, the East
Midlands has a lower number of police officers per 1,000 crimes
than any other region. That could to some extent be choice in
how the money is spent. Is it also the case that the grant per
crime and spend per crime are at the bottom of the table, or are
they somewhere else?
Richard Crompton: Yes. Let me
give you the specific figures. In the East Midlands, in relation
to grant-to-crime ratios, the region receives £1,330 to deal
with every crime committed in the area. We compare that with the
North-East region, where the amount is £800 more in relation
to urban crime. I can give the figures for police officers per
crime again if you wish, but it is a similar situation. In relation
to the spend per crime, which is the other area that you were
interested in, in the East Midlands region, forces spend an average
of £1,950 on every crime committed. Again in the North-East
region—it feels like we're picking on the North-East region—they
actually spend £2,597. That's some £650 over what we
spend in the East Midlands.
Q31 Sir Peter Soulsby: That's
very helpful, thank you. You also referred to some of the specific
sources of funding that the forces receive. I just wonder whether,
if you take all those specific grants together, you could give
us a flavour of where the East Midlands comes in terms of funding.
Richard Crompton: I'm not, at
the moment, able to parcel them all together, but in each of those
specific areas, we are at the lower end of the apportionment in
relation to other regions across the country.
Q32 Chairman: Could you do
the sums for us and let us have a new total?
Richard Crompton: Absolutely,
yes.
Janet Birkin: Perhaps I could
add to that, Richard, for Sir Peter. If you take the Crime Fighting
Fund, we're the fourth lowest funding per head of population.
If you take the Neighbourhood Policing Fund, we're the second
lowest. If you take capital grants, we're the third lowest level
of capital grant. We're the fourth lowest for grant funding per
head. Clearly, when you put all that together, we are going to
come in at around the fourth lowest, I would anticipate.
Q33 Sir Peter Soulsby: Increasingly,
forces are collaborating together in the East Midlands, as elsewhere.
Could you give us a flavour of to what extent synergies have been
achieved as a result of that collaboration?
Richard Crompton: Yes—perhaps
I could start off, Janet? We are quite proud of what's been achieved
in the East Midlands in relation to collaboration. We have been
collaborating together for a decade or so now in the East Midlands
Special Operations Unit, which you may well be familiar with.
It is a specialist resource to which all forces and authorities
contribute: some 160 officers and staff are there to help us address
serious and organised crime right across the region. It is something
which has been identified by the inspectorate as good practice,
and indeed has been held up as an example that others might follow.
Since the debate on force amalgamations from
2005 and since it was decided that forces would not amalgamate
but that emphasis would be on collaboration, we have kept a full-time
team working on our behalf in Newark, working up ever more opportunities
to collaborate. At the moment, we collaborate on round about 67
issues across the East Midlands region. Of those, there are some
very significant areas, such as, for example, witness protection,
which is looking to share the responsibility for that across the
region and actually provides a model, which I anticipate we will
see more and more next year and in the years to come, of hubs
within the region, if I may describe them as that, to provide
each of the five forces with specialist resource. Specialist covert
technical support would be another example where we see the benefit
of additional collaboration.
We have made significant savings through collaborating
together on procurement. We have also, it has to be said, managed
to bring into the region significant sums of money through Government
because of our collaborative style. For example, over £8
million was brought in last year and this year to enable us to
invest in over 5,000 mobile data devices, which will free up officer
time and make them more efficient. It has been, I think, an important
element of the way in which we not only manage money but also
manage the operational risk that we face, but I would have to
say that it is not the panacea, and it will certainly not solve
all our problems.
Q34 Sir Peter Soulsby: I recognise
that, and I recognise that it is not just about the money when
you collaborate, but I wonder whether you have actually tried
to quantify the financial effects of the collaboration.
Richard Crompton: In terms of—?
Sir Peter Soulsby: In terms of
savings. You mentioned something as you were going through there;
I just wondered whether you have tried to put them together.
Richard Crompton: In terms of
the amounts saved and the amount brought into the region, we can
certainly give you hard figures. Again, I have to say that the
amount saved does not amount to a massive amount of money. We
are in a position where collaboration tends to enable us to provide
an enhanced operational response and resource in the region, as
opposed, at the moment, to making much in the way of hard cash
savings, although, going back to procurement, I think it was £1.3
million through procurement. When you add together the total of
all our cash savings and the additional money that has been brought
into the region, it is just shy of £12 million.
Q35 Sir Peter Soulsby: If
amalgamation were back on the table, would that make a significant
difference? Is there the prospect of big savings from amalgamations?
Richard Crompton: In 2005, I led
the team which looked at this in the East Midlands and we costed
what it would amount to to bring all five forces together in the
East Midlands; the total cost was around £95 million. It
would have taken a decade to have recouped that amount of money.
To hammer that home, they were not just our figures; they were
audited through the Home Office and we agreed on that sort of
figure. It is true to say that there are savings to be made, but
it requires a very significant injection of cash to get it started
and it would take an awful long time to see the benefit in terms
of cash.
Sir Peter Soulsby: Thank you
very much.
Q36 Chairman: Can I just pick
up on two or three of those issues for people who follow our proceedings,
particularly our good friends in the press? Could you just make
it clear, Richard, that this base in Newark, which is very close
to me, is at the embryo regional stage?
Richard Crompton: I am very happy
to do that. It is in a unit on an industrial estate. It could
hardly be described as a prototype for a new regional headquarters,
I assure you.
Q37 Chairman: I know that,
but other people don't. Turning to EMSOU, the East Midlands Special
Operations Unit, I know it but I have lost sight of the funding.
Initially it was 100% Home Office funded, then it was 50% Home
Office funded. What is the position?
Richard Crompton: You are quite
correct and thank you for prompting me. We currently, this year,
enjoy £2 million funding for EMSOU, down to £1.5 million
next year and then we are told there is no further funding. While
we are grateful for what we have received, it does add to our
concerns about the future, given all the things that we have discussed
this afternoon.
Q38 Chairman: Just finally,
I am not entirely sure what the role of the Department for Communities
and Local Government is in this. That is more around the figures
and the material that goes into the formula. What I guess I am
saying is, who calls the shots? It is a Home Office issue, isn't
it?
Janet Birkin: You raise an interesting
question. Certainly, when we were threatened with capping, of
course it came from the Minister from the Department for Communities
and Local Government. Interestingly, it was a Policing Minister
last week who announced what the funding settlement was going
to be. I would imagine that there is an element of close working
and co-operation between the two Departments with regard to policing.
Chairman: Well, let's just keep that
in our imaginations, shall we? We won't put it higher than that.
Can I just thank you for coming? Our interviewing techniques,
Richard, may not be up to your standard and that of some of your
colleagues. When you are reflecting on the train back home and
think, "I should have confessed to this" or "I
should have told them that", don't be shy to drop us another
note if you want. I am grateful for your coming. We hope to produce
the report some time about the middle of February, so the sooner
you can let us have the material you promised us the better. Thank
you both very much.
Richard Crompton: Thank you for
the opportunity.
| 
