The East Midlands has been identified as an
area, which faces high risk in terms of counter terrorism, major
crime, serious and organised crime, critical incidents (eg firearms),
civil contingencies, strategic roads policing and public order.
Unfortunately, funding for the East Midlands Region does not reflect
this level of risk.
The five police authorities in the East Midlands
Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and
Northamptonshire have established the East Midlands Police Authorities
Joint Committee, which provides a focus for joint working to enhance
effective policing across the region.
All of the five East Midlands Police Forces
are disadvantaged by the operation of current funding arrangements.
They are concerned that the financial situation will impact on
further collaborative work and the delivery of effective policing
across the region.
The East Midlands receives the 4th lowest level
of general Government funding for the Police and the 4th lowest
level of grant funding per head across the 9 UK Government regions.
— Lincolnshire Police Authority receives
the lowest level of grant per head of any force nationally.
1.2 The East Midlands is subsidising other
regions
The Government decision to phase in the new
funding formula means that each year forces in the East Midlands
Region subsidise taxpayers in other regions. On average, each
East Midlands resident loses out on £4.31 of police funding.
This totals some £19 million annually across our region.
This is the second biggest regional loss of grant nationally.
— Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire suffer
the 4th and 5th biggest loss of grant nationally.
1.3 The East Midlands receives the lowest
level of specific grants
The Government provides these specific grants
in addition to the general grant to promote new government initiatives
eg Neighbourhood Policing. The general grant formula is not used
to distribute this grant. Instead different criteria or indeed
a bidding process will be used to distribute these grants.
Grants for specific policing activity include:
The Crime Fighting Fund: which was introduced
in 2000 to fund additional police officers. The East Midlands
receives the 4th lowest funding per head of population. This translates
into fewer additional police officers.
— Lincolnshire has the lowest level of
funding nationally per head of population from this fund.
The Neighbourhood Policing Fund: was introduced
in 2004 to fund additional Police Community Support officers to
enhance community policing and focus on anti-social behaviour.
These officers play an important role in helping forces build
confidence in local communities. The East Midlands has the 2nd
lowest level of funding per head of population from the Neighbourhood
Policing Fund. This translates into fewer additional police community
support officers to tackle anti-social behaviour.
— Derbyshire has the lowest level of funding
per head of population nationally from this fund.
Capital Grants: fund major building projects
and maintain authorities' property estates. These grants also
help forces to invest in new buildings and technology to generate
savings for the future. These grants have failed to keep pace
with inflation. The East Midlands receives the 3rd lowest level
of capital grant per head of population nationally. This impacts
on the ability of the East Midlands to invest in essential infrastructure
and to generate efficiency savings.
1.4 The Council Tax Yield for the East Midlands
is low
The tax-base for East Midlands' forces is much
lower than for shire forces in other Government regions. The East
Midlands has a greater proportion of properties in the lower council
tax bands (A, B & C) than most other regions. This can be
measured by the tax-base per head of population.
Effectively this means that East Midlands' forces
are in a worse position than most other regions to generate council
tax income at a time when government grants are more and more
restricted. Put simply an extra pound on the council tax bill
for each household in the East Midlands will raise much less than
a pound on the council tax bill for each household in the South
East or South West or indeed the West Midlands.
— Nottinghamshire has one of the lowest
council tax yields of any shire force nationally.
— Leicestershire, Derbyshire & Lincolnshire
are also in the bottom quartile for council tax yields in shire
forces.
1.5 The East Midlands has less to spend on
Policing than most other Government Regions
Relatively low government grants coupled with
lower than average council tax income means that overall funding
for policing across the East Midlands is low. The East Midlands
has the fourth lowest available spending per head across the nine
government regions.
— Lincolnshire has the lowest spending
per head of any force nationally.
— In the last five years Northamptonshire,
Leicestershire, Lincolnshire and Derbyshire have all been subject
to Government imposed capping limits.
1.6 Population Growth presents another funding
challenge
The East Midlands is the fastest growing region
nationally. The regional population is estimated to grow by 11%
by 2016. This growth in population is 33% faster than the national
average. The East Midlands has already had the second fastest
population growth between 2001-07. This places even greater pressure
on policing services in the region, particularly as this population
growth is slow to feed into increases in grant funding.
— A study by the University of Sheffield
in 2008 showed Northamptonshire and Lincolnshire had the second
and third highest population change between 1981 and 2006 of anywhere
in the country.
1.7 Regional Funding Gap
Police Authorities across the region estimate
that they will face a funding gap of some £17 million in
total next year, just to maintain the level of service they provide
currently. Many forces plan to use reserves to help close a significant
share of this funding gap. This is at best a short term strategy
as these reserves will soon run out.
2. THE POLICING
RISK IN
THE REGION
2.1 The region faces a higher level of policing
risk
Most forces across the East Midlands face average
or indeed above average policing risk. While crime levels in the
East Midlands have fallen substantially over recent years, the
region still faces substantial policing risks compared to most
other regions.
The simplest measure of policing risk is the level
of crime per 1,000 population. The East Midlands has the fourth
highest level of crime per 1,000 population of the nine government
regions.
— The HMIC study on Force's capability
to deal with Serious and Organised crime "Closing the Risk
Gap" identified the East Midlands as the most at risk region
in the Country.
— HMIC Force Threat Ranking for Serious
and Organised crime, across 43 English and Welsh forces, ranked
two East Midlands forces in the top 50% of forces nationally—Nottinghamshire
(16th) and Derbyshire (19th).
— The same threat ranking showed the other
three East Midlands forces still faced significant policing risk—Leicestershire
(24th), Northamptonshire (26th) and Lincolnshire (32nd).
More specifically:
— Counter Terrorism continues to place
heavy demands on the East Midlands. A number of national counter
terrorism incidents have originated in the East Midlands. This
means that our region is heavily involved in key counter terrorism
operations aimed at reducing the national counter terrorism threat.
— Despite significant reductions, Nottinghamshire
faces one of the highest levels of crime per 1.000 population.
2.2 Funding does not match Policing Risk
The above average policing risk faced by the
East Midlands region is not matched by above average funding.
The East Midlands Region has the lowest level of grant nationally
relative to the level of crime in the East Midlands Region. Current
it receives some £1,330 to deal with every crime committed
in the East Midlands Region, compared to the North East Region
which receives some £800 more in grant to deal with every
crime in their region.
2.3 The East Midlands has the lowest per-capita
spending per crime
Based on current 2009-10 budgets and the latest
2008-09 annual crime figures, East Midlands forces spend £1,950
for every crime in their region. This is the lowest level of spending
nationally.
For comparison the Met has £3,127 to spend for
every crime while forces in the North East Region have £2,597
to spend for every crime in their region. Put another way North
Eastern forces have nearly £650 extra to spend on dealing
with every crime committed in their region.
2.4 Funding shortfalls mean fewer police officers
in the Region
The low level of funding relative to crime levels
means that the East Midlands has relatively fewer police officer
to tackle each crime committed in the East Midlands.
Forces across the region have 24.6 officers to deal
with every 1,000 crimes committed in our region. This is the lowest
number of officers relative to crime numbers across the nine regions.
In the North East region forces have some 36.3 officers to deal
with every 1,000 crimes committed in their region.
3. STRIKING A
FAIRER BALANCE
3.1 The existing formula would deliver equitable
funding if fully implemented
We believe that the existing Police Grant funding
formula recognises the risks faced by the East Midlands region
and the relative needs of its five Police Forces. The formula
has however not been fully implemented. The use of damping arrangements
over the past six years has protected funding for other regions,
but means that the East Midlands doesn't receive funding to match
its policing need. If the formula were implemented entirely, it
would deliver an extra £19 million of Government funding
to police the East Midlands, which is very close to the extra
£22 million which the five East Midlands Police Authorities
estimate they need to spend an to address the immediate policing
risks that they face.
East Midlands' Police Authorities have worked together
with their MPs to lobby for a fairer grant settlement and the
full implementation of the funding formula.
3.2 The Police Grant Funding Formula should
be implemented in full
Police forces in the East Midlands are disappointed
that the opportunity wasn't taken to phase in the new grant arrangements
over the current three year funding settlement, which would enable
forces who stood to lose grant, time to plan for this.
It is frustrating that the Government has chosen
to adopt this approach for most other classes of authorities (education,
fire and district authorities) but has not done this for the Police.
3.3 Police authorities are concerned that
tighter funding settlements will make reform more difficult in
the future
With far tighter funding settlements in the
future, the East Midlands region is concerned that there will
be even less opportunity to redress the imbalance in funding between
the East Midlands and other regions. This doesn't just create
a greater risk across the East Midlands but also nationally. Effectively
it means that resources on a national level are not being targeted
at those areas of greatest policing risk, which undoubtedly will
impact on national crime levels.
4. FUTURE FORMULA
CHANGES
4.1 The Current Funding Formula provides a
reasonable assessment of policing need
The Department for Communities & Local Government
and the Home Office have recently embarked on yet another review
of the funding formula. Police authorities realise that no funding
formula can provide the "perfect" distribution of resources.
The current formula has been developed and refined over many years
to offer a relatively objective grant distribution system and
provides a good assessment of the needs faced by all Police Authorities.
Changes to the fundamentals to the system will simply
risk making funding disparities much worse. Specific reforms to
the current system would be much more effective in ensuring funding
equality.
4.2 Population Growth presents a challenge
within the formula
The main flaw with the current funding formula is
the way it deals with population and the time lags inherent in
the formula, which fail to recognise the pace of population growth.
The emphasis on historic capital spending to distribute capital
resources rather than future investment need is also questionable.
4.3 Any changes to the formula would be ineffective
unless fully implemented
Another revision of the funding formula is worthless
if there is no commitment to ensure its implementation. While
damping arrangements remain in their current form, the funding
formula has little impact on the grant received by individual
authorities.
4.4 Specific Policing Grants need to keep
pace with inflation
Specific grants (eg Neighbourhood Policing Fund,
Crime Fighting Fund) have failed to keep pace with inflation.
This means that the value of these grants continues to be eroded
over time.
Similarly the Capital Grant that authorities receive
has also failed to keep pace with inflation. This puts in jeopardy
the important new projects that the Government is seeking to encourage
and equally makes it harder for East Midlands Authorities to invest
in projects that will generate longer term savings, for example
IT investment to link up systems and deliver effective shared
services across a number of authorities.
5. INVESTING
TO SAVE
5.1 Collaboration has provided more cost effective
Policing in the East Midlands
Current funding levels have already placed East
Midlands forces under great pressure to deliver efficiency savings
and look at new and innovative ways to be more efficient.
Police Authorities within the East Midlands are at
the heart of collaboration with a Joint Committee and Regional
Collaboration Team established to look at ways that East Midlands
forces can work together to improve the service they provide and
save money at the same time.
The East Midlands Special Operations Unit (EMSOU)
is perhaps the best example of this. EMSOU brings together specialist
officers and police staff from across the region to tackle serious
and organised crime affecting the whole region. The unit has already
been identified nationally (by the Policing Minister Office, Cabinet
Office, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary) as an example of good
practice. It is identified in the Green Paper as a model for other
regions to follow.
5.2 Maintaining Home office funding is important
for the future of collaboration
Authorities and forces in the East Midlands
have lobbied hard maintain Home Office support for the unit up
until 2010-11. Clearly it is of real concern to forces in the
region that this successful unit may be placed in jeopardy with
the withdrawal of government funding at a time when all five contributing
forces are faced with considerable budget pressures.
5.3 Collaboration often requires significant
initial investment
Further collaboration will require some initial investment.
The current level of capital funding means that the East Midlands
forces are not as well placed as many regions nationally to invest
in these collaborative opportunities and generate savings for
the future.
Where the region is able to invest we do this to
good effect. The five East Midlands police forces submitted a
joint bid for government funding for mobile data. The region received
17% of the government funding available and will deliver 46% of
the national target number of mobile data devices.
6. CONCLUSION
6.1 Under-funding is harming policing in the
East Midlands
The East Midlands is not a well funded region
and funding doesn't match the policing risk. The East Midlands
region has the fourth lowest level of funding to deal with the
3rd highest level of crime per thousand population nationally.
This funding impacts directs on the officer resources and indeed
other resources that forces across the East Midlands have to deal
with crimes in their area.
6.2 The most effective way to deal with the
funding inequality faced by the region is through the full implementation
of the Police Grant funding formula
It has taken too long to implement the Funding Formula
in full, despite the finding of the Flanagan Review. East Midlands
Authorities have few major concerns with the formula, apart from
the way it deals with population growth. They re-iterate their
position that the funding formula is implemented in full.
November 2009
