Supplementary memorandum submitted by
the Association of Police Authorities
(1) THE STRATEGIC
ARGUMENTS
Police Authorities set out the case in the APA's
Submission for CSR10, which was presented to Home Office in September
2010.
- Communities will be hit in several ways over
the next few years:
- direct cuts in public services;
- loss of jobs & businesses;
- concentrated rise in youth unemployment;
- decline in the state of repair of public infrastructure;
and
- decline in local pride.
- All of these are breeding grounds for community
unrest and loss of community spirit.
- It is only a short step from the present positive
momentum on Crime and Anti Social Behaviour to one of decline.
- ..... and once the momentum is lost it will be
very difficult to reverse quickly; lack of engagement with young
people now could generate problems in 10 years time.
- Direct reductions in Police funding are clear
and evident; it is the "hidden" cuts which are of more
concern to the service because the scale is as yet unknown (examples
include support from Home Office and national bodies such as NPIA;
partnership contributions in money and in kind; voluntary bodies
etc).
- At the same time as the resources are reducing,
expectations will increase—everyone looks to the Police
when things go wrong, or when other public services are unavailable.
(2) RISKS
Drawing on research and public/stakeholder consultation
undertaken recently by Zurich Municipal, the main risks facing
the Police service over the next few years are:
- Long term impact of budget cuts in terms of the
inability to preserve core services, and to maintain operational
infrastructure such as buildings, equipment and IT.
- Creation of gaps in front line staffing capacity
and capability. The impact may be direct—a reduction in
officer numbers—or indirect—front line officers being
diverted to cover support service vacancies. Cuts in training
will have a long term impact on capability, and there is an increased
risk of industrial action affecting continuity of service.
- Adverse media comment and reputational damage
resulting from the service being increasingly unable to meet public
expectations on emergency response, preventative work and community
reassurance.
- Weakening of partnership activity as all public
services are forced to cut back their scale of activity; as a
consequence increased reliance on volunteer support where continuity
and consistency cannot always be guaranteed.
The risks exist both national and locally. The natural
culture of the Police Service is such that emergencies will always
be dealt with, but other functions may increasingly have to be
sacrificed.
(3) FINANCIAL
IMPACT—PHASING
AND FRONT
LOADING
- The service was ready for a grant reduction over
four years:
Plans were in hand for:
(a) absorbing the reduction using natural wastage
rather than compulsory redundancy; and
(b) improvements to productivity and efficiency.
- Front loading makes the initial challenge harder
to achieve. By increasing the targets, it increases the risks.
- If the phasing of the reductions was reversed
so that only a third of the real reduction accrued in the first
two years, or even if it was equalised across the period, it would
reduce the reduction in real resources by between 3 & 5% over
the next two years (equivalent to reducing the short term cuts
by over £600 million p.a.).
- The Fire and Rescue Service faces the same challenges,
but CLG has agreed to end loading in order to create room for
manoeuvre. CLG has tried to reflect the variations in local resources
and funding capacity by introducing graduated floors.
- CLG has also calculated local Authority "spending
power" in 2011-12, and will provide a transition grant compensating
those Authorities which would have experienced a reduction beyond
a threshold for 2011-12 and 2012-13. This protection has not been
provided for Police.
(4) DIFFERENTIAL
IMPACT ON
AUTHORITIES
- Flat rate reductions give the impression of an
equal impact on all Authorities. This is far from the case. It
would only be equal if every Authority was funded in the same
proportions (in fact the range extends from 51% to 88% grant).
- The results are perverse in the sense that Authorities
with high proportions of grant are penalised twice, through loss
of grant and lower potential for Council Tax expansion.
- It is further accentuated and localised because
the Authorities with higher grants also tend to be those with
high needs, reflecting high deprivation or social tension.
- ..... so the areas most in need of support actually
fare worst under the settlement, despite the flat rate.
- It is also a fact that each Authority is starting
from a different point, and has made different degrees of progress
with efficiencies. Again, the ones that have achieved most on
efficiency stand to be hit the hardest in terms of what they will
be able to achieve in future.
- Individual Forces will have different establishment
profiles, and therefore potential for natural savings.
- Similarly, the availability of reserves varies
substantially between Authorities.
- Each Force/Authority is distinct in terms of
the problems it faces. There is no standard approach which can
be applied across the board.
(5) 2012-13 IS
EMERGING AS
THE CRITICAL
PERIOD FOR
POLICING
For the following reasons:
- there are further increases in the in year cuts
in funding;
- most of the easy savings will have been used
in 2010-11 and 2011-12;
- reserves will have been drawn down;
- the Olympics will be a commitment for all Forces;
and
- partner contributions will be hit by cuts in
other sectors.
This will mean that recruitment freezes will need
to be continued, and it is inevitable that there will be an impact
on what can be sustained locally. There is also the question mark
over the future planning for the service under the Government's
reform proposals. Many of the most significant changes that will
deliver permanent reductions in costs will take several years
to develop and implement. There is a risk that under the new arrangements,
Policing priorities are expressed more narrowly in terms of election
pledges, and that planning horizons are much shorter.
(6) AUTHORITIES
AND FORCES
REACTIONS TO
THE NEW
RESOURCE LEVELS
- ACPO Surveys indicate that:
- over half of Forces expect to have to use reserves
in 2011-12;
- 14 out of the first 17 returns show reduced headcount
(average reduction 1.6% uniformed/2.8% staff);
- all Forces expect the trend to continue, and
the scale to increase;
- only 60% of reductions will be achieved by natural
wastage;
- a minority expect to have to use A19;
- every Force is putting together voluntary and
compulsory redundancy packages; and
- grossed up, the four year projections envisage
11,500 fewer Police Officers (minus 8%) and 13,900 fewer Police
Staff (minus 13.6%).
- APA Surveys indicate that:
- most Authorities have plans to cover most of
the gap in 2011-12, but sometimes with use of reserves;
- ..... which is not a long term solution; they
will never be replaced;
- long term plans for savings/productivity improvement
are in preparation; and
- there is a limit on the capacity to reduce uniformed
numbers, so support staff and PCSOs will take the bigger share
of the reductions. The terms "front line" and "back
office" are not helpful in a Policing context. Both are independent;
the front line can only operate effectively if there is a well
resourced support function behind it.
- Value of non uniformed staff in supporting the
front line:
- technical/specialist posts;
- ICT/series of crime/research and data analysis;
- effectiveness relies on accurate and timely information—risk
for service in that support resources will lead to reduced effectiveness
and/or uniformed officers reverting to "support" roles;
and
- workforce transformation require more
specialist support.
- EXAMPLES ALREADY EMERGING OF HOW PARTNER ORGANISATIONS
ARE AFFECTED
- Anti Social Behavior enforcement units in local
Councils will no longer offer an out of hours service for noise
nuisance, fly tipping etc. The public will therefore contact the
police who will be expected to deal with these issues.
- Partners are considering withdrawing funding
for PCSOs in 2011-12.
- 150 community care wardens have been made redundant
by one Yorkshire Council. Community care wardens assisted 4,000
vulnerable and elderly people, moving now to a wrist band alarm
service. There is now the potential for increased calls to the
Police to fill the gap.
- Lifewise Centre in Rotherham. The centre engages
annually with over 20,000 people from South Yorkshire, through
a variety of means including Crucial Crew (15,000 year six pupils).
By providing an alternative educational input Lifewise seeks to
help reduce road casualties, help reduce primary and secondary
fires, reduce anti-social behavior and knife and gun crime. It
presents South Yorkshire Police and South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue
Service, in partnership with the four Local Authorities, NHS,
Safe at Last, Magistrates, Probation, YOTS and other partnerships,
with a unique opportunity to engage with people in a safe, realistic
and stimulating environment. Reduction in partnership funding
will impact on the long term viability of the centre.
- YCAP (Youth Crime Action Plan) Home Office Funding
is under threat from April 2011. This funds a large part of the
safer schools partnership which pays for full time officers to
be dedicated to schools.
- The Youth Offenders Scheme involves partnership
working between the Probation Service, Local Councils and the
Police, programmes are vulnerable due to cuts occurring in all
three partners budgets with implications in potential future youth
offending and reoffending.
- IMPACT OF WIDER GOVERNMENT CUTBACKS
Policing depends on the input
from other national and local services. Cuts in wider national
programmes will have an impact on Policing by reducing standards
and quality if life in ways which will ultimately lead to increases
in crime or community disorder.
Examples already identified
include:
Young Person's Guarantee
(£450 million)
Increase in Youth unemployment—already a significant
problem in many areas.
The Working Neighbourhoods
Fund (£50 million and possibly to be discontinued)
The good work to date will be lost and unemployment will rise.
Building Schools for the
Future (715 schools scrapped)
Money already spent is lost. Reduced learning facilities for
children.
Free School Meals (£125
million)
Government's child poverty target will not be met.
Homes and Communities Agency
Funding (£230 million)
Lack of affordable housing and poor housing quality in the
most deprived areas.
Education Area Based Grants
(including Connexions) £311 million
Hits the worst off hardest as many of these grants are to
tackle deprivation.
(7) LOOKING AHEAD
FOR POLICING—TRANSFORMATION
- The present business model is not sustainable
once the % cuts go into double figures; diminishing opportunities
exist to make marginal savings.
- The risk is that service quickly reduces across
the board—rather than refocusing on a new range of priorities
and aiming to deliver high quality across a narrower range.
- There is a limit to what can be removed through
traditional efficiency measures. Police has been taking costs
out for over 10 years; the future capacity is now limited.
- Savings in unit costs (remuneration) may offer
potential to cut costs by 1-2%. Similarly better planning for
overtime working will reduce costs at the margin, but overtime
may actually become a more cost effective option in future as
the numbers of officers declines.
- The service needs productivity improvement and
a more integrated approach to ICT/Standardisation.
- Selective collaborative approaches, extending
in a few cases perhaps to mergers, will have a powerful role to
play.
- Traditional marginal savings will deliver in
the short term; the evidence demonstrates this for 2011-12. Beyond
the first two years, the response will need to be on a different
level:
- workforce productivity—better use of technology
business process improvement;
- use of volunteers (part time—specials:
use of volunteers for support roles as well as operational);
- integration of support services for all three
front line emergency services;
- regional/collaborative approaches to everything
behind the front line;
- Police/Fire—joint provision of Community
Safety services. This would better utilise risk based capacity
on the Fire Service and potentially release more time for community
Police Officers;
- Joint use of facilities; and
- Removal of specific functions.
January 2011
|
