This resource is from the Committees section. This is report 11 of the 25 November 2004 meeting of the MPA Committee, and contains a summary of the Government’s proposals for further reform of policing set out in the recent White Paper: Building Communities, Beating Crime - A better police service for the 21st century.

Sections available here:

• Police Reform White Paper: Building Communities, Beating Crime - A better police service for the 21st century
  • Summary
  • A. Recommendation
  • B. Supporting information
  • C. Race and equality impact
  • D. Financial implications
  • E. Background papers
  • F. Contact details
  • Appendix 1: Building Communities, Beating Crime
  • Appendix 2: Formal review of partnerships (CDRPs)

Police Reform White Paper: Building Communities, Beating Crime - A better police service for the 21st century

Report: 11
Date: 25 November 2004
By: Clerk

Summary

This report contains a summary of the Government’s proposals for further reform of policing set out in the recent White Paper. The report also summarises the Government’s proposals for a formal review of the partnership provisions of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

It draws attention to headline issues of particular interest to the MPA. It proposes a process for developing a considered response to the proposals to be submitted to the APA and the Government.

A. Recommendation

1. That the Authority welcome the overall direction for policing set out in the White Paper, and the objectives of the Review of Partnerships.

2. That the Clerk prepare a draft response to the White Paper, following consultation with the Chair and Deputy Chairs of the Authority and Committee Chairs, for consideration by the Authority at its meeting in January 2005.

3. That the Clerk prepare a draft submission to the Review of Partnerships for consideration by the Authority at its meeting in December 2004.

B. Supporting information

A copy of the White Paper will be supplied to Members on request to the Clerk. An electronic copy is available on the Home Office Police Reform website.

Overview and summary

The White Paper has three main objectives

• Spreading neighbourhood policing to every community and embedding a genuinely responsive customer service culture
• Workforce modernisation to ensure the service is fully equipped to deliver these changes
• Greater involvement of the community and citizens in determining how their communities are policed, and a stronger role for CDRPs in setting and delivering local priorities.

The White Paper sets out “10 commitments to the public” and “10 commitments to the police service” and how these will be delivered.

The detailed proposals contained in the White Paper are summarised in Appendix 1.

The Government has also announced proposals to review the partnership provisions of the Crime & Disorder Act 1998. Details of the Review and its terms of reference are set out in Appendix 2.

The Government’s overriding aim is to make CDRPs “the most effective possible vehicle for tackling crime, anti-social behaviour and substance misuse in their communities.”

Issues for the MPA

General

• Support the broad thrust of the Government’s proposals and the overall direction for policing proposed in the White Paper
• Welcome the fact that “Safer Neighbourhoods” has become a model for neighbourhood policing.
• Need to press the case for increased funding if the Government’s aspirations for policing are to be realised in a sustainable way.
• Welcome the government’s proposal to examine 3 year funding settlements for police authorities
• Note that the Government propose to change the membership of police authorities outside London to strengthen linkages with local authorities, and to reinforce the partnership between local and strategic governance levels. However, it makes no specific proposals for London and so leaves unresolved questions around relationships between the MPA and the Mayor and GLA

Neighbourhood policing

• Support the commitment to roll-out neighbourhood policing nationally and welcome the fact that the proposed model reflects the “Safer Neighbourhoods” model pursued by MPS.
• Emphasise that neighbourhood policing is resource intensive and that London and the rest of the country will need additional resources to deliver it in a sustainable way.
• Support the development of national customer service standards which can be built upon locally but draw attention to resource implications

Workforce modernisation

• Support the proposals to equip police officers with leadership skills at all levels.
• Note the intention to set a mandatory qualification for BCU commanders
• Welcome the new approach to career development and multiple points of entry into police ranks.
• Welcome the proposals for measures to improve the recruitment, retention and progression of minority ethnic, female and other under-represented staff
• Strongly welcome the new duty on provincial police authorities to promote diversity within authorities and the service
• Oppose proposals to reduce police authorities’ role in appointment of ACPO ranks (police authorities will only be consulted on the chief officer’s shortlist). Emphasise continuing need for MPA involvement in appointment of Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and Assistant Commissioners.

Greater involvement of citizens and communities

• Support the need for more responsive, citizen-focused policing services
• Welcome the proposals for a new duty on police authorities to ensure that local people are provided with information about local policing
• Note the Government’s recognition that local councillors should act as advocates in relation to local people’s concerns about policing or community safety and that any community “trigger mechanism” should only operate through local councillors.
• Welcome the proposed review of Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships.
• Note and broadly welcome the proposals that accountability and scrutiny arrangements should be exercised collaboratively at neighbourhood, CDRP and police authority level and that police authorities have responsibility for ensuring that robust accountability mechanisms are in place with minimum bureaucracy.

Police authorities

• Welcome the stronger role for police authorities in ensuring local community engagement at CDRP and neighbourhood level
• Welcome the clearer role for police authorities in holding forces to account, including through appraisal of chief officers
• Express strong reservations about removing the category of magistrate member of police authorities
• Express strong concerns about restricting members’ right to elect the Chair of the Authority

The consultation period ends on 1 February, and the APA invites contributions by no later than 28 January 2005. The APA is to hold a Special APA Plenary on 1 December to discuss the White Paper and to seek views on the Review of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 also announced today.

C. Race and equality impact

The White Paper sets out proposals intended to make policing services more responsive to everyone in the community, and addresses the need for special measures to reach out to minorities, and specifically to enhance recruitment from minority ethnic communities. It also proposes a new duty on police authorities outside London to promote diversity, echoing the provisions of S.404 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, which already places such a duty on the MPA.

D. Financial implications

The White Paper promotes a vision for policing that will require additional resources to achieve and sustain.

E. Background papers

White Paper; related APA Circulars.

F. Contact details

Report author: David Riddle

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1: Building Communities, Beating Crime

A better police service for the 21st century
Government Policy Paper November 2004

Note that references are to paragraph and page numbers in the White Paper.

Chapter 1 – Building a better police service

This chapter sets out the Government’s approach to reform; what it is seeking to achieve; the role of the police and what reform will mean for the public and the police service.

• Government’s goal: to make policing better – to build safe, secure, stable communities

Central/local control

• Government’s role:
  • set the national direction, strategic framework, priorities and targets
  • provide resources and powers to tackle crime/anti-social behaviour
  • protect public by intervening where demonstrable failure
  • ensure coherence/consistency in policing practices/systems in national interest
  • build confidence and empower people to keep their own communities safe
• Police authorities and chief officers responsible for delivering effective, responsive policing to communities they serve

Role of the police service

• Police role should continue to be broad based – both to maintain legitimacy and increase trust and confidence
• Police role is about both preventing/detecting crime and reassuring the public
• Need a shift towards more proactive, problem-solving, intelligence-led policing

Partnerships

• Crime and anti-social behaviour not for the police alone
• Effective partnerships vital both
  • locally with other criminal justice agencies, local government, health, children’s services, business, voluntary sector; and
  • nationally with SOCA and Security Services
• Also about individuals and communities recognising their responsibilities – policing a shared undertaking with communities

Future direction of policing

• Revitalised Neighbourhood Policing
• Responsiveness, customer service and community engagement – moving from policing with consent to proactive engagement & co-operation of communities
• A new police workforce
• Effective links from local to national level
• Clearer, stronger tripartite partnership

Chapter 2 – Progress to date and the case for reform

This chapter sets out progress to date; why further reform is necessary and how this should develop.

Progress to date

• successes to date: reductions in crime; highest ever police numbers; funding increases; implementation of NIM
• Recognition of effective partnership working - formation of LCJBs; CDRPs; introduction of ASBOs
• Establishment of a performance culture through the Police Standards Unit (PSU) and HMIC and provision of information via i-Quanta and performance monitors

Drivers for change

• Changing world places new demands on police eg modern technology; public expectations
• Falls in fear of crime have not matched actual reductions
• Crime is falling but still too high – key issues
  • Prolific and Priority Offenders
  • Violent/gun crime
  • Knife crime
  • Drug and alcohol misuse related offending

Proposed solutions

• Neighbourhood policing with real community engagement in identifying problems; prioritising action and shaping solutions
• Customer focused policing to improve public confidence and satisfaction, including e.g. tackling impact of police use of stop and search powers and implementing recording of stops
• Community engagement – giving people a greater say in determining local community safety priorities, encouraging Specials and revitalising Neighbourhood Watch
• Building a modernised workforce, reducing bureaucracy and eliminating discrimination
• Further training and development for the whole police workforce required to achieve necessary culture change
• Tackling terrorism, including through an expanding the Security Service; expanding Special Branch and tackling Organised Crime including through setting up SOCA
• Clearer and stronger local accountability arrangements – bolstered and simplified
• Putting the law-abiding citizen at the heart of the reform agenda

Chapter 3: A new relationship between the police and the public building trust and confidence

Government’s aims:

• accessible, responsive, neighbourhood policing capable of dealing with 21st century challenges of crime and anti-social behaviour across all force.
• Communities who know who is responsible for their area with dedicated neighbourhood policing teams
• New culture of customer responsiveness and guaranteed standards of customer service
• New opportunities for local communities to have a say in local policing priorities

Neighbourhood policing (3.6 – 3.16)

• Roll-out of Neighbourhood Policing to all forces
• Dedicated “mixed economy” teams comprising officers/PCSOs/wardens etc providing a visible and accessible presence
• Emphasis on local problem-solving and responding directly to local priorities
• Greater community engagement, creating a more customer-focused police service

Neighbourhood Policing Fund (NPF) (3.17 – 3.18)

• New NPF to bring together CFF, PCSO funding, specials funding, workforce modernisation funding, some new money.
• Police authority/force bid for funding – bids need to attract partner support including match funding from e.g. LSP, local authority, CDRP. Bid at force level but constructed from proposals generated at BCU level.
• Funding would be to deliver neighbourhood policing contract – outcomes and targets to include minimum police and PCSO numbers, reassurance and crime reduction targets.

Reducing bureaucracy (3.19 – 3.23)

• New action line for officers to raise any questions relating to bureaucracy
• Police Bureaucracy Gateway to identify bureaucracy impact of new policies, legislation etc
• Home Office reform will help reduce burdens

Guaranteed standards of service (3.29 - 3.32)

• The public should have a consistent, high quality of service that meets their needs
• There will be national standards setting out the quality of service the police service is committed to provide, which can be built on locally
• By the end of 2006, police services will have to agree a `Contract` with their communities in order to reflect particular community needs
• This will improve the service the public will receive when they contact the police, and a system will be put in place to monitor the quality of service received by the public.

Single non-emergency number (3.33 – 3.37)

• Direct single non-emergency telephone number for the public, which will deal with non-emergency issues of policing, crime and anti-social behaviour.
• Core of the system to be in place by the end of 2006. Training to be provided for call handlers to equip them with skills in customer service.

Improving call handling (3.38-3.42)

• National Strategy to improve call handling
• HMIC Thematic Inspection on Contact Management
• Manual of best practice based on HMIC findings

Measuring public satisfaction (3.43-3.44)

• Public satisfaction to be measured through new performance indicators that focus on quality of service
• From April 2005, overall force performance will include satisfaction with victims of crime in relation to their experience
• This will be expanded to include victims of anti-social behaviour or `non-crime` users

Local priorities (3.56)

• Changes will be made to the way police performance is measured and inspected so that it reflects the priorities of the public and their views about the policing they receive. This will include measures about local priorities in PPAF.

Better information to the public (3.49-3.53)

• Dissemination of better information to the public about policing a necessary first step to increasing engagement and accountability
• Value in brining an array of information into one clear concise document summarising local policing for the public
• There will be a statutory minimum requirement outlining what each household can expect in terms of local policing information
• the minimum requirements will include information to be provided by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships to rationalise the way in which police specific and CDRP information is provided to the public

Increasing opportunities for engagement (3.57 – 3.62)

• Sets out what effective engagement looks like for the police service (page 67)
• Strengthening of statutory responsibilities on agencies to have arrangements in place to actively engage with communities at neighbourhood level
  • Duty on police authorities to ensure implementation of a strategy to secure community engagement at all levels – including neighbourhoods
  • Duty on the police in partnership with other bodies to implement the strategy and respond to neighbourhood concerns
  • Duty on CDRPs to oversee delivery of neighbourhood level priorities eg through Joint Tasking and Co-ordination Groups

Giving communities a stronger voice (3.65 – 3.76)

• Strengthening the role of local councillors in community safety issues
• Home Office to work with ODPM to develop the role of local councillors in acting as advocates to represent the views of the public about the services they receive and to support access to policing services
• Possibly building on the role of community safety officers in communicating concerns to local councillors
• Giving local councillors the right to “trigger action” about acute/persistent community safety/anti-social behaviour problems, subject to safeguards against vexatious or malicious use by communities, at 3 levels
  • Obtaining information
  • Requesting attendance by the police or other agency at a public meeting
  • Requiring action by the police or other agencies including local councils
• Record of dealing with such “trigger” requests to be monitored by local authority scrutiny committee.
• Further consultation on possibly including provision to “trigger” inspections (to be considered as part of wider review of Inspectorates)

BCU level (3.77-3.85)

• BCU Commander now one of the most important jobs in British Policing
• Greater empowerment and development of police leaders at BCU level, with possible introduction of specialist qualifications (see Chapter 4)
• Programme of work to:
  • Examine carefully role of BCU commander and their contribution to partnership working
  • Develop further key enablers of delegation to BCU level
  • Examine stronger mechanism for BCU commanders to be held accountable for their performance and investigate relationships with HQ and allocation of resources
• Production of clear guidance on BCU delegation and empowerment

Chapter 4: building a new workforce

Government’s aim: further modernisation of workforce to reinforce neighbourhood policing and build more responsive, citizen-focused service; increased use of police staff to release officers to frontline; professionalizing roles of both officers and staff; multiple entry points; strengthening leadership; and making faster progress on diversity.

Role of constable (4.2)

• No intention of diminishing role of constable or of making constables employees of police authorities.

Extended police family (4.23 – 4.31)

• Develop minimum set of powers for PCSOs and empower forces to be able to grant power of detention to PCSOs
• Develop role profiles for PCSOs and training packages
• Develop national recruitment for PCSOs
• Ensure terms and conditions provide right rewards
• Enhance career structure for PCSOs

Developing senior police staff and police staff transfer into police grades (4.32 – 4.40)

• High Potential Development Scheme for police staff
• Role for police authorities in appointment of senior police staff same as for senior officer appointments
• Make it easier for suitably qualified police staff to become officers

Professionalising the workforce (4.42 – 4.69)

• Government will define career pathways and promote take-up
• National recruitment standards to become mandatory
• Multiple points of entry, with pre-entry training for those entering for outside
• Consider more attractive graduate recruitment including accelerated career development
• External Qualifications including accreditation of prior learning (APEL)
• Use PPAF to monitor PDR scheme
• Enhanced training leading to specialised qualification for people wishing to take on BCU commander role, to become mandatory over time.
• Senior Careers Advisory Service

Diversity (4.70 – 4.84)

• Changes to regulations to prevent police officers being members of organisations whose aims, objectives or pronouncements are incompatible with s71 of the Race Relations Act 1976 (e.g. BNP, NF, Combat 18)
• Standards for language skills will be developed so that forces can take the obvious advantage of taking those skills into account in recruiting where this is operationally justified. Such candidates will need to meet the other elements of the national recruitment standard.
• National panel of assessors from minority ethnic minority communities to be set up.
• National Recruitment Standards will require that all assessment and selection panels include representatives from ethnic minority communities and that where insufficient local assessors are available, members of the national panel will take part in the assessment centres instead.
• A standard exit interview procedure will be introduced to help understand why people are leaving the service.
• The Government will work with the NBPA in support of its development plan and strengthen the support network for minority officers.
• Specific exercises will be run to encourage members of ethnic minorities with successful careers in other professions to apply for lateral entry to the police service having met the same standards for entry as majority community candidates
• Promotion and progression procedures will be reviewed to ensure they are fair, transparent and have no adverse impact on any group.
• A new duty on police authorities to promote diversity within the police force and authority.
• Barriers to the recruitment of women will be reviewed and more flexible, family friendly working patterns made available
• The stages of the promotion process will be examined to identify barriers to the progression of women and take steps to remove them.
• The service will be consulted on the introduction of challenging progression targets to ensure greater representation of women at higher levels of the service.

PNB/PAB/PSC/PPAF issues (4.85 – 4.92)

• Explore links between PAB and police staff unions
• Further pay reform rewarding performance amongst other things and providing local autonomy within national structure
• Develop proposals for change in officer deployment
• Introduce more stretching sickness absence targets
• Encourage forces to assess people management skills in PDRs at all levels
• Develop measures within PPAF to reflect broader range of HR activities, especially effectiveness of force PDR systems

Chapter 5: Ensuring effectiveness

Government’s aim: clear national framework which supports locally responsive policing; intelligence-led policing at every level; sharper focus on performance; culture of change and self-improvement in service; right police structure and support to meet challenges of today; clearer stronger methods to ensure all communities enjoy responsive, citizen-focused policing.

National Framework (5.5- 5.25)

• A more tightly focused National Policing Plan;
• Not persuaded that need a national police force but do need national consistency, where appropriate (eg Bichard recommendations)
• A new Code of Practice to help embed the systematic application of the National Intelligence Model;
• Provision of performance information to the public (see Chapter 3)
• A new grading mechanism for police performance – with new arrangements for rewarding success and addressing under-performance.

Freedom & control (5.26 – 5.29)

• Greater freedom & earned autonomy for forces and BCU’s graded ‘excellent’, including:-
  • ‘Inspection Breaks’ for rolling 12 month periods
  • Additional funding and freedom on targets
• Detailed proposals to be developed in time for 2006/7 financial year

Intervention and inspection (5.35-5.40 & see also 5.116/7 re police authorities)

• Powers of intervention in forces/BCUs introduced by Police Reform Act 2002 to be simplified in light of experience and practical operation of Police Standards Unit “engagement” with forces – to be based on “stages fo engagement “ protocol
• Trigger for intervention to be widened from an HIC inspection, to include wider range of information
• Government to review inspection regime for public services within Criminal Justice System to ensure better coherence on cross-cutting issues.
• Detailed proposals to be developed through consultation early in new year.

National Policing Improvement Agency (5.42- 5.55)

• Agency will be set up to drive performance improvements
• Board will be a small body with significant tripartite decision-making invested in it
• Will lead to significant rationalisation of existing national landscape eg PITO, Centrex, ACPO policy work, some HO functions with full rationalisation by end of 2006/7
• HMIC’s inspection role and PSU intervention role will remain outside the agency
• Will make use of existing powers, codes, regulations etc
• No new resources

Level 2 crime/force structures/lead forces (5.56 – 5.66)

• Creation of dedicated teams across regions or groups of forces to co-ordinate effort against level 2 crime
• Proposal to create a duty on police authorities to co-operate with neighbourhood authorities to tackle level 2 crime
• HMIC commissioned to examine force structures in England and Wales
• Explore further development of arrangements for lead forces or specialisms

SOCA (5.67)

• A new Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) to bring together existing agencies into a groundbreaking new national organisation (para 2.35)

Police funding (5.68 – 5.75)

• Update funding formula, including possible link between performance expectations and resource allocation, and incorporate specific grants
• Examine how and to what extent 3-year settlements should be used for police funding
• In the context of the Lyons review of the balance of funding across local government, consider how local accountability could be strengthened for the police precept
• Look at whether the legislation on charging for police services needs to be changed once the new ACPO guidance on charging has been implemented.

Police powers (5.76 – 5.78)

• Modernise police powers as per August consultation document – conclusions following consideration of consultation responses to be delivered later in 2004

Science & technology (5.79 – 5.83)

• Introduces details of the first National Police Intelligence Computer system, IMPACT.
• That the Forensic Integration Strategy fully integrates all forensic intelligence by March 2008.
• That the Forensic Science Service (FSS) is to be transformed into a Public Private Partnership (PPP) via a Government owned company.
• Highlights improvements in efficiency and effectiveness from the continued roll out to forces of a number of key information and communication technologies.

Ensuring effectiveness of policing: General approach

• Public is unclear about how things work and who is accountable for police performance.
• Recognise this is a complex area, inextricably linked to local government arrangements – but need to put in place stronger, clearer, more transparent ways of ensuring that those with a responsibility for ensuring safer communities are effectively held to account for carrying out those responsibilities
• Important that there are strong transparent links between neighbourhood/district (CDRP/BCU) and strategic (police authority) level
• Given the complexity of the issues, want arrangements which accommodate the different complexion of communities in different parts of the country

Review of CDRPs

• Many CDRPs are working well but not as sufficiently visible or accountable to public as they should be
• New Performance Management framework being put in place for CDRPs
• Formal Review of Partnership provisions of Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to report by end January 2005, including
  • How to embed commitment to mainstream community safety activity in local councils including through CPA
  • How to reinforce democratic accountability eg through involvement of local authority community safety portfolio holders in CDRPs
  • Role of council scrutiny committees in scrutinising delivery of partnership priorities
  • Involvement of all key local agencies in building safer communities, including a review of duties under section 17 CDA 1998 and potential consequences of non-compliance
• Plans to develop a wider National Community Safety Strategy in 2005

Strengthening police authority role and membership (5.97 – 5.98)

• Changes needed to increase public trust and confidence and community engagement in policing
• Government’s approach is to strengthen police authorities to ensure that communities are policed effectively and that forces are responsive to needs and priorities of local public
• Government also wants to increase visibility of police authorities – by strengthening ties with local government and by the proposals to require provision of information about policing to householders (see chapter 3 above)
• Police authorities should be responsible for ensuring effective arrangements in place to secure public engagement at neighbourhood and district (BCU/CDRP) level (see chapter 3 above)

Police authority membership/chairs (5.99 – 5.107)

• Government proposes to strengthen the calibre, representative nature and democratic legitimacy of police authorities
• Police authorities should have between 17 and 21 members - depending on the area
• There should be two types of member: councillors and independents with councillors continuing to be in the majority by one
• Councillor Membership
  • No change in London
  • Unitary areas (ie metropolitan districts/Wales): councils should appoint their community safety cabinet portfolio holders to the police authority
  • Two-tier areas: there is a need for further discussion, but a number of potential approaches are suggested in Appendix V as to how this might operate but generally includes a mix of councillors from both counties and districts. Views on the possible models are invited.
• Magistrate Membership
  • The links with the wider CJS are recognised but it is proposed that there should no longer be a separate category of magistrate members per se: instead magistrates will be allowed to apply to be independent members. Presumption that, if magistrates apply, at least one independent must be a magistrate but beyond that it will be a matter for local flexibility
• Independent membership
  • There will continue to be independent members but these will be subject to a more rigorous competency based selection process. The Hamer Report recommendations for a new (5 member) local selection panel with a veto by the Home Secretary will be adopted.
• Police authority members should continue to elect own chairs but only from amongst candidates who have undergone a competency based selection process overseen by an accredited OCPA assessor.

Police authority powers (5.108 – 5.115)

• Clarify police authority role, including restating existing powers, for example, police authorities will continue to have responsibility for setting force policing priorities
• Holding chief officers to account for performance – crucial part of police authority business
• Authorities should have full access to information and data held by forces to enable them to carry out scrutiny
• new duties on police authorities to:
  • To take into account local policing priorities identified at Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) level when publishing policing plans and strategies;
  • oversee the relationship between CDRPs and neighbourhood bodies and ensure the implementation of citizen involvement – making sure that these arrangements are not overly bureaucratic;
  • co-operate with neighbouring authorities to help tackle cross border crime – known as ‘level 2’ crime – and analyse the effectiveness of their own forces’ performance in doing so;
  • promote diversity within the police force and authority; conduct the chief constable’s performance appraisal and to decide pay and bonuses-with a requirement to consult Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) in doing so.
  • request inspection by HMIC or intervention by the Police Standards Unit in respect of their force or particular parts of it where they consider this to be necessary.
• A robust and positive approach to efficiency should be at the core of police authority performance including on issues such as:
  • Increasing time officers and staff spend on frontline policing
  • Continuing the drive to reduce bureaucracy
  • Increasing collaboration or amalgamation to deliver corporate services eg financial HR;
  • Buying goods and service more efficiently and effectively

Inspection and intervention (5.116-117)

• Police authorities should be subject to inspection in respect of their full responsibilities and not just as now, in relation to their compliance with best value under the Local Government Act 1999
• The APA’s own police authority assessment and improvement framework could provide the basis for such inspection
• This will be explored further as part of the wider review of inspectorates (See above)
• If an inspection identifies serious problems, this should be subject to intervention, such as that which applies to police forces

Chief officers and government (5.118 -5.122)

• Chief officers should have freedom to exercise proper operational responsibility for taking policing decisions
• Policing must remain independent of political control and direction to retain public trust
• Chief officers should be open to proper scrutiny about policing decisions and how well their force is doing in terms of reducing crime and anti-social behaviour and building safer communities
• Home Secretary should retain current powers to suspend and remove chief officers, in extremis
• Government will review suspension process with APA and ACPO and discuss how best to ensure that both informal and formal mechanisms for addressing chief officer performance issues

Appendix 2: Formal review of partnerships (CDRPs)

The review will consider which aspects of existing legislation are most effective and which have been less successful and why. It will recommend legislative and other changes to enable local agencies to work together more effectively with local people to combat crime, anti-social behaviour and drug misuse in their communities.

Scope

The review will consider the provisions outlined in sections 5-7, 17 and 115 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, along with sections 97 and 98 of the Police Reform Act 2002. More specifically, it will explore:

• Role – the role of CDRPs, including their responsibility for determining strategic priorities for local community safety and delivering on them;
• Accountability – how the work of partnerships is scrutinised and how CDRPs can be held to account through the local democratic process. This will include examining the potential for using scrutiny committees and other governance mechanisms for this purpose;
• Inspection – making sure individual agencies’ inspection regimes take account of their contribution to partnership working; and identifying ways of assessing partnership performance through joint inspection of CDRPs;
• Community engagement – how partnerships best engage in ongoing dialogue with all sections of the communities they serve, how this informs CDRP decision-making and how CDRPs demonstrate responsiveness to the needs and concerns of local people;
• CDRP membership – how to ensure the right people are working together at the right level to combat crime, disorder and the misuse of drugs, with clearly identified roles and responsibilities, as well as consequences for poor levels of participation. We will consider the role of elected councillors as well as potential new responsible authorities;
• Mainstreaming (section 17) – how community; safety can be most effectively mainstreamed into key partners’ business, including systematic mechanisms for assessing and rewarding compliance, and specific consequences of non-compliance. The review will also assess whether section 17 currently covers the right agencies and bodies and will recommend extending its scope where appropriate. The Review will also consider the implications for, and potential role of, elected regional assemblies in respect of partnership working to tackle crime;
• CDRP mergers – whether to extend the circumstances in which small adjoining CDRPs should be merged in order to achieve greater efficiency;
• Boundaries – the effect of partner agencies’ different boundaries on partnership work and how best to remove the barriers these differences in boundaries sometimes cause;
• Drugs and alcohol – reinforcing the new joint approach to tackling local crime and disorder problems in conjunction with issues around the misuse of drugs and alcohol. This will include assessing how far the integration of CDRPs and Drug Action Teams has taken place to reflect this;
• Other local agencies – how the work of CDRPs feeds into and connects with that of other local partnerships, such as Local Strategic Partnerships, Local Criminal Justice Boards, Youth Offending Teams and the wider Criminal Justice System;
• Funding – to review the arrangements by which CDRPs fund and commission services from the police and other delivery partners in support of local priorities; and
• Data sharing – how best to encourage better data and information sharing between agencies for the purposes of crime reduction.

The review will be conducted between November 2004 and January 2005 with the direct involvement of key stakeholders. It will link with wider developments in public sector reform, most notably police and local government reform, and be underpinned by an unambiguous focus on raising partnership performance through improving accountability and visibility.