(COR0031)

Written evidence submitted by Professor Eddie Kane and Professor Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay (COR0031)

 

 

This submission focuses on two of the Committee’s priorities and suggests areas for possible examination:

 

How police and fire and rescue service business continuity plans are being designed to best safeguard the public and emergency service workers

 

The preparedness of forces to support Local Resilience Forums during a possible civil contingencies emergency

 

Possible Areas for the Committee to examine

 

Background:

 

Pre-Policing and Crime Act 2017:

 

  1. In November 2014/15 the Emergency Services Collaboration Working Group commissioned research from a consortium of the universities of Nottingham, Birmingham and West of Scotland and Skills for Justice, to evaluate existing and emerging emergency services collaboration.  The key objective was to establish an evidence base for greater emergency collaboration projects across England and Wales.  The work covered efficient services, effective services and emerging best practice.  Amongst the key findings of this study were that:

 

 

  1. We made a number of recommendations to the Working Group.  Amongst these recommendations was that there should be much more formal collaboration between emergency services, including unifying governance structures, management and budgets and also for alignment of responsibilities at government departmental level.  The Conservative government issued a consultation paper in September 2015 that set out some options for closer working between emergency services and a series of questions for response. Enabling Closer Working between the emergency services – consultation document and responded to the consultation outcomes in Enabling closer working between the emergency services/ consultation responses and next steps).  The options set out in the consultation and the final post-response recommendations for legislation included a number based on our study.  These included:

 

 

Post-Policing and Crime Act 2017:

 

  1. Police and Crime Commissioners (“PCCs”) were introduced in 2012 as part of a wider package of police reform enacted by the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (“the 2011 Act”). PCCs provide a directly elected, accountable local link between the police and the communities they serve and give the public a direct say in policing in their area. 

 

  1. The Policing and Crime Act 2017 further reformed policing and enabled important changes to the governance of fire and rescue services.  The changes were designed to build capability, improve efficiency, increase public confidence and further enhance local accountability.

 

  1. Amongst the main provisions is a duty placed on police, fire and ambulance services to work together and also to enable police and crime commissioners to take on responsibility for fire and rescue services.  PCCs in England have had opportunity to develop business cases and consult locally on changes to fire governance, subject to Home Secretary approval. To date only a relatively small number of areas have Police Fire and Crime Commissioners (PFCCs). 

 

  1. PFCCs are responsible for:

 

 

Suggested areas for examination:

 


  1. In line with these changes, the ministerial responsibility for fire and rescue services moved from the Department of Communities and Local Government to the Home Office.  The independent inspectorate function for policing Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) also had fire and rescue added to its remit to become Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS). The pandemic provides an unexpected but stiff test of whether there have been positive impacts from the Policing and Crime Act. We suggest two possible areas for examination:

 

    1. The extent to which the Policing and Crime Act have impacted on the cooperation between local agencies and delivered the building of capability, improved efficiency, increased public confidence and further enhanced local accountability that are essential to police and fire and rescue service business continuity plans design to best safeguard the public and emergency service workers.  It will also offer the opportunity to test the preparedness of forces to support Local Resilience Forums during a possible civil contingencies emergency

 

    1. To examine whether or not the introduction of PFCCs in some areas has in fact supported police and fire and rescue service business continuity plans design to best safeguard the public and emergency service workers.  It will also offer the opportunity to test the preparedness of forces to support Local Resilience Forums during a possible civil contingencies emergency.  Additionally, one can examine whether or not these authorities that have PFCCs have been differentially prepared to the rest where responsibilities and accountability remain divided.

 

  1. These two areas for examination offer the Committee a unique opportunity to test the robustness of two different governance arrangements for critical emergency services.  This examination also offers the opportunity for the Committee to develop recommendations for future governance structures, both nationally and locally as well as for the role of HMICFRS.

 

 

Professor Eddie Kane

Director Centre for Health and Justice

University of Nottingham

 

 

Professor Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay

Professor of Economics and Director, Centre for Crime, Justice and Policing

University of Birmingham

 

April 2020