(This note is not part of the Regulations)
Section 28 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 (“the 2011 Act”) provides for each police area listed in Schedule 1 to the Police Act 1996 to have a police and crime panel with the function of scrutinising the actions and decisions of the police and crime commissioner for the police area.
Schedules 5 and 8 to the 2011 Act respectively make provision about the scrutiny, by the police and crime panel, of a proposal from the police and crime commissioner as to the issuing of a precept and the appointment of a chief constable. The Schedules confer powers on the police and crime panel to veto a proposed precept or appointment. These Regulations make provision about the procedure to be followed in that regard.
Part 2 of these Regulations concerns the issuing of precepts. Regulations 3, 4 and 5(1) set deadlines for the taking of steps set out in Schedule 5 of the 2011 Act. This is to ensure that a precept is issued in accordance with Part I of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (c. 14) (“the 1992 Act”). Where a police and crime panel decides to veto a proposed precept but does not report to the police and crime commissioner within the deadline set out in regulation 4(1), regulation 4(2) allows the commissioner to issue the proposed precept in any event.
The remainder of Part 2 of these Regulations prescribes steps to be taken where the police and crime panel exercises its power to veto a proposed precept, with deadlines. Regulation 5(2) requires the police and crime commissioner to notify the police and crime panel of the revised precept that he proposes to issue. This must be lower than the precept proposed initially if the police and crime panel vetoed that precept on the basis that it was too high, and must be higher than the precept proposed initially if the panel rejected it on the basis that it was too low.
Regulation 6 requires the police and crime panel to scrutinise this revised precept and report on it. The police and crime panel may indicate that they reject the revised precept, but this does not amount to a power of veto. The only power of veto is in relation to the precept proposed initially by the police and crime commissioner. Where the panel fails to report to the police and crime commissioner by the deadline set out in regulation 6(1), regulation 6(3) allows the commissioner to issue the revised precept in any event.
Regulation 7 requires the police and crime commissioner to consider the police and crime panel’s report and respond to it. Once that response is given, the police and crime commissioner may issue a precept in accordance with regulation 8. This can be the revised precept considered by the police and crime panel, or a different precept. Where a different precept is issued, it cannot be higher than the revised precept if the police and crime panel vetoed the original precept on the basis that it was too high, and it cannot be lower than the revised precept if the panel vetoed the original precept on the basis that it was too low.
Nothing in Part 2 of these Regulations affects the operation of Chapters 4ZA and 4A of Part I of the 1992 Act, which prevent the issuing of an excessive precept following the holding of a referendum (in England) or the setting of a cap by the National Assembly (in Wales). Neither does Part 2 affect the operation of section 41 of the Police Act 1996 (c. 16) which allows the Secretary of State to direct a minimum budget requirement for the police and crime commissioner in order to ensure that the precept is not set at so low a level that public safety is endangered.
Part 3 of these Regulations concerns steps to be taken in the event that a police and crime panel vetoes a proposed appointment of a chief constable. Regulation 9 provides for the police and crime commissioner to propose a reserve candidate. Regulation 10 requires the police and crime panel to consider and report on the proposed appointment of this reserve candidate within three weeks, making a recommendation as to whether or not the candidate should be appointed. The police and crime panel must hold a confirmation hearing to assess the suitability of the reserve candidate. The police and crime panel must publish the report containing its recommendation.
On receiving the police and crime panel’s report, regulation 11 requires the police and crime commissioner to have regard to their recommendation and notify the panel as to whether the recommendation is accepted. Under regulation 12 the police and crime commissioner may then appoint the reserve candidate as chief constable, or may propose another reserve candidate. In the latter eventuality, the procedure under Part 3 of these Regulations is conducted once again in relation to this further candidate. The police and crime commissioner can continue to propose reserve candidates in this way if necessary.