A bit of politics

Congratulations are due today to Bob Jones, the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner, for outsmarting the Home Secretary on the politics of PCCs. Mr Jones, or some clever member of staff, has spotted that, while the Government went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that PCCs could not have employment contracts with people who were politically active, it conspicuously failed to ban PCCs from having service contracts with them.

As revealed by Fiona Hamilton in today’s Times, a Freedom of Information request from your favourite PCC blog at TopOfTheCops has established that what looked like a recruitment campaign earlier this year for “Assistant Commissioners” and non-executive members of a “Strategic Policing Board” was, technically speaking, not a recruitment campaign, but a procurement exercise in drag. The folk appointed are not Assistant Commissioners, or Board Members. They hold no employment or office. They are contractors providing a service, who can be dispensed with at a month’s notice, and who have no employment rights.

So what?

Well, Mr Jones, who was a Labour Councillor when elected, and who appointed a Labour Councillor as his Deputy, used the ‘recruitment campaign’ to appoint, wouldn’t you know it, 3 Labour Councillors (Faye Abbott, Judy Foster and Mohammed Nazir) to the, I guess technically non-existent, positions of Assistant Commissioners, giving them each £22,500 per year on top of their Council allowances for the two and a half days a week they spend ‘delivering a service’.

Some crumbs fell from the banqueting table for other parties too - £7,500 each for Lib Dem Councillor Ernie Hendricks, Conservative Councillor Tim Sawdon, former Independent PCC Candidate Cath Hannon and businessman Brendan Connor – all as non-executive members of the Board, but actually on service contracts.

Now, you all know the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 as well as I do, and I’m sure that when you were going through Schedule 16 of that Act and got to section 200, you noticed that any PCC employee who isn’t the Deputy PCC is automatically in a politically restricted post. So, Councillors cannot be employed by a PCC – but it turns out they can work for him, as long as they don’t count as employed.

So – general smug feelings all round in the West Midlands then? Well, maybe not. This sort of thing does not come about without certain complications….

1) Everybody else who works for the PCC is politically restricted. Everyone else. That includes the Chief Executive, of course, but also the office cleaner if the PCC employs them. It is just about the most all-encompassing political restriction I’ve ever seen. Even Civil Servants are allowed to be involved in local politics, and in local government the restrictions are themselves restricted depending on the nature and  seniority of the post, but all PCC employees are politically restricted. Which is why this law always looked a bit dodgy. It is overbroad. It shows no proportionality or consideration of degree or purpose. In its effort to be whiter than white the issue of those workers’ entitlements under Human Rights law is ignored and so the law could easily be subject to challenge. But how much more is this likely when, thanks to Mr Jones, it can be shown that someone else recruited like an employee, referred to in terms similar to an employee, and working like an employee, can through this ruse retain their active involvement in politics? This loophole undermines any Human Rights defence of just about any political restriction – as it becomes impossible to show the restriction is ‘necessary’ or ‘reasonable’ when they manage perfectly well without it in Birmingham.

2) Councillors around the country take note – here is a way to employ your political mates on decent rates without those pesky rules getting in the way. Think of what you could do – this could make politics popular again!

3) Except there are those other rules – procurement rules. Did these appointments that aren’t really appointments meet the rules that cover the award of contracts?

4) Contracts for service have previously raised their ugly heads because they allow folk to earn money in an, ahem, ‘tax efficient’ way. Are Mr Jones’s contractors paying personal income tax rates on these earnings, or perhaps less?

5) People who are not employees cannot be disciplined. They can’t be prosecuted for malfeasance in a public office because they don’t have an office. There is no established fair procedure to tease out what really happened in any given problem, and they lack the protection of employment law, which could make them overly agreeable to the PCC if their income depends entirely on his good humour.

If Mr Jones has put a nail in the coffin of the concept of political restriction, there will be few people happier than TopOfTheCops.   I note that a number of potential and actual candidates at the PCC election faced life-changing barriers to standing due to the political restriction rules. I favour registration of employees’ political affiliations, not the current pretense that they don’t have any.

But…

…you knew there would be a but…

… I also note that the West Midlands Police Authority, 17 members made up of a mixture of Councillors and Independents and led by Bob Jones, seems to have been replaced by a Strategic Policing Board, 9 members made up of a mixture of Councillors and Independents and led by Bob Jones. You could come to the view that not much had changed, that this flagship PCC policy doesn’t really apply in the West Midlands, and you might note that a net change of 8 members has only saved £30,000, meaning that on a per-member basis the new arrangements are actually more expensive than what they replaced.

The curious thing is that the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act specifically bans people on service contracts to the police or to PCCs from standing to become PCCs. In other words, when the Government were drafting the legislation, they knew about this loophole, but for some reason only closed it for those who wanted to be PCCs, leaving Mr Jones free to use it to recreate the police authority in miniature and resist the Government’s entire reform.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Perspectives and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to A bit of politics

  1. Ian Sinclair says:

    You have to laugh or you would cry. We need a new charge of bringing the public administration into disrepute by dishonest behaviour.
    I hope at least these so-called consultants will be put on the books for PAYE and National Insurance purposes as any other employee would be otherwise the authority will be breaching the tax laws.

  2. Joe Tildesley says:

    Sam, As always – Great article. I met the very heavily pregnant Faye Abbott this week. I am sure she is a very nice lady but what Policing skills, ability and experience does she bring to the table? The tragedy as you so eloquently point out is that within the West Midlands nothing has changed. Indeed, his new boards almost mirror those that have been replaced. I am pretty sure that the PCC budget also mirrors the previous Police Authority budget! I hope the story is picked up nationally. Very best wishes. Joe T. Mayor of Solihull Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 23:15:25 +0000 To: jdt1016@hotmail.com

  3. “your favourite PCC blog” ?? There could be other contenders!!
    ;-)

    But overall. a good article Sam – I think this just goes to show how badly drafted this piece of legislation was in the first place. You focus on West Midlands, but as you know not dissimilar appointments have been across the country by PCCs of different political persuasions.

    Your headline could have been “Shock Horror: Wily politico uses legislative loopholes (the size of barn doors) to create new governance structure”

    At least Bob has had the honesty to blog about his views on the political structure and suggest that his role should be scrapped.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-22797713

    But meanwhile…

    • samchapman says:

      Thanks Jon,
      Bob Jones has been reasonably straightforward about this. He didn’t shout about the loophole from the rooftops, but those who received the application packs were clear it was a service contract, and if I remember rightly you were the first to speculate about how it had been done.
      You are right about the barn doors – I support the PCC reform, so I’m not fond of the evident implementation errors.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s