Agenda item

This Council resolves to:

1.         Instruct the Chief Executive to write to all Lincolnshire MPs to lobby for a fairer funding settlement for Lincolnshire Police particularly given the Police and Crime Commissioner’s warning of a £6.5 million funding gap next year.

2.         Formally invite the Police and Crime Commissioner to an evidence-based scrutiny of all aspects of crime and policing across South Kesteven. Council requests that in light of recent events and to ensure public confidence, it would be inappropriate for scrutiny of policing to be chaired by Councillor Ray Wootten.

3.         Urge the Leader of the Council to consider replacing Councillor Wootten as the Council’s representative on the Police and Crime Panel to ensure that the public – and this council – can have confidence that future information provided regarding policing and police funding is accurate and properly researched.

Councillor Dilks proposed his notice of motion:

This Council resolves to:

1.      Instruct the Chief Executive to write to all Lincolnshire MPs to lobby for a fairer funding settlement for Lincolnshire Police particularly given the Police and Crime Commissioner’s warning of a £6.5 million funding gap next year.

2.      Formally invite the Police and Crime Commissioner to an evidence-based scrutiny of all aspects of crime and policing across South Kesteven. Council requests that in the light of recent events and to ensure public confidence, it would be inappropriate for scrutiny of policing to be chaired by Councillor Ray Wootten.

3.      Urge the Leader of the Council to consider replacing Councillor Wootten as the Council’s representative on the Police and Crime Panel to ensure that the public – and this Council – can have confidence that future information provided regarding policing and police funding is accurate and properly researched.

In proposing his motion Councillor Dilks stated that his intention when it was first put forward on 23 May 2019 was to support the Police and Crime Commissioner’s fairer funding campaign in the face of a funding shortfall, a reduction in police numbers, and an increase in crime, specifically violent and sexual offences. He referred to a statement that was made during debate at that meeting, which indicated that the Police and Crime Commissioner had secured an additional £10m funding and gave an assurance that there would be no cuts. It subsequently transpired that the additional grant funding awarded to the Police and Crime Commissioner was not for £10m and that there was an expectation that by the end of 2019, there would be 50 fewer police officers than at the start of the year. This position had been confirmed through a request made to the Police and Crime Commissioner under the Freedom of Information Act. Reference was also made to a question that was put at a previous meeting of the Council, the response to which suggested that the Police and Crime Commissioner had been misinterpreted. The member who had made the statement at the meeting on 23 May 2019 was not present at the time that question had been put. Reference was made to letters that had been published in the Journal and to a feeling that the subject had been turned into a political issue. He stated that the Council should expect the highest standards of probity, and where a mistake had been made, there should be an expectation that the Council should be given an explanation and an apology. The proposition was seconded.

Reference was made to the answer that had been given to the question that was put at the previous meeting, which indicated that Councillor Wootten had prepared a statement to Council. He had not, however, been present at a point when it could be presented. Councillor Wootten was given the opportunity to make his statement, in which he explained that the information he had given Council previously had been provided in good faith and that he would never deliberately mislead the Council. He said that he felt the comments that had been made by other Members and within the press were a slur on his character. The statement proceeded to clarify some of the comments that were included within his speech, specifically that police officers could not be made redundant. Finally, he addressed his attendance at the meeting, stating that he had arrived during the debate on trees but had left the meeting during the vote as he had not been present for the whole item. Accusations were made about Councillors behaving disrespectfully and Councillor Wootten called for an apology to be made to him.

Debate on the motion ensued. Members referred to the new Prime Minister’s commitment to increase police funding by £1.1bn and plans to put an extra 20,000 police officers on the beat by 2022. Members noted that the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner was holding public assurance meetings. Reference was made by Members to experiences of crime within their Wards and the impact that the reduction of funding had had on the number of police officers to date.

Several Members who spoke on the motion suggested that the political machinations of two members were distracting attention from the issue of lobbying for fairer funding for Lincolnshire Police and affecting the way members of the public perceived the Council. Calls were also made for Councillor Wootten to apologise to the Chamber; Members noted that whilst his intention may not have been to mislead the Council, the information he had provided was incorrect and therefore felt it would be appropriate for him to make an apology. With the intention of focusing debate back on police funding, an amendment was proposed and seconded on the proviso that Councillor Wootten apologised to the Council:

          This Council resolves to:

1.     Instruct the Chief Executive to write to all Lincolnshire MPs to lobby for a fairer funding settlement for Lincolnshire Police particularly given the Police and Crime Commissioner’s warning of a £6.5 million funding gap next year.

2.     Formally invite the Police and Crime Commissioner to an evidence-based scrutiny of all aspects of crime and policing across South Kesteven.

Several Members indicated that they would be prepared to support the amendment if an apology was made based on setting straight the public record and working together to rebuild public confidence. Accusations regarding disrespectful behaviour were refuted, suggesting that the way the issue was being played out was part of the cut and thrust of politics.

A proposition was made and seconded that the question be now put, however the Chairman, in accordance with article 4.11.11 (iii) did not consider that the matter had been sufficiently discussed and allowed the debate to continue.

Other Members who spoke reiterated concerns that political manoeuvrings were detracting from the issue that had been at the heart of the original motion. There was recognition that the statement made by Councillor Wootten in the first instance had been an honest mistake, for which Members considered it would be appropriate for him to apologise. In summing up on the amendment, reference was made to the funding shortfall and the reduction in the number of police officers by the end of the year. The proposer of the original motion stated that he was happy to support the amendment, on the basis of an apology being made, as he saw the statement that indicated there would be an additional £10m of funding as responsible for the defeat of the initial motion.

Councillor Wootten was given the opportunity to apologise; he said that he had nothing further to add to the statement that he had already made. This led the proposer of the amendment to say that she wished to withdraw it; the seconder agreed, and Council indicated its consent to the withdrawal of the motion by a show of hands. Members returned to the substantive motion.

It was proposed and seconded that the question be now put, however the Chairman, in accordance with article 4.11.11 (iii) did not consider that the matter had been sufficiently discussed and allowed the debate to continue.

Notice was given of an intention to make a further amendment; the Chairman agreed to a brief adjournment to enable representatives from across the Chamber to devise the wording of an amendment that would be acceptable to all groups.

15:15-15:30 – the meeting adjourned

An amendment was proposed and seconded:

            This Council resolves to:

1.     Ask the Leader to write to all Lincolnshire MPs to lobby for a fairer funding settlement for Lincolnshire Police particularly given the Police and Crime Commissioner’s warning of a £6.5 million funding gap next year.

2.     Formally invite the Police and Crime Commissioner to a meeting to discuss all aspects of crime and policing across South Kesteven.

Support for the motion was expressed and a comment made about how the Council would need to reflect on what had happened and its potential ramifications.

In summing up, disappointment was expressed that no apology had been forthcoming, however, the proposer of the original motion stated he would be grateful if the Council could support Lincolnshire Police in its need for funding. On being put to the vote, the amendment was carried and became the substantive motion. The new substantive motion was put to the vote and carried, and Council AGREED:

            This Council resolves to:

1.     Ask the Leader to write to all Lincolnshire MPs to lobby for a fairer funding settlement for Lincolnshire Police particularly given the Police and Crime Commissioner’s warning of a £6.5 million funding gap next year.

2.     Formally invite the Police and Crime Commissioner to a meeting to discuss all aspects of crime and policing across South Kesteven.