Scrutiny Report: Succession Planning within States of Jersey Police (SR 7/2011): Ministerial Response

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 14 November 2011:

Decision Reference: MD-HA-2011-0089

Decision Summary Title :

Ministerial Response: SR 7/2011

Date of Decision Summary:

14 November 2011

Decision Summary Author:

Executive Officer

Home Affairs

Decision Summary:

Public or Exempt?

Public

Type of Report:

Oral or Written?

Written

Person Giving

Oral Report:

N/A

Written Report

Title :

Ministerial Response Scrutiny Report 7/2011

Date of Written Report:

11 November 2011

Written Report Author:

Minister for Home Affairs

Written Report :

Public or Exempt?

Public

Subject: SR 7/2011 Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel – Succession Planning within the States of Jersey Police – Ministerial Response.

Decision(s): The Minister approved the presentation to the States of his response to the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel’s report – Succession Planning within the States of Jersey Police.

Reason(s) for Decision: Section 11.15 of the Code of Practice for Scrutiny Panels and the Public Accounts Committee as adopted by the States as amended 12 March 2008 states that ‘The Executive will respond to Panel and Public Account Committee Reports in accordance with the Protocol for Executive responses to Scrutiny Reports. The Executive will normally provide a detailed response to the findings and recommendations of the Panel within six weeks of publication of the Report.’

Resource Implications: There are no financial or resource implications arising from this decision.

Action required: The Executive Officer, Home Affairs, to request the Greffier of the States to place the response before the States as a Scrutiny Response.

Signature:

Position:

Minister for Home Affairs

Date Signed:

Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Scrutiny Report: Succession Planning within States of Jersey Police (SR 7/2011) - Comments of the Minister for Home Affairs

Response of the Minister for Home Affairs to the Report of the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel in relation to Succession Planning within the States of Jersey Police

1. Introduction

I wish to congratulate the Scrutiny Panel on this excellent and well researched Report. This Report explains how difficulties have arisen in the past in this area and has resulted in a change of policy.

2. Key findings and recommendations

1. The skills deficit throughout senior management of the Force as described in the Police submission is a matter of concern and must be addressed before there can be any realistic hope of finding sufficiently qualified and experienced local candidates ready to aspire to leadership of the Force.

I agree with this and this has begun to be actioned.

2. Given the skills deficit identified in the Police submission, it is understandable that the Minister should seek, in the short term, to strengthen the management team of the Police Force with expertise recruited from outside the Island.

I thank the Panel for their support.

3. The Minister intends that the introduction of experienced specialist officers should be used to assist with the development of future Jersey leaders.

Recommendation

The Senior Management of the Police must be held accountable by the new Police Authority for the effective implementation of the Minister’s intention.

I agree with this and, prior to the establishment of the Police Authority, this will be the responsibility of the Minister.

4. We received evidence from the former Chief Officer that significant measures were taken, particularly during the early part of his period as leader of the Force (2001 - 2004). However, it seems to us that the momentum for succession planning was diminished. There is no record of political oversight after that time.

That corresponds to the evidence.

5. The establishment of the new Police Authority provides the Minister with an essential mechanism to oversee and monitor the development and ongoing implementation of effective succession planning.

Recommendation

It is essential that the new Police Authority regularly monitors the development of the planned secondment programme for officers with high potential and in particular examines the budget allocation and reports to the Minister.

I agree with this and, prior to the establishment of the Police Authority, this will be the responsibility of the Minister.

6. The requirement for the Chief Officer and Deputy Chief Officer to meet the UK benchmark for completion of the Strategic Command Course sets the barrier very high for local officers. A review of this requirement in respect of the Deputy Chief Officer may improve opportunities for local candidates to progress to the top positions of the Force.

Whilst I agree that the requirement sets the barrier very high, I believe that that is absolutely necessary for the following reasons. It is the firm belief of the Current Chief Officer team that both the Chief and Deputy Chief Officers should be Strategic Command Course qualified.

The Chief Officer not only requires extensive knowledge and experience of executive management and operational police command, but also is required to fulfil a number of legal functions, particular to that rank. Qualification by Strategic Command Course attendance enables HM Inspector of Constabulary to assess the capabilities of each graduate of the course to undertake executive police command.

The function of the Deputy Chief Officer is to undertake the role of Chief Officer in his / her absence or unavailability and it therefore follows that that that individual should be similarly qualified and have the confidence of HM Inspector of Constabulary, Minister and Police Authority to undertake that role.

7. If a local candidate were to achieve a place on the Strategic Command Course it would be necessary for that officer to be guaranteed a position within the senior management team. This may require a review of the principle of opening all Senior Appointments to external

competition.

Recommendation

The Minister should consider whether the successful completion of the Strategic Command Course standard is entirely appropriate for both the Chief Officer and Deputy Chief Officer in a small Island Force. He should seek advice from the National Police Improvement Agency on this question.

I agree that a local candidate who wanted a place on the Strategic Command Course would first need to achieve a position within the senior management team. If a candidate were unable so to do then it is unlikely that they would ever achieve the rank of Chief Officer or Deputy Chief Officer. With an appropriate development programme in place I can see no reason why this should not occur.

8. In order for local officers with high potential to broaden their experience extensive periods of secondment to command positions in other UK forces are required as part of an ongoing programme of professional development.

Recommendation

We believe that it is essential that the new Police Authority carefully monitors the development of the planned secondment programme for officers with high potential to ensure that they have adequate and extensive opportunities to develop their policing experience in challenging environments.

I agree with this and prior to the establishment of the Police Authority this will remain the responsibility of the Minister.

9. Significant investment will be required over a number of years to redress the skills, leadership and command shortages identified in the Police Submission. In a period of spending restraint, training budgets are often hard pressed. It may therefore be necessary to reorder training and development priorities.

Recommendation

The new Police Authority must carefully consider the need to enhance the Police budget for training and development.

I agree with this and prior to the establishment of the Police Authority this will remain the responsibility of the Minister.

10. There are a number of structural factors in the States of Jersey Police which in our opinion have important implications for succession planning and fundamentally influence the motivation and commitment which local officers bring to seeking senior management positions within the Force. Some are simply facts which cannot be changed; for example, the size of the Force which is conditioned by the requirements for policing the population of a small Island. Some factors are capable of being addressed: we note, for example, that the previous Chief Officer and the current Senior Management have made and are making concerted to improve recruitment and graduate training schemes. Other factors, including the early retirement arrangements for police officers and the high differentials in pay scales, are complex and potentially contentious. However, an understanding of their implications is essential in developing an effective succession policy.

Recommendation

The Minister together with the Police Authority should examine the implications for effective succession planning of the structural issues identified in the report, including the impact of early retirement and pay scales.

I agree with this.

3. Conclusion

The Acting Police leadership had already started to make changes before the commencement of work on this report. However, the report has clarified a number of issues and through a programme of talent management, mentoring and development which has now been introduced by the new Command team, there is a clear commitment to develop local officers for the highest ranks, but this will require a personal commitment by the individuals too, to aspire to become senior and Chief Officers.