Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from:

• Councillor Trevor Cartwright, Fareham Borough Council
• Councillor Steve Clarke, New Forest District Council
• Councillor Tonia Craig, Eastleigh Borough Council
• Councillor Ken Muschamp, Rushmoor Borough Council
• Bob Purkiss, Independent Co-opted Member
• Councillor Jacqui Rayment, Southampton City Council
• Councillor Lynne Stagg, Additional Local Authority Co-opted Member

To enable Members to declare to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest they may have in any matter on the agenda for the meeting, where that interest is not already entered in their appointing authority’s register of interests, and any other pecuniary or personal interests in any such matter that Members may wish to consider disclosing.

Members were able to disclose to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest they may have in any matter on the agenda for the meeting, where that interest is not already entered in their appointing authority’s register of interests, and any other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in any such matter that Members may wish to disclose.

Councillor Adrian Collett declared a personal interest, as he had previously worked with Carolyn Dhanraj at the College of Policing, who had authored the Independent Member report on the Chief Executive recruitment process.

To receive any questions or deputations in line with Rule 31 and 31A of the Panel’s Rules of Procedure.

There were no questions or deputations received on this occasion.

Following notification from the Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner of his intention to appoint the preferred candidate, James Payne, to the role of Chief Executive, for the Hampshire Police and Crime Panel to hold a Confirmation Hearing in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.    

Following notification from the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire (hereafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’), Mr. Michael Lane, to the Hampshire Police and Crime Panel (hereafter referred to as ‘the Panel’) of his intention to appoint a preferred candidate, Mr. James Payne, to the role of Chief Executive, the Panel held a Confirmation Hearing in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

Members received a report (See Item 3 in the Minute Book)

setting out the powers of the Panel and the process to be followed in the Confirmation Hearing, as per the agreed ‘Confirmation Hearing protocol’. The Panel noted the information provided by the Commissioner relating to the appointment of the Chief Executive which included:

·      The name of the preferred candidate and application form / CV or personal statement of preferred candidate;

·      An Independent report from the recruitment process;

·      The advert and job description for role;

·      A statement/report from the PCC stating why the preferred candidate meets criteria of role;

·      The terms and conditions of appointment;

The Commissioner gave a short overview of the process followed to select his preferred candidate, Mr Payne. He informed the Panel that the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner had previously seen two Chief Executives in post; one who had transferred across from the Police Authority, and a second long-term interim secondment to the post. Both of these individuals had brought personal terms and conditions with them, and the roles had been tweaked to meet these. The Commissioner had inherited the arrangements of a seconded Chief Executive, and had determined that now was the right time to permanently recruit to this position. This would be the first time that a Chief Executive had been recruited to the Commissioner’s office via an open process and with a job description which matched the needs of the Commissioner and his Office.

The aim of the recruitment process for this role was to find the best skilled candidate for the role. There were a range of candidates of a high calibre who were interviewed for the position. Mr Payne presented himself as the most outstanding candidate and was unanimously selected by the interview panel for the position. The Commissioner commended Mr Payne to the Panel.

A question was put by the Panel to the Commissioner on some of the comments made in the Independent person’s report, which highlighted their non-involvement in the shortlisting process. The Commissioner was asked to comment on whether he was satisfied with this part of the process. In response, he noted that there was not a requirement on the Commissioner to involve an Independent person in this specific recruitment exercise, but he felt it enabled transparency in the process. The Independent person hadn’t been purposely excluded from the shortlisting, and did not attend this stage due to conflicting diaries. However, when shown the outcomes of the shortlisting stages the Independent person had signalled her understanding and support of the process used.

The preferred candidate thanked  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

Following notification from the Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner of his intention to appoint the preferred candidate, Andy Lowe, to the role of Chief Financial Officer, for the Hampshire Police and Crime Panel to hold a Confirmation Hearing in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

Following notification from the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire (hereafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’), Mr. Michael Lane, to the Hampshire Police and Crime Panel (hereafter referred to as ‘the Panel’) of his intention to appoint a preferred candidate, Mr Andy Lowe, to the role of Chief Finance Officer, the Panel held a Confirmation Hearing in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

Members received a report (See Item 4 in the Minute Book)

setting out the powers of the Panel and the process to be followed in the Confirmation Hearing, as per the agreed ‘Confirmation Hearing protocol’. The Panel noted the information provided by the Commissioner relating to the appointment of the Chief Finance Officer which included:

·      The name of the preferred candidate

·      A statement/report for PCC stating why the preferred candidate meets criteria of role;

·      The terms and conditions of the appointment.

The Commissioner gave a short overview of the process followed to select his preferred candidate, Mr Lowe. He informed the Panel that this had been a different selection process, as this post was covered by the shared services agreement in place between Hampshire County Council, Hampshire Constabulary, and Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service (as well as Oxfordshire County Council).  The post was being recruited to as Ms Carolyn Williamson, the current Chief Finance Officer, had taken up a national position with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy.

The post was in place to provide the Commissioner with strategic financial advice, and the previous Chief Finance Officer had set a high bar of performance. The Commissioner already had a strong working relationship with the preferred candidate, Mr Lowe, as he currently acted as a Deputy Chief Finance Officer in Ms Williamson’s absence. The Commissioner had seen evidence of his ability to engage and advise senior colleagues and politicians, as well as a clear understanding of the environment of policing and finance. The Commissioner noted that the role required someone in post who could challenge and ensure that this was applied to the appropriate spending of public finances, which were all skills that Mr Lowe possessed. The Commissioner commended Mr Lowe to the Panel.

The preferred candidate thanked the Panel for inviting him to the Confirmation Hearing, noting his excitement at the opportunity to operate at the Chief Finance Officer level. The candidate provide a brief overview of his working history, including senior finance roles in Southampton and Hampshire, and involvement in NHS and local government finance, with a history of supporting and advising senior leadership. In 2016, Mr Lowe had become involved in police finance with a view to providing continuity of involvement and understanding through the shared services agreement, deputising for the previous Chief Finance Officer where required. Mr Lowe had a good working relationship with Ms Williamson, and this would continue through their Hampshire County Council roles.

The Chief Finance Officer role would take up two to three days of Mr Lowe’s working week (with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.

To resolve that the public be excluded from the meeting during the following item of business, as it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during that item there would be disclosure to them of exempt information within Paragraph 3 of Part I Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, being information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding the information) and, further, that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

While there may be a public interest in disclosing this information, namely openness in the deliberations of the Panel in determining its recommendation regarding the proposed appointment, it is felt that, on balance, this is outweighed by other factors in favour of maintaining the exemption, namely enabling a full discussion regarding the merits of the proposed appointments.

The press and public were excluded from the meeting during the following item of business, as it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during that item there would be disclosure to them of exempt information within Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, being information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding the information) and, further, that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. While there may have been a public interest in disclosing this information, namely openness in the deliberations of the Panel in determining its recommendation regarding the proposed appointment, it was felt that, on balance, this was outweighed by other factors in favour of maintaining the exemption, namely enabling a full discussion regarding the merits of the proposed appointment.

Following notification from the Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner of his intention to appoint to the roles of Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer, for the Hampshire Police and Crime Panel to hold a closed session to agree its recommendations.

The Panel held exempt discussions which examined the evidence provided in the two Confirmation Hearing sessions. The final reports of the Panel are appended to these minutes.

The Panel agreed in relation to the Chief Executive Confirmation Hearing:

·      That the candidate clearly understood the role of the Chief Executive, and appreciated the distinction between the skills required in leading as Chief Officer of the OPCC, and operating as an advisor and support to the PCC.

·      That the candidate was clearly committed and enthused by the role of Chief Executive, and had a drive not only to develop personally, but to enable the team to succeed in being a leading OPCC.

·      That through the roles of Estates Director and Interim Chief Executive, the candidate had delivered significant change programmes on behalf of the PCC that had delivered best value from public resources.

·      That through openness, transparency, and the sharing of information, the candidate was dedicated to enhancing the scrutiny and support structures between the PCC and Panel, and would be a helpful conduit for ensuring a successful relationship going forward.

·      That the candidate gave answers which highlighted his commitment to team working, and promoting a constructive and open environment to work within.

The Panel agreed in relation to the Chief Finance Officer Confirmation Hearing:

·      That the candidate interviewed competently, and understood clearly the statutory role of the Chief Finance Officer.

·      That the candidate had a strong background in providing strategic financial advice in a public sector setting.

·      Where gaps were identified in the candidate’s knowledge or skillset (e.g. wider external networking opportunities), a clear plan was provided as to how the candidate would address these, should he be confirmed in post.  

·      The appointment would enable continuity of financial advice as part of the shared service arrangement, as the candidate already worked closely with partners as Deputy Chief Finance Officer.

·      There was a clear understanding of the role of the PCC, the Chief Constable and the Police and Crime Panel, and how the lines of accountability linked between these roles. Within this setting, the candidate clearly understood his role, and the importance of working in partnership with colleagues.

·      Answers to questions on personal independence were robust, and the recent examples given where the candidate acted independently and impartially when holding difficult discussions were helpful in confirming the candidate’s capability to operate in line with the statutory requirements of the role.

On the basis of the information provided by the Commissioner, and the discussions held in the Confirmation Hearing, the Panel unanimously agreed the proposed recommendations in relation to the appointment of the preferred candidates to the roles of Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer.

RESOLVED:

That the proposed candidate, Mr James Payne, is recommended to be appointed to the position of Chief Executive.

That the proposed candidate, Mr Andy Lowe, is recommended to be appointed to the position of Chief Finance Officer.