Agenda item

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 the Panel for inviting him to the Confirmation Hearing, outlining that he was well known to most of the Members present, as he had been Interim Chief Executive since the beginning of the year, and before that Estates Director. He felt that now was the right time for there to be a permanent Chief Executive in post for the Commissioner, and had encouraged the Commissioner to go out to recruit for the position. Mr Payne felt that he had learnt a lot from his time as an Interim Chief Executive, including the long hours and commitment this role required, but felt he was able to meet the needs of the job. In terms of successes during his time at the Office to date, he outlined his co-authoring of the Police and Crime Plan, the adoption of the draft precept, and the implementation of the Estates review to date. He had undertaken a wide-ranging review of staffing capability in the Office, redesigning roles and structures to help better support the Commissioner and deliver on the Plan.

Mr Payne provided an overview of what he felt the role of the Chief Executive entailed, and the legislation that supported its activity, noting primarily that his role would be to support and advise the Commissioner. His ambition would be to make the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner one of the best nationally.

The Panel then asked questions of the candidate which related to his professional competence and personal independence, the answers to which enabled Members to evaluate Mr Payne’s suitability for the role.

At the end of questioning, the Chairman thanked the candidate and provided an opportunity to clarify any responses given.

Councillors Ryan Brent and Lisa Griffiths left at this point during the meeting.