Police and Justice Bill

I am grateful to the Minister. She has now highlighted one of the major issues of concern. There is a great difference between the Government’s judgment on what comprises a cost and a benefit and the judgment of the police authorities and police forces. The briefing on police restructuring from the West Mercia Police Authority, under ““Costs and Council Tax””, makes the point:"““The funding of a new regional police force has yet to be settled. Council Tax for policing is currently much lower in the West Midlands conurbation than in the rest of the region. Council Tax equalisation is essential, but how this will be achieved and over what period is still unknown. Abolition and merger will be costly. Estimates of costs and savings have varied considerably. Set up costs have been recently estimated by the Home Office at both £51 million and £57 million. Calculations of net annual savings arising from the proposals have also varied widely, from £15.3 million to £26 million per annum. Whether that level of saving will be realised in practice is unknown””." Earlier, when we dealt with Amendment No. 14, we debated the federated model. In a contribution to the police reform debate, the Association of Police Authorities, in a paper called Joining Forces, published in January 2006, stated:"““The federated model will avoid many of the revenue and capital costs and risks associated with the large scale restructuring of forces, while providing greater flexibility in the approach to generating efficiencies in corporate functions. It may therefore represent a more affordable option for addressing the protective services deficit than forced mergers””." If I were confident that the Government were prepared to look at those costs at the same time as they carry on their discussions this summer, I would feel happier about withdrawing these amendments, as I am about to do. The difficulty is that the Minister says that her right honourable friend Dr Reid and her honourable friend Mr McNulty are now exploring ways forward whereas, as we said earlier, yesterday, on the Floor of the House in another place, the Home Secretary made it clear that the destination stays the same. It is all very well listening, but if one will not change one’s mind about where one goes, what does it matter?