This is a default template, your custom branding appears to be missing.
The custom branding should be at https://www.leicester.gov.uk/cabinet-pages-template/ if you cannot load this page please contact your IT.

Agenda item

Agenda item

CONFIRMATION HEARING FOR THE ROLE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE OFFICE OF THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER

Members to undertake a Confirmation Hearing for the proposed candidate for the role of Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner based on the procedure outlined in the cover report and Local Government Association guidance.

 

 

Minutes:

The Police and Crime Panel undertook a Confirmation Hearing for the proposed candidate, Mr. David Peet, for the role of Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, as based on the procedure outlined in the cover report and Local Government Association guidance.

 

The Chairman welcomed the Panel to the confirmation hearing and invited the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) to make any comments about his proposed candidate and the recruitment procedure which was followed.

 

The Police and Crime Commissioner, Rupert Matthews, introduced Mr Peet to the Panel, the preferred candidate for the Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). The Commissioner informed the Panel of the process undertaken to recruit a new Chief Executive, as advised by the Assistant Chief Officer of Human Resources of the Leicestershire Police, and further informed by prior Police and Crime Commissioners who have been through the selection process.

 

The selection panel was formed of four persons, Rupert Matthews (PCC), Bev Smith (Chief Executive of North West Leicestershire Council), Alistair Kelly (Assistant Chief Officer for HR for Leicestershire Police and Mrs. Nupa Chamund, a long-serving staff member of the OPCC, who was included by the Police and Crime Commissioner as a way of offering new training and skills to members of staff. After advertisement of the role, 11 applications were received, 4 of which were shortlisted. The four shortlisted candidates were interviewed, and were tested for leadership, competency, and skills.

 

After each interview, the Panel discussed the candidate’s suitability in depth, leading to a unanimous agreement for the proposed successful candidate, after the completion of the interview process. The successful candidate, Mr Peet, was highly regarded by the selection panel, believing that his interview and Curriculum Vitae (CV) demonstrated a broad range of experience and skills suited for the role.

 

The Police and Crime Commissioner felt it important to clarify Mr Peet’s independence from himself in that the only times he had met the candidate was during the course of PCC business, never having met under other social or business terms.

 

The Chairman thanked the Police and Crime Commissioner and welcomed Mr Peet to the Panel, who was invited to say a few words to outline his skills and experience.

 

The Candidate thanked the Chairman and Panel, briefly explaining the range of experience and track record he attained, which were noted as follows:

 

·         Mr Peet worked as the Chief Executive for Derbyshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner’s Office, for a period of just under nine years.

·         Prior to his role as a Chief Executive, he worked for the Police Authority in Northamptonshire, managing the transition from police authority to Police and Crime Commissioner.

·         The Candidate had worked nationally with complaints and developing guidance, in a close working arrangement with the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

·         He had chaired the Association of Police and Crime Commissioner Chief Executives for a number of years, only recently standing down.

 

The Chairman thanked the candidate for his address, and led the Panel on a questioning session for Mr Peet, regarding his suitability for the post under the following key headings:

 

·         Professional Competence;

 

·         Personal Independence.

 

Arising from the questioning, the Panel noted the following points made by Mr. Peet:

 

(i)            Mr Peet, due to his prior experience at Derbyshire OPCC, he had the opportunities and experience of working with a variety of partners of the OPCC, such as local authorities, Health authorities and the wider Criminal Justice bodies, but also more unusual partners through developing the synergy between partners. Mr. Peet stated that his focus was outcomes, and that he would work closely with the PCC and the Panel to develop the best outcomes for both the City and the Counties.

 

(ii)          Having worked for Derbyshire OPCC, Mr. Peet stated he was well aware of the types of issues that may arise in the role, and he had confidence and strong experience regarding when to respond decisively as the Chief Executive of the OPCC, and when to consult with the Panel or his team to form responses.

 

(iii)         With nearly nine years of experience in this type of role, Mr. Peet stated he had worked on developing a number of Police and Crime Plans alongside various teams and PCC’s, supported by robust delivery plans. He stated he would ensure the continued delivery of such plans which would report to the Panel to ensure they would always be aware of the actions being undertaken. Mr. Peet reiterated his focus of being outcome driven, rather than output driven.

 

(iv)         Mr. Peet stated, subject to the Panel’s confirmation, that Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Commissioner would be his fifth PCC to have worked with, one in Northamptonshire and 3 in Derbyshire, alluding to his extensive experience in the role of Chief Executive. He believed the role of the Chief Executive should be that of both a critical friend and advisor, as well as not being afraid to speak truth unto power. Mr. Peet specified his driver was to ensure the OPCC and PCC did the best job possible, to be doing exactly what they should be doing, while being aware that as the Monitoring Officer, he had to guarantee the best for residents of the area.

 

(v)          Mr Peet clarified that he didn’t perform the job of Chief Executive for personal glory, instead, he did it due to his strong commitment to the public service, and therefore it was important, as an office, to celebrate the positive outcomes and successes and to promote the importance of the role of the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Office to the public.

 

(vi)         As a side note at the bequest of the Chairman, Mr. Peet stated that there were 19 members of staff at the Derbyshire OPCC, of which not all worked full-time equivalent.

 

(vii)        Upon being asked why Mr Peet chose Leicestershire, he stated his interest in the area as a local resident, and the personal importance in ensuring effective policing. Due to the lack of availability for the role as Chief Executive in Leicester in recent times, he developed his skillset and experience nearby in Derbyshire and Northamptonshire, with ambition to be able to take his expertise back to Leicester and make a difference for the community he lives in.

 

(viii)       Mr. Peet stated his personal test was to evaluate whether or not he had made a difference. He referenced his experience in both the charity and public sectors and expressed his genuine need to make a difference and to lead on positive outcomes for people’s lives.

 

The Chairman thanked the PCC and Mr. Peet for their attendance and informed them that it would be necessary for the Panel to come to a view in private on whether to endorse or otherwise the PCC’s proposed appointment.

 

Following a discussion in private the Panel confirmed that they were happy to endorse Mr Peet’s appointment as Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

 

RESOLVED:

That the proposed appointment of Mr David Peet to the post of Chief Executive the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner be endorsed.

Supporting documents: