(12 Apr 2018, 7:17 pm)Jamie M wrote I think it's a silly way of using the money. Maybe using it to subsidize fairs or investments, but cutting money out of the system completely seems... a waste of time and spending. Why not just carry on with their plans to reuse VED and continue to charge people for the service, even if at a subsided rate?? More money to re-invest...
I'm also more concerned about public health and public education and public safety (police & CSOs) than I am about public transport subsiding also, and they definitely should be dead-center of attention for an opposition, it's an open goal. I think it's just politicians trying to appease the common people rather than making a serious pledge, at least I'd hope so in this case.
Whilst the Home Office is ultimately responsible for divesting funds to the police forces around the country, it is up to the local PCC to allocate the funds as they see fit.
This also applies to any precept raised via council tax.
Regardless of how much or how little the Home Office allocates, that PCC will spend accordingly and look after issues they feel important.
Vera Baird has a particular agenda and allocates accordingly. Regardless whether we agree with it or not. This includes victims services, which strangely enough enabled her to award the contract to an organisation she is a director of.