Local Government Lawyer: A return to Regional Police Authorities?

The planned abolition of Police and Crime Commissioners by 2028 signals a major shift in police governance, but key questions remain over the role, powers and boundaries of the proposed Policing and Crime Boards. Vanessa Cooper and Amy Stokes explore the structural and legal uncertainties facing police forces.

The UK Government’s plan to abolish Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) by 2028 raises some fascinating – and, given the limited details and lack of legislation so far, uncertain – questions about what comes next. In areas where PCC powers can’t be transferred to elected Mayors, new Policing and Crime Boards will be established. These will bring together council leaders and ‘cooptees’ (who will bring expertise) to oversee local police forces. The Home Office’s recently published white paper ‘From local to national: a new model for policing’ confirms that the duties and responsibilities of the Chair and Crime Leads for the Policing and Crime Boards will be set out in statute where appropriate.

The governance challenge

Here’s where things get complicated. By 2028, around 13 elected Mayors are expected to exercise PCC powers, covering 15 police force areas. That still leaves most areas – 27 police forces – without an elected Mayor. Key to the government strategy will be the “optimal configuration” of police forces, subject to an independent review, which will report in the summer of 2026. This does mean some forces will be governed by an elected Mayor and some by a Policing and Crime Board. For those areas/forces that will have a Policing and Crime Board, the governance arrangements, authority and relationship between the new boards and Chief Constables remain unclear. The white paper confirms the Policing Protocol will be overhauled to clarify this relationship, although the Policing and Crime Boards are expected to have “broadly the same” powers as a directly elected Mayor. The complications extend beyond simple structures. In many cases, police force boundaries don’t align neatly with the new strategic authorities. For example, some police force areas are split across two or three new strategic authorities. The white paper confirms that there will also be simplified powers for the Home Office to alter force boundaries, which will facilitate fewer forces, as proposed by the white paper. Without doubt, there will be significant change on the horizon for most, if not all, police forces.

The ‘double transition’ risk

Some argue that PCCs should have remained in place until devolution arrangements were settled. Proceeding with the abolition of PCCs in 2028 could mean some staff are transferred first to a Policing and Crime Board in 2028 and then transferred again when a mayoral structure is later created. We know that effective governance requires stable institutions retaining experienced staff with clearly understood lines of accountability, and that everyone needs to know the scheme of delegation for timely decisions to be made and enacted. It is this that enables police services to be efficiently and effectively delivered.

This creates a real governance headache. Once the review and further legislation are published, we will know more. However, whatever the review concludes, new governance will still need to be developed to ensure a smooth handover to Policing and Crime Boards and newly elected Mayors.

Employee transfers

One of the most pressing practical concerns is: what happens to staff currently employed by PCC offices? The people working in these offices, such as policy advisors, finance officers, communications staff, and administrative personnel, have built up expertise in police governance over the past decade. The new Policing and Crime Boards will still require staff, leadership and administrative support. But the transition raises significant questions about employment continuity, institutional knowledge retention, and staff morale. TUPE regulations will presumably apply, but staff transfers are rarely straightforward. Different local authorities have different pay scales, pension arrangements and working cultures, and not all PCC functions are currently embedded within local authority structures. There is also the question of who the new employer will be. The board itself? A host authority? Or a shared services arrangement across several constituent councils? The complexity also means that, even where TUPE applies, roles may not map neatly into equivalent positions. Staff will want certainty about where they will sit in the new structure but without clarity, the risk of losing valuable staff and experience is high.

Looking ahead

Strong governance will be critical from day one. New Policing and Crime Boards will need:

• Robust governance structures that avoid operational disruption
• Clear schemes of delegation
• Well-defined relationships with chief constables
• Unambiguous lines of accountability

We have seen firsthand, based on our experience from the implementation of PCCs under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, that clear and robust governance is critical to enabling smooth organisational change with minimal disruption to the essential day-to-day work of police forces. Drawing on this experience, together with our governance, employment, regulatory and broader expertise in supporting forces, we can help the new Policing and Crime Boards to operate efficiently and effectively, delivering strong outcomes for policing and the communities they serve.TLT is developing practical guidance, template governance documents and targeted support to help forces and authorities navigate this change with minimal disruption and cost. We would welcome a conversation about how we can support you through this transition.

This article was first published in Local Government Lawyer.

This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at March 2026. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions.

‍