Anger at Crime Commissioner's security bill

The commissioner’s office said that the decision had been taken following a risk assessment after the PCC election last November.

But Rotherham resident Tricia Fearn said the Wright family should pay for their own security, describing the move as “outrageous.”

She added: “Why can they not afford to fund the work themselves instead of clobbering the taxpayer?

“My message to Shaun Wright is pay for the work to be done yourself — you can afford it.”

A spokesman for Mr Wright said extra security measures were “deemed fully appropriate and proportionate to the level of threat/risk.”

He added: “The risk assessment flagged-up many of the typical risks associated with a high-profile public figure whose personal address is available in the public domain, and while some of the recommendations were taken on board by Commissioner Wright, others were not.

“It is standard Police procedures for public officials who are considered at risk and who do not enjoy the added security of non-disclosure of their family address, as, for example, is the case with Members of Parliament.

“There is also precautionary element involved with the increase in security to proactively discourage any threats to the Commissioner, threats that no one working in public life should have their family exposed to.

The nature of the funding of the Commissioner’s role sees the security recommendations and implementations in turn funded by the public purse.”