In the months before the General Election was announced, the thorny issue of how the political parties would handle police governance had been a huge talking point.

The pledges from the three main political parties had ranged from Labour's commitment to preserving the status quo at one end of the spectrum to abolishing police authorities and replacing them with Directly Elected Police and Crime Commissioners from the Tories at the other.

The radical concept of having elected individuals was, however, met with a volley of criticism from some senior officers. Among them, ACPO President Sir Hugh Orde said the proposals could ultimately prompt the resignation of Chief Constables if operational independence was compromised.

But with the Tory and Liberal Democrat coalition now settled on introducing legislation to create directly elected individuals in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill in the autumn, attentions are turning to how the plans will work in practice – and the exact remit of the commissioner.

"The government now needs to look at the dull legal detail of these proposals and ensure that the commissioner is able to deliver," emphasised Fraser Sampson, Vice-Chair of the Association of Police Authority Chief Executives. "As things stand, we have a very complex governance arrangement that has evolved alongside policing over many years.

"There is great political resolve to carry out these plans, but the fact is that this determination on its own will not be enough to push them through – a few years ago merger plans between Forces were derailed because of legal issues, and these proposals could face very similar challenges."

Despite concerns about the introduction of the individuals, Policing and Justice Minister Nick Herbert is confident the proposal is winning wider support.

The Taxpayers Alliance pressure group is among those backing the government plans. The organisation claims the move will strip away bureaucracy as well as bringing far greater accountability and transparency.

"It's great to see that the Police and Crime Commissioners will be elected by the communities they serve," John O'Connell, the Deputy Director of the group said in an interview with PoliceOracle.com. "But the Home Office must be careful that accountability measures are more than just a token gesture and that citizens get a real say in how their communities are policed."

The government argument for introducing directly elected commissioners is simple. Ministers believe the individuals will make the police more accountable to the communities for which they are responsible and raise the profile of police governance – police authorities are currently all but unseen by the public.

But while there is now some flesh on the bones of the proposals set out in the Policing in the 21st Century consultation document, critics have maintained that the full picture will be needed quickly if the government is to maintain its pledge of introducing the first commissioners by May 2012.

In a broad overview of the proposals, the document confirms that the individuals will serve for a four-year fixed term on election and will be limited to a maximum tenure of eight years in office. They will be able to stand on a party political agenda or independently, with their responsibilities including agreeing a local strategic plan for the force, setting the budget and precept and the hiring and firing of the Chief Constable.

Under the proposals, forces will be required to publish data "at a level which allows the public to see what is happening in their area" from next year while arrival of the commissioners will see the first "beat meetings" between officers and the public.

In addition, the government has also made it clear that the commissioners will "be under a strong duty" to collaborate with other forces to help save money as well as tackling cross border crimes and helping to prevent terrorism.

Elected individuals will be responsible for appointing and leading a support team. This group must include somebody with the financial skills and that there will be a process "to ensure appointments are made with propriety".

The commissioner's actions will be scrutinised by new Police and Crime Panels, made up of councillors and independent members from constituent wards. They will be able summon the individual to public hearings to give evidence, make any concerns public and can call in the IPCC if they feel it necessary. The consultation paper also makes it clear that HMIC will take on a greater overseeing role.

With a complex arrangement on the cards, however, some commentators have voiced concerns that the plans will create extra layers of bureaucracy with the creation of a police authority-style body to oversee the commissioner.

According to Fraser Sampson, the system could add an extra leg to the current tripartite agreement if the discussion document is carried through in its current form. But he added: "Unfortunately there is no detail below the headline.

"As it stands, each commissioner will be able to decide on the size of their team and we are going to have these Police and Crime Panels. The costs are also going to be a concern, particularly with the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review – it is not really an issue of how much it will cost but we need to establish exactly where the money is coming from."

While the overwhelming majority of forces will be overseen by commissioners, there are some important exceptions. In London, the Metropolitan Police Authority will be abolished and the Greater London Authority will be responsible for taking on the scrutiny role. There will be no commissioners for the British Transport Police, MoD Police and Civil Nuclear Constabulary.

Despite the government's enthusiasm for the proposals, however, it would seem that the creation of directly elected commissioners is not set in stone just yet.

As well as the Labour opposition pledging to fight the plans, it has also been mooted that the legislation could be dealt a blow by the House of Lords. While, under the Salisbury-Addison convention, peers cannot hold up the second or third reading of any manifesto commitment of a victorious party, some believe this may not apply to the coalition agreement as the Liberal Democrats had put forward a different idea of Directly Elected Police Authorities in their election pledge.

But while the political arguments continue to rumble on, it is the detail of the proposals and ensuring that the plans are operationally workable that is of key concern for those responsible for delivering at the sharp end of policing.

In the words of ACPO President Sir Hugh Orde: "Chief Officers understand the need to be accountable to local communities – policing's relationship with the public we serve is the source of its legitimacy and consequently its effectiveness.

"We now need to examine in detail the government's proposals for maintaining operational independence against the practical reality of directly-elected Police and Crime Commissioners."