Agenda and minutes
Venue: Committee Room 4, Brent Town Hall, Forty Lane, Wembley, HA9 9HD. View directions
Contact: Bryony Gibbs, Democratic Services Officer 020 8937 1355 Email: bryony.gibbs@brent.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Declarations of personal and prejudicial interests Members are invited to declare at this stage of the meeting, any relevant financial or other interest in the items on the agenda. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
Deputations Minutes: There were no deputations. |
|
Minutes of the previous meeting held on 26 July 2011 PDF 162 KB The minutes are attached. Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting held on 26 July 2011 were approved as a correct record subject to the following amendment to minute 4, 'matters arising': -
· that the words 'working programme' referred to in the first sentence of the item, be replaced with 'work programme'. |
|
Matters arising Minutes: With reference to the item 'Registered Social Landlord Performance', an update was sought with regard to the council's Tenancy Strategy. The committee was advised that work on the strategy was on going but a draft was not yet ready for distribution.
A member of the committee noted that it had previously been agreed that meeting dates would be scheduled to avoid clashes with Area Consultative Forum (ACF) meetings; however, there was a clash with the current meeting and the Wembley ACF. It was agreed that officers would address this issue. |
|
Anti Social Behaviour in Brent PDF 114 KB Additional documents: Minutes: Genny Renard (Head of Integrated Community Safety and Development) presented a report to the committee setting out the current work being delivered by the Community Safety Team and their partners to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB). Commonly, ASB complaints related to issues such as noise or drinking on the streets; however, ASB encompassed a wide range of issues and it was emphasised that people’s understanding of what constituted ASB could vary. Consequently, the local authority was contributing to work being conducted by the police to clearly define what could be deemed ASB for purposes of police enforcement.
Local Joint Action Groups (LJAGs), which brought together community safety partners to provide a more localised, operational response to tackling ASB, had been established in May 2011. Membership included the police, ward working, Brent CRI, Brent Youth Service, Adaction and a growing number of registered social landlords (RSLs); in addition, other agencies and partners such as victim support and Brent Mental Health could be invited to help resolve particular ASB issues. There were three Brent LJAGs, one for each police safer neighbourhood cluster. Recently, changes had been made to the way in which problems were brought to the LJAGs to ensure that the relevant partner agencies were in attendance as necessary. There were a number of resources available to the LJAGs including considerable police input in the form of five local authority funded police officers, comprising two constables and three police community support officers (PCSOs), as well as three detectives. Other resources included access to shared data, allowing an in depth look at families, particularly in relation to issues of domestic violence and violence against women and girls; demographic data which was being used to map poverty and unemployment in each cluster, and; limited funding from the Mayor of London. Genny Renard noted that the sharing of data had been very valuable, particularly the demographic data which had helped to create a better profile of each area. Funding from the Mayor of London had been used for a number of discrete projects. One of these projects, termed ‘autumn nights’, sought to address the peak in street robberies which occurred around events such as Halloween and Diwali. Another piece of work had been conducted around repeat callers and victims, which it had been found absorbed circa forty per cent of police time. A sample taken in the Kilburn locality had demonstrated that a vast majority of these cases required input from services other than the police, such as mental health services.
The three Brent LJAGs reported to the Brent Joint Action Board, which in turn reported to the Crime Prevention Strategy Groups. This structure had been seen to be successful and a number of other boroughs and the Mayor of London were interested in exploring the project set up further. However, the council was currently waiting before actively engaging with other interested parties, to test that the structure worked effectively.
Genny Renard drew the committee’s attention to paragraph 3.14 of the report which set out ... view the full minutes text for item 5. |
|
Crime Indicators (verbal report) In February 2011 the Partnership and Place Committee agreed to monitor a set of crime related performance indicators. Members will receive a presentation at the meeting which will provide the most up to date information.
Minutes: It was noted that the committee had previously considered several updates from the Community Safety Team and that it had been agreed that the committee should select key areas for data monitoring. Genny Renard tabled two supporting documents for the committee's consideration. The first of these, a key performance indicator report for 2011-12 for the Brent area, had been supplied by the police. The second document set out the suggested data areas for the committee to monitor and possible targets for these areas.
Genny Renard outlined some of the key trends evident from the police performance indicator report. Members were advised that the figures set out in the police performance indicator report were not representative of the number of incidences or victims, as one crime could be counted a number of times if it crossed several classifications. For example, a robbery could be both a property crime and a violent crime. The committee was further informed that gun or knife crime included all incidents in which someone had reported seeing a gun or knife, as well as actual violence committed with such weapons.
Genny Renard then drew members attention to those areas proposed for further monitoring, setting out the reasons for their selection. It was suggested that members monitor the violence portfolio with particular emphasis on serious youth violence and violence with injury, the number of sanction detections for Rape and the property portfolio. The latter of these contained most of the significant property crimes including robbery, motor vehicle crime, burglary and shoplifting. Suggested targets for these selected areas included a reduction by eight per cent in the numbers recorded for violence with injury and a reduction in the rise of Serious Youth Violence by twenty per cent in 2011/12, fifteen per cent in 2012/13 and ten per cent in 2013/14. It was intended that the sanction and detection rate for rape would be increased by ten per cent by the end of 2013/14. For property portfolio offences a reduction of three per cent was proposed for 2013/14 alongside a target of fifteen per cent increase in the sanction and detection rates by 2013/14.
During member’s discussion a number of queries were raised and members sought clarification with regard to several issues. With reference to the target of an eight per cent reduction in violence with injury, the Chair sought further details regarding how the targets had been set. Genny Renard explained that the targets reflected informed estimations of what could be achieved. For instance, targets for youth violence related to a reduction in the increase of youth violence rather than an overall reduction in these crimes. The Chair further queried whether benchmarking data relating to other similar local authorities was available. Genny Renard noted that Hackney had experienced a rise in youth violence by twenty-six per cent and Lambeth by thirty two per cent over the same period. It was agreed that benchmarking information would be circulated to members before the next meeting of the committee.
Clarification was sought ... view the full minutes text for item 6. |
|
Update on emerging local and national policing issues (verbal report) Members will be provided with a verbal update on the emerging local and national policing initiatives and the impact they are likely to have on Brent. This will include a brief overview of how the new Safer Neighbourhoods Teams are bedding in.
Minutes: Sergeant Barron (Metropolitan Police – Brent) provided a brief update to the committee on policing issues in Brent. The committee was advised that borough tasking meetings took place every two weeks and resources to tackle issues of specific concern were allocated as needed. Such resources might include decoy cars to address issues of car theft or vandalism. Current priorities for the borough related to tackling burglary, robbery and gang related crime. Figures were not available per Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) but across the borough for the previous month there had been eighty-four arrests and one hundred and fifty six searches carried out. Twenty to twenty-five per cent of arrests had arisen from people being stopped and searched. Eleven fixed penalty notices had been issued; these fixed penalty notices could be issued for offences such as drinking in public areas, littering and dog fouling. Sergeant Barron added that a sex offender had been active in Gladstone Park but that an individual had now been arrested and charged with nine offences which ranged from indecent talking to attempted rape. In response to a query, Sergeant Barron agreed that graphs indicating the types and levels of crime for each ward could be provided to the committee.
Sergeant Barron informed the Panel that she had recently taken over responsibility for the SNTs for Brondesbury Park ward and Mapebury ward. The SNTs in Brent had recently been rearranged so that there would be five dual wards. Whilst separate SNTs would be maintained for each ward within the dual-ward areas, the teams would be overseen by only one Sergeant. Each SNT would still have the same number of Police Constables (PCs) and Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs). Genny Renard noted that the dual-ward areas would be monitored closely and added that the resource funded by the council of five additional police officers could be allocated to help meet specific needs as they arose.
During members’ discussion, Councillor Hashmi raised a concern regarding communication with SNTs, noting that he had left messages previously and no one had responded. Sergeant Barron advised that this situation would be explored further.
Councillor Hirani asserted that the information sharing between SNTs did not work as it should do and noted to the committee that the advice given to residents regarding the use of Gladstone park during the period where a sex offender had been known to be active had differed between neighbouring wards. Sergeant Barron acknowledged that communication should be better. A communications strategy was currently being formulated and would be circulated shortly. Sergeant Barron confirmed that communication between SNTs would improve.
Councillor Hirani further queried what arrangements were in place to ensure that sufficient cover was provided for those SNTs where an officer was on maternity leave or long term leave due to illness. Sergeant Barron advised that in some circumstances individuals may be placed on recuperative duties if they were unable to carry out their normal duties due to illness or injury. In such circumstances, these officers were still ... view the full minutes text for item 7. |
|
The work programme is attached. Minutes: The Chair briefly outlined the items due to be brought to the next meeting of the committee and noted that an update on the crime strategy would be brought to the meeting scheduled for March 2012.
The committee was advised by Genny Renard that the local authority was now required to hold a review following any domestic homicides. Sadly there had recently been two domestic homicides in Brent. The findings of the subsequent reviews would be brought to a future meeting of the committee. The reviews would involve establishing a timeline of interactions between the victim and various public agencies and services. It was intended that the findings of the reviews would improve practice. Genny Renard added that there was no additional funding provided by the government to conduct these reviews and it was expected that they could be very costly. The similar process of conducting a serious case review could cost approximately £70k. Brent had agreed, along with other London authorities to chair the domestic homicide reviews of other local authorities. It was hoped that the reviews would be completed within six months.
Genny Renard further advised the committee that following an extremely severe attack on a woman recently, a special single issue meeting of the multiagency case review panel would be held. The findings of this meeting would also be brought to the committee. |
|
Date of next meeting The next meeting of the Partnership and Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting is scheduled to take place on 13 December 2011. Minutes: The committee noted that the next meeting was scheduled for 13 December 2011. |
|
Any other urgent business Notice of items raised under this heading must be given in writing to the Democratic Services Manager or his representative before the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 64. Minutes: None. |