Agenda item
Trading Standards Priorities 2016/2017
This report provides information and an opportunity for the Joint Advisory Board to discuss areas of work the Trading Standard Service should prioritise during 2016/17 which will then be used to form our annual work plan.
Minutes:
The Board received a report that outlined areas of work for consideration of priorities for the second half of 2016/17 and into the coming year which would be used to form the annual work plan. Information matching duties to corporate plans was noted. It was noted that the National Trading Standards Board identified priorities for the current year and whilst there was no remit to require the same focus in local activities it was intended that where possible, work carried out on a local basis would feed into that being done regionally and nationally. Priorities were identified by London Trading Standards through an intelligence based task as those causing the highest amount of consumer detriment across London.
Members expressed the view that priority should be given to the protection of the old and young who were the most vulnerable. In response to queries regarding doorstep crime and scams, the officers provided the following responses:
- scams could have a large financial impact, even the loss of life savings, and the protection of the elderly and vulnerable was a priority. Scams were dealt with on a case by case basis and efforts made to avoid vulnerable residents having their names added to lists to be targeted again if there had been previous dealings with a rogue company;
- with regard to underage sales for cigarette, knives and alcohol, this must remain a priority to protect children from harm;
- in Brent a task force partnership based approach was being developed with other regulatory council services and key partners to deal with the Boroughs’ top issues such as shisha bars. This was achieving some success and was in accordance with the aspiration that should all work together for seamless public protection. There was no clear divide between licensing or trading standards and intelligence was improving. An example of multiagency support was planning enforcement and members encouraged this approach in both boroughs;
- Members expressed concern that Council ‘week of action’ campaigns see the situation revert back within a week and stressed the need for task forces to have a strategy to ensure sustainability. The Joint agreement between Brent and Harrow helped prevent the spread across the border but task forces operated within a borough boundary whilst perpetrators did not so there was a spread to other areas. The officer reported on a much improved pooling of information;
- it was not possible with current levels of resource, to investigate every complaint made to the Service by members of the public. Therefore, each complaint was risk assessed against a set criteria so officers could then determine which complaints would receive further investigation.
The Board expressed satisfaction with the priorities set out in the report and noted that these would be further considered at the March meeting of the Board when the budget for the forthcoming municipal year was known and the annual service plan was presented. In response to a question, the Chair indicated that he was unaware of any proposals for reductions in funding for trading standards in the Harrow budget. With regard to Brent an officer reported that an exercise was underway for all services to look at funding reductions plus innovative means of generating income.
RESOLVED: That the report be noted.
Supporting documents: