Agenda and minutes

Please note that this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method. Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting. Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on. 

By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred to the filming of meetings and this information was noted.

Apologies had been received from Ms Caroline Haines.  

The Chair will consider the admission of any items of Urgent Business. (Late items of Urgent Business will be considered where they appear. New items of Urgent Business will be considered under Item 11 below).

There was one matter of urgent business regarding the Haringey New Deal. This item would be taken as part of item 11 on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2023 as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2023 be agreed as an accurate record.

Noted.

Presentation by Russell Symons

Mr Andrew Lovejoy, Probation Services, presented the item.          

The meeting heard that:

·      The Council had, in conjunction with Probation, an additional Probation Officer that sat within the Youth Justice Service that supported the transition of children going from Youth Justice Services into Adult Probation. This was a critical role to support children making that transition.

·      The funding criteria was discretionary to Probation Services.

·      In relation to drug services, there had been an increase in the number of probation service staff (non-qualified staff) and it had been possible to identify roles which needed to be appointed to. A drug services lead had recently been appointed. it may be useful if he was connected to Council staff so that the Council, The Grove and Probation Services could have a joint meeting.

·      In relation to the IOM (Integrated Offender Management), the Probation Service was in the process of arranging a meeting with the Police to see to see if it was possible to explore opportunities to restructure the Probation Services IOM. A bigger cohort was needed on IOM and we need to be doing more with them.

·      From a Probation point of view, the location of service users and distribution service users within the borough was not something that was often discussed. It may be useful to have an outline of what different parts of Haringey meant from a service user perspective. A meeting or a discussion regarding this would be useful to the Probation Service.

·      Some data flow between Probation Services and the Council would be useful.

·      The IOM was a separate cohort which had joint Police and Probation involvement. The Probation selection criteria was based on a type of statistical data. For example, how much risk an individual posed and/or how prolific they were. The total case list was around 900 with around 60 on the IOM scheme.

Co-Chair, Ms Rhona Hunt stated that the funding offer would be acknowledged in addition to ideas regarding data sharing.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted. 

Presentation by Matthew Knights

Mr Matthew Knights presented the item.

RESOLVED:

That the presentation be noted. 

Presentation by Matthew Knights

Mr Matthew Knights presented the item.

The meeting heard that:

·      MOPAC were due to hold their Children and Police Custody public event and this may be an opportunity to reference the summit and the Action Plan.

·      It was important to see the work be coordinated under the Youth Justice Service. There had been conversations regarding the work being done and consideration needed to be given regarding understanding what needed to be commissioned.

·      Once the summit had been confirmed, the department would communicate with the Partnership so that all parties could stay informed. Views from parties would also be sought regarding the impact report.

·      Preparations were underway regarding an OFSTED inspection. All parties would be notified in the next few weeks to inform them of what groupings they would be placed into and how they would be prepared.

·      A Joint Targeted Area Inspection was due in Haringey on Serious Youth Violence. It was important to prepare for this as a partnership. Some areas of the country had already gone through the process and it would be useful for some of the learning from other areas be outlined and taken into consideration. 

·      After the MOPAC public meeting on children in custody, an internal blog would be done by the Police to be sent out to officers and staff and this could be useful as background information. 

RESOLVED:

That the presentation be noted. 

Presentation by Sandeep Broca

Mr Sandeep Broca introduced the item.

In relation to violence reduction contribution, the meeting heard that:

·      Some of the findings from NAVRAG (North Area Violence Reduction Group) could be brought to the Community Safety Partnership for consideration. The Chair of NAVRAG could be asked for feedback on progress.

·      Sharing and cross referencing data helped progress understanding. Children who had been referred to the Youth Justice Service had background checks on where they resided in the borough any activities took place.  

·      A top 20 persistent offenders report was being completed and this would examine the life journey of the child before they were referred to the Youth Justice System. This was a large item of analysis work, but obtaining data from education, children's social care and health sectors were useful to understanding the needs of the child. This would likely be completed by the end of March and something that the Partnership could use as a whole. This would be presented at a future meeting of the Community Safety Partnership.

·      The illegal drugs market had an impact on violence as well and project ADDA was coming into Haringey and the Community Safety Partnership should take interest in the project. It would be useful to consider this for the next meeting.

·      The resources the borough had did not correlate to the amount of organised crime on the borough. There were many factors involved and the borough was not comfortable with the amount of resources it had been allocated currently. Neighbourhood policing would receive an uplift and this touched into serious and organised crime and part of this work would be focused on the two Clear, hold, build projects in the borough. Across London, Haringey would be allocated two sites. One was Finsbury Park and the other was Northumberland Park. Those specific areas had been chosen because that approach was the Home Office approach and although was there to reduce serious violence, it was to mostly target serious and organised crime. The borough recognised that serious and organised crime was a significant issue for Haringey and it was impacting the wider community, wider violence levels and local residents in terms of their feelings of safety and their actual safety. Recruitment was also important.

·      There was a significant amount of collaborative work that was being undertaken across the borough to try and address violence against women and girls and there were ongoing campaigns throughout the work that was led by the Council. There were good opportunities to raise awareness about how important the issue was, but also an opportunity to signpost people to local, regional and national Haringey Services. Over the next year, the Council would be recommissioning a number of Violence Against Women services, but specialist provisions had been put in place, such as for children and young people. Around prevention and early intervention, there was a Protect Our Women program that went out into schools and talked about healthy relationships. It was hoped that this offer would be increased into the next  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

To consider any new items of Urgent Business admitted under Item 3 above.

Ms Jean Taylor introduced the Haringey Deal.

The meeting heard:

·      It was a natural inevitability that the work would involve partners. It was important that partners understood the Haringey Deal.

·      The purpose of Weeks of Action was to show a style of rapid response to the issues that had been raised to kind of create the space for conversations recognising that if immediate issues would not be considered.  There was a significant emphasis on showing action. As an organisation, the Council had been reflecting on being careful that when residents were invited to engage, it was done in an intentional way and participation could be linked to impact so that residents did not feel fatigue regarding the value of participating. Colleagues who had been involved with Weeks of Action would be consulted on learning about how to maximise the impact of this kind of intervention.

To note the dates of future meetings set out below:

20 December 2023

21 February 2023

This would be confirmed at a later date.