Agenda item

Verbal Update.

The Panel received a verbal update in relation to a safeguarding project to look at Stop and Search, including a pilot programme to look at the safeguarding needs of children stopped and searched by police in Haringey. The update was provided by Bev Hendricks, AD for Safeguarding and Social Care. Ann Graham, Director of Children’s Services was present for this item. Cllr Brabazon, Cabinet Member for Children, Schools and Families was also present for this item. The following summarises the update that was provided to Members:

• The Project was initiated because of information relayed to the Director of Children’s Services (DCS) about children’s experiences in Haringey with Stop and Search. The information related to a child stopped and searched 12 times over a period of time and the fact that child was not referred for support. Since then, officers have spoken to a range of families and other relevant groups.
• From the above case it became clear that there was no requirement to refer the case to child welfare agencies unless the attending police officer thought that there was a safeguarding concern, based on a safeguarding criterion used by the police.
• The DCS then entered into a dialogue with the Borough Commander and it was agreed that a pilot project would be set up. Phase 1 of the project was an examination of 6 cases of children being stopped and searched, that were not referred on to the MASH following use of the police matrix, in order to see if there were safeguarding opportunities that had been missed.
• The 6 cases were examined against information held by other agencies largely Children’s Social Care and it was discovered that there were safeguarding concerns that could have been picked up. From the findings of this, there was further agreement to look at a larger sample of cases.
• The project required an information sharing agreement to be agreed with the Police which took a long time.
• Officers agreed that they wouldn’t publish the data before the police, partners to the pilot  were ready to share and it was hoped that this would form part of the police Children First strategy and that was the reason this information was being shared as a verbal update.
• A joint conference with the Police was being organised in Haringey on 12^th December 2023 where the findings of this work would be shared, and the police would set out their response.
• Phase 2 of the project involve an examination of a sample of 90 cases. Of those 90 cases:
  • 3 involved children who were Looked After Children in Haringey. But the authority was not informed of the stop and search as corporate parents.
  • 14 cases involved children from households with domestic abuse
  • 16 cases involved children with significant housing instability
  • Some of the children were known to the Haringey Learning Partnership and other young people had a range of needs including autism and SEND, ( special educational needs and disabilities). 
• Some of the key concerns that came out of these cases were around the fact that the details of the cases were not shared with other agencies and the only reason that these issues came to light was because the police recorded the stop and search. Officers wanted to see a trauma-led approach adopted rather than one based purely on crime prevention and detection.
• Officers have spoken to DCSs across London and received their support for the pilot.
• Officers emphasised that the project was a marathon and not a sprint and that it was felt that the project was moving at the correct pace to bring people on board and to effect sustained change.
• The DCS advised the Panel that on 24^th August she met with the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and that he was supportive of the business case and the impact of trauma on children who were stopped and searched. The DCS and AD for Safeguarding and Social Care would be meeting with MOPAC on this from September.

The following arose from the discussion of this item:

1. The Panel sought clarification around invites to the conference. In response, officers advised that all scrutiny councillors would be invited, with a particular focus on those from the areas of N17, N15 & N22. Police colleagues and the Directors of Children’s Services from across London would also be invited.
2. The Panel questioned whether the police were obliged to inform a child’s parents or even ask about whether they had a social worker. In response, officers advised that they did not have to inform a child’s parents and that the only obligation under the law was to inform if there were safeguarding concerns based on the matrix they used. Officers advised that it was expected that a change in the legal framework would be needed if police officers were required to inform parents. There was also a recognition that for some children, perhaps a minority,  informing their parents may increase risk and this would need careful consideration.
3. In response to a question, officers advised that the youngest child stopped as part of the data they had seen was 10 years old. The numbers of children stopped within a particular age group increased with each cohort.
4. In response to a question, officers advised that the conference would involve Children in Care and that children had been engaged with throughout the wider project.
5. A co-opted member of the panel raised concerns about a perception that nothing had changed within the police and also raised concerns that even working collaboratively with Police would not bring about any meaningful change. It was suggested that the Council should be looking at how more meaningful engagement could be taken forward with the community. In response, the DCS recognised that the issues people experienced with the police were generational. However, the DCS argued, it was her job as a Safeguarding lead to keep pushing for  change.
6. In relation to a question, the Panel were advised that the timeframe for the child stopped 12 times was between March 2022 and June 2023. Ethnicity figures for the cases considered may be released as part of the conference report, but that a level of disproportionality would not be surprising.
7. A member of the Panel highlighted the findings of the Baroness Casey review and in particular the case studies within the report, which painted a clear picture that the issues with the Police were institutional and systemic. The Members emphasised that the key to improving the culture of the Police was public scrutiny and accountability. It was suggested that the Children’s Safeguarding Board should receive reports on this issue. It was also suggested, that following the conference in December, the Cabinet Member should consider writing to the Shadow Justice Minister, as this was an area for reform considerations. In response, the DCS advised that it was not her job to reform the culture of the police or the laws governing the way the police operated. However, she was determined slowly build confidence, in order to try and bring about a positive change for children.
8. The Cabinet Member emphasised the fact that this piece of work was unique and that in her opinion, it was one of the most creative pieces of work done by Children’s Services to try and work a different angle to what was a very difficult issue. The Cabinet Member set out that the fact that a number of children were found to be Looked After or to have Special Educational needs, showed how critical the piece of work was.
9. Officers asked Members to use their contacts with counterparts in other boroughs to support them and their DCSs to undertake similar audits with their respective BCUs across London.

RESOLVED

That the update was noted.