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 Members present to agenda Item 1 as shown on the agenda in respect of filming at this meeting, and Members noted the information contained therein.

Apologies had been received from Co-Chair, Ms Caroline Haines, Mr Jonathan Waterfield would be substituting in her place.  

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 12 below).

There were none.

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2022 as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

That minutes of the meeting held on 4 July 2022 be agreed as a correct record.

Noted.

Presentation by Joe Benmore.

Mr Joe Benmore and Mr Sandeep Broca introduced the item.

The meeting heard that:

•     It was important to work collaboratively with residents and traders to make progress on issues such as drug dealing and other issues that needed collaborative working. Members of the local public could provide intelligence and alternative methods of working needed to be established due to the lack of resources.

•     The Council was developing a combating drugs partnership based on the national strategy and the borough needed a strategy and action plan which matched the community safety strategy. There would be some overlap between the areas.

•     The Council had multidisciplinary panels, including the PPSG, which all partners attended. It was important for residents to be able to feed into the meeting along with the different partners add this code inspire different styles of approach in issues such as community safety and antisocial behaviour

•     Street violence was driven by drugs. Dealing with drugs and alcohol was part of the strategy. Officers had met with the commissioner in the past few days discussing issues and placing emphasis on preventing crime in areas that were considered to be greatly at risk of crime.

RESOLVED:

1)  That the Community Safety Strategy Development process and timeline as outlined in the presentation be approved.

2) That it be noted that; in line with the Haringey Deal, the Council would engage with residents, communities, stakeholders and partners as early as possible to ensure their input was embedded within the strategy development process.

Presentation by Heather Hutchings.

Ms Heather Hutchings presented the item.

The meeting noted the following points:

•     The zero tolerance policy also should apply for staff carrying out their duties who were receiving abuse. This issue needed to be highlighted and promoted internally. A discussion had been held at the staff network panel regarding what can be done to promote inclusivity add challenge hate as a workforce. This would include when staff were outside the office doing their job.

•     It was important to encourage reporting.

•     Reporting of hate crime need to have a double-sided approach. It was important to report to the Police to ensure that the offender would be held accountable, but it was also important to report to local organisations such as the CST, Tell Mama and other groups who offered therapeutic support so that victims would have adequate support.

•     There was a significant amount of under reporting particularly with hate crime. There were particular groups which suffered from hate crime which were considerably under reported this made it difficult to deploy relevant resources. It was important to be able to reach hard to reach communities. All communities need to understand hate crime and have a confident way of being able to report it and be confident that the matter would be followed up.

•     There were many individuals who were members of various sections of the community and there needed to be a more carefully considered approach to collaborative working. For example, MIND had not been invited to the Council's Mental Health Awareness Week. Members of the community should be using the services of organisations such as Rise and You v You which worked directly with many communities and these organisations were not geared to reporting hate crime. Various members of the community would not report to the Police but would report to somebody who they felt could support them.

•     There was some organisations which dealt with various forms of hate crime.

•     It was important to acknowledge the low levels of reporting for certain groups such as disabled and to see an increase in reporting.

•     Public services need to see higher numbers in reporting of issues such as domestic abuse and sexual abuse which would be generally widely underreported.

•     There were many young people who felt various degrees of safety. There were many young people who were targeted inside certain areas of the borough. Various young people felt that there were certain parts of the borough to which they simply could not travel. It was important to link hate crime to the safety strategy and offer adequate support as there were some characteristics some people had which made them susceptible to being targeted.

•     There was a segment of the training area which examined online hate and the need to report online hate, put this needed to be more explicit.

•     The tension monitoring forms were useful as this could get people to fill in forms frequently without involving the Police. However, in cases  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Presentation by Joe Benmore.

Mr Gavin Douglas presented the item.

The meeting heard that:

•     It was important for the Council and the Police to work together and with residents and it would be useful for the public to see the partnership working.

•     The Regeneration team was prioritising 'Wood Green voices' and there should be outcomes from that engagement which could then be targeted.

RESOLVED:

1) That the outcomes of the pilot week of action that took place in Bruce Grove between 26 and 30 October be noted.

2) To promote the Weeks of Action within individual service areas and to commit to the deployment of resources to support the activities.

Presentation by Jonathan Waterfield.

Mr Jonathan Waterfield presented the item.

The meeting heard that:

•     It was important to note that the new arrangements were temporary.

•     Although it was important that Police abstractions were communicated to the borough, it did not require widespread communication. The public would not notice a difference in Police services. This was particularly true for Noel Park ward.

•      External assets such as Violent Crime Task Force would not be used to perform neighbourhood police officers. At a recent meeting with community representatives was a need for pre-briefing and updates on the deployments and results for the month. This would be provided.  

•     Residents need to feel that they were being collaborated with. This needed to be a meaningful engagement.

•     Residents reported issues to the Police but feel that their reporting was not considered particularly important.

RESOLVED:

That the presentation be noted.

Presentation by Joe Benmore.  

The meeting acknowledged the report that had been released from Sir Mark Rowley and how it impacted Haringey and what assurance the Council might have from Police about those in office in Haringey.

Ms Rhona Hunt stated that she and many staff members at the Police had a drive to see change and staff took the issues seriously and were clear on what values needed to be upheld. Work was being done with the Equalities Board in Haringey and effort was being made regarding community led training.

Mr Joe Benmore and Sandeep Broca presented the item.

RESOLVED:

That the presentation be noted.

Ms Chantelle Fatania stated that the Council needed to undertake a domestic homicide review. A male suicide had occurred where domestic abuse was a factor and the case was heard at the MARAC in 2021. The Home Office had been notified.

Mr Eubert Malcolm wished to thank the team for their contributions to the meeting.

To note the dates of future meetings set out below:

13 December 2022 at 11:00am.

9 February 2023 at 2:00pm.

The next meeting would take place on 13 December 2022. .