Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed attendees and introductions took place.

The Chair updated the Partnership on the impact that the recent Extinction Rebellion activity had had on local police resources with the levels of central aid that was required.

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 for absence were received from Rachel Lissauer (CCG), Geoffrey Ocen (Bridge Renewal Trust), Zina Etheridge (Haringey Council Chief Executive), Ian Thompson (London Fire Brigade), and Joanne McCartney (MPA London Assembly), Cllr Mark Blake and Beverley Tarka.

Tim Miller to substitute for Rachel Lissauer, Deborah Williams to substitute for Geoffrey Ocen, Andy Maloney to substitute for Ian Thompson.

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 14 below).

There were no items of urgent business.

At this point in the meeting, Eubert Malcolm, AD for Stronger Communities, noted that the VRU update which was mentioned in the previous meeting of 5^th June, would be circulated to the Partnership (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 5^th June 2019 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

The Partnership agreed the minutes of the meeting held on 5th June 2019 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

That the membership and Terms of Reference were noted and agreed.

At this point in the meeting, the Chair noted, at the request of officers, the variation of the agenda to consider agenda item 11 Children and Young People’s Service – Developing a Repository for Young People’ prior to agenda item 7 ‘North Area Violence Reduction Group Update.’ The order of the minutes reflects the order that the business was taken, rather than the order on the published agenda.

Verbal update by Beverley Hendricks (Assistant Director for Safeguarding and Social Care).

The Partnership received a verbal update from the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care, Beverley Hendricks, around developing a repository for young people to protect them from gangs and knife crime. The AD for Safeguarding and Social Care also presented a flyer to the Partnership, as set out in pages 57-60 of the agenda pack, which provides advice and guidance about gangs and knife crime. The Partnership were informed that the community flyer was created in response to the loss of a 15-year-old from the Borough as a result of an incident and based on concerns and questions from parents on what needed to be done. It was noted that the community flyer was an opportunity to educate parents on the signs of gang involvement and who they might turn to for support. It was hoped that the information in the community flyer could be replicated to schools, and to move towards creating Community Safe Zones (CSZ), which would be a place young people could access support if they were unable to speak to professionals or their parents. It was further noted that there were ideas around developing an app for young people where they could click on their phone to trigger responses from MASH and other preferred providers to reduce the line between the incident and response. The AD for Safeguarding and Social Care sought the Partnership’s agreement on the concepts put forward in order for future representatives to work it up to a better proposal to come back to the Partnership.

The Chair welcomed the ideas proposed by the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care. 

The following was noted in response to the discussion of the update:

1. The AD for Safer Communities mentioned that safe havens were being set up along businesses on Wood Green High Road and suggested that the proposed work also tap into the safe havens project to ensure that young people who sought safety were signposted to the relevant information. In response, the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care agreed to build on the safe haven work, but noted that the businesses would need to have training to ensure they understood their role and close the gap to make sure the community was involved with the Council’s efforts around safeguarding.
2. In response to a question on who would be involved in the training, the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care agreed that it needed to be multi-agency. The Partnership were informed that there was a small working group to help identify which portfolios would do the different parts of the training.
3. In response to a request, the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care agreed to circulate the printed versions of community flyer to different partners (Action: Beverley Hendricks).
4. In response to a concern raised that the app on the young person’s phone could be scrutinised by senior gang members and make the young person vulnerable, the AD for Safeguarding and Social Care explained that the Social Care service were launching a Mind Of My  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

Briefing note about the joint police North Area (Haringey and Enfield) Violence Reduction Group (NAVRG) and provides an update on the project and performance trends.

The Partnership received a report which provided updates on the joint police North Area (Haringey and Enfield) Violence Reduction Group (NAVRG) and on the project and performance trends as set out at pages 17-19 of the agenda pack. The Partnership also received a short presentation which provided an overview of the performance trends for violence in the North Area and London, key hotspots for violence across the North Area, and the socio-economic cost of violent crime in the North Area. The report and presentation were introduced by Sandeep Broca, Intelligence Analysis Manager- Community Safety & Enforcement Team.  The following was noted in response to the discussion of the report:

1. In response to a question around the reason behind the increase in robbery in Haringey such as mobile phone related robbery, the Chair explained that crime trend analysis suggested that  many robbery suspects were between the ages of 14-18 years old, and the theft of mobile phones was quick access to cash for them.  The Chair informed the Partnership that the police had a dedicated robbery team trying to identify and prosecute suspects, complimented by understanding the hotspots and visibly policing those hotspots. The Chair confirmed that areas around train stations, such as Turnpike Lane Station, were one of the hotspot areas for robbery.  The Partnership were informed that the police were working on trying to enforce further the education of the public in protecting their mobile phone against theft.
2. Regarding a question on whether there were statistics on the timings of criminal activity, the Chair confirmed that the police had that data and it formed the basis of their hotspot patrols, and when the police receive central aid such as the Violent Crime Task Force, that they would be tasked to patrol those robbery hotspot areas. It was found that there were spikes in areas between 4pm and midnight, and on occasion Tuesday nights tended to be busier than other nights. The Chair noted that there were massive spikes of criminal activity in August and July; however, the overall figures had dropped off slightly, which showed that the work the police were doing was making a difference.
3. In response to a suggestion of making a business case around tracking and prevention work on the socio-economic costs of violent crime, the Chair explained that there was a similar journey for domestic abuse and there were various intervention points, and a lot of lives and money could be saved if that could be looked into.  The Chair agreed that this is a suggestion that could be looked into (Action: Chair).

RESOLVED

That the content of the report was noted.

Briefing note about the Prevent programme, its key priorities and local delivery.

The Partnership received a report which provided an update on Prevent as set out at pages 21-23 of the agenda pack. The Partnership also received a short presentation which provided an overview of the key aims, work undertaken by the team, the local context and local trends. The report and presentation were introduced by Karina Kaur, Strategic Lead of Communities. 

The Partnership undertook a workshop exercise and were allocated around 10 minutes to give some thought and provide feedback on the following questions:

1. What is your role in preventing extremism and radicalisation in the Borough?
2. What are your barriers to preventing extremism and radicalisation in the Borough?
3. How can the Prevent team support you to overcome these barriers?

The following key suggestions were noted in the workshop exercise

Regarding question 1 on role of individuals in preventing extremism and radicalisation:

·         Training and awareness of frontline staff and services who come in contact with young people and vulnerable individuals:

- to identify vulnerabilities, such as mental health and domestic abuse

- to provide support on mechanisms to identify and raise concerns, such as a package around vulnerabilities

·         Need a multi-agency approach, including other safeguarding issues and holding accountable in implementing what Prevent are doing

Regarding question 2 on the barriers to preventing extremism and radicalisation:

• Resourcing and capacity within organisations, for example there was a will to be part of the response, but it would be a challenge to attend all the relevant meetings due to capacity issues
• Knowing how to deal with identified concerns
• Balancing trust of clients with a duty of care
• Requiring knowledge of the referral pathway and resources available for identified subjects
• Uncertainty around Brexit and the links to far-right issues
• Difficulties in obtaining information, for example by police
• Engagement levels of subjects once they have been referred, for example individuals with Counter Terrorism risks
• Competing messages from different communities and agencies
• Socio-economic disparities

Regarding question 3 on how the Prevent team can support individuals to overcome the barriers:

• Working with the community and providing support when the political narrative changes locally and nationally
• Informing and educating hard to reach groups, to ensure engagement with those groups continued and not losing groups within the community
• Looking at how to manage the dark web as a lot of recruitment came from that space
• Ensuring there was enough intel on the radicalisation of people in prisons
• Knowledge on high risk locations and managing emerging risks, such as contingency plans
• Ensuring families and communities were not marginalised

In response to the marginalisation point, the Strategic Lead of Communities clarified that Prevent was a pre-criminal space, and she emphasised that Prevent was a supporting safeguarding panel. 

Regarding the suggestions made by the Partnership, the Strategic Lead of Communities noted that a lot of the points made were myths around Prevent, and this could be resolved through further training. It was suggested that in-depth training could be provided, for example on how to manage risks and understanding the threshold of cases taken  ...  view the full minutes text for item 88.

This report outlines the way in which Haringey Council, Haringey Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Metropolitan Police will work together with other partners  to deliver the new multi-agency safeguarding arrangements in order to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people in Haringey and in accordance with the Working Together to Safeguard Children Guidance July 2018.

The Partnership received a report from Fatmir Deda, Strategic Safeguarding Partnership Manager, which outlined the way in which Haringey Council, Haringey Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Metropolitan Police would work together with other partners to deliver the new multi-agency safeguarding arrangements in order to safeguard and promote the welfare of children and young people in Haringey and in accordance with the Working Together to Safeguard Children Guidance July 2018.

RESOLVED

That the content of the report was noted.

Verbal update

The Partnership received a verbal update from Laura Wileman, Communications Team Media & Campaigns Manager, in relation to the Communications Plan regarding the Performance Reward Grant Funding and youth violence. The Partnership were advised that the Communications Team were working on three campaigns:

• Burglary campaign;
• Youth violence campaign aimed at young people; and
• Youth violence campaign aimed at parents and the community

Overall the campaigns were to showcase what the Community Safety Partnership were doing to rebuild trust within the community, to ensure residents felt safe, and to help reduce youth violence.

The Partnership were informed that the Burglary campaign had almost finished. It was noted that information had been published online which showed residents how to avoid being a victim of burglary. The online information would be circulated afterwards to the Partnership by the Communications Team (Action: Laura Wileman). A minimum of 100,000 people had viewed the information, and it could increase to 185,000 people by the end of the campaign. Although there had been some parts of the Borough that showed more interest in the campaign, it was noted that the interest in the campaign was roughly evenly spread across the Borough. It was mentioned that the Communication Team would have the full results of the campaign soon, which would then be circulated to the Partnership (Action: Laura Wileman).

The aim of the campaign for young people was to capture the attention of young people and for them to be directed to opportunities and services that were on offer in the Borough.  The Communications Team got twenty young people from around the Borough who wanted to be involved in the campaign, such as being in the video or doing behind the scenes role with the production company. It was noted that the young people provided many ideas for the campaign, however the young people concluded that the campaign should be hard hitting and they wanted the opportunities offered to be realistic, for example would the directed business give the young people the same shot as everybody else. There were currently two production companies which the Communications Team would get to speak to the young people in the next couple of weeks to ensure everyone worked together. The Partnership were informed that the final part of the campaign was focused on talking to parents. This part of the campaign involved fact packs in schools that parents could pick up anonymously; graphics on social media, such as Facebook; and outdoor advertising. It was also noted that the Metropolitan Police had a number of campaigns and pilots in Haringey that the Communications Team were working on.

The following was noted in response to the discussion of this update:

1. The Partnership were informed that the Community Safety Partnership logo had gone out to primary and secondary schools to design. The Communications Team would provide the Partnership an update on the Community Safety Partnership logo after the design deadline, which would be in a week and a half (Action: Laura  ...  view the full minutes text for item 90.

Briefing on suicide and young people.

The Partnership received a written briefing note on Suicide and Young People. The report was introduced by Susan Otiti, AD of Public Health, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 61-62. It was noted that the Office of National Statistics (ONS) data showed that between 2008 and 2018, 30 young people aged between 10 and 24 years of age died by suicide in Haringey. In relation to the rate of suicide, Haringey was currently below London.

The AD of Public Health stressed that it was important to place the total of 30 suicides of young people into context as the ONS data covered children and young people up to 24 years of age, whereas the query at the previous Partnership meeting was regarding children and young people up to the age of 18. In consideration of the query, the AD of Public Health mentioned that she chaired the Child Death Overview Panel in Haringey and the Panel had looked back at all the deaths in the Borough since 2008. It was found that since 2008, there had been a total of 3 suicides in Haringey for children under the age of 18.

It was further noted that Haringey had a multiagency suicide prevention group that covered all ages and chaired by Mind in Haringey. It was highlighted that the group were involved in a robust comprehensive action plan, which included looking at particular vulnerable groups of young people with an emphasis on prevention and early intervention. The group had carried out work in schools around improving young people’s resilience around emotional health and well-being, and work on mental health services to support parents of young children, particularly the voluntary organisation Open Door, which had carried out a lot of work with teenagers.

In discussion, it was mentioned by the Interim Director of Public Health, Dr Will Maimaris, that there was a good training pack about the London-wide campaign called ‘Zero Suicide’ which he would circulate to the Partnership (Action: Dr Will Maimaris). Post meeting note – Zero Suicide online training link was circulated to the Partnership following the meeting.  

RESOLVED

That the briefing was noted.

This report provides an update on the community conversation initiative. The purpose of the community conversations is to provide a platform to listen to the community’s concerns to improve community confidence.

The Partnership received a report which provided an update on the community conversations initiative. The report was introduced by Eduardo Araujo, Senior Tottenham Community Safety Manager, as set out in the agenda pack at pages 63-64.

The Partnership was asked to form groups to discuss key themes that emerged from the community conversations and to put forward suggestions on solutions to address the concerns of the community. The suggestions would be fed back to the community (Action: Eduardo Araujo).

The Partnership undertook a workshop exercise and were allocated around 10 minutes to give some thought and provide feedback on the following questions:

1. Resource challenges were recognised across all participants. How can community groups be supported in strengthening their networks of collaboration and capacity, in order to provide the infrastructure and diverse activities and diverse activities for young people?
2. Transparency and lack of trust in institutions is more prevalent amongst BAME communities and young people. How can this be potentially addressed?
3. Exclusions from mainstream education can play a role in increasing the vulnerability on young people. How can the Community Safety Partnership work with educational establishments to ensure that young people and institutions are supported?

The following key suggestions were noted in the workshop exercise:

a.    Regarding question 1 on resource challenges:

·         Create or support self-organising groups

·         Building and understanding existing groups

-mapping hard to reach groups

·         Consistent results and feedback. Need a consistent presence in the community

·         Risk averse to ideas

·         Empower groups, reduce bureaucracy and be action focused.

b.    Regarding question 2 on transparency and lack of trust in institutions:

·         Institutions to visibly reflect community diversity at senior levels

·         Ensure long term commitment embedded

·         Listening, gaining trust, being responsive, and talking to communities

·         Language is very important to communities

·         Co-producing material with people concerned – develop solutions with communities

·         Ensure making a difference not just a promise

·         Challenging organisations to have diversity

·         Learning from community and good practices

·         Make sure partners share values

·         When there are disparities - need awareness, address the disparities and justify

·         Encourage transparency

c.    Regarding question 3 on exclusions from mainstream education:

·         Early identification at cusp of exclusion

·         Supporting parents, such as supporting parents with children at risk of exclusion

·         What is available to help parents identify risk factors?

·         Training and experience of leaders can be a contributor

·         Shared cultural knowledge of teachers can be a supporting factor

·         Review or undertake a deep dive into exclusion factors

·         School targets may play a part

·         Off-rolling can be unhelpful

·         Trailblazer programme – building resilience, regulating emotions

·         A ‘zero exclusions’ approach

RESOLVED

That the Board:

i. Noted the contents of the report

ii. Recommended how to attempt to address the main topics raised during the community conversations. 

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

N/A

The Managing Director of Homes for Haringey, Sean McLaughlin, noted there was an initiative called the Domestic Abuse Housing Alliance (DAHA). This was a national scheme to get housing organisations to a level of accreditation, which was a process Homes for Haringey were currently going through. As part of that process, it was suggested that it would be useful for Homes for Haringey to attend most of the statutory boards, such as the Community Safety Partnership, and it would be useful to have that discussion for future agendas. The AD for Stronger Communities noted that the Homes for Haringey Director for Housing Demand, Denise Gandy, had emailed him regarding this and this matter would be put on the agenda for the next meeting in December (Action: Denise Gandy & Eubert Malcolm).

In response to a question on whether there was a contingency plan for Brexit, the Chair explained that there was a multi-agency meeting a few weeks ago to consider different factors that might be influenced by Brexit. The Chair noted that she envisaged that there would be a lot of central aid. The contingency plan would be similar to what was currently happening, such as officers going onto12 hour shifts, and depending on what was happening in parts of the UK, there may be mutual aid. It was re-iterated that there were certainly plans in place, but it was difficult to know what would happen due to the uncertainty of Brexit.

Joe Benmore, IOM Strategic Lead - Community Safety & Enforcement team, reminded the Partnership that the second episode of The Met: Policing programme would be on BBC1 on 10^th October about the killings in Haringey in 2018. He asked that the Partnership provide feedback on the programme (Action: Partnership).

To note the dates of future meetings set out below:

11^th December 2019

26^th February 2020

Future meeting dates were noted as:

11th December 2019

26th February 2020

Item 18  is likely to be subject to a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as it contains exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1985); para 7.

Noted.

As per item 7.

As per the content and recommendation noted in the North Area Violence Reduction Group Update item mentioned above.