Agenda and draft minutes

None.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

None.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business.  Late items will be considered under the agenda items where they appear.  New items will be dealt with at item X below.

None.

To approve the minutes of the meetings of 26 November and 8 December 2009 (attached). 

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of 26 November and 8 December 2009 be approved.

To receive evidence from the following:

·        The Children and Young People’s Service on the provision of grant funding for Victim Support

·        The Anti Social Behaviour Team on support provided for victims of anti social behaviour

·        The Youth Offending Service on work to support young victims of crime.

The Panel received evidence from Luciana Frederick from the Children and Young People’s Service (C&YPS) and Mike Bagnall from the Anti Social Behaviour team.

Ms. Frederick reported that the C&YPS provided £38,700 to Victim Support.  This had been provided in six month blocks whilst the grant was being reviewed.  Concerns had been expressed at this by Victim Support due to the affect that this was having on their service.   A review was being commissioned on the work of Victim Support by the Community Safety Service and C&YPS.   This would review the delivery of services to young victims and best value.   Criteria for the new service would then be jointly be developed.  In particular, it would look at how the service could best relate to young people.  A low percentage of young people who had been victims currently reported crime.  A joined up approach across the Youth Offending Service, C&YPS and Victim Support was required.  Members of the Panel indicated that they would endorse a review of what was currently provided.

Mr. Bagnall reported that the Anti Social Behaviour team (ASBAT) had a key role in encouraging victims to report anti social behaviour.  Although the service was widely publicised, some residents were unaware of its existence and how to report incidents.  Work was being undertaken with the Council’s communications service to further publicise it.  The service was proactive and visited areas where they knew that there had been problems but had not received any reports about in order to encourage people to come forward.  The service had a dedicated anti social behaviour telephone line and was one of the first to have one. 

There were significant issues relating to young people.  The team had linked into 33 primary schools and 8 secondary schools so far and had provided training for teachers.  Whilst schools had to have a policy on bullying and harassment, few had procedures to deal with it.  The obligations of schools extended beyond school gates.  ASB reports received from young people and schools were very low in number. The service had introduced texting of reports and the use of live messaging but there had been little take up.

Support was available for schools if requested.  It was noted that some schools were issuing their own acceptable behaviour contracts (ABCs) but these had no official status.  Ones issues by the ASBAT were recognised officially and monitored.  These had to be witnessed by a Police officer.

There was an issue with the willingness of schools to work with others – all that the service could do was to continue to visit schools.  The Home Office was impressed with the work that had been undertaken with schools but there was no funding for this work and officers had to be taken away form their casework to undertake it.   Members of the Panel felt that there was a potential role for specific governors to act as “champions”.  Another option would be for information about anti social behaviour and reporting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.