An opportunity to question the Cabinet Member for Communities, Councillor Bernice Vanier, on developments within her portfolio.
Minutes:
The Panel questioned Councillor Bernice Vanier, the Cabinet Member for Communities, regarding developments concerning her portfolio.
The Panel noted that progress had been made with the development of the forum of local businesses and crime reduction partners and a senior partner from Metro Bank had been appointed as Chair.
The Cabinet Member stated that a large amount of reassurance work had been undertaken with the Muslim community, including visits to local mosques. This had been done with the assistance of Haringey Racial Equality Council (HREC). The Council participated in the Prevent programme and outreach was an integral part of this. Data had been analysed to determine whether there had been any recent increase in hate crime against the Muslim community and it had been determined that there had only been one additional incident in the period examined. It therefore appeared that any perceived increase in Islamophobia might not be reflective of the actuality. However, it was possible that there was under reporting.
Mr Trevers reported that he had attended a meeting with Leon Joseph, Senior Co-ordinator (Prevent) and HREC where some communities had indicated that they were unsure of when they should call 999. It was possible that Islamophobia was similar to how domestic violence had been historically in respect of under reporting. The perception was that attacks were commonplace. A greater focus on reassurance would help to address this. In particular, information on action that had been taken against perpetrators could be shared better, via social media in particular. It was noted that further work was taking place in respect of the data and agreed that an update would be provided to the Panel once this was completed, which was likely to be in two months time.
The Panel noted that £600,000 over 3 years had been used to fund additional Police officers for the borough. Mr Trevers commented that the funding gave the Police a clear partnership focus. In the absence of this, the deployment of officers might be led my other priorities. In particular, it gave the Council greater influence over where Police were used. A report was being prepared on the impact of the additional officers in the last 12 months.
A Panel Member asked whether guidance was given to Police officers about informing victims of burglaries that they were at risk from being a repeat victim. It was not uncommon for people had been burgled to be burgled again soon after. Mr Trevers stated that officers should be aware of this and, if this had not been relayed to residents, it was an issue that needed to be taken up as part of training. Officers normally undertook a thorough assessment following a burglary, which included calling at neighbouring houses. It was noted that the levels of burglary had been coming down and that this was one of the positive aspects of the most recent crime statistics.
It was noted that there were a number of performance targets in respect of community safety in order to monitor the effectiveness of action taken. Quarterly returns were required to be made to the MOPAC. Targets were now fewer in number but tighter.
Community safety was mainly funded by grants, particularly from the MOPAC. Of particular note was the funding that had been obtained for a project focussed upon mental health and gangs. Funding from the MOPAC was not more strategically focussed and was set for a period of 4 years, renewable annually. Additional funds could be obtained by pooling resources and match funding. Additional funding had also been obtained for a joint project with Enfield Council focussed on accident and emergency at the North Middlesex Hospital.
Action was being undertaken to join together all enforcement activities. This would align services, improve communication and assist in the prioritisation of action. In particular, it would assist in addressing a range of issues arising from houses in multiple occupation (HMOs). There was a desire to encourage residents to complain when necessary so that action could be taken.
Panel Members felt that there was a need for quicker and more robust action to be taken. It was noted that joint enforcement would mean that one officer was able to deal with a number of different matters.
AGREED:
That the issue of Islamophobia be considered as an agenda item at a future meeting of the Panel.