Agenda item

The CSP considered the presentation at Annex A which summarised the 2017-18 Haringey Community Safety Partnership Strategic Assessment. The presentation outlined areas of concern and/or where performance was not in line with the London average. Areas covered were critical locations and emerging problems. The Strategic Assessment would be used to form the basis of the Community Safety Strategy (as discussed at Item 9) and the key areas of focus. The CSP was advised that the Strategic Assessment was an annual statutory requirement of all Community Safety Partnerships in England and Wales, authored between September and March.

The CSP was informed that the Strategic Assessment corroborated with the Mayor’s priority areas to address. Amongst the priorities were:

• A commitment to tackling violence against women and girls;
• Working with community organisations to further youth engagement; and
• Zero tolerance approach to hate crime.

The local priorities identified for the borough of Haringey included robbery and Non-Domestic Violence with Injury (VWI). The Strategic Assessment placed particular emphasis on the pressing need for violence reduction (such as in knife crime, firearms and gang related activity) and that this should be one of the principal objectives for Haringey.

It was noted that, whilst overall recorded crimes in Haringey had increased (+7%), Haringey had experienced a smaller increase than the London average (+8%). The CSP’s attention was drawn to the fact that there was specific areas where Haringey was not performing as well when compared to London as a whole, such as an increase of +3.5% in hate crime reports in the 12 months to December 2017, whilst London had seen an increase of +3% during the same period. However, there were areas where Haringey was doing better than London as a whole, such as the statistic which showed that there had been a reduction in young victims of knife injuries, reducing by -8% in the 12 months to February 2018. During this period, London overall had increased by 8%.

In further discussing the statistic on the reduction of young victims of crime, specifically ‘knife injury victims aged under 25 (non-domestic)’, it was noted that this had fallen by 28% in Haringey. It was queried how accurate this figure was, given that this statistic was only from what had been reported to the police and there might have been more cases than those reported. In response, it was noted that this figure was more likely than not to be correct as there was alternative means by which it could have been discovered that there had been a knife injury to a victim, other than it being reported to the police, such as the analysation of hospital admissions or data attained from young people. Lastly, it was acknowledged that, although the figure was a positive one and indicated a general move in the right direction, it must be noted that knife enabled crime was on the increase year on year and complacency must be avoided in view of positive statistics.

The following points were also raised in discussion:

• Different issues affected different parts of the borough, e.g. the rise of robbery in the west wards. Further, it was noted that particular schools had more issues than others and it should be the focus to identify which schools were having problems in order to address them. It was acknowledged that, with regard to causes, the data was significant in providing causational issues. The example of data around school exclusions was highlighted as being useful in showing which schools required greater intervention to address why there was a pattern of exclusions.

• It was noted that drug dealing was felt to be far more pervasive than it had done in the past in Haringey and that it formed a large part of street culture.

• It was queried to what extent mental health was being seriously engaged with, specifically amongst youth at risk, and that this should be a focus for the strategy. It was raised that the threshold for admission for those displaying mental health problems appeared to be too high, potentially due to the cuts to mental health services in previous years. This was a particular problem for youth who had to wait a significant period of time to be seen.  

• With regard to unreported crime, it was queried how confidence was restored amongst the community in the police and institutions so that individuals felt comfortable to report criminal acts. In response, it was noted that there had been piloted schemes, such as one in Northumberland Park, which allowed individuals to report crime anonymously. This could serve as a blueprint for future schemes in the borough to follow.

• Drugs was a driver for crime and that, if it was known where the drug problems were, then this should be tackled as a priority. It was noted that Homes for Haringey was working in tandem with the Council and police to identify and report properties that it was aware of where drug dealing was taking place.    

• It was questioned whether there was a link between the drop in knife crime in Haringey (as discussed above), and the increase in gun offences (such as Lethal barrelled firearm discharges increasing from 17 up to 44 year on year, a 160% increase). It was noted that, in terms of the data, it was difficult to categorically say if the increase in gun offences was on the up because knife crime was down but that this would continue to be monitored.  

• Perception was important to note. There needed to be confidence in the authorities that the figures being reported were the correct ones.

Resolved

To note the contents of the Strategic Assessment and that the

Key findings are used to inform the Community Safety Strategy.