Agenda item

Community Safety Strategy

Minutes:

The Panel received a report which provided an introduction to the draft Community Safety Strategy 2019-23. The draft strategy was attached to the report. The Community Safety Strategy is constitutionally required to be considered by Overview and Scrutiny, which had delegated the task to the Environment and Community Safety Panel. The following was noted in discussion of the Strategy:

a.    The Panel expressed concern about Haringey having the lowest score in relation to public confidence in the Police of any of the 33 London Boroughs. The Panel sought clarification on why this might be the case. In response officers advised that confidence was a tricky issue, as it was based on perception as much as reality. The Cabinet Member commented that some of this was historic, however there were a number of anecdotes around the nature and quality of interactions between police officers and young people on the streets. The Cabinet Member acknowledged that they were at a low ebb but reassured the Panel that they were working to improve this.

b.    The Panel sought reassurance around the veracity of consultation and engagement with the community, given the relatively small sample size of 1900 used in the 2018 Residents Survey, which was referred to in the report. In response, officers advised that the surveying was carried out by a national polling company, BMG, who developed a representative sample of residents when undertaking this work. Officers advised that Panel that the consultation and engagement undertaken as part of the strategy was from a number of sources from across the borough, not just the Resident’s Survey. For example, the Godwin Lawson Foundation were involved in the development of the Youth at Risk Strategy, which sat underneath the Community Safety Strategy.

c.    The Chair asked whether Sophie Linton and Lib Peck had been engaged as part of this work. The Cabinet Member advised that they came in August and agreed to look into reinventing them back to Haringey for a follow-up meeting. The Chair requested to be informed of the dates of this meeting so that the Panel had an opportunity to be involved (Action: Cllr Blake/Eubert Malcolm).

d.    The Chair commented that a multi-agency approach was needed to improve confidence in policing and questioned the extent to which bodies such as the VRU at MOPAC had been engaged. Officers advised that officers from the Violence Reduction Unit had been to the Community Safety Partnership and officers had met with them on a number of other occasions. In addition, someone from the VRU had come and worked in Haringey for a few days. The VRU was using Haringey’s Youth at Risk Strategy as an exemplar. The AD for Stronger Communities agreed to circulate further information in relation to the VRU to the Panel (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

e.    The Panel advocated further consideration should be given to how best to communicate with ward panels and the community more widely.

f.     The Panel sought clarification around what role officers played in setting the MOPAC priorities and whether they agreed with those selected. Officers responded that this was done using Haringey data and the priorities had remained constant over the last few years. Officers set out that there had been significant engagement with MOPAC and that the priorities were all data-informed. The AD for Stronger Communities advised that he agreed with the selection of robbery and non-domestic violence as key areas of concern.

g.    In response to a question around the age demographic of the highest number of perpetrators of crime, officers advised that this was difficult to say, however there was data to suggest that the trend was towards perpetrators becoming a bit younger. Officers advised  that a more relevant correlation was around indices of deprivation and that this was reflected nationally. Officers agreed to unpick the age data for reoffending and circulate this to the Panel. (Action: Ian Kershaw).

h.    The Committee also advocated that the Strategy needed to set out how residents could engage with partners around community safety. Officers agreed to give some further consideration around how community triggers could be activated.  (Action: Eubert Malcolm).  

i.      The Panel emphasised the role of the Safer Neighbourhood Teams in building community confidence. It was suggested that routine joint activities also played a role in building relations with the community.

j.      In relation to a question about some of the underlying causes of youth crime, officers advised that the Youth at Risk Strategy contained a really good needs assessment. Officers advised that a lot of the young people at risk were also excluded from school. There was also a high correlation with factors such as childhood trauma, mental illness and abuse.

k.    In response to a question, officers advised that that the Community Safety Strategy was the overarching strategy and it contained references to a number of other strategies such as the Youth at Risk Strategy, it was also closely aligned to the Corporate Plan. Each of these strategies had its own action plan but each of the strategies supported one other.

l.      The Panel emphasised the role of ward panels and suggested that these needed to be higher up the agenda for the police and at a political level.

 

 

RESOLVED

 

That the Panel:

       I.        Noted the contents of the report

     II.        Approved the Community Safety Strategy for submission to Cabinet.

 

 

Supporting documents: