Agenda item

To invite comments from the Panel on current performance and priorities for the borough’s Community Safety Partnership. 

*Clerk’s note – The Chair agreed to take agenda items 7, 8 & 9 together and then the Committee would ask questions at the end.

The Committee received a cover report and accompanying presentation which provided information about the Haringey Community Safety

priority setting process for 2021/22. This was similar to the 2020/21 process, and was to be finalised by March 2021. The presentation was introduced by Sandeep Broca, Intelligence Analysis Manager as set out in the agenda pack at pages 9-22.

As part of the Mayor's Police and Crime Plan, MOPAC were committed to setting local policing priorities across the capital in conjunction with borough leaders and police. Alongside the local priorities were London wide policing priorities on mandatory high-harm crimes: sexual violence, domestic abuse, child sexual exploitation, weapon-based crime and hate crime. Last year, data showed that both violence (Robbery; Non-Domestic Violence with Injury) and burglary were trends on the rise and should be considered actively by boroughs when setting local priorities. As a result, many Boroughs chose a violence measure and/or burglary as a priority. Alongside this, MOPAC ensured that anti-social behaviour remained a local borough priority across London.

The following points were raised in discussion of this item:

a.    The Committee welcomed the positive news in relation to decreasing crime trends around robberies and serious youth violence but noted concerns around a rise in hate crime and the possibility of this getting worse as Britain leaves the EU. The Panel sought reassurance around what plans were in place to tackle this and in particular to support the victims of crime.  In response, the Borough Commander advised that hate crimes were traditionally under reported and that she was pleased that this was now being reported to the Police. The Borough Commander advised that her aim was to ensure that every victim that wanted to pursue charges was supported in doing so and that cases were progressed in order to give the reassurance to the community that the issue was being taken seriously. However, the Panel was also advised that many victims did not want to pursue cases and that the criminal justice system could be daunting for victims and that she was also keen to explore other avenues such as restorative justice.

b.    In response to comments around restorative justice not always being applicable, the Borough Commander acknowledged this point and advised that ultimately, the pursuit of any crime was dependent upon the victim’s needs. It was the Police’s responsibility to investigate fully and to pursue every case where there was a will and desire from the victim to do so.

c.    It was also commented that some people perhaps didn’t know how to report hate crime and that there was a communications point around the Police ensuring that this information was communicated widely to our communities.

d.    In response to a supplementary question around whether there was a breakdown of hate crimes in the borough, officers advised that some of the data was not separated out, but that the highest classification was under racism and religious hatred. It was commented that some of this rise seemed to be linked to neighbour disputes and the use of inappropriate language in shops and supermarkets, during the initial lockdown period.

e.    In response to a question around the rise in domestic violence incidents, the Borough Commander advised that this was another crime that was under reported. The Borough Commander set out the importance of schemes such as Operational Alliance which provided an opportunity to provide outreach support to young children who perhaps didn’t want to be at home because of domestic violence and who perhaps would have been missed by the Police and the local authority  otherwise. 

f.     The AD for Safer and Stronger Communities agreed to circulate a briefing in relation to the Refuge. (Action: Eubert Malcolm).

g.    In relation to a question around the setting of MOPAC funding for next year, officers advised that Haringey’s crime prevention funding would be maintained at the same level for next year and this covered areas such as the Integrated Gangs Unit, ASB and VAWG. In relation to hate crime, officers advised that they had set up a hate crime awareness group to develop areas of learning and to signpost victims to voluntary sector organisations who could provide additional support. A hate crime awareness week had also been arranged to highlight the issue and highlight how victims could receive support.

h.    The Committee enquired as to how many police officers were on duty at any one time. In response, the Borough Commander advised that she couldn’t give a specific figure but that there were lots of different officers on different shifts. The response teams and safeguarding teams operated a 7am-3pm shift daily. Some officers operated on a 10am-6pm shift pattern and CID operated split shifts. There was also flexible working arrangements and compressed hours. All together there was a 24/7 service in place across all of the different strands – response, neighbourhoods, CID and public protection.

i.      In response to a question around what concerned the Borough Commander in relation to the presentation, the Committee was advised that of course she would like to see the crime numbers come down further and that she would like to get robberies down to zero. The Borough Commander also set out that she would like for every residents to feel safe on the street and feel that they could call the police if they needed to.

j.      Concerns were noted about the ongoing severity of the gang problems in Haringey and assurance was sought around what was being done by the Council and the Police to address this. In response, the Borough Commander acknowledged the good work being done and also the frustration at the ongoing problems. The Borough Commander advised that this was a very complex problem which covered a range of issues including exploitation, violence and often involved children who didn’t have a good home life. The Borough Commander set out that the key was around adopting a whole systems approach and early intervention with key partners, such as Children’s Services and outreach workers  to intervene at an early stage and prevent that child from being further embroiled in gangs.  The Borough Commander emphasised the important role that Crimestoppers played in providing completely anonymous intelligence reporting.

k.    The Committee expressed concerns about loss of police stations across London and the loss of the Hornsey police station in particular, as there was no police station in the west of the borough. In response, the Borough Commander acknowledged that this was a significant concern for many residents and councillors but it was a decision that had already been taken by MOPAC and the Borough Commander was unable to do anything to stop it. The Borough Commander set out that with the roll-out of mobile technology, police officers were able to be out on the streets for longer and to have greater visibility.

l.      The Committee raised serious concerns about the redundancy of the Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator and Parks Links Officer. It was commented that this seemed to be a short sighted decision as any short term savings would almost certainly not justify the long term effects of losing such a valuable role.

m.  In response, the Borough Commander acknowledged the fantastic job that the post holder had done over the last ten years. The Borough Commander set out that she had been working for the past year to try and find a solution to this problem but that the bottom line was that the Police could not afford to fund 75% of the post as there was no funding available from MOPAC. Ultimately, the only way this could be funded was to lose a dedicated ward officer, which she was unwilling to do. The Borough Commander set out that North Central was an outlier as no other BCU had a coordinator role and therefore MOPAC would not provide funding. The Borough Commander advised that she was looking at how to deliver most of the work that the post holder provided through the existing neighbourhood teams and would report back on this in due course. The Borough Commander also advised that she was undertaking a community mapping exercise to ensure that good practice was understood and replicated across different areas.

n.    In response to a follow up, the Committee set out that although an outlier, the police should be looking to replicate this post across London. The Committee also expressed some degree of scepticism that the role of the Neighbourhood Watch Coordinator could be done by a neighbourhoods officer, due to workloads and given that exiting neighbourhood officers were regularly re-assigned to other policing duties.

o.    In response to a question around the extent to which improvements in robberies were sustainable, the Borough Commander advised that there was a uniformed Burglary & Robbery Investigation Team in place who provided a focused investigative resource on burglaries and robberies. The Borough Commander  acknowledged that it was difficult to quantify the extent to which lockdown had impacted the figures, however some of the improvement was undoubtedly due to the good work being done by police, such as Operation Vertis.  Since 2017, high-visibility daily foot patrols were put in place with a specific emphasis around robberies. There was also fixed micro-beat patrols in place in hotspot locations.

p.    In response to a question, the Borough Commander assured the Panel that she was very focused on drugs and that she recognised the close links with a range of other criminal activity including aggravated burglary.

q.    The Borough Commander agreed that she would be happy to respond to any further questions that the Panel had via email.

r.     The Chair thanked the Borough Commander for coming along to the panel meeting and responding to questions.  

RESOLVED

1. To note that Haringey’s agreed local priorities for 2020/21 are Violence with Injury (Non-Domestic) and Personal Robbery. Whilst some positive improvements have been noted in Violence with Injury (Non-Domestic) (-11%) and Personal Robbery (- 30%), both of these remain significant challenges for the borough. The seriousness of such incidents continues to also remain high, with levels of injury sustained often being significant.

2. To note that the volume of recorded crime has reduced significantly since March 2020, in Haringey and across London. Some crime types have experienced reductions in excess of 30% during this period.

3. To note that as each phase of lockdown easing was implemented, crime levels have generally increased once again, however, they remained below previous baseline levels in most cases. Nonetheless, Haringey experiences over 1,600 violent crimes per year and almost 1,700 robberies, equating to one of each of these offences approximately every 5 hours, throughout the year.

4. To note that Violence with Injury (Non-Domestic) and Personal Robbery remain key local priorities for Haringey, along with the basket of high harm crimes (sexual violence, domestic abuse, child sexual exploitation, weapon-based crime and hate crime) and anti-social behaviour. These priorities would also support a number of ongoing workstreams in Haringey, including the Community Safety Strategy, the Young People at Risk strategy, the Borough Plan and the North Area Violence Reduction Group (NAVRG