Agenda item

Haringey Youth Justice Plan 2024 - 2027

To receive a report which informs members of Children and Young People’s Scrutiny Panel of the priorities within the statutory Youth Justice Plan for 2024- 2027. Members are asked to provide comments on the report, which will be considered by Cabinet.

Minutes:

The Panel received a copy of the Haringey Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2024-2027. The Panel was asked to note the plan and the priorities contained within it, and to provide any comments and observations to the AD: Early Help, Prevention & SEND. It was noted that the plan had been approved by the Youth Justice Strategic Partnership Board on the 26th June and submitted to the Youth Justice Board ahead of the statutory publication deadline of 30th June. The Youth Justice Strategic Plan and covering report was introduced by Jackie Difolco, AD: Early Help, Prevention and SEND as set out in the agenda pack at pages 9-82. The following arose during the discussion of this agenda item:

  1. In response to a question about the reasons behind why some of these young people entered the criminal justice system, officers advised that there were a number of local factors in Haringey linked to deprivation and the cost of living. A lot of work was done to work with these children as they came into the system and the Council was also rolling out a ‘whole family’ approach to work with the whole family to try and address some of the underlying causes. Officers highlighted that there hadn’t been a CAMHS service in Haringey for some time and that the DCS had pushed partners hard to ensure that services were in place. The Panel was advised that joint funded speech & language therapy and a substance misuse service had been secured to ensure that, going forward, the Council was able to offer targeted services.
  2. In response to a question about disproportionality in the youth justice system, officers advised that a lot of work was being done to tackle disproportionality. The YJS received funding from MOPAC through the disproportionality fund. The service also offered tailor-based interventions, particularly for young black men. An example was the Ether programme which focused on raising aspirations. Officers also set out that they had training across the YJS and wider partners around disproportionality and inequality. The service also has a trauma informed approach across the service to ensure that they fully understood what was happening with the child, so they could provide an appropriate response.
  3. In response to a question about was being done to work with looked after children to ensure they did not fall into criminality, officers advised that there had been an improvement from a position where one third of the youth justice cohort being looked after down to one quarter. Officers advised that one of the key priorities for the next 12 months was a dedicated focus on improving experiences and outcomes for children who were looked after as well as SEND children. Dedicated resources were in place along with targeted interventions. Officers were reporting to CPAC on performance indicators to ensure improvements on education, employment and training, mental health and wellbeing, and substance misuse.
  4. In response to a question about reoffending rates, officers advised that Haringey had lower levels of reoffending than most of its neighbours and that was largely down to the targeted work that had been done with this cohort and the tailored approach to interventions. The reasons behind reoffending were similar to those outlined for offending, namely; cost of living, increased levels of deprivation, poor parenting, and mental health problems. The Director added that the context was that we lived in a society where crime and crime related to drugs was prevalent. Young people were groomed into crime through the drugs trade.
  5. The Panel sought assurances about what other agencies that Council was working with around young people and drugs. In response, officers advised that the service worked with a range of partners agencies and VCS organisations. Officers agreed to share the Youth at Risk Strategy with Members so that they could get a better understanding of the partner agencies involved in reducing serious youth violence in the borough. (Action: Jackie Difolco).
  6. The Panel welcomed the process of embedding restorative justice and suggested that in general they would like to see more of this. Members raised concerns about seeing young people wearing Hi-Viz clothing in Highgate with ‘Community Payback’ written on the back. It was suggested that this terminology seemed to be in contradiction to the child-led interventions set out in the plan. In response, officers agreed that using appropriate language was important. Officers responded that young people didn’t wear vests when doing reparations in Haringey, it was suggested that they were likely to be adults. Reparation work for young people in Haringey was oriented towards volunteering. The Director added that it would be administered through the courts rather than Haringey. Officers agreed to check to make sure that under 18’s were not wearing branded clothing, and that if they were, that clothing used appropriate language. (Action: Jackie Difolco).
  7. The Chair welcomed the approach taken to adopt a three-year strategy, rather than a one-year strategy. The Chair commented that she recognised the hard work involved in producing the Youth Justice Plan and also recognised the future challenges.

 

RESOLVED

That Members noted the report and provided comments on the Youth Justice Plan 2024-2027.

 

Supporting documents: