Venue: Room 8, Lambeth Town Hall, Brixton Hill, SW2 1RW. View directions
Contact: Nigel Harvey, Democratic Services Officer Democratic Services Officer
Welcomes and Introductions
Matt Bell chaired the meeting.
Everyone introduced themselves.
Declarations of Interest
There were none.
To agree the minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2012.
Amendments and corrections to the minutes should be emailed to Democratic Services before the meeting.
The minutes of the meeting held on 16 October 2012 were AGREED as an accurate record of the meeting.
Item 4 – 2011-12 End of Year Performance
It was reported that the total cost for the GAIA Centre contract when it was tendered in January 2012 was £450,000 per year. The contract had commenced on 16 January 2012 and there had been an open tender process.
Item 6 – Performance and Risk Issues from the Partnership Delivery Group (PDG).
Councillor Rachel Heywood reiterated the points she had made at the last meeting as outlined on page 6 of the minutes that there had been very few papers circulated as part of the agenda. She stated that as there had been no performance figures produced since October 2012 it was difficult to ascertain what work was being carried out. She also questioned the fact that there did not appear to be enough business for four meetings a year.
A copy of the new format for reporting performance was tabled. Members stated that this was an improvement on the previous format. It was also agreed that performance information should be circulated to members on a quarterly basis and that it be circulated separately from the agenda if necessary.
That in future performance information be circulated to members of the Safer Lambeth Executive on a quarterly basis.
Lead Officer: Nigel Harvey
Reason: To ask the Executive’s views on future arrangements.
Timing: 2.10pm – 2.15pm
(See report at agenda item 4)
Members made the following points:
(1) That the next meeting be held on Wednesday 17 July 2013 at 2.00 pm.
(2) That the Chair of the Environment & Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee be given a standing invite as a member with a right of attendance.
(3) That the other requests be considered at the AGM as part of the review of the Safer Lambeth Partnership Governance Structure and Constitution.
Performance and Risk Issues from the Partnership Delivery Group (11.12.12, 15.01.13 and 12.03.13)
Lead Officer: Jo Cleary
Reason: To inform the Executive of performance against key partnership performance indicators and highlight any risks.
Timing: 2.15pm – 2.35pm
Ann Corbett made a report to the meeting covering the following:
· The Performance Delivery Group (PDG) had met three times since the last Executive meeting in October
· Overall performance around crime was positive, with most crime types falling in the borough back to the levels of 2011
· Lambeth remained one of the highest crime areas in London and violence in the borough remained unacceptably higher than elsewhere in the country. (Also see Item 5 below)
· Following the tragic death of Anastasia Voykina in January the partnership would be conducting its first domestic violence homicide review. Anastasia’s partner, Felipe Lopes, had been charged with murder and was currently awaiting trial in police custody. The PDG would act as the project board for the review, and updates would be given at each executive on progress. The final review report would be released following the end of the criminal proceedings
· Work had also been undertaken to increase the rate of sanctioned detections for domestic violence. This had substantially improved over the previous three months and the performance was better than a year before. Although the target for 2012/13 would not be met it would be much closer than previously. If this performance could be sustained in 2013/14 the target should be achieved
· As regards prostitution in the Brixton Hill area this had increased during the Olympics period and had not decreased since. There would be a refresh of the strategy concentrating on the ‘supply side’
· Following the successful alcohol summit in November the Night Time Recovery Hub on Clapham High Street had been launched. The hub provided assistance for those in distress on the high street to reduce vulnerability, and anti-social behaviour and disorder for local residents. This was a co-operative project based at the local Methodist church. Local businesses were supporting the project and the NHS was providing trained medical care. A local venue (Infernos) was providing qualified security staff. The number of disturbances in the local area had been reduced and care and treatment was provided for numerous people who otherwise would be in an extremely vulnerable condition on the high street
· A Business Crime Reduction Partnership (BCRP) had been set up. This was a partnership between retailers, licensed premises and the partnership to reduce business crime in Lambeth. It would improve information sharing between retailers, support night time economies to grow and develop safely, train staff to reduce crime and make premises safer, and forge closer links between businesses and the police. In areas where Business Improvement Districts were set up they would link through directly to the BCRP so that organisations were not faced with joining two or more organisations at once
· In November a collaborative conversation was held with the Home Office ending gang violence team. This specialist team of peer reviewers held a one day event to work with Lambeth on assessing and improving the work to tackle gang violence. The team met with partners, voluntary sector organisations, community members and the political leadership. The day was ... view the full minutes text for item 5.
Safer Lambeth Partnership strategic assessment 2013
Lead Officers: Nicole Terrieux/ Deborah Baker-Oates
Reason: Presentation to Executive setting out the findings of the Strategic Assessment
Timing: 2.35pm – 2.55pm
Ann Corbett and Kristian Aspinall gave a presentation which covered the following topics:
· The position at the end of 2012-13 was as follows:
- Overall crime had fallen by 5%
- Lambeth remained the highest crime borough in the most similar group of boroughs
- Lambeth had the highest levels of overall violence in London
- Lambeth had the second highest levels of robbery in London as Southwark had recently become top
- Lambeth had the seventh highest levels of burglary in London
· Crime remained the number one issue for Lambeth residents with 45% of them listing it as their main priority. However this concern had fallen significantly for young people (from 30% to 14%) but remained stable amongst adults
· Community cohesion levels in the Borough were at their highest ever levels
· The most common forms of Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) experienced were begging and street drinking
· Young people were more likely than adults to have witnessed knife and gun crime
· Adults saw drug dealing as the biggest problem
· For 2013/14 the following factors needed to be taken into account:
- Welfare benefits changes could significantly impact on the borough
- A domestic violence definition change could increase service demand and resource requirements
- There was a new law around ASB which was “Putting the victim first”
- The Mayors Police and Crime plan
· Emerging priorities were:
- Serious crime and communities – Youth Crime; Gangs; Robbery; Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG); Preventing terrorism
- Neighbourhood Management – Night Time Economies (Brixton, Clapham, Vauxhall, South Bank and Streatham); ASB; Burglary; Vulnerable locations (Hot spots and transport hubs)
- Offender Management – Drugs misuse; alcohol misuse; adult reoffending
· The key findings of the assessment was that the following strands should be priorities for 2013/14:
- Serious Violence – Out of the 326 Boroughs in the country Lambeth was ranked 316 for violence against the person; 304 for hospital admissions and 320 for sexual offences. It was explained that this related to the address at which the victim lived and did not necessarily mean that the offence was committed in Lambeth
- Gangs – There were nine active gangs in Lambeth with over 200 people on the gangs matrix; 60% of the high risk gang offenders on the matrix were adults; Lambeth was one of the top three gang Boroughs in London
- VAWG – based on evidence from commissioned services there had been an increase in street based prostitution, which had not reduced since the Olympics; Lambeth had the highest number of calls about domestic violence to the national helpline (5%); it was the most common form of sexual assault on females with rape being second
- Prevent – Lambeth remained a nationally identified Prevent Borough; the local profile showed that it was a low level risk and this was improving
- Night Time Economies – key areas remained Clapham, Brixton and Vauxhall; violence had decreased in these areas but overall crime had increased; emerging areas included Streatham and the South ... view the full minutes text for item 6.
Implications for the partnership as a result of funding reductions and service responses
Metropolitan Police – Matt Bell
London Borough of Lambeth – Derrick Anderson
NHS Lambeth CCG – Andrew Eyres
Probation Service – Adam Kerr
Fire Service – Ian Black
Reason: To enable the Executive to hold a strategic discussion on the impact of future funding reductions and how these could impact on delivery by the Safer Lambeth Partnership against the Strategic Assessment priorities.
Timing: 2.55pm – 3.40pm
Superintendent Matt Bell informed the meeting regarding the funding reductions from the Metropolitan Police as follows:
· Although the overall budget for the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) had been determined it was not known at this time what budget would be allocated to Lambeth. The MPS budget had been reduced by 20%
· There had already been a reduction in the number of police officers in Lambeth and it was anticipated that the new policing model would not be radically different in Lambeth from what was already being done
· There was the flexibility to ensure that resources were retained in priority areas
· The reduction in funding would result in areas of the business being challenging and there would be a change in roles and ranks during the forthcoming two years
· The commitment to the partnership would remain
Members expressed concerns about the future of specialist roles, particularly the two Crime Prevention Advisers dealing with designing out crime in new developments. Matt Bell confirmed that the long term aspiration was that this would be centralised on the basis of one adviser for each borough. The possibility of using Section 106 money through the planning process for this to be sustained was raised. There was a need for discussions to determine who would carry out this role.
Derrick Anderson informed the meeting of the funding reductions faced by the Council as follows:
· Between 2010 and 2016/17 it was planned that the budget would be reduced by 45%. This meant that there would need to be further cuts of £108 million up to 2017
· As a result it was necessary to do things differently and to ascertain what the priorities were
· Commissioning of services would be dependent on outcomes. There would be a need to see what assets there were and how they could be used
· Reductions in the ‘back office’ and management costs would be addressed
· There would be a dependence on external funding and a struggle to find funding
· Although there would be difficulties Councillors would be responding to what people were saying about how they saw crime as being a priority
· There would be a change in the structure and when this was determined decisions could be made about what investment should be made
Members made the following points:
· Councillor Jack Hopkins acknowledged the difficulties and stated that people working on the front line would need to work out what needed to be done to make sure that their roles were performed properly
· Concerns were raised that one of the biggest issues affecting Lambeth was mental health
· Debbie Jones reported that the changes to YOS had shown where something simple could be done which would make a difference. The number of people referred to the service had been reduced from 87 to 57 as a result of there being an improved working relationship with the Courts
· Ann Corbett reported that the Community Safety Unit was much smaller than before. Generic job descriptions had been introduced and the service had been realigned on ... view the full minutes text for item 7.
Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime: Update
· Police and Crime Plan 2013-16 – Implications for Lambeth
· Crime Prevention Fund: decision on bids
· Safer Neighbourhood Boards
Presentation by Natasha Plummer, MOPAC
Timing: 3.40pm – 3.55 pm
Natasha Plummer, Head of Borough Information & Engagement, MOPAC,made the following points:
· The Mayor’s Police and Crime Plan had been launched and was the first in the country. There had been extensive consultation which had resulted in changes being made from the original proposals, particularly around equality issues
· As regards the estate strategy there had been a robust debate and changes had been made. As regards the Gipsy Hill area changes had been made in that although there would not be a front desk facility in the area there will be a base from which police officers could be deployed which was a reasonable compromise
· There were also proposals for police officers to have a presence in other buildings around London and MOPAC would be carrying this out in partnership with other bodies
· As regards the Crime Prevention Fund there had been six bids from Lambeth. Overall there had been a variation in quality of bids received and Lambeth’s had been of a decent standard. There were limited funds available and most boroughs had overbid
· The following bids were successful:
- Integrated Offender Management (IOM)
- Women’s Criminal Justice Service
- Business Crime Reduction Partnership (BCRP)
- Lambeth Gangs Violence Reduction Programme
· The following bids were unsuccessful:
- Prevention of Serious Youth Crime Application
- Lambeth Quality of Life Bid: A Preventative Approach
· MOPAC would be looking at the outcomes of the bids as regards future years funding and it was hoped that additional funding would be available. In answer to a question she confirmed that funding for 2013/14 had been established but that future funding would depend on the outcomes set out in the bids and if this was not satisfactory the funding would be withdrawn
· As regards engagement activity it was envisaged that there would be a Safer Neighbourhood Board for each borough. MOPAC would not be prescriptive about how many boards each borough should have and it would adopt a localist approach. It was important that whatever was adopted should be fit for purpose. It was intended to talk to stakeholders in the next year
Members made the following observations:
· It would be useful to have a steer from MOPAC about the introduction of Safer Neighbourhood Boards as each borough was different
· Hopefully this would cement the partnership approach as it would enable a productive dialogue and an opportunity to engage with stakeholders
· Concern was expressed that both of the unsuccessful bids were preventative and involved early intervention whereas all the reactive bids had been successful. Natasha Plummer stated that this had not been reflected across London. It was possible that boroughs would be asked to prioritise their bids in future. The ones that were unsuccessful were those which had a less secure outcome
That the verbal report be noted.
Suggested future items and themes should be emailed to Democratic Services.
(See report at agenda item 9)
It was agreed that an item on the outcome of preventative work be added to the plan for the July meeting.
That the report be noted with the above addition.
Any other business
Debbie Jones reported that recruitment was complete and new officers were joining on a weekly basis. Performance had increased and there were very positive trends. An inspection of the service was expected shortly.
Councillor Jack Hopkins asked that a representative from Lambeth Living be given the right to attend future meetings.
That the Chief Executive of Lambeth Living be invited to attend future meetings.
Bruce Grain, London Fire Brigade
The Chair reported that a request had been received from the operators of the GAIA Centre that the service they receive from Bruce Grain at the London Fire Brigade be recognised by the partnership.
They had been running a sanctuary scheme for the victims of domestic violence which involved measures to ensure that their residences were secure. He had supplied, free of charge, arson proof letterboxes and smoke alarms to the scheme and attended talks on site at short notice about making property safer and set up a personal email system for the organisation so that talks could be arranged to ensure that every fire station in Lambeth was aware of the importance of these to the vulnerable people they served.
That the Partnership recognises the work done by Bruce Grain of the London Fire Brigade for the GAIA Project and thanks him for this work.