Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Tim Stevens and Alf Kennedy.

Councillor Alan Collins substituted for Councillor Tim Stevens.

Apologies were also received from Kate Frail from Victim Support, and Millie Banians from Bromley Youth Council.

The Borough Commander also sent his apologies and the Deputy Borough Commander, Superintendent Trevor Lawry attended to provide the Police update.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to this Committee must be received in writing 4 working days before the date of the meeting.  Therefore please ensure questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on 22^nd September 2016.

There were no questions from Councillors or Members of the Public.

The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting of Public Protection and Safety PDS Committee held on 29^th June 2016.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 29^th June 2016 be agreed.

Report CSD 16112

Members noted the Matters Arising report.

Councillor Cartwright referred to minute 76 on the Matters Arising report, as this was a matter that he had previously raised. The matter in question was a request from the Borough Commander to supply the Committee with a rolling figure for ASB. It was noted that this information had not been supplied.

The Chairman requested that the Borough Commander be contacted and asked if he could supply the data.

RESOLVED that the Borough Commander be contacted and requested to supply the relevant ASB data.      

The Chairman informed the Committee that she had attended the Crime Summit on 17th September, and had also attended the most recent meeting of the Safer Neighbourhood Board.

The Chairman had met with the Vice Chairman and the Portfolio Holder on 23rd September to discuss internal audit reports pertaining to CCTV and Stray Dogs     

The Police update was provided by the Deputy Borough Commander, Superintendent Trevor Lawry.

The Chairman directed the attention of the Committee to the MOPAC 7 crime figures which had been tabled:

The Chairman requested that the MOPAC figures be circulated pre-meeting in the future, and it was noted that criminal damage was not included on the list.

The Committee heard that new directions for priorities had not been received from the London Mayor’s office. In view of this, performance was still being measured against MOPAC 7 targets. In the MET generally, the performance levels against MOPAC 7 were now either slowing or reversing; this was not the case in Bromley where there was now a 21% reduction in overall crime. These figures were positive and encouraging. There was no further news on the possible transition to a BCU model. Two pilots had been undertaken, but in the light of no decisions being made for Bromley police, they would continue to operate as an individual entity, without any mergers.

A Member requested that in future, ‘theft of motor vehicles’ be broken down so that it could be seen what type of vehicles were actually being stolen.  Members were informed that the new Policing and Crime Plan would need to be finalised by 31^st March 2017, subsequent to a 12 week consultation period.

A Member stated that she had attended the Crime Summit and that the Borough Commander had provided a good update. She expressed disappointment that a MOPAC representative did not attend. She asked the Deputy Borough Commander (DBC) if he would provide assurances that town centre patrols in Orpington would be retained, and also if the patrols in Mottingham and the Crays would also be maintained. The DBC responded that a ‘Tasking Meeting’ was held on a weekly basis to assess where resources should be allocated.

The same Member stated that all 22 Wards needed to have patrols on night duty. She remarked that she had received many emails from police officers and police staff asking her for help because of current conditions in the police force. She expressed concern about the current state of the MET Police force, and the general morale of officers. She pointed out that it was Lambeth control room that was dealing with calls relating to incidences in Bromley, and that calls were stacking. She expressed concern that because of delays in response to serious incidents, there was a danger that members of the public would be dead by the time police arrived at the crime scene. She further expressed concern around the consequences of police patrols being limited to particular wards.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 91.

A presentation on Town Centre Security was given by the INTU General Manager, Kate Miller, and Georgia Hillyard, Security Manager. 

The Committee were provided with various facts and figures, and it was interesting to note that 47% of INTU customers were over 55, and that 70% of customers were female.

Ms Miller highlighted the recent additions of five new restaurants and other new retail developments. Slides were shown of various events including a Lego event and a Child Autism event.

Ms Hillyard explained that she was responsible for various areas, including Guest Services, Training and Counter Terrorism initiatives. It was noted that a live training exercise had taken place in March 2016, where various partners took part, including the police, police cadets, LFB and LAS. Another live exercise was planned.

Ms Hillyard introduced the various training programmes that INTU provided, one of these was Project Griffin. Project Griffin aimed to advise and familiarise managers, security officers and employees of public and private sector organisations across the capital on security and counter-terrorism issues. It worked by encouraging the public to be vigilant and to report suspicious behaviour and activity around their community. This would help to combat both terrorism and crime.

Project Griffin was developed by the City of London Police and was introduced in central London in April 2004 as a joint venture between the City and Metropolitan police forces. Project Griffin had been adopted by police forces across the United Kingdom and overseas.

Another training initiative was Project Argus. Project ARGUS was an initiative developed by the National Counter Terrorism Security Office (NaCTSO) and delivered by Counter Terrorism Security Advisers (CTSAs) throughout the UK.

It was a three hour multimedia simulation posing questions and dilemmas for participants working in syndicates and aimed to raise awareness of the threat from terrorism, providing practical advice on preventing, handling and recovering from an attack.

INTU was also an SIA approved contractor.

It was noted that Simon Day was a finalist in the security category of the UK Heart Safe Awards 2016. It was also noted that Freddie Harris had received the Borough Commander’s Commendation for his actions during events that had occurred at INTU during Boxing Day 2015. It was further highlighted that Ms Hillyard was a finalist in the Security Manager category at the ‘Women in Security Awards’.

The Chairman enquired if there were figures available for shop lifting, and if a ‘Shop Safe’ scheme was operating. It was confirmed that INTU did have a Shop Safe radio system, and that most of the retailers also had a radio. This meant that good communication existed between shops and the security team. It was noted that there was at least one shoplifting incident every day. It was noted that the new restaurants had increased the footfall into the shopping centre. This was known as ‘spend and dwell’. 

A Member enquired how many defibrillators were in the centre. It was confirmed that two existed in the Mall, outside of Menkind and Debenhams. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

This presentation had been re-scheduled to the November meeting.

Pauline Mark attended to provide the Street Pastor update.

It was explained that a Street Pastor was someone from the Christian Community who was willing and available to help others, especially young people and those that were marginalised and were out on the streets at night. They were out on the streets to engage with the community, to build relationships with people and to care, listen and help. They aimed to practically show and demonstrate the love of Christ in their interactions with society. Street Pastors worked in teams, patrolling the town centre, visiting pubs and clubs.

Street Pastors aimed to be a presence on the streets from 10pm to 2am on Friday evenings, and volunteers would be asked to commit to one evening per month, and had to undergo training. They worked in collaboration with the police and the local authority, and were supported by the Home Office. Currently, 22 Street Pastors operated in Orpington, 16 in Beckenham and 5 in Bromley. A Member was delighted to learn that 22 Street Pastors operated in Orpington.  

Over the last year in Beckenham they had collected 600 bottles, given out 43 flip flops, and had also given out blankets, sleeping bags and water. They were well received in the local community by clubs and security guards. Ms Marke gave examples of situations where help and support had been provided to individuals who for various reasons were vulnerable.  

It was suggested that Ms Marke liaised with Andrew Rogers with a view to an article on Street Pastors appearing in the Safer Bromley News.

The minutes of the recent meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership will be tabled for information at the meeting.

Members noted the minutes of the previous meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership Strategic Group that had met on September 15^th 2016.

There were no questions concerning the minutes.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to this Committee must be received in writing 4 working days before the date of the meeting.  Therefore please ensure questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on 22^nd September 2016.

There were no questions from Councillors or Members of the Public.

Report FSD 16055

The Budget Monitoring report 2016/17 was written by Claire Martin, Head of Finance.

The report provided an update on the latest budget monitoring position for 2016/17 for the Public Protection and Safety Portfolio based on expenditure and activity levels up to 31^st May 2016.

The PDS Committee was happy to endorse the report.

The Portfolio Holder endorsed the latest 2016/17 budget projection for the Public Protection and Safety Portfolio.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder endorse the latest budget projection for the Public Protection and Safety Portfolio.

Report FSD 16055

The Capital Monitoring report was written to clarify the revised Capital Programme that was agreed by the Executive on 20^th July 2016.

It was explained that the underspend for 2015/16 (£99k) had been rephased into the 2016/2017 budget.

The report contained the revised programme for the portfolio, and detailed comments on scheme progress.

The PDS Committee was happy to accept the changes that had previously been agreed by the Executive.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder note and endorse the changes agreed by the Executive on 20^th July 2016.  

Report ES 16043

This report was written by Jim McGowan, Head of Environmental Protection.

The report had been written so that the PDS Committee and the Portfolio Holder were informed concerning the current status of the contracts for Stray and Abandoned Dogs, and Pest Control. The report explained that the current contracts were due to end in March 2017. The report outlined the service requirements and the recommended commissioning strategy to ensure continuity of service from 1^st April 2017.

It was the case that not only was there a requirement for a contract extension, but there was an additional requirement for logistical reasons to build in options for contract extensions if required.

It was proposed to market tender both services in lots, in order to test the market and obtain VFM.

The services were going to be tendered in the following lots, and then an evaluation process would follow:

·  Lot 1: Dog Warden, Kennelling and Rehoming and Pest Control

·  Lot 2: Dog Warden

·  Lot 3: Kennelling

·  Lot 4: Re-homing

·  Lot 5: Pest Control

The Committee heard that the current contractor provided the services around the dogs, but also provided the Pest Control service with added value. The current contractor provided a discounted service for pest control for those on benefits; the number of residents in the Borough who were receiving this discount was 15%. LBB’s prices for pest control services using the current contractor were, generally speaking, cheaper than other boroughs and private companies.

It was the case that LBB could end up with 1 or 4 contracts. In considering the cost of multiple contracts, it was the case that the cost of officer time would also have to be considered as part of the Evaluation process.

Mr McGowan explained the use of ‘bait points’. A ‘bait point’ was a point where bait would be placed to see if it was eaten or not. If bait was eaten, it would mean that rats or mice existed in that area, and so action would be required. If the bait was not eaten, it meant that the area concerned was free of rats or mice.

The PDS Committee was happy to accept the recommendations of the report.

RESOLVED that

(1) The Portfolio Holder agree to re-tender the Stray and Abandoned Dogs and Pest Control services for a period of three years, with the potential to extend for two further years, at an estimated total contract value of £620k

(2) The Portfolio Holder agree to delegate authority to the Executive Director of Environment and Community Services (in consultation with the Portfolio Holder) to extend the contract if required.   

Report ES 16052

This report was written by Jim McGowan, Head of Environmental Protection.

The report was written because LBB’s contract for CCTV monitoring and CCTV maintenance was due to expire on 31^st March 2017. Permission was being sought to extend the contracts by one year. The report outlined the proposed extension of the contract.

It was explained to the Committee that not only would the contracts require to be extended, but that flexibility was required concerning the option to extend due to logistical issues. This was because at some point in the future, depending what was happening on site, a new location for the CCTV control room would be required.

A Member asked if the possibility of a joint tender with Lewisham had been explored. It was confirmed that this would be an option that would be considered going forward. Another Member asked if the price for the extension would be fixed or flexible. It was confirmed that the price was ‘fixed’ but could still be negotiated. It was noted that an ‘options’ paper would come back to the Committee in January 2017.

The Chairman asked Mr McGowan to explain why the ‘rag status’ for the CCTV contracts on the Contracts Register was amber. It was explained that the contracts needed to be extended, and that six months’ notice of an extension was required. The amber status was therefore giving warning concerning the need to extend the current contracts in time. Once this was done, the rag status would change to green.

The Committee agreed the recommendations of the report.

RESOLVED that:

(1) The Portfolio Holder agree to the proposal to extend the CCTV maintenance and CCTV monitoring contracts for one year to 31^st March 2018

(2) The Portfolio Holder agree to delegate the authority to the Executive Director for Environment and Community Services to extend the contract for a further year until 2019 if required

Mr Vale informed the Committee that Community Payback was still operating, but that there was no data to provide to the PDS Committee as LBB were struggling to obtain the relevant information and data from the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC).

Mr Vale advised the Committee that he would try and obtain the relevant data, and feedback to Members via the Committee Clerk.  

RESOLVED that Mr Vale endeavour to make progress with obtaining information and data from the CRC so that the PDS Committee can be properly updated.

CSD 16113

The Chairman directed the Committee to the contracts relating to Domestic Abuse. It was noted that 4/5 of these contracts had a RAG status that was red. It was explained that the reason for this was not because there was anything wrong with the contracts, but that rather it was to do with the position relating to MOPAC funding going forward. The RAG status was red because the projects were funded by MOPAC, and funding going forward had not been confirmed. Once funding was confirmed, the status would change to green. LBB were hopeful that the required MOPAC funding would be released.

More information concerning funding would be available in October. Other projects that required MOPAC funding were:

·  Operation Crystal

·  Out of Hours Noise Service

·  Safer Bromley Van

The Chairman commented that in future, when the Programme of meetings was being drafted, more time should be allocated between the PDS meetings so that meetings were spaced out and this would avoid the need for rescheduling.

A revised Work Programme had been tabled; the changes on the revision were as follows:

·  The presentation from Bromley Women’s Aid had been rescheduled to the November meeting

·  It was hoped that updated reports from Internal Audit concerning Stray Dogs would be available for the January meeting

·  A CCTV Options report had been added to the Work Programme for the January meeting

·  It was hoped that updated reports from Internal Audit concerning CCTV wold be available for the March meeting

The Committee Clerk briefed Members concerning planned visits to LFB LIFE passing out parades, LFB Impact courses, and the possibility of going out with the Trading Standards Team on visits to monitor the age of age related products.

It was also noted that Sgt Thomas had invited Members to come out with the Town Centre Police Team on patrols.

Other arrangements would be made in due course, such as visits to Victim Support.        

Mr Belcher asked if the problem of litter in Avalon Road in Orpington was a matter for the PPS/PDS Committee. The Chairman responded that it was a matter for the Environment PDS Committee. Mr Belcher was also advised to use ‘Fix my Street’ which had in the past proved effective in dealing with issues such as the one that had been raised by Mr Belcher. 

The date of the next meeting is 1^st November 2016.

It was noted that the date of the next meeting had been confirmed as 29^th November 2016.