Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room 1 - Bromley Civic Centre. View directions

Contact: Steve Wood  020 8313 4316

No. Item





Apologies were received from Councillor Richard Williams. Councillor Vanessa Allen attended as substitute. 


Apologies were received from Councillor Kim Botting, and Councillor Tony Owen attended as substitute.


Apologies were also received from Dr Robert Hadley, and Alf Kennedy.


Apologies were received from the Executive Director of Environmental and Community Services, and the Director for Environment acted as substitute.


Apologies were also received from the Borough Commander and Detective Superintendent Paul Warnett acted as substitute.






Councillor David Cartwright declared an interest as he was listed as a director of Operational Assurance Ltd, a company which undertook independent auditing of emergency planning systems and structures for local authorities.




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 January 2nd 2018.



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





The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting of the Public Protection and Safety PDS Committee held on 21st November 2017.


The Chairman referred to minute 43, which was in respect of the minute pertaining to the presentation from the London Fire Brigade. The last sentence in paragraph 16 read as follows: ‘If you were working in an office environment, you were normally encouraged to evacuate the building in an orderly and swift manner’.  


The Chairman asked that the word ‘encouraged’ be replaced with ‘told’. With this amendment noted, the minutes were agreed and signed as a correct record.






CSD 18004


The Matters Arising report was noted and members considered the progress that had been made with respect to matters that had arisen at previous meetings.


It was noted that the Portfolio Holder had drafted a joint letter with LB Sutton to express concerns over the BCU tri-borough amalgamation between Croydon, Bromley, and Sutton. The Committee was informed that no response had been received to the letter. The Portfolio Holder had also emailed her counterparts in boroughs where the BCU trials had taken place, to find out if the trials had been successful.


The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Safety had emailed her counterpart at Havering, but had not received a reply.


The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Safety had emailed her counterpart at Redbridge, but a response had not been received.


The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Safety had emailed her counterpart  at Barking & Dagenham, but had not received a response.


The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Safety emailed the Conservative Group Opposition Leader for Redbridge, and a response had been received as outlined below: 


‘The Tri Borough BCU has been a failure in our view.  In the first few weeks response times fell through the floor, and breached Met and HO guidelines.  As a result they were forced to abandon the tri borough approach and divide the three boroughs in two "areas". Response times are still inadequate.


We are also unhappy with the command structure.  Our nominal Tri Borough commander is based in Romford.  We had huge difficulty getting him to take a series of violent and disruptive traveller incursions seriously.  This led to huge clean-up costs.


I can think of no positives.


Based on our experience I could not recommend the Tri Borough approach.’


The Chairman suggested that the Leader of the Council write a letter to the Mayor for London to reinforce LBB’s opposition to the tri-borough BCU being proposed for Bromley, Croydon and Sutton. The letter could highlight the failings shown in the boroughs where the trials had taken place. The Committee agreed with this suggestion. The letter would be addressed to Sadiq Khan and Sophie Lindon would be copied in.


A Member noted the mention of ‘Travellers’ in the response from the Conservative Group Opposition Leader for Redbridge. He mentioned that Croydon had recently had to deal with an incursion onto Shirley Park Golf Club by Travellers, and expressed the view that the response from Croydon Police was lacking. He hoped that going forward, the response from Bromley Police to incursions from Travellers would continue to be robust.


RESOLVED that the Leader of the Council be requested to write to the Mayor for London to express LBB’s ongoing concerns related to the proposed tri-borough BCU merge between Croydon, Bromley and Sutton. 









The Chairman informed the Committee that she would be attending a visit to Victim Support’s Head Office in London on January 22nd.


The Chairman attended the extended Corporate Leadership Team / Cabinet meeting at Bromley Civic Centre on Friday 15th December.





The Police update was provided by the Deputy Borough Commander, Detective Superintendent Paul Warnett.


Concerning a comment made previously by a Member with respect to night time economy statistics, Mr Warnett stated that it was not a problem for him to provide the night time economy statistics if they were still required.


The Committee was updated with respect to the proposed BCU merger with Croydon, Sutton and Bromley. It was noted that the new BCU Commander would be Chief Superintendent Jeff Booth who was currently the Borough Commander at LB Croydon.  Despite the fact that various local authorities had raised objections and concerns about the BCU amalgamations, the BCUs would be going ahead. The London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea had written a letter of objection, and they were informed that the matter was a Police decision rather than a political one.


The Chairman asked Mr Warnett if he was familiar with the disturbing reports emanating from the BCU trials. He responded that it was the case that first response rates had fallen, and that there had been some infrastructure problems. Lessons would be learnt from the trials, and the 12 BCUs would not all be operating the same model.


The BCU would have 5 Functional Superintendents that would cover :


a)  Emergency Response

b)  Partnership

c)  Investigation

d)  Safeguarding

e)  Neighbourhood Policing


The Committee heard that the current Borough Commander would be leaving in two weeks, but no further details on his posting were mentioned.


The Tri-Borough amalgamation for Croydon, Sutton and Bromley was expected to go live in either late summer or early autumn. The Chairman expressed concern that geographical factors had not been given proper consideration.


Crime had increased in most areas, particularly robbery, burglary and the use of violence. The increased figures for robbery were partly related to an increase in moped crime. The number of reported burglary offences had increased because this also now included break-ins to out buildings. A Member asked if going forward the burglary statistics could be split to distinguish between the burglaries of houses and outbuildings.


A Member requested if he could be sent performance data with respect to ASB. The Chairman referred to the previous emphasis that had been given to ‘MOPAC 7’ crime areas, and expressed concern that some of these areas may no longer be a priority for the Police. Mr Warnett explained that the Police would still be responding to these crimes, but that it would not be the total focus like it was previously. 


The Committee was briefed with respect to the three murders that had occurred over the last three months. A number of suspects had originally been charged with respect to the murder of Michael Jonas in Betts Park. However, the case had just been discontinued and the suspects had been released.


A suspect had been charged with respect to the Knockholt Train Station murder case where a person had been chased onto the tracks and stabbed. There had also been a murder committed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.





The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Safety (Councillor Kate Lymer) informed the Committee that she had sent a letter to Sophie Lindon on 11th December 2017 concerning the proposed tri-borough BCU amalgamation of Croydon, Bromley and Sutton. No response had been received despite a chaser email.


The Portfolio Holder had recently attended the following:


·  A meeting of the ‘Gold’ group

·  Two public Council meetings

·  Bromley Youth Council Executive meetings

·  The VAWG Forum

·  A meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership on December 19th

·  A Safer Neighbourhood Board public meeting

·  A visit to Biggin Hill Fire Station


Members of the LFB at Biggin Hill had come across an elderly gentleman who had been living in squalid conditions with no heating or support. The fire brigade tidied his place up, and brought him 2 heaters; going forward they planned to keep an eye on him to make sure he was ok.


The following week the Portfolio Holder would be attending a meeting of the Children’s Services Governance Board, and the Bromley Mentoring Steering Group.


The Portfolio Holder informed the Committee that new laws were being brought in concerning letting agencies and estate agents, and these would need to be added to the Work Programme.


The Portfolio Holder expressed her thanks to Paul Lehane who was due to retire in April 2018.


Recruitment was underway for the post of Assistant Director for Public Protection and Safety. In the meantime there may be a requirement for an interim manager. 




The presentation was given by Sergeant Paul Thomas, from the Bromley North Safer Neighbourhood Team.


Sergeant Thomas commenced by outlining some of the main changes that had occurred during 2017:


·  Policing Numbers had reduced

·  The Mayor’s directive of maintaining two District Ward Officers per ward had been achieved earlier than planned

·  Uncertainty with respect to the BCU trials and whether or not this would affect Safer Neighbourhood Team base closures

·  Disruption caused by Grenfell and terrorist attacks

·  Increased focus on Safeguarding and Child Sexual exploitation.


Sergeant Thomas explained that both the Town Centre Teams for Bromley and Orpington had been maintained. Good relationships had been developed with both BIDs. In December, a funding stream had been negotiated with the Bromley BID that had allowed extra patrols in Bromley Town throughout the Christmas period.


The Safer Neighbourhood Teams had been monitoring the potential BID in Beckenham and Penge, and would be looking to develop positive relationships with the BID should the vote be positive. 


Data was presented concerning the number of notifiable offences for Bromley during December 2017. The total number of offences that were notified was 206 during that period. The highest percentage of these offences (100) related to theft and the handling of stolen goods. Sixty four of the theft offences were for shoplifting. The second highest percentage of offences pertained to violence against the person where 67 offences had been recorded. 


The Committee was updated concerning the night time economy for Beckenham and Bromley. Much work had been undertaken to review licenses of various premises. The Tasking Team had been lost and so consideration had to be given concerning how to manage the DWO shift patterns. Representations had been made centrally and now a new shift pattern had been established which meant that the Police were patrolling on Friday and Saturday evenings until 4am.


A new tactical plan was being developed in line with the new shift pattern, the new tactical plan was referred to as ‘Operation Resolve’. This would be aimed at the night time economy issues of ASB and Crime, particularly violence with injury. Part of the plan was to renew the working relationships with partners like security guards and street ambassadors. As the England football team had qualified for the World Cup, a tactical plan to deal with this would need to be developed. The Chairman wondered what the relationship was between the high number of violent offences against the person, and the consumption of alcohol.


A Member commented that when Jonathan Booth had been the local Police officer assigned to dealing with licensing issues, he had received regular reports concerning crime committed in the night time economy. He stated that this was no longer the case. He noted that several key premises including O Neil’s, Vu Vu and Bar Du Vin had been granted extensions to their licenses, and that these were all in close proximity geographically. He expressed the view that the relevant statistics were required so that night time economy violence could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62.




A PowerPoint presentation was given by Katie Nash (Interim Head of the National Probation Service for Bexley, Bromley and Greenwich).


Ms Nash commenced by briefing the Committee on the history of the Probation Service. It was noted that the Probation Trusts split on 01/06/2014 to form the National Probation Service and the Community Rehabilitation Company. The Committee was provided with statistics related prisoners, offenders, offenders on probation, and offenders recalled to prison.


In terms of re-offending rates, the National Probation Service re-offending rate for London was 37%, compared with 44% for the CRC. 


It was explained that the main legislation that influenced the work of NPS London was the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014. 


Each NPS Service User had a Risk Assessment Plan that consisted of the following elements:


  Other agencies involved

  Existing support and control

  Added measures for specific risks

  Undertake actions

  Additional conditions

  Level of contact



Ms Nash updated the Committee with the results of a recent HMIP inspection:


  Overall, the quality of NPS public protection work was good. Assessments focused on the right issues and informed good planning.

  However, timely information on child and adult safeguarding was often not available, and some staff lacked relevant training. Information was exchanged well with the police. Staff did not always review plans to reflect changes or progress.

  Sound arrangements were in place to address the risk of involvement in terrorism, organised crime and gangs, which were additional complexities for offender management in London.

  Overall, managers had a sound appreciation of what needed to improve.

  Access to suitable accommodation was difficult.

  There was effective communication with mental health, drug and alcohol services, and with employment, education and training partners.

  Bespoke services for women were poor.

  Reviews were not carried out reliably and service users were not involved often enough in planning or reviewing the work they were required to do



A Member asked if the re-offending rates were increasing, and the answer to this was no, they had remained static.


A Member asked how the NPS worked with the Youth Offending Service, and what was the current position with regard to Community Service. Ms Nash informed the Committee that a part time person had been appointed to work with the YOS. The purpose of this was to manage the transition from the YOS to the Probation Service. It was clarified that ‘Community Service’ had now changed to ‘Community Payback’ and this fell within the remit of CRC.  



Additional documents:


FSD 18004


The Committee was presented with a Capital Programme Monitoring report for the second quarter of 2017/18.


The report had been drafted by James Mullender, Principal Accountant.


The Portfolio Holder was requested to note and confirm the changes agreed by the Executive on 6th December 2017. 


The report showed that £13k had been allocated to the budget for CCTV control room refurbishment. The accounts showed a credit balance of £34k as a sum of retention had been applied as the new system would need to run successfully for 12 months before final payment would be made.


RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder agree and confirm the changes agreed by the Executive on 6th December 2017. 




DRAFT 2018/19 BUDGET pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Additional documents:


FSD 18008


The Draft 2018/19 Budget report was written by Claire Martin—Head of Finance.


Members were requested to consider the initial draft budget proposed and identify any further action that might be taken to reduce cost pressures facing the Council over the next four years.


Executive were requesting that each PDS Committee consider the proposed initial draft budget savings and cost pressures for their Portfolio and that the views of each PDS Committee be reported back to the next meeting of the Executive, prior to the Executive making the recommendations to Council on 2018/19 Council Tax levels. 


The Committee was being asked to consider the update on the financial forecast for 2018/19 to 2021/22, and also to consider the initial draft 2018/19 Budget as a basis for setting the 2018/19 Budget. The Committee was also being asked to provide comments on the initial draft 2018/19 Budget for the February meeting of the Executive.




1-The update on the financial forecast for 2018/19 to 2021/22 be noted


2- The initial draft budget be agreed as the basis for the setting of the 2018/19 budget.  




ES 18005


The report dealing with the Emergency Planning and Business Continuity Service Update was drafted by Paul Lehane (Head of Food Safety, Occupational Safety and Licensing). The update on the night was presented jointly by Mr Lehane and Laurie Grasty-- Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Manager.


The report had been written to update Members on the Emergency Planning and Business Continuity Service following an earlier report to the Committee on 18th January 2017. The previous report had highlighted the limited resources allocated to the function and the need to review the Council’s business continuity arrangements.


Members were asked to note and comment on the report.


Mr Lehane stated that since the previous report, LBB was in a better place with respect to Business Continuity and Emergency Planning, and that much had been learned. LBB had provided assistance to the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea after the Grenfell Tower fire, and Ms Grasty had grown into her role as Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Manager. She was being assisted in this role by Sophie Olive, who was previously a graduate intern, but who was now employed on a full time temporary basis as Business Continuity Officer.


Mr Lehane said that a number of Bromley staff had volunteered to provide assistance with Ms Grasty at the West Way Assistance Centre, and that it was an awful experience and very stressful. The Grenfell incident had shown how a Council’s reputation could be destroyed with just one event where there was an inadequate response.


Recruitment had been undertaken for volunteers to help if an incident occurred; training was ongoing and crucial. The BRF (Bromley Resilience Forum) would co-ordinate local responses and would be chaired by the Chief Executive and by the Executive Director for Environmental and Community Services. The BRF is a multiagency forum that meets 3 times a year to ensure that known risks can be planned, and trained for in the borough with relevant training exercises.


The Chairman referred to section 3.12 of the report that outlined a series of exercises that had been undertaken to assess LBB’s practical ability to respond to incidents. She asked how the exercises went and what was learnt. Ms Grasty explained that one of the exercises had been run directly by LBB, and that was the table top exercise to set up and run a rest centre. LBB had been participants at the other exercises. Subsequent to each exercise, a debriefing report was produced, and any lessons learnt were incorporated into LBB’s emergency planning documentation. 


A Member asked if training was undertaken with the local emergency services and with other boroughs. Ms Grasty explained that London Resilience co-ordinated pan London exercises for all 33 London boroughs. Some joint borough training was undertaken for standardisation.


A Member asked if there was an incident that LBB would not be able to deal with. Mr Lehane responded that it was unlikely that any local authority would be able to respond to an incident of the magnitude  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.




The verbal update on Crime and Dis-Order in the night time economy was provided by Mr Paul Lehane.


Mr Lehane informed the Committee that he had attempted to interrogate the Metropolitan Police crime statistics from the ‘London Safe Stats’ website. The data from the London Ambulance Service and the British Transport Police was capable of being analysed by ‘time of day’ but the Metropolitan Police data was not. Mr Lehane offered to look at data pertaining to hospital admissions at the PRUH and analyse that if required.


Mr Lehane informed the Committee that Mr David Wray had been recruited to replace a Licensing Officer that had recently left to work at another local authority. Mr Wray was a former Police officer. Mr Wray had recently been in attendance at a hairdressers’ when a customer collapsed. He resuscitated the customer, and waited for the LAS to arrive.


Mr Lehane provided a brief update concerning the Purple Flag that had been awarded to Beckenham Town Centre, and informed the Committee that the next Purple Flag inspection was due in June. It was anticipated that the BID would lead on the Purple Flag going forward. LBB Licensing would be looking to provide safeguarding training in partnership with the Police for clubs and pubs, so that vulnerable clients would be looked after. Training would also be considered with respect to acid attacks. 


Mr Lehane updated the Committee with a brief history of licensing applications with respect to 210 High Street Beckenham. An appeal against the variation of the licence was being launched in the magistrates’ court, and the matter was due in court the day following the Committee meeting to set a date for the full appeal. 


Mr Lehane informed the Committee that the Mayor of London had established the Night Time Commission to give him independent advice on London at night. By this was meant all activities between 6pm and 6am, across the whole of London. The interest was not just in commercial operations like pubs and restaurants. The Mayor was equally interested in services, retail and leisure, the experience of London night workers and the ability of all Londoners to use and enjoy streets, public spaces and transport networks safely at night.


Post meeting note:


Details of the consultation questions and how to respond were subsequently emailed through by the Portfolio Holder for Members’ attention.


A Member asked if taxi marshals still operated.It was confirmed that taxi marshals still operated and that they exercised a calming effect. 




ES 18006


The MOPAC update report was written and presented by Rob Vale (Head of Trading Standards and Community Safety). The report was presented to update the Public Protection and Safety Policy Development and Scrutiny Committee on the London Crime Prevention Fund (LCPF) granted by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), in particular the impact the reduction in the grant would have on each service.


Members of the Committee were asked to note and comment on the report.


Members noted the table in section 3.2 of the report which detailed how the LCPF funding had been allocated over 4 project areas between 2017/2018 and 2018/2019. The 4 funding areas were:



·  IOM

·  Mentoring Young People

·  ASB and Noise


The total funding allocation over the two years was £643,430.


The funding for VAWG had remained more or less constant for 2018/19, and so this service would continue as normal for the next financial year. However there was no guarantee that MOPAC would provide the same level of funding for years 3 and 4, which could put the services at risk. Alternate sources of funding should be considered going forward.


There was no change in services or funding for year 2 with respect to IOM, and so this service would continue as normal for the next financial year.


It was anticipated that there would be a funding shortfall with respect to year 2 for the mentoring of young people. The funding shortfall was £17,536 and alternative sources of funding were being explored. In year 2 there would be a shortfall in funding of £5k for the ASB Co-ordinator post. This would be met from the Community Safety budget for 2018/19.


Mr Vale stated that officers were waiting for further information from MOPAC to see how these services would be funded for years three and four. A report would be drafted for a future meeting in either June or July 2018 when an update on the budget would be provided. It may also be the case that at the end of years 3-4, the funding could reduce further, and so long term resolutions to the funding issues should be considered. 


The Chairman acknowledged the importance of all of the various projects, and hoped that funding could be sourced so that all of the projects could be fully maintained.


RESOLVED that an updated MOPAC funding report be presented to the Committee in July 2018. 



Additional documents:




The Contracts Register report was written by Dan Jones, Director of Environment.


The report presented an extract from the November 2017 Contracts Register for detailed scrutiny. The Committee was asked to review the contracts register, and to note that the part 2 version of the register contained information in its commentary that may be commercially sensitive.


Where contracts were red-flagged, it did not necessarily mean that any problems existed with the contracts, it could simply mean that a particular action was required. 


The Committee noted that the Council had 230 active contracts with a total contract value greater than £50k. There were six contracts noted in the report which were:


·  The Mortuary Contract

·  The Contract for the Coroner’s Service

·  CCTV Monitoring

·  Dog Collection and Transportation

·  CCTV Repair and Maintenance

·  Domestic Abuse Advocacy Project


The Committee heard that with respect to the mortuary contract, LBB had to contribute as part of a tri-borough agreement, and arrangements were being finalised with Croydon. 


The Director for Environment informed the Committee that the CCTV contracts had now been extended to March 2019. The Dogs contract had also been extended. It was clarified that the Coroner’s Office was no longer based at LBB, but had been re-located to purpose built offices in Croydon.






CSD 18005


Members noted the Work Programme report and that an updated MOPAC report would be brought to the PDS Committee in July 2018.




It was noted that Members were visiting the Victim Support headquarters at Hannibal House on Monday January 22nd.


The Chairman asked if any Committee members would be interested in attending a Community Impact Day.


It was agreed that the details of future Community Impact Days would be sent to the Committee Secretary who would then disseminate them to Committee members.


Post Meeting Note:


Details of future dates and locations for Community Impact Days have been disseminated to Committee members.





No other business was considered.



The Chairman to move that the Press and public be excluded during consideration of the items of business listed below as it is likely in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings that if members of the Press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information.





The commentary that accompanied the part 2 copies of the Contracts Register was noted.



The date of the March is Tuesday 6th March 2018.


The date of the next meeting was confirmed at 6th March 2018.


Original Text: