Agenda and minutes

Venue: Bromley Civic Centre

Contact: Steve Wood  020 8313 4316

Items
No. Item

STANDARD ITEMS pdf icon PDF 1 MB

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND NOTIFICATION OF SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Chris Pierce, and Cllr Keith Onslow attended as substitute. Apologies were also received from Cllr Hannah Gray,  Cllr Colin Hitchins, Dr Robert Hadley and Oscar Searle.

 

The Chairman thanked Councillor Kate Lymer for her hard work and service as the previous Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Enforcement and welcomed Councillor Angela Page as the new Portfolio Holder .

2.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest.

 

3.

MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC PROTECTION AND ENFORCEMENT PDS COMMITTEE HELD ON 16th MARCH 2021 pdf icon PDF 406 KB

Minutes:

The Committee considered the minutes of the Public Protection and Enforcement PDS Committee held on 16th March 2021.

 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 16th March 2021 be agreed as a correct record.

 

4.

QUESTIONS FOR THE PUBLIC PROTECTION AND ENFORCEMENT PORTFOLIO HOLDER

The Public Protection and Enforcement PDS Committee examines executive decisions and reviews policy on anti-social behaviour, drug action, youth offending, trading standards and partnership with the Metropolitan Police.

 

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions from the public that are not specific to reports on the agenda must have been received in writing by 5pm, 10 working days before the date of the meeting. The deadlines are expected to be:

 

Meeting on 22nd June 2021—question deadline was 8th June.

 

Questions specifically regarding reports on the agenda should be received within two working days of the normal publication date of the agenda. The deadline is given on each agenda. For this meeting, any questions relating to reports on the agenda should be received by Democratic Services by 5pm on Wednesday, 16th June.

 

The Council is now taking both oral and written questions.

 

When submitting questions, each question should be limited to 50 words, and please specify if you would like to attend the meeting and receive an oral response, or if you would like to receive a written response. We will endeavour to supply written responses the day after the meeting if possible.

 

Minutes:

No questions had been received.

5.

MATTERS OUTSTANDING pdf icon PDF 129 KB

A report is received at every meeting that details any matters that may be outstanding.     

Minutes:

Chief Inspector Craig Knight provided an update concerning the matters arising that were related to the police.

 

The police and fire service were monitoring any possible delays in responses as a result of low traffic zones. The police reported that to date they were not aware of any significant delays. The LAS had written to the Chairman to inform him that last year, the low traffic zones had caused delays on 188 occasions.

 

In the rolling 12 months there had been 3403 recorded harassment cases. Chief Inspector Knight provided the Committee with the official definition of what constituted harassment. It was quite a broad area, covering a variety of offences. It was noted that with respect to the offence of harassment, Bromley had been ranked as the 9th safest borough in London. The areas for the most recorded number of harassment cases were Bromley Town, Penge/Cator and the Crays.

 

The Committee discussed the differences between Hate Crime and Harassment. Councillor Bance had previously requested a breakdown of the harassment data and she stated that she was happy with the information that had been provided from the police. The Chairman said that he would ensure that the harassment data provided by the police would be disseminated.

 

The Chairman had asked that the police provide data to show the recruitment and subsequent retention of officers from ethnic minority backgrounds. Chief Inspector Knight provided extensive data in this regard concerning recruitment. This also included a breakdown relating to male and female recruits.

 

The Chairman thanked the Chief Inspector for the data, but he pointed out that recruitment was different to retention and he was very much interested in how many of these recruits from ethnic minorities were retained in service after completing the relevant training.

 

The Chief Inspector replied that losses were very small, somewhere in the region of 10 to 20 officers in the first two years. Overall, the retention of officers  had improved in the last 12 months--this was something that the Met Police and MOPAC monitored closely.

 

A Member asked about security checks when new recruits applied to join the police. (This was in the light of the tragic circumstances surrounding the murder of Sarah Everard). The Chief Inspector replied that the police vetting checks were stringent, but no amount of vetting could always identify a propensity to commit murder. With respect to the Sarah Everard case, the officer concerned had been transferred in from another police force that required a higher form of vetting and he was vetted again when he joined the Met. It was noted that DNA samples and finger print samples were taken from new recruits.

 

A further discussion took place looking at the difference in retention rates from those who had entered the police force via ‘direct entry’ and those who had entered by more usual routes.

 

An update was provided concerning the bones that had been dug up in the Biggin Hill area. The Chief Inspector assured the Committee that this incident was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

POLICE UPDATE pdf icon PDF 4 MB

An update from the police is provided at every meeting.

Minutes:

Members were briefed that the Metropolitan Police and MOPAC agreed to base crime data figures on 2019 as opposed to 2020, as the 2020 figures would have been affected by the Covid pandemic. MOPAC would be holding the police to account with respect to the 2019 data.

 

The trend currently was that crime was beginning to rise as the country started to move out of lockdown. It was clear that a disproportionately high volume of crimes took place in certain problem Wards. Crime was being classified by volume as well as by the amount of harm caused by that crime. Resultingly, the police were targeting their actions in a different way and were developing a new patrol strategy. They would be focusing on ‘high harm’ areas.

 

It was noted that burglary had fallen as a result of the Covid pandemic because more people were at home. The police now had to consider how they could better target residential burglary when the country moved out of lockdown. It was also the case that criminal damage and theft from motor vehicles was also starting to increase. Theft of motor vehicles was subject to seasonal variations.

 

The police had been very successful in targeting catalytic converter crimes and significant reduction in volume had been seen in this area. Chief Inspector Knight informed the Committee that many of these criminal gangs had been taken out of the system and many had fled; European arrest warrants would be used as required. It was also the case that during the Covid lockdown the number of robberies fell because streets were quieter as footfall was lower. At the time of the meeting, knife crime figures were also down.

 

A Member asked if there had been an increase in domestic violence because of lockdown. Chief Inspector Knight reported that there had been a 6% rise in domestic violence cases across London, so the increase was not dramatic.

 

A Member expressed his thanks for the work undertaken by the Police in the Petts Wood and Knoll areas. He asked why there had been police dogs in the Glades; the Chief Inspector was not aware of the reason for this and promised to find out and report back to the Member.

 

A Member referred to a report which indicated that in the period 2019 to 2020, 141 police officers and staff had breached professional standards; 55% of these had been proven and 37% had resulted in charges of gross misconduct. She asked if the Committee could have a tri-borough figure with respect to this provided at the next meeting.

 

The matter of motorised scooters was raised. Chief Inspector Craig Knight confirmed that the legislation on this was straight forward. In cases where an individual was utilising a motorised propelled vehicle, such a vehicle would fall within the remit of the Road Traffic Act and would need to be registered and insured.

 

The police in the first instance generally issued warnings to the individuals concerned and to the shops selling the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

HOLDING THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER TO ACCOUNT

7.

PUBLIC PROTECTION AND ENFORCEMENT PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW AND PORTFOLIO HOLDER UPDATE pdf icon PDF 127 KB

Minutes:

The new Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Enforcement (Cllr Angela Page) stated that she was looking forward to her new role.

 

Apologies were given because it was hard to read the high volume of data contained in the public performance overview document; this was despite the fact that it had been printed off in A3 for convenience. This was an issue that was noted across committees and was being addressed. 

 

Three areas had been flagged as red:

 

1.  It was noted that the Council’s efforts to promote awareness of activities had been negatively affected by the Covid pandemic.

 

2.  Similarly the amount of test purchasing had also been negatively affected by the Covid pandemic.

 

3.  The third area was the matter of the provision of business advice which had also been flagged as red. However, the Director for Environment & Public Protection stated that this in fact was not correct and the relevant data had not been harnessed together properly into one set of data . This being the case, this indicator should be green and would be changed for the next meeting.

 

RESOLVED that the update regarding the public protection and enforcement performance overview be noted.

8.

EXTENSION OF THE STRAY DOG SERVICE AND PEST CONTROL SERVICE pdf icon PDF 357 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

ES20094

 

The Assistant Director for Public Protection and Enforcement informed Members that the current stray dog service and pest control service was working well and so the resultant report being presented was straight forward. The Council had utilised the last year of the contract extension option and would be looking to re-tender in early 2022. It was likely that another three year contract would be agreed with extension options included.

 

A Member asked why LBB were charging because another local borough appeared not to be doing so. The Assistant Director responded that there was a statutory fee that had to be charged so the other borough would have to charge.

 

The Chairman referenced the possibility of a joint arrangement. The Assistant Director responded that the Council benefited from excellent rates in the existing contract and so a joint arrangement was not required. 

 

RESOLVED that:

 

The Portfolio Holder noted the history and annual contract value of the contract with SDK Ltd and agreed to the extension of both the Stray Dog Service (Lot 1) and the Pest Control Service (Lot 2) as supported by the business case outlined at 5.1 (Lot 1) and 9.1 (Lot 2), and in accordance with Contract Procurement Rule (CPR) 23.7.3 as outlined in paragraph 17.2 to 31st January 2023.

 

9.

PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR HOUSING ENFORCEMENT POLICY 2021 pdf icon PDF 356 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A draft report on this matter had previously been presented to Members and then the proposals had gone out for public consultation. The aim of the proposals were to enable the Council to clamp down on rogue landlords. The report outlined proposals for a civil penalties policy. There had been no changes made to the original report.

 

RESOLVED that:

 

1)  The Portfolio Holder noted the summary of responses received from the consultation.

 

2)  The  Portfolio Holder recommended the adoption of the finalised enforcement policy.

 

3)  The Portfolio Holder agreed  that delegated authority be given to the Director of Environment and Public Protection, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Enforcement to make minor amendments to the Policy post adoption, should it be required.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10.

DELEGATION OF FUNCTION pdf icon PDF 233 KB

Minutes:

ES20097

 

Members were briefed that the report related to two current Trading Standards investigations that were proceeding to prosecution and which required cross boundary authorisations from other local authorities; acceptance of the recommendations would also have a bearing on ongoing and future cases.

 

Delegation of Function needed to be agreed by the Portfolio Holder in the first instance and then by the Executive.

 

RESOLVED that: 

 

The Portfolio Holder for Public Protection and Enforcement recommended that the delegation of function from other local authorities (listed in Appendix 1) for adoption, be accepted by the Executive on the 30th June 2021.

 

 

 

11.

MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING OF THE SAFER BROMLEY PARTNERSHIP STRATEGIC GROUP pdf icon PDF 389 KB

Minutes:

Members noted the minutes of the meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership that met on the 25th of March 2021.

 

The actions arising from the March meeting of the SBP had been covered in the meeting of the SBP on the 17th of June.

 

It was confirmed that the Crime Needs Assessment was produced for the partnership meeting on the 17th of June. The CNA had also been added as an appendix to the main agenda item for the PDS meeting, covering the Safer Bromley Partnership Annual Update.

 

RESOLVED that the minutes of the SBP meeting that was held on 25th March 2021 be noted.

 

 

12.

ANNUAL UPDATE ON THE SAFER BROMLEY PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY pdf icon PDF 331 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members were reminded that it was the responsibility of the PDS Committee to scrutinise the Safer Bromley Partnership at least on an annual basis. The update report provided Members with details concerning the progress made by the SBP with respect to their strategic priorities. It was a testimony to the hard work that had been put in by partners.

 

The Assistant Director explained that the Crime Needs Assessment had to be produced by the Community Safety Partnership as a statutory requirement and it would highlight the wards within the Borough where resource was needed to be allocated to deal with incidents of ASB and crime.

 

The assessment showed that the two priorities identified by MOPAC of non-domestic violence with injury and domestic burglary were accurate and appropriate. It was noted that the percentage figure for non-domestic violence with injury was not 64% but was actually 29% .

 

It was noted that the documents and appendices relating to the annual update on the Safer Bromley Partnership Strategy had been disseminated previously for Members’ attention. At the same time, a request was made for Members to submit any questions that they deemed appropriate with respect to the strategy. One member submitted questions, which were answered in full and the questions and answers had been previously disseminated. 

 

A discussion took place regarding Hate Crime and how the data was broken down.

 

A Member stated that the way in which the information had been presented with respect to the update on the Safer Bromley Partnership Strategy had made it difficult to get to grips with. The Chairman agreed with this. He suggested that some sort of covering report be drafted next time (with pointers to relevant details) so that scrutiny would be easier. The Assistant Director responded, saying that in future she would draft a covering report with additional sections and pointers to the relevant appendices. The Chairman suggested that he have a meeting with the Assistant Director and the Portfolio Holder to discuss this issue.

 

A Member requested that going forward could the issue of hate crime be broken down further and could a definition of hate crime be provided?  Chief Inspector Craig Knight stated that with respect to obtaining a definition of Hate Crime, the Police or Crown Prosecution Service websites would provide a good definition. Discussion took place between the matter of hate crime and free speech in a democratic society and how these could be balanced.

 

A Member noted that in the papers presented to the Committee there had been a reference to 513 Hate Crimes. He asked if there was a breakdown of how these were constituted. This was noted as a matter arising for Chief Inspector Craig Knight to take away and he promised that the Member would be provided with the answer to his question.

.

A Member raised the issue concerning the Chairmanship of the Safer Bromley Partnership, stating that it was the Portfolio Holder who had previously chaired these board meetings and expressed concern that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

13.

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC PROTECTION RISK REGISTER pdf icon PDF 184 KB

Minutes:

Members were briefed concerning the red risk rating for the Out of Hours Noise Service. It was noted that this was run on a voluntary basis; it was funded by MOPAC. A review of the service was underway.

 

Members were referred to the proposed increased cost of the Coroner’s Service. This was being challenged by the Director of Environment and Public Protection. The Director was seeking an explanation as to why these non-related COVID costs were increasing. A meeting was being arranged between the Council and the Coroner.

 

The risk with respect to the ‘Uniform’ system was noted and the system was  referred to as being currently dysfunctional. This matter was in the process of being resolved and should no longer appear as a red risk.

 

RESOLVED that that the risk register update be noted.

14.

CONTRACTS REGISTER REPORT pdf icon PDF 710 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members noted the update regarding the Contracts Register.

 

RESOLVED that the update regarding the Contracts Register be noted.

15.

WORK PROGRAMME pdf icon PDF 215 KB

Minutes:

CSD 21063

 

It was noted that a report would be presented to the September meeting concerning the Food Safety Plan.

 

A Member drew attention to what she perceived as the failure of the 101 service, with callers being put on hold for 30 minutes. She asked if this was a matter that could be brought before a future meeting of the Committee. The Chairman suggested this should be a question that could be directed to the police and that Members could be updated at the September meeting. 

 

RESOLVED that:

 

1) A report on the Food Safety Plan would be brought to the September meeting.

 

2) A question would be submitted to the police concerning possible in adequacies in the 101 service and a response to this should be provided at the September meeting.