PLEASE NOTE: This meeting will be held in the Council Chamber at the Civic Centre, Stockwell Close, Bromley, BR1 3UH. Members of the public can attend the meeting: you can ask questions submitted in advance (see item x on the agenda) or speak on a planning application (see item 3 and the box on public speaking below) or just observe the meeting. There will be limited space for members of the public to attend the meeting – if you wish to attend please contact us, before the day of the meeting if possible, using our web-form:

https://www.bromley.gov.uk/CouncilMeetingNoticeOfAttendanceForm

Please be prepared to follow the identified social distancing guidance at the meeting, including wearing a face covering

Apologies were received from Sharon Baldwin, Alf Kennedy and Nathan Ward.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting of the Public Protection and Enforcement Committee that met on the 1^st February 2022.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 1st February 2022 be agreed and signed as a correct record.

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. For the meeting on 23^rd March 2022, this deadline was 5pm on 9^th March.

Questions specifically on 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. The deadline for questions relating specifically to reports on the agenda for the March meeting is 5pm on 17^th March.

No questions had been received.

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. For the meeting on 23^rd March 2022, this deadline was 5pm on 9^th March.

Questions specifically on 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. The deadline for questions relating specifically to reports on the agenda for the March meeting is 5pm on 17^th March

No questions were received.

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

CSD 22041

Members noted that the matters arising with respect to Fiona Baker (the Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Security Adviser) had not been actioned by Ms Baker. The Chairman stated that this should be followed through and that the update was still required.

Minute 48 in the Matters Arising report referenced some questions that Members wanted to ask the police. The police had been notified of the questions by the Portfolio Holder, but they were not in attendance at the meeting to respond. The Chairman stated that this matter should not be forgotten and that the questions should still be raised with the police when they attended the Committee next.

Minute 51 on the Matters Arising report was the matter concerning how the Communications Team could better support the Fly Tipping Action Plan initiatives. The Director for Environment & Public Protection reminded the Committee that an email update on this matter had been disseminated pre-meeting. It was a matter that had been taken up by the Chief Executive and assurances were provided that more communications support for the Fly Tipping Action Plan initiatives would be provided. Susie Clark from the Communications Team was in attendance on this occasion.

An update on the Dogs and Pest Control contract was provided and it was explained that while the relevant officer had been working on the report, additional information had come to light which meant that the update would now be moved to the June Committee.

A discussion took place concerning the updates and scam notices that were disseminated by the Trading Standards Team. A Member stated that these notices were not easy to share. She said that the notices were sent out in PDF form which made them difficult to deal with and to share with others. She asked if going forward the Trading Standards updates could be sent out as a JPEG or image file rather than a PDF. This was a matter that needed to be discussed with the Head of Trading Standards and Commercial Regulation.

A  Member commented that Trading Standards used visit places such as church halls and residents’ associations to speak to elderly people about scams. This was particularly important as many elderly residents were not using social media. She asked if this could be done again and what was the diary plan for doing so. Again, this was a matter that needed to be expanded upon by the Head of Trading Standards and Commercial Regulation. Susie Clark from the Communications Team said that she had recently been in attendance at a meeting of the Adult Safeguarding Board with the Head of Trading Standards and Commercial Regulation and it was stated there that he was now beginning to pick up this activity once more.

RESOLVED that:

1) A response to Matters Arising should be requested from Fiona Baker (Metropolitan Police Counter Terrorism Security Adviser).

2) Member questions due to be answered by the police at this meeting should be answered by the police at the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

It was noted that the Chairman’s Annual update would also be presented to Full Council.

RESOLVED that the Chairman’s Annual Update report be noted. 

Probably around the issue of mental health.

Oscar Seal attended to provide the BYC (Bromley Youth Council) update concerning the mental health of young people. This was the third year in a row that BYC had focused on young people’s mental health. The Chairman said that it was appropriate that representatives from SLAM were also in attendance.

The Committee heard that the focus of the BYC campaign was on the mental health specifically of young men, as they seemed to be disproportionately affected. Bromley Youth Council wanted to explore why this was the case and why it was different for young men.

They targeted their campaign in schools and via their Instagram page to draw awareness to the relevant services available in the borough. BYC had come to the conclusion that in most cases the advice provided was too generic and was not specific enough for the individual concerned. For many young people the services were not really working and more was needed to be done to address the problems. It was noted that those young men who were experiencing mental health issues were more likely to be involved in anti-social behaviour, crime in general and in the taking of drugs. The young men affected did not seem to have much awareness of the services available to them, and in some cases did not seem to appear to want to take on the information regarding available services. Mr Seal felt that all Services needed to step up their game in order to tackle this serious problem.

In the course of their investigations, BYC liaised with ‘Bromley Y’ with whom they continued to work. Mr Seal said that it was not a ‘one glove fits all’ situation and the effect of the COVID pandemic had made one to one personal consultations difficult. The aim of BYC was to develop and improve services so that they would be more effective in helping both young men and young women who were experiencing mental health issues.

The Chairman thanked Mr Seal for his insightful update and asked if he felt there was a connection between the taking of cannabis and mental health.  Mr Seal replied that young men and women took cannabis for  stress relief; once they felt a relief of stress they would want to feel that again—and this was the road to addiction. He felt that the use of cannabis was increasing. 

The Chairman asked what the solutions were and how this matter could be confronted. Mr Seal responded that BYC had not come up with any solutions yet, but it was important to readdress the drug culture in schools.

A Member asked if MIND had been contacted as she normally found them very helpful. Mr Seal responded that he was not aware if any contact had been made with MIND by BYC, as their main connection was with Bromley Y, but he would look into this and check. The Member said that when she was Mayor, Bromley Mind was one of the Mayoral charities that she supported and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

Members received an update from SLAM (South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust).

Attending from SLAM were:

1.  Hilary Williams (Service Director)

2.  Dr. Shubalade Smith (Clinical Director)

3.  Ranjeet Kaile (Executive Director of Communications)

The representatives from SLAM expressed their condolences regarding the death of Councillor Mary Cooke. Councillor Cooke was part of a small delegation from the Council that had visited the Bethlem Royal Hospital on 18^th November 2021.

The Service Director said that the main areas that she wished to focus on were:

a)  The continuation of the provision of services during the course of the pandemic.

b)  The development and focus on the Trust’s Mental Health Strategy.

c)  The activities that took place on the Bethlem Royal Site.

d)  The site had now reopened after the pandemic and was being used by local services and the general public.

e)  The Bromley Protocol.

It was noted that most cases of leave passed without event. When this was not the case, the Trust worked closely with the police and the Ministry of Justice and informed local stakeholders via the Bromley Protocol. During the period of March 2021 to February 2022, there were 10 incidences of a person absconding, with one person being responsible for three of these incidences.

Dr Smith informed Members that the Trust had robust risk management procedures:

a)  Physical Risk Management

b)  Procedural Risk Management

c)  Trust Policies and Procedures

d)  Relational Security.

With respect to relational security, this enabled staff to get to know the patients and to get to know what increased or decreased risk. As far as the Trust was concerned they were not adopting a ‘one size fits all’ policy but worked by formulating individual plans for their patients. 

The Director of Communications said that SLAM were keen to work with the Council to challenge the discrimination that was often associated with mental health. It was the case that during periods of isolation or lockdown because of the pandemic, that this isolation could worsen mental health issues. SLAM was keen to work with the Council, schools and other community groups.

It was noted that 10 incidents of low risk absconding had been recorded. The Service Director explained that two of these were of a particular type of notified incident and would therefore be subject to an investigation to see what lessons could be learnt. In these cases, the patients did not return to the hospital setting at the correct time. A response was mobilised, the Bromley Protocol was activated, the police were called and the Ministry of Justice was informed. There was no harm caused to the absconder or to any members of the public. Incidences such as these would have a bearing on further decision-making in respect to the patient’s clinical treatment plan.

Doctor Smith explained that there were different types of leave, there could be leave in the unit, leave in the grounds (both escorted) and if they conformed to these boundaries, then they could be considered for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

An update from the police is provided at every meeting.

It was noted that this item, together with Agenda item 11 (SBP Police Partner Update) would be deferred to the June meeting. 

A Member noted that there was data provided in the document for 2020 and 2022, but no data had been provided for 2021.

Partner = Police

End of Year Performance, and Plans for the year ahead

Specific Scrutiny Question

Considering the performance of the previous rolling 12 months, what are you plans for the year ahead, to tackle any areas where performance is seen to be in decline.

This item was deferred to the June meeting as it had to be presented to the next meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership first.

RESOLVED that the SBP Partner Update from the Police be provided at the June meeting.  

The Portfolio Holder was pleased to note the extra number of prosecutions for Blue Badge offences. She was also pleased to note the ‘untidy site’ prosecution in Beckenham. This was currently being appealed by the resident.  She also commented on the latest edition of Safer Bromley News and described it as a ‘great piece of work’. The Portfolio Holder thanked officers (and in particular Susie Clark) for this. 

The Portfolio Holder had met with Sharon Baldwin (Chairman of the Safer Neighbourhood Board) during the previous month to discuss issues relating to the Safer Neighbourhood Board and police ward plans.

The Portfolio Holder attended the BCU South VAWG Roundtable event. The Portfolio Holder attended the Bromley Town Centre Police launch and informed Members that now Bromley had 18 new Constables  in the Town Centre. 

A Member asked if some information relating to the VAWG event that the Portfolio had attended could be shared with the Committee. The Portfolio Holder agreed to share this.

A Member said that previously discussions had taken place with Safer Neighbourhood Panels regarding how they were organised and the possibility of membership being extended wider to a greater number of members of society. He asked if there had been any updates regarding this. The Portfolio Holder stated that some work regarding this was being undertaken by Sharon Baldwin and Inspector Stuart Baker but this was all the detail she was aware of to date.

A Member highlighted the large number of catalytic converter thefts in the borough. She felt that more needed to be done to raise awareness of this and to warn/inform the public. The Chairman said that this was a matter that needed to be progressed via the Safer Neighbourhood Board. It was noted that the police had initiatives in place to deal with catalytic converter thefts.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder update be noted and that the Portfolio Holder share details of the VAWG event that she had attended.

The Committee noted the Performance Overview report and that the situation with respect to food hygiene inspections was improving. It was anticipated that inspections would be up to date by the end of March.

RESOLVED that the PP&E Performance Overview report be noted. 

FSD22026

The Committee was informed that with the aid of Covid Grant funding, a balanced budget had been achieved. It was noted that all Portfolios had received funding from Covid grants.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder endorse the latest revenue budget monitoring position for the Public Protection and Enforcement Portfolio. 

ES20164

A Member referred to Section 3.6 of the report—Community Safety. She commented on the significantly different decreases in the percentage figures for Arson. There had been a 4.2% decrease in Cray Valley East compared to a 75% decrease in Penge. She asked what the reason was for this and what were the actual figures as opposed to percentages. The Head of Performance Management and Business Support said that she would access this data and send it out to Members. A Member commented that there had been a prolific arsonist previously operating in Penge, and so the figures may have been distorted by his actions. The Chairman agreed that more clarity was required with respect to the data provided. 

The Chairman said that he had received a number of calls on Sunday morning with respect to parking issues in his ward. This was caused by two significant sporting events taking place in two playing fields close together. He said that this had occurred before and that on each occasion when he had attempted to contact the out of hours noise service for assistance, he was informed incorrectly that the OOH noise service was not operational on a Sunday. He requested that the correct information be provided to whoever was dealing with the phone calls, so that they were aware that a response service was operational on a Sunday. The Director responded and said that Council officers did attend the events that the Chairman had mentioned and that PCNs were issued. He also said that steps were being taken to resolve matter so that whoever was taking calls was properly briefed.

RESOLVED that the Portfolio Holder endorsed the outcomes, aims and performance measures set out in the Draft Portfolio Plan. 

The end of year update was provided by Mr David Tait--Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Lead.

He said that lessons had been learnt from the incident of flooding that had occurred in the Crays. This was because he had only become aware of this incident after being informed by a Councillor. He was confident that lines of communication would improve going forward. In the aftermath of the flooding there had been good collaborative working with the relevant Housing Association.

The Committee was informed of the incident at Christmas time in Beckenham which had left 400 homes without power. This matter was resolved with good collaborative working with SGN.

A specialist contractors list had been developed. This was a list of contractors that could be contacted 24/7 in the case of various emergencies such as road traffic accidents and incidents involving chemical spillages. 

The Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Lead mentioned the ‘Safer City Exercises’ and said that they had provided useful learning with respect to how training should be approached. He was hoping that his ‘team’ (just 1.6 FTE) would now be able to leave Covid work behind and so focus on core activities such as further exercises and training. He was hoping to renew and refresh business continuity plans in May.

Mention was made of the presentation that had been provided previously by Fiona Baker from the MET police regarding an extension of the Council’s responsibilities under the Protect Duty. He said that little progress had been made on this front as there had been no updates from central government with respect to legislation. This made it difficult to assess what the precise impact would be on the Council. One thing was clear and this was that it would be a large piece of work which would require training and education. The cost to the Council of this was currently unclear. It was clarified that school academies would not be the responsibility of the Council as far as this duty was concerned. A Member suggested that the potential cost of the new Protect Duty to the Council should be flagged to the Executive. 

A discussion took place regarding a training package for Councillors with respect to civil emergencies. The Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Lead said he was hoping to put something together for Members after the local elections. The training should include advice on dealing with the media. 

A Member asked for Members to be better informed regarding incidents and their resolutions. She cited some examples where incidents had occurred and she had not been informed. The Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Lead was disappointed to hear this, as generally speaking there was good dissemination of these matters via the Communications Team.

It was noted that the LFB would be staging an event around a simulated air crash at Biggin Hill. All Councillors would be invited.

A Member expressed thanks to the Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Lead for the quick response in dealing with fallen trees  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

ES 20160

The Director informed Members that the Dog and Pest Control Contract would be presented to Members at the June meeting.

The Mortuary Contract had been extended.

This being the case, the Director informed Members that there were no significant issues to report either in the Part 1 or Part 2 section of the report.

RESOLVED that the update with respect to the Contracts Register be noted.    

ES 20162

The Director explained that the Head of Community Safety, Environmental and Domestic Regulation was working with colleagues across the Council to produce an Out of Hours Noise Service that was more standardised and formalised.

An update report considering the various possible options for the OOH Noise Service would be presented to Members at some point during the next meeting cycle.

RESOLVED that the Risk Register report be noted and that an update report regarding the OOH Noise Service would be presented to the Committee in due course. 

CSD 22042

It was noted that the police would be attending the June meeting.

The report regarding the Out of Hours Noise service would be presented either in June or September. A Member expressed concern regarding any delay in the presentation of the OOH Noise Service report, as the Summer was the main time that offences were likely to take place. The Director responded that the service was still being provided.

A Member asked if presentations could be arranged from LAS and the Magistrates’ Court and also if visits could be arranged with respect to both of these. The Chairman noted these comments and also suggested a visit to the mortuary.

RESOLVED that the Work Programme be noted and that a report regarding the Out of Hours Noise Service would be presented during the next cycle of meetings—either in June or September.