Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Anne Ball.

Apologies were received from Commander Jeff Boothe, Anne Ball, Chloe Todd, Doctor Nada lemic, Nigel Davies, Janet Bailey, and Justin Brett.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 6^th September 2018 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

CSD18163

The Matters Arising report was written by Steve Wood from Democratic Services, and updated the Group on matters that had arisen from previous meetings.

It had been resolved at the previous meeting on September 6^th 2018 that the SBP look at ways of developing a coordinated plan for working with the Organised Crime Command (OCC). The Head of Trading Standards and Community Safety (Mr Rob Vale) informed the Group that Trading Standards had met with OCC officers to share information and to consider how they could work collaboratively in the future. The OCC had also met with the  London Fire Brigade.

The Chairman said that it was good to have the OCC on board, and that they would be helping out with fly tipping operations in the Star Lane area.

RESOLVED that the Matters Arising report be noted. 

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions to the Safer Bromley Partnership Strategic Group must be received in writing 4 working days before the date of the meeting. Therefore please ensure that questions are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on 23^rd November.

No questions had been received.

A Locality Review report for Bromley had been published in July 2018. This had been produced by the Violence and Vulnerability Unit (VVU) which was supported by the Home Office and MOPAC. The report had been drafted by three VVU consultants: Paul Cullen; Mick McNally and Jenny Oklikah.

The LBB Head of Service for Youth Offending (Betty McDonald) briefed the Group concerning the report.

The aim of the report was to inform about serious youth violence and gangs in Bromley. The VVU consultants were particularly interested in interviewing front line practioners, although they did interview some senior managers also. They interviewed staff from the Youth Offending Service, Community Safety, Housing, Education, Police, Safeguarding, and from Targeted Youth Support. There were not any findings that were particularly new, but rather a reinforcement and confirmation of issues that were already known and suspected.

There was a feeling expressed by the VVU consultants that young people were not being dealt with robustly enough when serious offences had been committed. There was also a sense of frustration that the process of dealing with the issues and administering justice took too long to get through the courts. 

The report concluded with seven recommendations which were commented upon by the Head of YOS:

·  There was a perceived lack of governance and overarching strategy regarding where the main governance responsibilities lay for serious youth violence and gangs. The question that had not been clearly resolved was who owned the serious youth violence agenda in Bromley. Did it sit under Community Safety or Children’s Services?

·  Consideration should be given to running a visioning event  involving partners from across the Borough. The Head of Youth Services felt that this matter was now being addressed. The previous week there was a Safeguarding Board Conference regarding vulnerable adults, and there were speakers there who spoke about serious youth violence and gang activities. Next week there would be a Safeguarding Conference for Schools.

·  A local multi-agency analyst forum should be established. The Head of YOS agreed that the SBP needed to have a better understanding of the relevant data and how it was collected and used.

·  Consideration should be applied to the production of an informed needs assessment that charted the status of the drug market and gang activity in the town and surrounding areas. What was required was not just a needs assessment, but also a plan to determine how the information should be used.

·  More use should be made of current legislation around modern slavery and trafficking--against gangs and offenders that exploited vulnerable people.

·  It was recommended that a regular dialogue be set up with the Youth Courts and the CPS to discuss the sentencing of young people involved in gangs, county lines and knife crime.

·  It was further recommended that multi-agency training in matters relating to county lines and the associated vulnerability issues should be arranged. There should also be a strong multi-agency arrangement to work out how the vulnerabilities could be addressed.

It was clear that gangs and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

The police update was provided by Superintendent Craig Knight. The Group was informed that there had been a rise in offences which was expected at this time of year—however the rise had been sharper than anticipated. In the rolling 12 months, burglary had risen by 4.2%. Two ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) operations were planned which would be a collaborative effort involving Kent and Surrey police.

Non domestic abuse violence had risen by 4% in the last month; however, overall crime levels had reduced. There had been a small increase in the number of ASB calls over the last month, and most of these were related to abandoned vehicles.

The Superintendent was pleased to inform the Group that street robbery had fallen by 15%. Over the rest of London there had been an increase in robberies of 2%. In Bromley there had been a 17% decrease in knife crime which compared to a 7-8% rise in London as whole. So overall the numbers were good. There had been a rise in the number of public order offences reported—an increase of 14%. The Superintendent stated that there had been a rise in the number of public order offences because more crime was being detected and more arrests were being made.

Mr Knight stated that theft was on the increase because the public were not doing the basics like locking doors and windows. The police were considering adopting a name and shame policy for people that were being silly in this regard by not taking even the most basic crime prevention precautions. There was a need for the public to be educated in terms of crime prevention. Public satisfaction was 71%. The number of ‘I’ calls responded to within the target times was 82%, and it was 84% for ‘S’ calls. 

Mr Knight was asked if the police used Crime Prevention Officers and the answer to this was affirmative.

It was asked if there would be any adverse effects regarding performance as a result of the new BCU command structure. Mr Knight responded that there would not be any loss of performance. In fact, with respect to the tri-borough BCU, three separate response sites had been retained. This was designed to avoid dips in performance. Mr Knight informed the Group that there had been a significant loss of senior officers. 

The good news was that more money and resources would be provided for Safeguarding, the number of schools officers was increasing, and there would be more emphasis in looking after vulnerable people.

The Head of Business Continuity and Resilience for LBB (Mr David Tait) asked if the police had sensed any increased community tensions after the murder in Penge that had taken place on November 4^th. It was noted that in addition to the murder, there was an incident where 3 shots were fired from a vehicle. It was the case that specific individuals were causing tensions. Resultantly, extra resources had been deployed in the area and this included the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

The Resilience update was provided by Mr David Tait who had recently been appointed as the LBB Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Manager.

There were some issues around Business Continuity Planning that Mr Tait needed to work with managers around.  What was required was to check the various business continuity plans of all areas with managers to finalise any tweaks that may be required. The Group heard that Zurich (LBB’s insurers) had offered to assist managers with the finalisation of their business continuity plans if they were struggling to complete them on time.

The Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Manager would be contacting managers in due course to speak to them about completing their business continuity plans and to provide assistance as required.

The Emergency Planning and Corporate Resilience Manager had attended a London Resilience meeting where Brexit and the control of the UK’s borders was high on the agenda. Brexit implications for LBB’s suppliers would also need to be investigated. Mr Tait expressed an interest in having a discussion with Sharon Baldwin (outside of the meeting) with respect to any preparations that the BID (Business Improvement District) was involved in to prepare for Brexit. 

With respect to emergency planning, work with other boroughs was being undertaken to help with the development of best practice and benchmarking.

Standardisation training was being rolled out by London Resilience at all levels. This would mean that if a borough needed to bring in staff from other local authorities then new training would not be required. This meant that standardisation training would be provided to around ninety LBB staff. ‘Gold’ and ‘Silver’ training would also need to be provided and with the current Chief Executive leaving, Mr Tait would need to have discussions with the Deputy Chief Executive and the Executive Director for Environmental and Community Services concerning this.

Mr Tait was looking forward to running testing exercises with the help of other blue light partners. The Group was informed that the BRF (Bromley Resilience Forum) had met on 27^th November, this was well attended and a Business Plan had been developed. Mr Tait had chaired the meeting. 

In terms of recent incidents, reference was made to:

·  A fire in Orpington where a family had to be re-housed

·  The incident at Metro Bank where a man threatened to douse himself with petrol and set himself on fire

·  A fire in Holmesdale Road by the gas works

·  The fire at a bus garage

The Chairman thanked Mr Tait for his comprehensive update.

RESOLVED that the Resilience update be noted. 

Post Meeting Note:

Reference was made in the minutes to the Deputy Chief Executive (Mr Ade Adetosoye). Mr Adetosoye has subsequently been appointed as Interim Chief Executive from 17^th December. 

The Knife Crime and Serious Violence Action Plan update was provided by the Head of Trading Standards and Community Safety (Mr Rob Vale).

The Action Plan was a requirement for all local authorities, as it had been a commitment undertaken in the Mayor’s Police and Crime Plan. The template that had been provided for the Action Plan was comprised of 7 items. A small working group had been set up to develop Bromley’s Action Plan. The Action Plan had to be submitted to MOPAC by the end of September and it was. The Action Plan had received a green RAG rating from MOPAC.

It was noted that the Action Plan was a live document, it was evolving and ownership of the document lay with the Safer Bromley Partnership. It was also noted that the Action Plan Working Group would be meeting again in February. The Action Plan would be shared with the Children’s Safeguarding Board and the Vulnerable Adolescents Group. Consideration was also being applied to sharing the document with the relevant PDS Committee and the Health and Wellbeing Board.

The Head of Trading Standards and Community Safety stated that a redacted version of the document would be published in due course. When ready, the document would be sent to the Committee Clerk for dissemination. It was confirmed that governance of the Action Plan would sit with the Safer Bromley Partnership.

It was agreed that the public should be kept informed so that they could be assured that LBB and other partners were taking measures to reduce knife crime and serious violence in the borough.

The CRC Manager (Lucien Spencer) suggested that certain aspects of the document should be re-worded. He felt that there should be more of an emphasis on rehabilitation and ‘safer streets’. He expressed the view that some of the wording needed to be more ‘sophisticated,’ so that a distinction could be made between knife crime and other offences relating to serious violence. Mr Spencer asked to be invited to the February meeting of the Working Group.

It was agreed that publication of a redacted Action Plan be delayed pending further consultation and development of the wording of the document. 

RESOLVED that:

1- In due course, a redacted version of the Knife Crime and Serious Violence Action Plan would be provided to the Committee Clerk for dissemination.

2- The Action Plan would be shared with other groups and committees as deemed appropriate.

3- Governance of the Action Plan sat with the Safer Bromley Partnership

4- Mr Lucien Spencer should be invited to the next meeting of the Action Plan Working Group.  

The Group heard that the development of the Strategy was ongoing. There had been a slight pause over the last couple of weeks due to issues with dealing with MOPAC funding and with time that needed to be allocated to the development of the Serious Violence Action Plan. Group Leads had provided feedback into the Serious Crime Assessment, and this feedback would be used in the development of the Safer Bromley Strategy.

In the New Year a working group would be set up to identify new priorities for the Strategy. The next meeting of the Safer Bromley Partnership was scheduled for 14^th March 2019, and it was anticipated that the new Strategy would be finalised by then. 

The Group was reminded that LBB was a low priority borough as far as Prevent referrals were concerned—indeed the Channel group had not met since June 2018. At the moment, the Counter Terrorism Local Profile for the South East was being developed. It was anticipated that the Counter Terrorism Local Profile for Bromley would be signed off in November 2019. Then a report would be drafted for the attention of the Chief Executive and the Corporate Leadership Team.

Nationally, the Home Office was rolling out a new scheme called the ‘Dovetail Model’. The new model would place most of the responsibility for dealing with Prevent referrals with the local authority, rather than with the police. This would come with some funding so that a Prevent Co-ordinator post could be created. In the meantime, training workshops were ongoing, and new online training was being developed.

The Safer Neighbourhood Board update was provided by the Board’s Chairman—Sharon Baldwin.

The Group heard that the Crime Summit had met on 29^th September and was well attended with 144 attendees. Commander Jeff Boothe attended and gave an update on the BCU which was well received. The last public event for this year had been held in Mottingham on 22^nd November—this was not so well attended with just 30 attendees. There was some feedback around this to the effect that the public in the area did not wish to be seen to be meeting with the police.

A request had been made to hold a public meeting in Penge but this had not been possible currently for various reasons. Croydon and Sutton SNBs had been contacted recently to share good practice, and to help with benchmarking and developing consistency. The SNB had received confirmation of MOPAC funding and had consequently been able to fund 7 projects that were all youth related. The success of the projects would need to be assessed.

Ms Baldwin referenced the ‘Broken Window’ syndrome and emphasised the need for a good street environment, this was particularly the case in the High Street where some business premises were now vacant. It was important that these vacant areas were not abused and used by people purporting to be homeless for the purpose of begging. There had been reports of individuals coming in to the borough overnight, and then pretending to be homeless and subsequently begging. Because of these issues, the SNB were encouraging people to divert giving to the homeless charity Shelter, rather than giving to people that were begging on the street.

RESOLVED that the SNB update be noted. 

The LAS update was provided by Philip Powell (LAS Stakeholder Engagement Manager).

Previously, performance was measured in the LAS differently. Response times were measured by using categories A, B and C, where A was the category where the response time was the most urgent. Fast response cars would be sent to category A calls, and then the ‘clock was stopped’ in terms of hitting the fast response time target. However, in most of these cases the ambulance would arrive 10-15 minutes later, and in the majority of these incidences the patient would still need conveying to hospital. The use of the fast response car was not necessarily the best option in terms of patient care.

Currently, instead of ‘ABC’ response categories, the response categories were 1,2,3. Category 1 calls were the most urgent and life threatening calls, but these calls only made up approximately 8%--9% of the total call volume. Category 1 calls had a response time target of 7 minutes. Most of the LAS work was responding to category 2 and 3 calls, with a required response time of 18 minutes. The ‘clock’ was only stopped now when the ambulance arrived at the patient’s location.

LAS was currently hitting the target for responding to category 1 calls, with an average response time of 6 minutes and 25 seconds. The average response time for category 2 calls was in the region of 15 minutes. So overall the LAS in Bromley was performing well.

Mr Powell mentioned the LAS preparations for the winter, which it was acknowledged seemed to be arriving later this year with the mild temperatures. However, the LAS had been busy for the whole of the summer period and subsequently. This was because of the ‘Beast from the East’ and the summer heatwave which were two extremes of weather that had arrived close together. The LAS had been preparing for winter since April.

The LAS was now trying to encourage people to look after themselves properly, so that they were prevented from becoming patients in the first place. A new process was in place for care homes and nursing homes. They were being encouraged to dial 111*6 and they would be able to speak to a clinician. It was hoped that in this way, some transfers to hospital could be avoided. 

Ms Baldwin asked what the situation was with respect to hospital beds. Mr Powell responded that he felt that the PRUH was likely to struggle during the winter, but he was not able to provide a more definitive response as it was also the case that the PRUH would have contingency and escalation plans that could be adopted if required.

Mr Bill Kelly(LAS Bromley Group Manager) informed the Group that a trial of a Vulnerable Persons Vehicle would commence on Monday, December 3^rd.  Ms Baldwin stated that with respect to ‘homeless’ people on the streets (whether they were genuinely homeless or not) clarity and information was required so that people knew where to signpost these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

The MOPAC update was provided by Samantha Evans. Ms Evans thanked Anne Ball for her recent work around signing off the quarter 2 returns. Ms Ball had also been working hard in submitting projects online for the year ahead. Various pots of funding were being looked at including funding from the co-commissioning fund. A Violence Reduction Unit was planned and when more details regarding this (and any possible associated funding) were available, Ms Evans would inform the SBP.

Funding for VAWG was also being investigated and MOPAC would be sending out a newsletter shortly. 

RESOLVED that information regarding the Violence Reduction Unit be forwarded to the SBP in due course.

The Domestic Abuse Sub-Group update was provided by Rachel Dunley (Head of Service for Early Intervention and Family Support).

The Group heard that VAWG (Violence Against Women and Girls) funding was provided by MOPAC and that the service was provided by Bromley and Croydon Women’s Aid (BCWA). VAWG had recently been transferred to Children’s Services. Ms Dunley had recently attended a meeting with BCWA and looked at their update reports. They were on target in most areas except for one.

The Group was informed that a bid had been submitted for the final two years of the four year funding stream. The result of the submission would be known in January. LBB was totally reliant on MOPAC funding for the provision of VAWG services. The current contract with BCWA was due to expire on March 31^st 2019. There was an option to extend the contract for one year which would be exercised.

The Group was advised that MOPAC funding could not be guaranteed beyond 2020-2021.

There was now an urgent need to recruit a VAWG Co-ordinator as soon as possible, and the recruitment process was about to commence.

Paul Sibun (Bromley CCG) expressed concern that since the sudden departure of the previous VAWG Commissioner, there were certain groups/areas where momentum was being lost, and matters were falling into the wayside.

Joanna Davidson (Senior Service Delivery Manager for Victim Support) stated that it had been fed back to her that MARAC (Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference) was not working well in Bromley, and that the previous meeting of MARAC was cancelled at very short notice. Victim Support had said that they were not aware of who the current Chair of MARAC was, and also were not aware of the dates of any meetings. There was also a concern expressed as to what was happening with referrals. The minutes of the previous MARAC meeting had not been circulated, and there was a general concern regarding the governance of MARAC in Bromley.

Ms Dunley stated that she was meeting with the police shortly to discuss MARAC, as the police led and chaired this group.

Mr Spencer explained that the CRC was looking to appoint a female worker on a voluntary basis to support offenders, and offered to work closely with Ms Dunley where possible.

The issue was raised concerning provision for disabled women in refuges. There was a concern that such provision was not available. Ms Dunley promised to look into this and report back to the Group. 

RESOLVED that

1- The VAWG update be noted, particularly the current concerns relating to the operation and governance of MARAC.

2- Rachel Dunley liaise with BCWA to assess provision for women who were disabled.

A brief update was provided by Mr Rob Vale. The IOM (Integrated Offender Management) cohort had remained largely unchanged, and IOM was currently in a process of transition. LBB received a small amount of funding from MOPAC to run IOM services.

The police were seeking to uplift some police officers across the three boroughs to assist with IOM.

A new Senior Probation Officer from CRC had also been appointed, and Mr Vale was meeting with this person in about two weeks to discuss the IOM service.

It was noted that Mr Dan Jones (former LBB Director of Environment) was previously the Chair of the IOM Strategic Board, but he had now left the Council.

Betty McDonald provided the YOS update and focused on two areas:

The first matter was the closure of Camberwell Court. It was due to close soon, and as a result extra cases would be heard at Bromley Court. Work was now in progress at Bromley Court to accommodate the changes. Concern had been expressed about tensions/issues that could potentially arise as gang members were coming into Bromley from other boroughs.

The Chairman mentioned that different local authorities would be assigned specific days for hearings. Ms McDonald responded that this would not help where there were overnight issues. It was also pointed out that people would know which days were allocated to different boroughs--which could potentially enhance the possibility of conflict. The BID in Bromley had expressed concerns.

The other matter discussed was the number of children and young people in custody. In England and Wales, the current number was 861. In Bromley, the number of young people in custody was 6. Three of those had been sentenced, and three were on remand. In these cases the offences were serious and so only a custodial sentence was appropriate.

The young people in custody and on remand in Bromley would be supported by the YOS until they were 18, and then they would transition over to the Probation Service. 

Beverly Brown was not available to provide the gangs update.

The Chairman asked if Ms Brown could provide a post meeting update for the Group.  

The ASB and Envirocrime update was provided by Peter Sibley—ASB Co-ordinator.

Forty nine high profile ASB offenders were visited by the multi-agency team; 43 fire safety installations had been carried out for vulnerable people. 

New work had been undertaken with British Transport Police and with Network Rail. The operations with Network Rail linked in with ‘county lines’ investigations as far as Kent. The operations had been focused around Penge and St Mary Cray stations. In the last three months, 58 people had been dealt with for offences just at those two stations.

Work was also being undertaken with British Transport Police and Network Rail with respect to human slavery. Mr Sibley expressed thanks to Mark Wells for his help and support. Seven weapon sweeps had been undertaken and knife arches had been employed in train stations during operations.

A large garage that had been used for crime related activities had been demolished and re-developed into flats. There had been a 40% reduction in the MOPAC wards for arson in the previous 6 months. December was one of the main months for arson offences. Cray Valley East was one of the main areas for arson; many fires were caused by dumped rubbish that had not been cleared. A plan was needed to reduce arson in the Cray Valley area; operations were planned with the Organised Crime Command (OCC). The OCC were interested in getting involved due to possible links with organised crime. 

The number of ASB offences had decreased in the MOPAC wards by 17%; this was the result of intelligence led operations and the targeting of high profile offenders. 

Ms Baldwin asked if train stations were going to be manned to reduce crime. 

It was suggested that efforts be made to persuade Railtrack to man problem stations so that crime related activities at the train stations would reduce.

Feedback from the community was good, and the public were getting more involved in Community Impact Days.

The Chairman and Mr Vale thanked Mr Sibley for his hard work and dedication.

Post Meeting Note:

The Borough Fire Commander had to leave the meeting before it was ended as he was required to attend another event—he later asked if the following could be added as a post meeting action point for consideration by the Group:

The Community Impact days are delivering real results with regard to both arson and ASB across the 4 wards targeted.

It is encouraging to see some real committed action in the Star Lane area around CCTV and initiatives to reduce the fly tipping. Unfortunately , the six cctv cameras that were installed have been stolen.

The ASB team would like the SBP to endorse a proposal to look at limiting the traffic flow in Star Lane by either a one way system or a permanent road closure in the area where the majority of the fly tipping is taking place.

RESOLVED that:

1) The ASB and Envirocrime Sub-Group update be noted

2) The SBP consider endorsing a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54d

The Group heard that the latest edition of the Safer Bromley News had been printed and was in the process of being distributed throughout the borough. The Chairman praised LBB’s Twitter messages relating to community safety and also the safety messages that were posted on Twitter by LFB.  

The next meeting will take place at Bromley Civic Centre on Thursday, 14^th March 2019 at 10.00am.

The date of the next meeting was confirmed as Thursday, 14^th March at 10.00am.