Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence when received from the BCU Commander Andy Brittan, David Dare, Chan Farooqui Dina Shamonivoc, Richard Baldwin, Cllr Angela Page, Dawn Helps, Finola O Driscoll,  Betty McDonald and Rob Vale.

There were no declarations of interest.

The Minutes of the Safer Bromley Partnership Board that sat on the 27th of October 2022 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

Partners noted the matters arising from the previous meeting and noted that the actions had been implemented. It was noted that the Violence and Vulnerability Action Plan needed further work before completion and dissemination.

RESOLVED that the Matters Arising report be noted.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, questions that are not specific to reports on the agenda must have been received in writing 10 working days before the date of the meeting. 

Questions specifically concerning reports on the agenda should be received within two working days of the publication date of the agenda.  Please ensure that questions specifically regarding agenda items are received by the Democratic Services Team by 5pm on Friday, 6^th January 2023.

A question was received from Councillor Simon Jeal.

He asked that with reference to the update on Priority 2 of the Safer Bromley Strategy (Violence Against Women and Girls), could the Chairman confirm whether sex workers were included within the scope of 'High Risk Victims' under the Strategy and if so, what specific actions were being undertaken by the Council, commissioned providers and partners, to address barriers preventing those who were victims of violence being able to access VAWG support services provided under the Strategy.

The Chairman responded and stated that sex workers were indeed included in the Priority 2 element of the Strategy. The multi-agency approach was designed to deal with a wide range of crime and disorder across the borough, including the area that had been identified in the question.  It was noted that the Council had a Domestic Abuse Strategic Lead, based in the Community Safety Team of the Public Protection Division. This post worked across a broad range of partners, agencies and organisations to support existing services and to develop new ones where required. A key element of the post’s work was to ensure that there were not barriers that prevented victims of violence & abuse to access appropriate services and where required, to work with partners in the borough to develop new ones.

The following organisations and services providing assistance and support to victims and survivors in the borough were noted.

·  There was a local Bromley Procedure for modern slavery & human trafficking: procedure_26_modern_slavery_and_human_trafficking_policy_and_guidance.pdf (bromleysafeguardingadults.org)

·  The Bromley Safeguarding Adults Board (BSAB) was a member of the London Modern Slavery Leads (LMSL) group, facilitated by the Human Trafficking Foundation.

• WGN  (Women and Girls Network) - LBB part funded their hotline; they offered various services, including an advice line, a dedicated sexual violence helpline and counselling sessions.

• Nia – an organisation in receipt of national funding and who provided a service in Bromley to deliver 1-1 outreach and professional training and support services for vulnerable women affected by sexual and domestic violence  Specialist Refuge Strand Leaflet-2017-2023.pdf

• Bromley & Croydon Women’s Aid (BCWA) – the Council’s commissioned service, providing support to victims & survivors in  all the areas of domestic abuse

• WIP (Women in Prison) - national funding for work to be done in Bromley on sexual violence/abuse

• Victim Support - Supporting victims of sexual violence, slavery and trafficking. 

• Early Intervention & Family Service (EIFS) - providing support to EU nationals and those with no recourse to public funding (NRPF)

• LBB website was multi-language

• Brighter Beginnings, a local charity, providing financial and practical support to vulnerable victims

Councillor Jeal and the Chairman of the Safer Neighbourhood Board said that recent comments from Cllr Sean Slater were damaging to the Strategy. The Chairman of the SNB said that she was surprised that a statement had not been released by the Council. She said that a counter education campaign was needed in schools to counter misogynistic messages from people like Andrew Tate. 

RESOLVED that the question and the response to the question be noted.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

Councillor David Cartwright commented that he could not read the size of the print and that the document should be provided on A3 in the future. He said that the document should be ‘RAG RATED’ with appropriate lettering used to aid anyone who was colour blind. It was noted that the MOPAC website was no longer producing the data which now  had to be sourced from the MET website. The data was the same, but the presentation of the data was different. There was no published pack containing the data for ease of access.

It was noted that the only area of crime that had decreased was burglary, most other areas had increased. This included sexual offences and domestic violence offences which were up nationally as were vehicle crimes. This may be the result of more confidence with respect to reporting.

The Board was informed that the Police Commissioner was intending to introduce new policing priorities as part of a revised policing framework; there would be a movement towards dealing with acquisitive crime as well as violent crime and more proactive policing and targeting of offenders. It was  acknowledged that too many abstractions had taken place previously which meant the Neighbourhood Officers were not able to carry out their day-to-day activities as well as they would have liked. Plans were in place to address this. Recruitment would be undertaken for more Neighbourhood Officers to replace any that had moved to Response Teams. The focus of the police would be on local and national priorities as well as Ward Panels.

It was noted that the police had forwarded a public attitude survey the day prior to the meeting and that this document would be disseminated with the minutes. The Chairman said that she was looking to draft a standard template going forward so that the police data could be provided in a uniform format. It was felt that when data was provided it should meet the following criteria:

·  Cover specific topics/areas

·  The data provided should serve a useful purpose.

·  The data should be useable

The Chairman of the Public Protection and Enforcement Committee reminded the police that the Council had a statutory duty to scrutinise the police and MOPAC. He expressed concern that there was not a readily available pack of data that could be used as a basis for scrutiny and asked that the police provide some useful data that could be used by the PP&E PDS Committee going forward. He pointed out that this was a matter that had been ongoing for 5 years. The Chairman of the Public Protection and Enforcement Committee referenced the public attitude survey document—he said that this was an important issue and that he hoped that the PP&E PDS Committee would look at this document at its next meeting. He commented that it was just not good enough for MOPAC to say that the data was there so go and find it. He expressed the view that MOPAC (in conjunction with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

Partners noted that the number of specialist purpose meetings continued to change and increase. All partners increasingly appreciated the advantages of access to the knowledge of their inter-agency colleagues and the value of multi-agency working for the sharing of relevant intelligence and the development and implementation of best practice. Partners noted the list of multi-agency meetings and networks that were highlighted in the report.

The update was provided by the LBB Interim Community Safety Manager and he drew the Board’s attention to the Community Impact Days which were accepted as  making a positive difference in communities. Partners were looking to capture  points of learning from these days.

A brief update was provided on the work of the CCTV camera operatives and the number of incidents that they had been involved with. An update was provided on the number of Trading Standards service requests and the significant amount of doorstep scams that the Team had dealt with.

A review was being undertaken of the Domestic Abuse Strategy with colleagues and partner agencies. Reference was made to Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs) and the unfortunate lessons to be learnt from them. The DHR reviews would be disseminated in due course. It was noted that a Domestic Abuse Worker was now embedded in the Community Services Safety Team and that the domestic abuse contract and plan going forward were  being reviewed.

The NHS Adult Safeguarding Manager stated that the lack of a full time Bromley MARAC coordinator was causing concern. The Police had notified the Bromley MARAC membership that they no longer had the resources to fulfil the MARAC coordination role going forward and had temporarily combined the functions of Chairman and Coordinator. Whilst the police officers involved had been doing a sterling job, this was not a sustainable situation and had resulted in numerous escalations of concerns from partners, including from members of the Domestic Abuse Health Forum regarding Bromley MARAC. There was concern that a lack of a full-time Coordinator had, and still was, having a serious detrimental effect on the running of Bromley MARAC.

The NHS Adult Safeguarding Manager said that MARAC dealt with only the highest risk Domestic Abuse concerns and  understood that the matter was  the subject of an LBB Risk Register entry. Whilst MARAC members and the Safer Bromley Partnership had been given assurance in the preceding years that the coordination of MARAC  was to  be the subject of a business case--this had not been progressed. In response, the Chairman said that she was happy to meet with  relevant colleagues and to attend MARAC meetings. She was aware that a resolution was required. Work was being undertaken to resolve the situation and funding was being sought for additional resource.

The Board discussed the problems of ‘cuckooing’. Cllr Jeal highlighted a cuckooing situation where a breakdown in communications between a housing association and the police had caused issues. The AD for Housing said that the LBB Housing Department was now more aware and better equipped to deal with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

A verbal update regarding the development of the new Strategy wiill be provided by the Head of Community Safety.

The recommendation was that the Safer Bromley Partnership (SBP) agreed to the proposal for the creation of six task and finish groups to focus on existing priorities as outlined below:

·  Steering Group: · General oversight and management of all the T & F groups. Provide updates on progress to future SBP meetings. · Draft 2024-27 Plan

·  Data Group: Gathering, sifting and sharing local data from relevant agencies (Police, Fire, Health, Council, Probation, etc) to provide trend data and evidence for possible priorities and actions by the CSP. Identify any emerging issues or concerns.

·  Safer Neighbourhoods Group: Review work of the group to date: successes & challenges, consider issues ahead, draft smart proposals & actions

·  Domestic Abuse / VAWG Group: Review work of the group to date: successes & challenges, consider issues ahead, draft smart proposals & actions

·  Keeping Young People Safe Group: Review work of the group to date: successes & challenges, consider issues ahead, draft smart proposals & actions

·  Hate Crime and Extremism Group: Review work of the group to date successes & challenges, consider issues ahead, draft smart proposals & actions

The list of groups was not final and would be subject to review.

The LBB Interim Community Safety Manager outlined the way forward as follows:

 A Steering Group would have oversight, decision making and reporting requirements.

Task and Finish Groups would:

·  Review their element of the current 2020-2023 Plan

·  Identify success, journey travelled, and whether there are any new issues, emerging concerns, new legislation, or guidance.

·  Begin creating a three-year plan for 2024-27, based on and using appropriate evidence/data

·  All Groups to submit their plans using common pro-forma (for consistency)

·  Draft Strategy produced & ‘stress tested’

·  Shared for comment & critical appraisal

The Final Plan would be agreed and submitted to the SBP meeting in December 2023 for adoption/approval. The Plan would need to be in place by April 2024

The NHS Adult Safeguarding Manager reminded partners that there would be new duties and responsibilities required soon because of the Police and Courts Act, and this Act would need to be taken into consideration when developing the new SBP Strategy.

RESOLVED that the final version of the revised Safer Bromley Strategy  would be agreed and submitted to the SBP meeting in December 2023 for adoption and approval.

Mr Lucien Spencer (Head of Service for the Probation Delivery Units in Bromley and Lewisham) attended to provide the update. He gave a PowerPoint presentation and this is amended to the minutes. In response to a question he said that the IOM (Integrated Offender Management) Framework had changed and that mechanisms were in place to manage offenders effectively. The emphasis of the PDU was to effectively manage high risk and complex individuals. It was commented that it was important to keep victim services updated.  Mr Spencer was asked if he could present at the Domestic Abuse Operational Forum. Mr Spencer responded that he would be happy to do so if required. It was noted that another review would not be expected  for another three years. 

RESOLVED that the Probation Services Update be noted.

The Head of Trading Standards and Commercial Regulation provided the following written update in his absence:

Prevent

It was almost 4 years since the Government commissioned a review of the Prevent Strategy. It was hoped that the report would be published by April this year.

•  Islamist Extremism continued to be the predominant threat and risk in London.

•  The threat and risk from Extreme Right Wing Terrorism (ERWT)  had not significantly increased in the last 12 months.

•  Mixed, Unclear, Unstable (MUU) Prevent referrals were increasing, however very few presented a genuine threat or risk, or were escalated to Channel.

•  Self-radicalisation online was a continuing threat

Channel

Within Bromley, the Channel Panel met monthly to consider any referrals of individuals deemed at risk of radicalisation, and LBB would be introducing a new Chairman for the Panel in the next few months – Vicky West, LBB Assistant Director of Children’s Services.

Domestic Homicide Reviews

No change to the update at the previous meeting. Three DHRs were active, two related to suicides. One DHR remained with the Home Office – LBB had been assured that the report would be signed off by March 2023.

RESOLVED that the DHR and Prevent update be noted.

This item provides a roundtable update from all partners on developments in relation to performance and emerging issues.

No emerging issues were reported at the meeting.

The Chairman of the Public Protection and Enforcement Committee said that the deaths of road users were now in the region of 3800 per year. In his view that would constitute a ‘high harm a crime’. He expressed the view that a letter should be written to MOPAC saying that police officers were required to patrol the streets and roads to deal with speeding.

The Safer Bromley Partnership will meet next in the Council Chamber at Bromley Civic Centre on the 7th of March 2023.

The date of the next meeting was confirmed as the 7th of March 2023 at 10:30am in the Council Chamber.