Agenda item

ES20137

Members were updated concerning the report that looked at draft protocols for how the PP&E PDS Committee should undertake scrutiny of the Safer Bromley Partnership Board. A Task and Finish Group had been set up to look at this and this was chaired by the Vice Chairman of the PP&E PDS Committee (Cllr Colin Hitchins). The Task and Finish Group also consisted of Cllr Kathy Bance, Cllr Mike Botting, Sharon Baldwin and the Assistant Director for Public Protection and Safety.   

The aim of the Group was to re-define the terms of reference for scrutiny of the Safer Bromley Partnership Board by the PP&E PDS Committee. The Group also looked at the type of data that should be provided by the police. After a review of the work programme of the PDS Committee it had been noted that the Committee had only been scrutinising the police (within the SBP) and not the other partners. It was proposed that going forward the work programme of the PP&E PDS Committee would be revised to allow for specific scrutiny of different partners throughout the year. Partners would be provided with at least 4 week’s notice of any proposed intention to scrutinise them.

Members noted that it was further proposed that the police data package be changed and modified and that the police would no longer be required to attend every PP&E PDS meeting, but would attend the first and last meeting of the year. It was proposed that the SBP minutes would be included in all future PP&E PDS agendas. Henceforth, this would form the basis for future police scrutiny by the PP&E PDS Committee.

The Chairman of the SNB gave an update to Members concerning the Safer Neighbourhood Board . There was a SNB in every London borough. Its purpose was to bring the police and the public together so that problems could be solved collaboratively. It was important that the public be involved in any decisions being made that impacted on local community safety. The SNB Chairman informed Members that she had just received an email from MOPAC concerning a new tender process for a revised ‘transparent and accessible community engagement programme’. This was about reviewing MOPAC and MPS engagement mechanisms.

The SNB Chairman stated that over the last two years, there had been a directive from MOPAC that allocated funding should be used for smaller scale projects and that SNBs should support the BCU command in the delivery of ward panel improvement plans. MOPAC’s aim was that there would be a ward panel in every ward across London by the end of March 2022.  The setting up of Ward Panels was a statutory obligation and they allowed scrutiny of policing at a local level. Councillors were welcome to sit on Safer Neighbourhood Panels but would not have voting rights. The SNB Chairman said that she was in receipt of a document that explained how Ward Panels would now be structured and that she would pass this on.

It was explained that SNBs were set up, maintained and scrutinised by MOPAC; the Council was not therefore responsible for the scrutiny of SNBs. 

The Assistant Director explained the process of  a CCFA (Councillor’s Call for Action). This was the means whereby a Councillor could call for certain matters relating to crime and disorder to be looked at by the CDC (Crime and Disorder Committee)—in this case the PP&E PDS Committee. There were certain conditions that were required to be met before this could be done. Councillors should have tried to resolve the matter at other boards or forums in the first instance and should only raise matters with the PP&E PDS Committee as a last resort. This mechanism would not be available during any periods of Purdah. Additionally, CCFAs could not be raised for matters relating to licensing or vexatious complaints. Furthermore, CCFAs could not be raised if the matter was already on the work programme of another scrutiny committee. Councillors would need to evidence what they had done to resolve the matter before raising it as CCFA with a scrutiny committee and that the matter was of genuine local concern.

The Assistant Director offered to provide a flowchart to explain how the CCFA process worked. The Vice Chairman said that CCFA training should be provided and that perhaps this responsibility would rest with Ms Stowell’s successor. Ms Baldwin offered to provide support in this matter if it was required. 

A Member suggested that instead of this training being offered just to PP&E PDS members, it should be offered across the board to all Councillors—perhaps as part of Councillor Induction Training. The Chairman agreed with this.   

A Member pointed out that there was a significant disparity in  attendance levels at Ward Panels and he asked what could be done to improve this. The SNB Chairman responded and explained that the SNB was currently working on a structured document that would outline how many people should be on a ward panel, and who they should be. It was clear that representation was required from a variety of sectors.  What was required was engagement with potential ward panel members so that the value of joining a Ward Panel could be explained.

The Chairman thanked the Vice Chairman and the members of the Task and Finish Group for their hard work.

.

RESOLVED that:

1)  The work programme of the PP&E PDS Committee would be revised so that a variety of SBP partners could be scrutinised and not just the police.

2)  The nature of the police data package be changed and that the police would now just attend the first and last meetings of the Committee.

3)  The minutes of the meetings of the Safer Bromley Partnership Board would be included on all PP&E PDS agendas going forward.

4)  The SNB Chairman would disseminate the new document that she had received which outlined how Ward Panels would be structured going forward.

5)  The Assistant Director would draft a flow chart that would explain how the CCFA process worked.

6)  CCFA training should be supplied to all Councillors.