Agenda item

This paper sets out elements of development and delivery by the BCP Community Safety Partnership (CSP), ‘Safer BCP’ and its constituent agencies. It provides Members with an update since the last report to Overview and Scrutiny Panel in December 2022.

The Local Government Act 2000 includes crime and disorder scrutiny as one of the functions the council must ensure its scrutiny arrangements cover. Sections 19 and 20 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and related regulations require the Council to have a committee with the functions of reviewing and scrutinising decisions and actions in respect of the discharge of crime and disorder functions by “responsible authorities”. 

The specifics of the duty are set out in the Police and Justice Act 2006, which also allows members to refer any “local crime and disorder matter” raised with them by anyone living or working in their area, to the Crime and Disorder Committee. The Board designated as the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committee must meet at least once every 12 month period to conduct the functions.

Guidance issued concerning how this role should be conducted include that:

•          the role should be one of a critical friend, providing constructive challenge at a strategic level.

•          the focus should be on the entire partnership and if issues arise that relate specifically to a particular partner agency, it may be more appropriate to refer such issues to the governing bodies of that organisation.

•          the scrutiny of partners should be “in so far as their activities relate to the partnership itself.”

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Chair of the Community Safety Partnership presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these Minutes in the Minute Book. The Board was informed that the paper provided Members with an update since the last report to Overview and Scrutiny Panel in December 2022. The Local Government Act 2000 includes crime and disorder scrutiny as one of the functions the council must ensure its scrutiny arrangements cover. Sections 19 and 20 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and related regulations require the Council to have a committee with the functions of reviewing and scrutinising decisions and actions in respect of the discharge of crime and disorder functions by “responsible authorities”. The specifics of the duty are set out in the Police and Justice Act 2006, which also allows members to refer any “local crime and disorder matter” raised with them by anyone living or working in their area, to the Crime and Disorder Committee.  The Board welcomed the report and raised a number of issues during the discussion of this item including:

·     Reductions in CCTV monitoring. It was hoped to minimise reductions in CCTV monitoring but at present there would be a reduction in monitoring times in order to achieve budget savings.

·     CSAS officers – CSAS Officers would be prioritised in the town centre area. The DfT funding would allow CSAS officers to also be positioned in key transport locations. In response to a question regarding the impact of potential cuts in CSAS officers from a police perspective, the Board was informed that the Police were aware that there was a risk that anti-social behaviour may rise in these areas. It was suggested that other bodies should be approached for additional CSAS funding before any reductions were made.

·     Violence against women and girls – violent and sexual offences were shown within the same category it was asked if it was possible to separate these to provide better information. It was acknowledged that this could probably be done to make things more clear. There may be an App available to allow people to indicate when they feel unsafe. There was further work needed on this to ensure that the data from this would be available.

·     Sharing of the outcomes from the various different groups. There was a risk that there could be duplication between different bodies and there was currently a mapping exercise underway to look at how and where issues were being covered. From this there would be a reporting mechanism which would then feed up through the CSP.

·     Communications – This was being assessed and it was acknowledged that this could be improved as there was some excellent work going on which may not always be communicated well.

·     It was acknowledged that reporting of crime was an issue, both because some felt that there was no point in reporting as action wouldn’t be taken but also some felt it was too difficult to report. It was noted that data on this was now being compiled and analysed.

·     The Serious Violence Needs Assessment was excellent and included a lot of detail, but it had required someone to manually go through all of these issues and there should be an improved way of doing this.

·     Being part of a community – The Board was advised that the BCP residents survey taking place next year would ask about this issue. There may be particular groups of people who may not feel safe linked to community belonging. The Communities Manager undertook to provide a link to this information which was online.

·     Links to crime and deprivation. It was noted that inequality in itself was a risk factor for crime and whether it would it be possible to start recording this. The Serious Violence Strategy included the clear links around this issue, once this was signed off there would be great level of information which would be shared and feedback would be welcomed.

·     The importance of early intervention was highlighted and Officers undertook to raise this with the youth service.

RECOMMENDED/RESOLVED that

i)      Members note the progress of the Community Safety Partnership over the past year, to November 2023

ii)    Members note the BCP Community Safety Partnership’s priorities under the Serious Violence Duty.

Voting: Nem Con

The meeting adjourned at 5:54 pm and resumed at 6.00pm