MPA update on the Community Engagement Commitment Action Plans

Report: 6
Date: 3 November 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

The report responds to a number of queries raised by members about how the MPA and MPS Community Engagement Commitment action plans relate to each.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members note the report.

B. Supporting information

1. At the June 2011 Community Engagement and Citizen Focus (CECF) Sub-Committee meeting, members asked MPA officers to provide further information on the MPA and MPS Community Engagement Commitment action plans. MPA officers were asked to focus on the following issues:

• Duplication and how MPA aspirations could be delivered by working with the MPS;
• CPEG and Safer Neighbourhoods panel fit; and
• Victims.

2. Members are reminded that the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPC) transition plans are still in development. Whilst the principles outlined within the joint MPA and MPS community engagement commitment will still remain relevant to the community engagement approaches adopted by the MOPC, at this stage it is unclear how many of the activities listed in the MPA action plan will still be pertinent and therefore the action plan activities will need to be revised. This work will be done early in the New Year.

3. This report does not provide a line by line comparison of the MPA and MPS action plans. Rather it responds to each of the issues raised by members at the June 2011 CECF meeting.

4. Finally, the examples below will need to be discussed with the relevant MPA leads in order to determine feasibility. As the MPA is now in its transition period, it would be more practical to explore this once the transition process has been completed and it is clearer how and what the MOPC will be delivering in regards to community engagement. MPA and MPS action plans will then be revised accordingly.

Duplication and how MPA action plan aspirations could be delivered by working with the MPS

5. In the MPA update paper provided to CECF on the 13 June 2011, MPA officers listed a number of MPA and MPS community engagement activities where there was alignment between the approaches of the two organisations. These examples have not been duplicated in this report. The bullet points below indicate where the MPA/MOPC could work with the MPS to deliver shared aspirations:

• Both the MPA and MPS are committed to ensuring that their community volunteers (for example the Community Police Engagement Group (CPEG) members and Safer Neighbourhoods panel members) have the relevant skills to be able to undertake their roles and responsibilities effectively. It would be useful and cost effective for the MPA and the MPS to look at their individual existing training opportunities and consider which training sessions could be opened up to all community volunteers regardless of whether they are MPA or MPS volunteers.
• It was highlighted in the June 2011 CECF update, that the MPA and MPS are looking at how to develop social networking opportunities in order to promote and build on existing community engagement work. The MPS action plan highlights the pilot projects that are currently underway. This work should be utilised by the MPA in order to determine ‘what works’ in regards to social networking and community police engagement and should inform the development of any future MOPC digital media strategies and approaches.
• It is highlighted in the June 2011 CECF update, that the MPA and MPS will pull together good practice information on community engagement. This work should be undertaken together by the two organisations. The MPS undertakes considerably more community engagement work than the MPA and therefore it would be practical for the MPA to contribute to a MPS database than create a separate one.

CPEG and Safer Neighbourhoods panel fit

6. The MPA and MPS are jointly undertaking a small project which looks at the community engagement work undertaken by Safer Neighbourhoods teams and in particular the work of Safer Neighbourhoods panels. To inform this work, two focus groups have been undertaken with Safer Neighbourhoods Sergeants and community consultation has been undertaken with a handful of Safer Neighbourhoods panel members and CPEG representatives. As part of the consultation, all community volunteers were asked how CPEGs and Safer Neighbourhoods panels worked together. The findings of this consultation are outlined in a separate committee paper coming to the November 2011 Communities, Equalities and People meeting.

Victims

7. The new Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 makes particular mention of ensuring that the views of victims are obtained about matters concerning the policing of their areas. Members noted that victims had not been mentioned in the community engagement action plans of the MPA and MPS. However, there is mention in both plans and in the overall commitment that the MPA and the MPS will ensure that all Londoners are provided with opportunities to take part in community police engagement activities. The commitment also recognises that there is a requirement to better involve those who are disproportionally impacted on by policing policy (i.e. young people) and those who are directly impacted by crime and disorder (i.e. victims.)

8. The joint MPA and MPS community engagement commitment was ratified at the July 2010 Full Authority meeting and therefore the wording of this cannot now be changed. However, the inclusion principle in the opening sections of both the MPA and MPS action plans has been amended to reflect member’s comments regarding victims:

Inclusion: We will improve participation of groups who have not traditionally taken part in MPA and MPA community engagement activities. We will ensure that our engagement activity involves a wide range of communities (in terms of age, race, sexual orientation, gender (including transgender), disability and faith) and reflects the requirements of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. There are no direct equalities implications in regards to this report, however in moving forward into MOPC, the intention is to ensure community engagement activities are developed with the six key principles in mind: information; inclusion; preparation; integration; involve and feedback. The MOPC will need to consider how it can utilise a wide range of traditional and non-traditional community engagement methods so that all Londoners who are interested in becoming involved in community police engagement have the opportunity to do so.

Consideration of Met Forward

2. Community engagement remains a key priority within Met Forward. It sits within the ‘Increasing confidence in policing’ strategic driver. Met Forward Two pledges include two that particularly pertain to community engagement: ‘to improve the quality of our community engagement with the public’ and to have ‘a better conversation with those we protect.’

Financial Implications

3. There are no direct financial implications arising from this report.

Legal Implications

4. There are no legal implications arising from this report.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental implications arising from this report.

Risk Implications

6. There are no risk implications arising from this report.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report authors: Hamera Asfa Davey, Community Engagement and Neighbourhood Policing Officer, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback