MPS Service Delivery and LGBT Communities

Report: 4
Date: 11 February 2010
By: Director, Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an overview of service delivery for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities in relation to hate crime reporting, the deployment of LGBT Liaison Officers, Independent Advisory Groups and community engagement.

A. Recommendation

That members note the contents of this report and appendices.

B. Supporting information

Homophobic/Transphobic crime and policing

1. Over the past ten years homophobic crime statistics have remained relatively consistent at approximately 1,200 offences per annum. From 1 April 2009 to 6 December 2009 the figures for homophobic incidents stands at 1135 compared to 995 in the same period 2008. This is a 14.4% increase for homophobic incidents.

2. Homophobic offences from 1 April 2009 to 6 December 2009 stands at 997 compared to 787 for the same period in 2008. This is a 26.7% increase in homophobic offences.

3. Although the reported homophobic crime statistics have remained fairly constant the sanction detection rate for these offences has increased from 14.7% to the current figure of 45.6% (6 December 2009) against a target of 44.0%.

4. Between 1 April 2009 to 6 December 2009, there have been 348 charges, and 102 cautions for homophobic crime, which is an increase of 97 perpetrators held to account for homophobic crime compared to the same period last year.

5. Transphobic crime has only been measured separately from homophobic crime since April 2009. In previous years, the homophobic and Transphobic statistics had been combined because of the low amount of incidents/offences for Transphobic crime. Reporting of Transphobic crime has increased although there are a number of boroughs with no Transphobic offences recorded.

6. From 1 April 2009 to 6 December 2009 79 Transphobic incidents / 63 Transphobic offences were recorded by the MPS. To date 15 sanction detections have been achieved, with 12 of these being resolved through charges.

7. On 5 December 2008, the MPS introduced a change to the crime recording (CRIS) system, which has improved recording and identification of both homophobic and Transphobic offences. The increase in homophobic and Transphobic incidents and offences that has taken place since then is, therefore, at least partly due to the changes made to the CRIS system. This increase was also to be expected due to the levels of under flagging observed previously.

8. Looking at the variations in monthly levels of homophobic incidents and offences recorded since January 2006, there are only a few months that show higher than expected levels: July 2006 (incidents and offences), June 2009 (offences) and September 2009 (incidents). However, the incidents and offences for all other months fall within expected ranges (even following the changes to the CRIS system). Variations in the monthly levels of homophobic incidents recorded are predominantly due to monthly variations in the levels of incidents of harassment recorded.

9. There is no consistent upward trend in the number of either homophobic incidents or offences from January 2006 to December 2009. However, there is a consistent upward trend in the number of sanction detections and charges relating to the homophobic offences recorded over this time period.

10. Across the MPS, 23 boroughs have had increases in reported homophobic offences and 9 have had decreases (FYTD 6 December 2009) compared to the same period a year earlier. Across the MPS Link commands, there is variance compared to the same period last year;

North Link

11. (Camden, Enfield, Hackney, Haringey, Islington & Tower Hamlets) Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 263 homophobic offences recorded across the North cluster. This is 16 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 6.5%. Of the six boroughs within the north link, 3 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 3 have had a decrease.

East Link

12. (Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Newham, Redbridge & Waltham Forest). Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 102 homophobic offences recorded across the East cluster. This is 56 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 122%. Of the five boroughs within the east link, 4 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 1 has had a decrease.

South Link

13. (Bexley, Bromley, Croydon, Merton, Sutton & Wandsworth). Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 122 homophobic offences recorded across the South cluster. This is 45 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 58.4%. Of the six boroughs within the South link, 5 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 1 has had a decrease.

Central South Link

14. (Greenwich, Lambeth, Lewisham & Southwark). Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 196 homophobic offences recorded across the Central South cluster. This is 12 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 6.5%. Of the four boroughs within the central south link, 2 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 2 have had a decrease.

North West Link

15. (Barnet, Brent, Ealing, Harrow, Hillingdon). Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 104 homophobic offences recorded across the North West cluster. This is 24 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 30%. Of the five boroughs within the North West link, 4 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 1 has had a decrease.

South West Link

16. (Hammersmith and Fulham, Hounslow, Kensington and Chelsea, Kingston upon Thames & Richmond upon Thames). Between the 1st April 2009 - 6th December 2009, there have been a total of 117 homophobic offences recorded across the South West cluster. This is 37 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 46%. Of the five boroughs within the South West link, 4 boroughs have had a rise in Homophobic offences and 1 has had a decrease.

Westminster

17. Between the 1 April 2009 - 6 December 2009, there have been a total of 90 homophobic offences recorded across Westminster. This is 17 more offences than the same period last year which is an increase of 23.3%.

18. The rise in the East link is mainly attributable to increased reporting within two of its boroughs;

• Waltham Forest - increase from 8 to 31 offences
• Newham - increase from 9 to 34 offences

19. Waltham Forest states that their rise is due to a number of reasons;

• There was an increase in homophobic offences within a Public Sex Environment (PSE) on the borough which led to increased reporting. There was a multi - agency response to this and the borough launched ‘operation Morpheus’ to re-investigate reported offences and proactively encourage further reporting of offences. This again led to an increase in reported offences.
• The borough had a serious assault that was detected and was linked to other 4 victims.
• The borough has been working closely with support agencies (e.g. IAG) and the local authority, which has led to increased reporting.

20. Not only has the reporting increased but the sanctioned detections have also increased from 3 to 16, against the same period last year.

21. Similarly, Newham has increased the number of sanction detections that it has achieved, from 6 to 17 (representing a 50% sanction detection rate) compared to the same period last year. Specific drivers for the increase in reporting in Newham are less clear at this stage; however the Borough is concerned and has conducted analysis that shows no discernable pattern of offences, or any particular LGBT location or venue.

22. There is a slight increase of offences in the Beckton area, but again this is not in any particular LGBT location or venue. Extra SNT patrols have been deployed to the area in consultation with the CSU. The Borough continues to monitor the situation and maintains good working relationships with support agencies (e.g. East London out Project and Positive East).

23. More widely, boroughs, with support from the Violent Crime Directorate, have been reviewing crime investigations containing homophobic language to ensure that they are correctly recorded as hate crimes. This is also a contributory factor to the increase in recorded offences.

Victim Gender analysis

24. Of these 997 recorded offences of homophobic hate crime there are a total of 1002 victims shown.

• 765 gave their gender as male,
• 215 gave their gender as female,
• 22 victims had no gender recorded.

25. Of these 63 recorded offences of Transphobic hate crime there are a total of 68 victims shown.

• 28 gave their gender as male,
• 39 gave their gender as female,
• 1 victim had no gender recorded.

Compound Discrimination analysis

26. Of the 1061 recorded offences of homophobic and Transphobic crime, the following relates to other discrimination experienced by the victims.

Homophobic only 830

Homophobic and Racial 149

Homophobic and Faith hate 2

Homophobic, Faith Hate and Racial 12

Homophobic, and Transphobic 8

Homophobic, Transphobic and Racial 1

Total 1002

Transphobic only 58

Transphobic and racial 1

Total 59

The above total for Transphobic shown as 59 does not take into account the 9 offences under the homophobic section. With the addition of these 9 offences the total becomes 68.

Survey findings regarding the LGBT Community and the police

27. 2.7% of all respondents (389) to the MPS User Satisfaction Survey stated that they were lesbian, gay or bisexual for the four quarters of October 2008 to September 2009. There are no significant differences in their satisfaction levels compared to those of heterosexual respondents.

28. 0.8% of all respondents (174) to the MPS Public Attitude Survey (PAS) stated that they were either gay, lesbian or bisexual for the four quarters of October 2008 to September 2009. There was no difference in levels of confidence in local policing (i.e. the percentage stating that their local police are doing an excellent or a good job) between heterosexual respondents and gay, lesbian or bisexual respondents.

29. Gay, lesbian or bisexual respondents were more likely to agree that the local police deal with things that matter to people in this community and that local police listen to the concerns of local people (74% each, compared to 67% and 66% of heterosexual respondents respectively).

30. Gay, lesbian or bisexual respondents are less likely to feel safe walking alone in their local area during the day (91% feel safe, compared to 96% of heterosexual respondents). There is however, no difference in levels of worry about crime, although gay, lesbian or bisexual respondents were more likely to base their levels of worry on the experience of someone they know (14%, compared to 5% of heterosexual respondents).
31. DCFD has also designed a simple questionnaire which is used at local and large scale LGBT community events to gauge community sentiment towards policing and hate crime reporting. This has been used at a number of community events where the MPS has a presence, including the 2009 London Lesbian and Gay Film Festival (LLGFF), 2009 LGBT Outburst and Black Pride and Gay Sunday at London Zoo in September 2009. These surveys provide an additional mechanism to gain specific feedback from the LGBT community. These surveys tend to indicate respondents have lower levels of satisfaction in the police than respondents to the MPS Public Attitude Survey. However, these events attract national and international visitors so their responses may not relate specifically to the MPS.

32. A survey commissioned by DCFD to find out more about women’s experiences of homophobia and transphobia in London [1] (1112 respondents) found that, of those who told the police officers that the incident was homophobic, 63% felt that they were treated with respect. This is lower than the proportion of women in general surveyed in London as part of the MPS Public Attitude Survey who feel that police would treat them with respect if they had contact with them.

33. The survey also showed that just under half (48%) of women who had reported homophobic incidents to the police found that the police were supportive and reassured them. In addition, 50% felt that the police had taken the incident seriously and only 29% stated that the police had kept them informed of the progress of the investigation. These levels are significantly lower than the levels observed in the MPS User Satisfaction Survey.

Development of Third Party reporting

34. The Violent Crime Directorate (VCD) is leading a review of third party reporting arrangements across 32 boroughs. Once the scoping exercise is complete a draft proposal will be forwarded to relevant stakeholders as part of the consultation process. The proposal will then be taken forward by a sub group of the Pan London LGBT Strategic Group - but will relate to all aspects of hate crime. The sub group has been formed to deal with matters arising from the Galop report “Filling in the Blanks” and the Women’s Experience of Homophobia and Transphobia Project Report, which provides a number of recommendations on improving service delivery for LGBT people including third party reporting. Currently most third party reports to the MPS come from Galop.

Compliance and monitoring of boroughs

35. Boroughs are accountable for their individual performance. Assistance and guidance is delivered by VCD to those boroughs identified as having difficulties in achieving their targets. Good practice is shared between boroughs via the Community Safety Unit Managers, LGBT Liaison Officers Special Interest Group Site and Liaison Officer training events.

36. Compliance is monitored by the Borough Community Safety Unit Detective Inspectors supported by their investigating officers. Many boroughs have an intervention policy, which is implemented when the standards of investigation fall below what is expected. The TP VCD staff also dip sample crimes to quality assure investigations and ensure standards are maintained.

37. All identified serious and high risk cases are reviewed during the TP VCD’s Daily Management Process, whereby the investigations, SOP compliance and risk assessment/management are quality assured.

Specific activity taking place in response to the perceived increase in serious violence hate crime.

38. The Deputy Commissioner is leading on work across the MPS to increase the confidence of all communities in London and to drive forward work to improve engagement activity with the LGBT community. Within the wider police service the MPS is leading on the implementation of the Equality Standard that will enable boroughs and other OCUs to identify any gaps in service provision.

39. The MPS has conducted awareness raising activities to assist victims to identify that they have experienced hate crimes and to report the matter to police. These activities include: multi agency partnership working; engagement with Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNT); reporting protocols with third party organisations e.g. Galop; media campaigns e.g. posters, LGBT press publications and Gaydar Radio programmes.

40. Proactive operations continue to target hate crime perpetrators and geographic areas. Activities include high visibility patrols, intelligence gathering and maximising evidential opportunities. Multi-agency crime prevention initiatives with LGBT focussed organisations continue.

The MPS response to other general issues identified by the LGBT communities.

41. The MPS regularly engages with the LGBT Advisory Group (LGBT AG) and will respond to issues raised by the Group. Additionally when specific issues are raised by community groups in writing to the Commissioner there will be a written response by a senior officer or member of police staff stating the MPS’ position.

42. At a local level LGBT issues can be raised through local LGBT Forums, LGBT Advisory Groups, Ward Panels and other local Community Engagement Forums as well as directly through the local LGBT LO.

43. Additionally the Commissioner has an internal LGBT Focus Group who are able to raise internal and external LGBT issues with him. These matters are then directed to the appropriate business lead via the Diversity Board.

The role and function of LGBT Liaison officers (LOs) across all boroughs

44. The role and function of LGBT LOs is outlined in the “MPS Corporate Development of LGBT Liaison Services” published in December 2006. The document provides guidance to boroughs on delivering this function.

45. A small number of boroughs have recently restructured their LGBT LO function to better meet local needs, linking in more closely with Safer Neighbourhood Teams while the central role of the LGBT LO remains the same.

46. Westminster Borough for example has reconfigured their team and now have a restructured Equality and Diversity Team with five post holders two of whom are dedicated LGBT LOs. This team has been configured to work across all six strands of diversity whilst also taking account of human rights legislation and socio economic factors.

47. Westminster is integrating the work of this team more closely with Safer Neighbourhood Teams, Community Safety Teams and non uniformed officers as well as refreshing communications and links with the voluntary sector and relevant business interests in Westminster.

48. Boroughs seeking to change the structure around the LGBT LO role in the future will be required to fully consult with stakeholders, to undertake an EIA to inform the decision making process and to carefully manage any transition in order to maintain service levels.

49. The recommendations from future EIAs will form part of the borough’s diversity and equality action plan. Diversity Advisors will monitor the action plan to ensure it meets the needs of individual boroughs and the themes of the MPS Diversity and Equality Strategy.

50. Additionally there is a commitment to the on-going development of LGBT and other LOs and Hate Crime Co-ordinators as tactical advisors following the lessons learnt from the investigation of domestic violence and all hate crime (objective C21 of the MPS Equalities Scheme).

LGBT Liaison Officers - training, support and consistency

51. The corporate guidance on the LGBT LO function advised that there should be 2 days of recognised formal training for LOs including working with the CSU and acting as conduits between the MPS and the LGBT peoples. It recommended that each officer would be trained according to the needs and requirements of that borough.

52. Currently all LGBT LOs are invited to attend a series of awareness raising days which are run by VCD and DCFD throughout the year. Topics include hate crime reporting, Public Sex Environments, Forced Marriage, same sex domestic violence as well as input from a variety of LGBT support organisations. Topics for discussion and presentation are constantly reviewed to reflect known training needs and emerging trends. There are no plans as yet to change this format.

53. The time each borough allocates to its LGBT LOs will vary according to borough need. Boroughs with visible LGBT communities are likely to allocate a greater amount of time for their LGBT LOs to carry out the role. Since it is not mandatory for borough’s to have an LGBT LO it is left to them to decide their requirements and to adjust this as appropriate in response to community need. Consequently there is no central record of each LGBT LOs time allocation or effectiveness, only whether they are deployed on a part time or full time basis. Succession planning and handover arrangements when LGBT LOs move on are managed at a local level.

54. Whilst there is no central record of LO effectiveness potential indicators of success could be increased reporting of homophobic/transphobic crime, the impact of local surgeries and establishing working partnerships with LGBT services and people. In time this information will be captured with the roll out of the MPS Equality Standard 2010.

Training for officers and staff on LGBT issues in relation to service delivery

55. A Performance Needs Analysis (PNA) for all MPS officers and staff was completed by the MPS for Centrex (Now NPIA) during 2005 - 2006 and involved a steering group of community and police experts. It involved numerous focus groups in all regions of England and Wales and was supported by input and advice from LGBT groups and organisations and questionnaires sent to some 50 plus high profile individuals and organisations. The final NPIA learning resources which comprise of an e- learning suite, learner workbooks, trainer guidance and supporting materials, learner guidance and management guidance have since been updated and are now on version 2 (this review was also conducted by the MPS).

56. In the MPS PCSO's, Dedicated Detention Officers, Custody Nurses, Station PCSO's, Special Constables and Police Constables are required to engage with the learning materials in either a trainer led classroom environment or by completing the supporting e-learning (through NCALT). This has also been supported by sessions involving members of the LGBT community. (The exact format of the community sessions is currently under review, as changes to the delivery of training require a new approach).

57. At present work is nearing completion (for introduction from Feb. 2010) for diversity issues to be integrated throughout the whole of the 104 week recruit programme. This means, for example, that in a lesson on burglary, LGBT issues will be examined in addition to the original input. In January 2010 27 trainers from Police Constable Foundation Training (IPLDP) attended Trainer up-skill workshops for all strands of equality and diversity in order to better implement the above changes to recruit training.

Corporate and Borough LGBT Independent Advisory Groups

58. The central LGBT Advisory Group (LGBT AG) has made a significant impact on service delivery to LGBT Londoners. They are consulted for most if not all critical LGBT incidents, particularly homophobic/transphobic murders. Their thematic review of cold case murders has helped to change the way these crimes are investigated.

59. As a result of this review a number of recommendations were made which have been taken forward by the Serious Crime Group. These include the management of critical incidents involving LGBT people now being embedded in the Investigators Manual and included in On- Call Duty sites for uniform and CID investigations. They include the establishment of Gold Groups with LGBT AG and LGBT specialist representation.

60. The wording of media briefs and communication strategies are only released once sanctioned by Gold Group Stakeholders, DCFD and TP VCD leads. The LGBT AG Advisors meet regularly with SCD leads to review service improvement measures, to contribute to Investigating Officer training programmes and to monitor critical incident management which as a result is now recognised as best practice.

61. The LGBT AG is consulted and represented on matters/groups regarding stop and search, firearms incident training, MPS policy generally, LGBT training content, LGBT LOs, methamphetamine, HIV policy and crime investigation and a huge variety of other topics.

62. As a result of the energies of this group the MPS has made significant strides in improving service delivery to LGBT Londoners, particularly around critical incidents and media response.

63. At a local level not every borough has a local LGBT AG although most have some form of community contact and/or engagement option. See Appendix 1 for full details. Additionally each member of the Central LGBT AG is responsible for linking in with around three boroughs.

Engagement with LGBT communities at a pan London level

64. The MPS uses events such as Pride London, LGBT History Month and International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO) to reach the wider LGBT community by participating as part of the LGBT community and demonstrating a continued commitment to making London safer for LGBT people.

65. The MPS is represented on the Greater London Authority (GLA) LGBT Quarterly Meetings which brings together a wide cross section of LGBT organisations and support agencies.

66. The LGBT Strand, Diversity and Citizen Focus (DCFD) Directorate also works in partnership with LGBT organisations to improve service delivery to LGBT people. Partnerships include: Age Concern England, Galop, Stonewall, Gires and so on.

67. At a local level, the full time LGBT LOs have Gaydar profiles which enable them to hear community concerns and to either act upon them or bring them to the attention of the relevant unit which can.

MPS engagement/work with schools on issues of LGBT hate crimes

68. The MPS Youth Team is engaged with the GLA Peer Outreach Group and the BTP Youth Board and access 22 Borough Youth Panels/IAGs and local Councils.

69. The MPS Youth Team is working to improve engagement with young people in relation to homophobic crime and have identified groups such as Children’s Rights Officers and Advocates (CROA), Schools, Out and London Consortium to develop contacts and strategic links in engaging united voice through young people to help prevent homophobic crime.

70. The MPS “Watch Over Me” programme contains modules on hate crime and in particular homophobic crime. The programme includes training for specialist teaching staff within 1,000 schools including Faith Schools and roll out of the programme will be completed January/February 2010. Once training has been completed schools Pan London will have access to the Watch Over Me programme at the start of the school year, September 2010.

71. All Safer School police officers and PCSO’s will undergo a revised MPS designed and delivered three day training programme. The first of these courses will commence 16 January 2010 and all will complete training by September 2010.

72. The MPS recognised through a training needs analysis that there was a specific need for raising awareness of homophobic hate crime in schools. The module around homophobic bullying and hate crime has been designed with the assistance of Stonewall.

73. The MPS through the Junior Citizen programme reach last year students within primary schools and use these forums to raise awareness and understanding of hate crime including LGBT matters.

MPS partnership work with the Crown prosecution Service (CPS).

74. The MPS is represented on the CPS Hate Crime Scrutiny Panel. This group reviews the CPS’ processes and decision making in respect of all aspects of hate crime including homophobic and transphobic hate crime cases. The findings of the panel informs CPS learning and training and is shared with lawyers involved in specific cases as well as informing MPS learning and knowledge.

75. The CPS shares conviction data with the MPS which is compared with charging rates on individual boroughs to identify attrition rates.

Diversity and Citizen Focus Advisors

76. Their agreed role is to work with Borough Commanders, OCUs and Business Groups to improve performance by:

• Reviewing diversity, equality and citizen focus performance areas, identifying gaps between current activity and the required levels of performance, working locally to improve performance delivery
• Utilising a problem solving approach to identify and develop solutions for diversity, equality and citizen focus challenges
• Working with colleagues to develop and deliver local Equalities Scheme Action Plans
• Work across the MPS and with key stakeholders to identify solutions e.g. in community engagement, independent advisory groups
• Providing advice and promulgating good practice on EIAs
• Identifying, collating and disseminating good practice.

77. Diversity and Citizen Focus Advisors (DCFAs) will ensure that Senior Management Teams (SMTs) for each borough are appropriately monitoring existing and future LGBT LO provision. Each SMT will have to show that there is effective governance of diversity and equality work through the development and monitoring of key diversity and equality priorities. DCFAs will ensure that good practice is disseminated across the MPS.

C. Race and equality impact

This report focuses on the services provided by the MPS to meet the needs of LGBT communities. It identifies a number of processes and policies relating to the services provided to LGBT communities and a range of improvement work under way to improve service provision. An analysis of compound discrimination is included in the body of the report. It is the responsibility of policy owners to ensure that robust mechanisms are in place to ensure there is no disproportionality and implement improvements where required.

D. Financial implications

There are no financial implications for consideration.

E. Legal implications

1.The MPS is under a statutory duty to have due regard for the:

1. elimination of unlawful discrimination and harassment;
2. promotion of equality of opportunity for all;
3. promotion of good relations between peoples of different groups;
4. promotion of positive attitudes towards others.

2. The MPS Equalities Scheme 2006-2010 is designed to ensure continuous improvement in service delivery in this regard by improvements in the standard of policing, staff awareness of the organizational strategy and by community engagement. Effective governance is required to ensure improvements are achieved and is itself an aspect of the Equalities Scheme.

3. In providing an overview of service delivery to the LGBT communities this report assists the MPA in monitoring MPS performance in relation to the sexual orientation strand of the Equalities Scheme.

F. Background papers

None

G. Contact details

Report author(s): Police Sergeant Amanda Gutierrez-Cooper (DCFD) & Detective Inspector Jim Foley (Violent Crime Directorate), MPS

For information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Do all Boroughs have an LGBT IAG?

Are they informed about all critical incidents?

Barking and Dagenham

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG but has followed MPS Corporate Guidance and moved away from IAGs to Community Advisory Groups. The LGBT rep on the KG CAG is contacted following any relevant critical Incidents.

Barnet

Regular meetings were being held with an LGBT IAG until approximately a year ago.
Links are in place should a critical incident occur.

Bexley

Does not have an independent LGBT IAG. The General IAG is informed of critical incidents.

Brent

Does not have a current Borough LGBT IAG member but if required would go to TPHQ centrally for access to an LGBT IAG member. The nominated LGBT IAG member would then be informed about any LGBT related critical incident.

Bromley

Does not have an LGBT IAG. In response to the MPS change in the role of central IAGs, and to better meet local need, PY introduced the Bromley Community Advisory Group (BCAG) last year. BCAG are informed of critical incidents and is able to deal with LGBT issues if they arise. The MPS corporate LGBT IAG would be accessed if necessary.

Camden

Does have an LGBT AG. The LGBT AG is informed of relevant critical incidents.

City of Westminster

Is redeveloping its Corporate IAG on which there will be at least one LGBT independent advisor. The first meeting of the new group took place in December 2009. This group will have links with the LGBT Business and Community Forum.

Croydon

Has an IAG with at least one IAG member from the LGBT community. Also has regular meetings with umbrella organisations on the borough representing the LGBT community. The IAG is informed about all critical incidents where they would have a role to fulfill.

Ealing

The borough has an LGBT Diversity Group which has a member on the general IAG. Both the chair of the IAG and the LGBT Diversity Group would be informed of any critical incidents as appropriate.

Enfield

No specific LGBT CIAG but LGBT representatives on the local CIAG.

Greenwich

Does not have an LGBT IAG but does have LGBT representation on the borough IAG and this member also has links with GALOP and the Metro Centre. The LGBT IAG member will be informed of critical incidents. If the borough has messages to put out the LGBT community advice is normally sought from that member.

Hackney

Has an IAG member who represents LGBT interests on the borough IAG.

Hammersmith and Fulham

This borough is in the process of setting up an LGBT AG and the first meeting is scheduled for January 2011.

Haringey

The LGBT IAG is known as the Haringey LGBT Network. It has members of both the local IAG and the Central LGBT IAG. The Chair is also linked in with the Borough's CPCG and one of the SNT Ward Panels, together with other local groups. The Haringey LGBT Network is informed of Critical Incidents via the borough’s "Community Leaders' Briefing" arrangements.

Harrow

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG and at present the borough cannot be certain that there is LGBT representation on the general IAG. Any critical incidents would be brought to the general IAG’s attention as appropriate.

Havering

Does not have a LGBT IAG.

Hillingdon

Does not have a separate LGBT IAG but the borough IAG is reflective of the LGBT community. Members of the borough IAG are informed about Critical Incidents and attend Gold Groups as necessary.

Hounslow

Does not have a specific LGBT AG but does have an LGBT member on the local IAG.

The IAG are informed of critical incidents.

Islington

Islington Borough has a single IAG - one that is capable of covering a broad spectrum of issues. The group has two LGBT members. The IAG is contacted in relation to all Critical Incidents - and at least one member of the IAG is invited to sit on Gold Groups.

Kensington and Chelsea

Has an IAG with representation from the LGBT community and an LGBT forum which looks at the local response to all LGBT hate crime. The borough IAG will be informed of all critical incidents.

Kingston Upon Thames

Kingston has an IAG with an LGBT representative from the local community. Members of the IAG are informed about critical incidents.

Lambeth

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG but a prominent member of the Vauxhall Gay Business Forum is a member of the borough’s IAG. The IAG are informed of critical incidents when appropriate.

Lewisham

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG although a member of the Lewisham IAG is from the LGBT community. Any LGBT issues are advised on by this member who is included in any LGBT critical incidents/gold groups.

Merton

Does not have a dedicated LGBT representative but does have a positive relationship with the Local IAG. Additionally, the BOCU actively participates in the local LGBT forum. The local IAG are informed of critical incidents.

Newham

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG but does have an IAG. In the event of an LGBT critical incident it would be referred to the IAG in the normal manner, like any other critical incident.

Redbridge

Has an LGBT member on the IAG but no dedicated LGBT IAG. The borough also has an LGBT Forum. The LGBT IAG member is consulted on any LGBT issues.

Richmond Upon Thames

Does not have an LGBT IAG but does have an LGBT Forum which Richmond officers attend. The borough also has a hate crime forum which is a partnership initiative with the local authority. The LGBT forum reviews all appropriate Critical incidents on a regular basis and dip samples the police response to non critical incidents.

Southwark

Southwark does not have an LGBT IAG but does have two members of the LGBT community on the local IAG (referred to as CIRAG in Southwark). There is also a community led LGBT forum that has been in existence for many years, which the police attend. For LGBT related critical incidents the CIRAG would be directly engaged and the issue specifically referred to the LGBT CIRAG members. Critical incidents are not routinely referred to the LGBT forum.

Sutton

Does not have a specific LGBT IAG. However there is a dedicated LGBT lead officer as part of the Borough Equality & Diversity Forum. This officer has three nominated deputies to look at both internal and external LGBT issues and is responsible for coordinated LGBT engagement events. The LGBT liaison officer covers the role for SPOC & liaison in relation to hate crime on the Borough.

Tower Hamlets

Does have an LGBT IAG and they are informed of Critical Incidents.

Waltham Forrest

Does not have an LGBT IAG although the General IAG is represented by LGBT persons and the current chair is from the LGBT community. The IAG are on the partnership circulation list so do hear about all critical incidents on the Borough. Police also engage with the LGBT community particularly over any critical incidents.

Wandsworth

Wandsworth has an IAG which has LGBT representation. Additionally they have an LGBT Forum which is consulted on all LGBT matters / issues. The IAG are routinely informed about critical incidents.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback