Minutes - draft

Please note these minutes are currently draft and are subject to committee approval.

Minutes of the meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 6 December 2005 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London, SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Len Duvall (Chair)
• Reshard Auladin (Deputy Chair)
• Cindy Butts (Deputy Chair)
• Tony Arbour
• Jennette Arnold
• Richard Barnes
• Dee Doocey
• Toby Harris
• Kirsten Hearn
• Damian Hockney
• Elizabeth Howlett
• Bob Neill
• Aneeta Prem
• Murad Qureshi
• John Roberts
• Richard Sumray
• Graham Tope
• Abdal Ullah
• Rachel Whittaker

MPA officers

• Catherine Crawford (Chief Executive)
• Ken Hunt (Treasurer)
• David Riddle (Deputy Chief Executive)
• Simon Vile (Head of Secretariat)

MPS officers

• Sir Ian Blair (Commissioner)
• Paul Stephenson (Deputy Commissioner)
• Stephen Rimmer (Director of Strategy, Modernisation & Performance)
• Brian Paddick (Deputy Assistant Commissioner)

64. Apologies for absence

(Agenda item 1)

Apologies for absence were received from Karim Murji, Abdal Ullah, Peter Herbert, Jenny Jones and Nicky Gavron and from Graham Tope for late arrival.

65. Declarations of interest

(Agenda item 2)

None notified.

66. Minutes

(Agenda item 3)

Resolved – That the minutes of the meetings of the Authority held on 27 October and 17 November 2005 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

67. Minutes of committees

(Agenda item 4)

The minutes of the following committees were received for information:

• Equal Opportunities & Diversity Board, 6 October
• Co-ordination & Policing Committee, 7 October and 4 November
• Planning, Performance & Review Committee, 13 October
• Corporate Governance Committee, 17 October
• Human Resources Committee, 20 October
• Finance Committee, 20 October
• Professional Standards & Complaints Committee, 10 November

68. Chair’s update

(Agenda item 5)

At the request of the Chair, the Treasurer gave the Authority an oral update on the Provisional Grant Settlement. The Police Funding Formula had been changed, not to the advantage of the Authority, and the MPA was likely for the first time to receive contributions from other authorities to achieve a 3.2% floor. It was to be a two-year settlement with a 3.7% flat rate increase in 2007/08. Funding had been top sliced for counter-terrorism but at this stage it was not known what the MPA’s allocation from this fund would be and this would have an important impact on the outcome of the grant settlement for the MPA. The Government had re-affirmed the capping criteria at 5%.

69. Commissioner’s update

(Agenda item 6)

The performance report for the period to October was tabled. Total notifiable offences over the year had fallen as had, for instance, homicide, motor vehicle crime and racist crime. There had also been a significant increase in Sanction Detections. The counter-terrorism scenario remained challenging but the MPS had thwarted three conspiracies since July. Other good news included a targeted operation against domestic violence offenders which had resulted in 230 arrests across London.

In response to a question from Elizabeth Howlett, the Commissioner said that the MPS had expressed ‘surprise’ to the Home Secretary about the relaxation in the amount of cannabis defined as for own use. In response to a question from Murad Qureshi, the Commissioner said that the new licensing law had had limited impact on policing in the first couple of weeks. Any impact was most likely to be felt in outer London areas. The MPS would seek reimbursement from the licensing trade if it were found that the MPS were incurring additional costs. In response to a suggestion from Richard Barnes, the Commissioner agreed in future updates to address emerging policing threats as appropriate, such as drugs and kidnap.

In reply to a question, the Deputy Commissioner referred to the risk assessment of dangerous offenders in the community, which might usefully be the subject of a future report to the Authority. In reality, given the demands on and difficulties faced by multi-agency protection panels, it was mostly a case of mitigating rather than managing risk.

Richard Sumray expressed concern that a report on drugs commissioned for the Planning, Performance and Review Committee later that week had not yet appeared. He did not consider that there was effective co-ordination of drugs work across the MPS – the problem needed to be looked at holistically and effective measurements developed.

70. Joint Review of Mental Health and Policing

(Agenda item 7)

Richard Sumray, the Chair of the Review Board, introduced this joint review. He commented that the review had shown how little co-ordination there had been in the past and the need to develop joint working at a strategic level between the relevant authorities. Too often mental illness was stigmatised and blamed for criminal acts – efforts must be made through training to change the police perception of mental illness.

The joint review made a series of recommendations. For instance it highlighted the need for an early assessment on arrest of a person’s mental health condition (although this should not necessarily result in their being treated differently). The development of Safer Neighbourhoods teams provided an opportunity for the police to develop closer links with those with mental health problems. There was a need for joint training programmes for the agencies concerned. The exchange of information between agencies continued to be an issue and there was a need to develop mutual trust as to how the information was to be used. There was also an urgent need for the NHS to address the number of protocols in London (at least 19) in relation to places of safety.

The intention was to set up a conference in early March with all the agencies concerned to ensure that the review’s findings are carried through. Specific recommendations would be brought back to the Authority.

Richard Sumray thanked Siobhan Coldwell and DAC Paddick for their work on the joint review.

In the ensuing discussion it was recognised that there were not well established mechanisms for discussion of policy, much less individual cases, but that this would always be difficult until there was a strategic health authority for London. Similar difficulties were experienced between the NHS and local authority Social Services Departments. There should also, perhaps, be more dialogue between the MPS and the London Ambulance Service, for instance about arriving at potentially dangerous situations. In terms of the criminal justice system, it did not appear that magistrates had been given any particular guidance or training on how to approach those claiming mental health problems as a defence, although this was likely to be picked up by the Home Office review of the criminal justice system.

Resolved –

1. That the report be received and an action plan reported to the Authority in the New Year; and
2. that the report’s recommendations be promoted with other relevant organisations, such as the Association of Chief Police Officers, the Association of Police Authorities and the Local Government Association.

71. Police Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF) and HMIC Baseline Assessments 2004/2005

(Agenda item 8a & 8b)

The Authority considered a report by the Commissioner on the Home Office’s assessments of the relative performance of all police forces for 2004/05, which took into account the baseline assessment produced by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabularies. It also considered a report by the Chief Executive outlining the key issues.

The Deputy Commissioner reported that the assessments gave some good news for the MPS about its performance, for instance on serious and organised crime, but some timely reminders too on volume crime and citizen focus. The PPAF was very important for the MPS but was not considered sufficiently sophisticated yet to take account of the range of MPS services, including its national and international functions. The Deputy Commissioner considered that comparisons with the other forces in England and Wales were meaningless. Because of its size, the MPS was, effectively, the average, which made improvement that much more difficult.

In the discussion, whilst members understood these difficulties it was felt that the MPS’s unique position should not be used as an excuse. It was incumbent on the MPS and the MPA to look at those areas where the MPS had been assessed as poor and stable to analyse the underlying issues. It was felt that the MPS did the big things well but often performed less well on the smaller things, such as citizen focus or making the crime reporting process more user friendly. There continued to be a significant gap between people’s experiences as victims or witnesses of crime and what the MPS were aiming to achieve in this area.

It was felt that the MPS had not fully engaged with the development of the National Crime Recording Standard and this was important to ensure that the MPS position was adequately represented. Richard Barnes asked how much it was costing the MPS to improve its data collection.

Members recognised the pressures on the MPS and that it was not necessarily realistic to expect the MPS to be able to improve on every area of PPAF. It was also recognised that the MPA shared the responsibility to bring about improvements. In response the Commissioner commented that since the start of his appointment in February the MPS had fundamentally changed its approach on NCRS, citizen focus, volume crime and those other issues of concern in the PPAF assessment. It must, however, continue to balance these against other roles, such as counter terrorism, which were not measured in the PPAF. The MPS had no choice but to improve across all the areas of its service.

Resolved –

1. That the report be received and future progress monitored by the Planning, Performance and Review Committee; and
2. That a further report be made in due course on the costs of implementing the National Crime Recording Standard.

72. Update on the planning process 2006/07

(Agenda item 9)

The Authority considered a report by the Commissioner outlining progress on the development of the high level objectives that underpin the operational corporate priorities for inclusion in the Annual Policing Plan 2006/07.

Resolved – That any views be communicated to the MPS to inform the detailed discussion at the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.

73. Re-organisation of Police Forces

(Agenda item 10)

The Authority considered a report by the Chief Executive and Clerk proposing a way forward for the MPA submission to the Home Office on the review of the organisation of police forces in England and Wales.

Resolved – That submission of the preferred option for re-organisation in London be deferred from 23 December to 6 January 2006 so that the Authority can consider the final draft report.

74. Joint MPA/MPS Equality Statement

(Agenda item 11)

The Authority considered a report by the Chief Executive and Clerk proposing a joint MPA/MPS Equality Statement.

Resolved – That the joint MPA/MPS Equality Statement be endorsed and signed by the Authority Chair and the Commissioner on behalf of the two organisations.

75. Retail Crime, with particular reference to Shop Watch

(Agenda item 12)

The Authority considered and noted a report by the Commissioner providing an update on the current position around retail crime with particular reference to the Shop Watch initiative.

76. Special Meeting of the Authority

(Agenda item 13)

The Authority considered a report by the Chief Executive and Clerk proposing a date for a special meeting of the Authority in January.

Resolved - That a Special Meeting of the full Authority be held on Friday, 6 January 2006 at 11 a.m.

77. Urgent action taken under delegated authority

(Agenda item 14)

The Authority considered a report by the Chief Executive and Clerk giving details of action taken under delegated authority on the grounds of urgency.

Resolved – That the Authority receives the report on urgent action taken under delegated authority, as provided for in Standing Orders.

The meeting ended at 12.10 p.m.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback