Minutes

Minutes of the meeting of the Communities, Equalities and People Committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 7 July 2011 at 10 Dean Farrar Street,, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Victoria Borwick (Vice-Chair)
• Faith Boardman
• Valerie Brasse
• Kirsten Hearn
• Clive Lawton

MPA officers

• Catherine Crawford (Chief Executive)
• Fay Scott (Head of Equalities and Engagement)
• Natasha Plummer (Engagement and Partnerships Manager)
• Michael Taylor (Committee Officer)

MPS officers

• Peter Spindler (Covert Policing)
• Stuart Cundy (Trident)
• Nigel Verrill (Criminal Justice Protection Unit)
• Stuart Dark (Territorial Policing)
• Dave Zinzan (South East Area Commander)
• Alan Horton (Metropolitan Special Constabulary and Volunteers)
• Allan Gibson (Specialist Crime Directorate)
• Graham Morris (Vetting Unit) and Ellie Ryan (Employee Relations)

Others: Rena Sodhi (Safer London Foundation)

1. Apologies for absence

(Agenda item 1)

1.1 Apologies were received from Cindy Butts (MPA Member) and Reshard Auladin (MPA Member).

2. Declarations of interests

(Agenda item 2)

2.1 Faith Boardman declared an interest in item 6, as she carries out consultancy work for the courts services.

2.2 Valerie Brasse declared an interest in item 10, as she is a non-executive board member of the Independent Safeguarding Authority.

3. Minutes: Communities, Equalities and People Committee – 5 May 2011

(Agenda item 3)

3.1 The minutes were agreed as a correct record.

4. Oral update from the Head of Equalities and Engagement

(Agenda item 4)

4.1 Following the report on Multi-Point Entry which was received at Full Authority in May 2011, discussions have been held with the MPS on how to progress those proposals which will not require any legislative changes. The MPS is developing a training scheme for a select number of high potential Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) candidates to advance to superintendent level. The MPA is liaising with the MPS to consider the feasibility of using this as an example of good practice for the development of future training schemes.

4.2 The second stage of the Windsor review has begun, which will examine Multi-Point Entry; with a report due to be published in January 2012. A consultation meeting is being held between the Home Office, the Association of Chief Police Officers and private sector organisation. The MPA is holding discussions with the Home Office on potential legislation changes which can be made to support Multi-Point Entry. The MPA is consulting with other police forces to identify good practice which can be shared nationally. Members requested that updates on the development be provided.

Action: MPA to provide members with ongoing updates on the development of Multi-Point Entry.

5. Safer London Foundation report

(Agenda item 5)

5.1 Rena Sodhi introduced the report, and provided an overview of the projects developed by the Safer London Foundation (SLF). The SLF has grant funded 127 third sector crime reduction related projects over the last five years, and £1,300,000 funding has been raised in the last three months. SLF is now working in partnership with the MPS to support diversionary activities, such a Kickz, which will be strategically aimed at young people who are at risk of criminalisation. SLF is monitoring the reduction in reoffending rates to calculate the financial savings arising from these projects. Members requested a briefing note providing details of the savings arising from SLF projects.

Action: SLF to provide a briefing note outlining the financial savings resulting from the SLF projects.

5.2 SLF is currently concentrating on working with partners to coordinate delivery and support of diversionary activities, such as by assisting gang related projects to find employment opportunities for young people. Although private sector organisations are primarily more receptive to providing funding to support diversionary activity; SLF can be also be unrestricted in how they funds are spent.

5.3 Looking to future developments; SLF aims to continue to deliver projects in support of the MPS and the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime, managing projects which meets MOPC established priorities. SLF will also be reducing the amount of projects which are grant funded, instead focusing on supporting a select number of high impact projects, by coordinating partnership working.
SLF has also received funding from the GLA to support the development unformed young people’s groups, such as army cadets, so that they can engage with young people who are at risk of criminalisation.

5.4 Members noted that whilst funding may be provided by central government, local communities should be provided with the opportunity to claim ownership of their local projects. SLF agreed, and outlined how it seeks to empower community groups to establish projects and for these to become self-sustaining. An example of this is the Lambeth Youth Panel, which was established to provide a forum for young people to engage with Safer Neighbourhood Teams, and is currently project managed by SLF.

6. Witness Protection and response to ‘Stop Snitching Campaign’

(Agenda item 6)

6.1 Peter Spindler introduced the report, and provided an overview of witness protection, which is assessed on a case by case basis. In most circumstances, a temporary relocation is sufficient to reduce the threat to a witness, with a full identity change being utilised only in extreme cases.

6.2 In light of the reactive nature of witness protection, members enquired how the MPS is able to set a budget, as the number of relocation operations cannot be predicted. The MPS follows stringent control measures in order to manage the budget and reduce costs. The aim is for witnesses to be able to live a secure life where regular contact with the MPS is no longer necessary; although the MPS will always be available to provide support. An identity change will last indefinitely, and the MPS maintains records of the locations of all relocated witnesses.

6.3 Members enquired on the reasons for the lower numbers of BME people on the witness protection scheme. This is due to certain communities having stronger community and family ties to their locations, and therefore being disinclined to relocate. Although the MPS offers the same services to all communities, it is up to individuals whether they choose to utilise the scheme.

6.4 Members enquired how the MPS liaises with other partners to provide witness protection and anonymity. Because Trident is reliant on intelligence provided by members of the public coming forward; the MPS liaises with the courts to enable witnesses to provide evidence anonymously. Other agencies, such as Revenue and Customs, have their own covert units, which the MPS will liaise with on matters relating to the creation of new identities for witnesses. Trident is also working with Crime Stoppers to encourage third party reporting from witnesses, particularly from young people.

7. Borough Partnerships funds 2010-11

(Agenda item 7)

7.1 Stuart Dark introduced the report and provided an overview of the Basic Command Unit Fund (BCUF), which is administered by the MPA, and had a total spend of almost £8,000,000 in 2010-11. In 2010-11, the fund was used to support 370 projects which linked into confidence themes established by the MPA. The MPA Partnership Fund equates to £50,000 per borough, with a total spend of £1,641,000 in 2010-11.

7.2 The BCUF was used to support targeted pro-active projects throughout the year, for example during Halloween and bonfire night, when there is increased anti-social behaviour. The MPS also works with partners such as the Safer London Foundation and the Safer Learning Partnership, in order to identify funding streams which can be used to support further projects. The MPS is also working to support uniformed organisations, in order to improve coverage across London and to provide engagement opportunities with young people who are at risk of criminalisation. Members noted that as the BCUF is being reduced, and that it will be difficult to maintain any posts which were funded through the BCUF.

7.3 Members enquired whether the projects which are supported by these funds will be inputted onto Oracle, so that their effectiveness can be evaluated. All projects which are supported by the MPS will be on Oracle by October 2011, with the GLA also inputting projects supported by the GLA family. An analysis of best practice will be conducted by December 2011.

8. MULTI-AGENCY SAFEGUARDING HUB (MASH) INITIATIVE

(Agenda item 8)

8.1 Dave Zinzan introduced the report and provided an overview of the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hubs (MASH), which enable partners to co-locate to a single secure location and improve information sharing capacity. Fourteen boroughs have signed up to the London pilot scheme. The objective of MASH is for partners to identify the best support which can be offered for individual cases, so that the number of repeat referrals can be reduced. The cost of installing the IT systems required for a hub is approximately £50,000 - £100,000, and the MPS has allocated £1,000,000 funding for developing MASH across London.

8.2 Although MASH is currently focused on safeguarding vulnerable children, the MPS intends to progress into vulnerable adults and families, once MASH is established. The MPS has been engaging with health services, such as the General Medical Council and Mental Health Trusts, and is confident that they will become involved in MASH.

8.3 The benefits of the pilot scheme will be evaluated through interim assessments. Although there is a risk that local authorities will not provide funding; there is an evidence base that co-location of services through MASH does result in financial savings for partners, as the improved services lead to fewer referrals being received. It is also recognised that if MASH is implemented across London, then the additional boroughs entering the scheme will be less developed that those who took part in the pilot scheme. This risk will be mitigated through effective project planning of all boroughs developing MASH. The first two boroughs (Haringey and Harrow), will go live in October 2011, with the first evaluation of MASH being conducted in early 2012.

8.4 Due to the wider implications of MASH across London, it was decided that a briefing meeting should be scheduled to inform all MPA members.

Action: MPA to organise a briefing meeting on MASH for all members.

9. Development of Metropolitan Special Constabulary by Territorial Policing

(Agenda item 9)

9.1 Alan Horton introduced the report, which outlines the improved support and development opportunities for special constables. Whilst some special constables are permanently attached to work with specific teams in their boroughs, others are deployed to support teams as required. Deployment decisions are made by Borough Commanders, with performance assessments for specials being conducted in each borough.

9.2 Members commended the low wastage level of special constable. In order to monitor wastage; exit interviews and leavers reports have been conducted since July 2010. The primary reason for special constables leaving is that they are unable to meet the minimum time requirements. In order to address this; the recruitment information for special constables emphasises the requirement for specials to commit to16 hours per month. Members requested a briefing note providing a breakdown of the number and proportionality of BME and female special constables in each borough.

Action: MPS to provide a briefing note on the number and proportionality of BME and female special constables in each borough.

9.3 Members welcomed the addition of the ranks of special Sergeants and special inspectors, and enquired whether these higher rank specials have authority over regular police officers, and whether new arrangements will be made to accommodate this during the Olympics. Because special Sergeants do not receive the same training as regular MPS Sergeants, the two ranks do not have equal authority, as specials cannot conduct the same duties as a regular. Generally higher rank specials will only supervise special constables, although there is ongoing work to further the integration of specials into the MPS work force.

10. Vetting in the MPS - progress report

(Agenda item 10)

10.1 Allan Gibson introduced the report, and outlined the developments which have been implemented to improve consistency and completion times in the vetting process. The vetting unit is exceeding the set targets for completion times for vetting conducted on officers, staff and contractors. 96% of Counter Terrorism Checks are completed within 35 days, with an average check being completed in 20 days.

10.2 Members enquired whether a system had been put in place to identify MPS employees who joined prior to the implementation of the 1995 Vetting Police, and still require national security vetting. Although a system has been developed, which will also identify cases where vetting needs to be renewed; it is estimated that it will take approximately one year to populate with all the relevant employment data. The MPS reaffirmed that enhanced levels of vetting are conducted on all employees who transfer to new positions which require it, such as youth supervision posts.

10.3 Members enquired what action can be taken to improve completion times for individual vetting cases. The MPS does monitor the completion times, and is constantly considering ways to improve the system. Whilst the use of automated systems to process the cases would improve completion times; the MPS considers that in the current financial climate it is not feasible to justify the additional expense of implementing this system. Members acknowledged the issue of budgetary limitations, but noted that there is a business case for additional funding to improve the vetting systems.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback