Minutes

Minutes of the meeting of the Equalities & Diversity Sub-committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 22 October 2009 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Cindy Butts
• Jennette Arnold
• Kirsten Hearn (chair)
• Clive Lawton

MPA officers

• Shirani Gunawardena
• Natasha Plummer
• Bennett Obong
• Siobhan Coldwell
• George Fry

MPS Officers

• Dick Fedorcio
• Alastair Campbell
• Denise Milani
• Glen Allison
• John Whittaker

Others in attendance

• Sonoo Malkani
• Derek Inwood
• Gerard McGrath
• John W Howard
• Mulat Haregot
• Doug Lewins
• Ibrar Ahmed
• Gulzari Babber
• Jenni Chan
• Shivlal Vekaria
• Warren Scott
• Mark Healey
• Shawn Collick
• Halil Huseyin
• David McFarlane
• Andy Garrett
• Penny Banham
• Helen Williams
• Veronica Ball

22. Apologies for absence

(Agenda item 1)

Apologies were received from Michael Wadham (MPA).

23. Declarations of interests

(Agenda item 2)

No interests declared.

24. Minutes: Equality and Diversity Sub-committee 11 February 2010

(Agenda item 3)

Notes amended to reflect attendance of Doug Lewins and Marie Stewart

Resolved to approve the notes of the meeting held on 11 February 2010 as a correct record.

The chair informed the meeting that David Morris had recently passed away. The chair spoke of his passion, drive and significant contribution in campaigning for the rights of disabled people as well as the excellent support he had given to MPA Equal Opportunities & Diversity Board.

25. Communicating with London's diverse communities

(Agenda item 4)

25.1 The Director of the Directorate of Public Affairs (DPA) presented the committee with a report that set out how the MPS DPA communicates with London’s diverse communities.

25.2 The Director of DPA informed the committee that the MPS needed to identify the best methods by which to communicate and understand communities with the resources available. It was vital for the MPS to build trust and engage with communities. There have been successes such as Operation Blunt which is well known and has received several awards.

25.3 Members noted the very low percentage of disabled people being very / fairly well informed (56%). The Chair requested further information on how the MPS will address this.

Action: See appendix 1

25.4 The MPS noted that the internal headline measure from the corporate ‘Your Views Count’ survey reflect the whole of the organisation and are not exclusively referring to the communications activity undertaken by DPA.

25.5 The Chair requested that the DPA ensure work undertaken to engage with the LGBT community retains a focus on women as the activity undertaken to engage with LGBT communities tends to be focused on gay men.

Action: See appendix 1

25.6 A community member asked how the MPS was communicating and engaging with Trans media? Noted that during LGBT History Month, the MPS had online blogs from a gay male PC. It was suggested that next year could include blogs from a lesbian and transgender officer.

25.7 Members asked if transgender categories are captured within major surveys such as the Public Attitudes Survey (PAS). The Chair requested that the MPS clarify how the views of transgender people are captured on surveys such as PAS.

Action: See appendix 1

25.8 In terms of engaging and communicating with young people, the Committee was provided with an example of a new magazine targeted at young people called ‘The Beat’. This magazine had been commissioned by the Communities Together Team within Specialist operations (SO15), working with a number of other departments within the MPS. Members queried the extent to which this magazine would appeal to the target audience (10-14 years). It was noted that DPA became involved in this project after it had been commissioned.

25.9 The Chair said the MPS needed to bring engagement to 'life', in particular, the way in which it communicated with young people. If we are to produce magazines and leaflets they need to have content, or at least input, from young people.

25.10 A representative for Harrow CPEG suggested that to communicate and understand young people we need to employ young people from diverse communities and get them involved.

25.11 The MPS said that the number of young people working in public relations is very low. The MPS noted that they are unable to employ anyone under the age of 18 years.

25.12 The MPS are liaising and taking advice from Youth Advisory Teams as they have skills and innovative ideas when it comes to working with young people. A community member suggested further ways of engaging with young people through the youth council and youth parliament.

25.13 The chair of S.A.M.U.R.A.I. (Staff Associations Meeting Up Regularly and Interacting) noted that in the Public Attitude Survey (PAS) the ethnicity categories were very broad and did not capture other communities such as Turkish and Kurdish.

25.14 Another member suggested that if everyone is informed of police activity then they are more likely to feel included and be willing to get further involved.

25.15 The MPS were asked a question on media and what had proved to be the best source of media communication. The MPS were asked to identify which media was used to communicate with hard to reach communities and individuals.

25.16 The MPS responded that radio seemed to be an effective media resource and it is currently being used for the Safer Neighbourhood campaign, the MPS said that money has been budgeted for radio use and believe it is a good investment.

25.17 It was suggested that pirate radio stations could be a way of increasing engagement with broader range of communities, especially in targeting those affected by gun and knife crime. The MPS does not engage through this medium as it would send out confused messages.

25.18 The MPS are looking to improve communication with the Chinese community. The response from this community has been low and so the MPS are developing contacts to improve the situation.

25.19 Doug Lewins thanked the MPS for the report, however he noted that it would be useful if the MPS had identified where they are struggling so that people can help. He noted that pages 7 and 8 of the report referred to developments regarding training and Performance Development Review’s (PDRs) but did not mention what action is needed.

25.20 The MPS agreed that many aspects of communication are difficult; however plans are in place to improve overall communication with internal staff and communities. Any suggestions or ideas on how to improve engagement would be gratefully received.

25.21 A member of the Black Police Association (BPA) asked the MPS how many BME staff were on his Senior Management Team and what was grade or rank was the most senior BME member of staff / police officer within DPA.

25.22 The Director of DPA said that all his management team were of white British origin and that the most senior BME officer was pay 'band 3' and a police inspector.

25.23 The members noted that it would be very useful to have more a diverse management team.

25.24 The Director of DCFD said that she would take feedback from the discussion to the MPS Diversity Board, including the issues around strategic engagement by the MPS and how the MPS is profiling London, given the increasingly diverse and rapidly changing nature of communities.

25.25 The MPS were thanked for all their hard work and the report.

26. MPS Language Paper

(Agenda item 5)

26.1 In June 2009, the Finance and Resources Committee noted the decision of the MPS to put in place an integrated Language Programme solution and agreed £5.6m capital investments to support the Programme. This report provided members with an update on implementation on the programme.

26.2 The MPS informed the committee that the Rosetta Stone Programme would be used to teach officers new languages. The benefits of this will be that officers first at a scene will be able to communicate with individuals that do not speak English and be able to note down details of the incident and take victims/witnesses comments without delay.

26.3 A staff association representative thanked the MPS for the report, but questioned the impartiality of using officers as translators and if this would be an issue? Members requested information on the particular circumstances when a member of staff would be used as a translator, given the concerns discussed.

26.4 The MPS responded that there will be legal representative present and officers will be trained to 'legal level'.

26.5 A member wanted to know what the cost would be to train officers in other languages.

26.6 The MPS said that the programme will be very beneficial once officers are fully trained as third party interpreters are very expensive. The travelling time of interpreters must be paid for and waiting for an interpreter increases the time (and therefore cost) of custody.

26.7 A member asked if the officers trained in additional languages will be taken off their usual duties to travel to incidents where their language skills will be needed.

26.8 The MPS said that the idea is not to take officers away from their day-to-day duties but to increases their skills and flexibility.

26.9 A member asked a question regarding the pay for officers with additional language skills. Would they be rewarded for their additional skills?

26.10 The MPS said that officers with languages skills would not receive any extra pay or benefits for their extra skills or work.

26.11 In response to this the Committee thought it was very important that officers were rewarded in some way for the use of their language skills. They questioned why people would be willing to learn a new language and put this into use when they are not getting any benefits for doing so.

26.12 A member asked who the MPS have engaged with regarding the languages programme.

26.13 The MPS informed the committee that they had spoken with many interpreters and run 8 focus groups on the programme.

26.14 Members asked if the MPS had spoken to the communities who would be using this service what they thought about it.

26.15 The MPS said that they have not yet spoken to any communities or local people. They are looking at a structured steady approach to roll out.

26.16 Members requested more details on how the MPS will engage with communities on the Languages Programme. The MPS was urged to go back and speak to communities and the people that the service will be used by.

26.17 A Member raised concerns noting that the report contained references to British Sign Language (BSL), but there are other forms of sign language that need to be considered and taken into account.

26.18 The MPS said that this would be a challenge; however all communities do need to be considered.

26.19 Given the number of concerns raised within the discussion, the Director of DCFD said that she would take the issues back to Diversity Board as a matter of urgency in order to identify how to take this work forward. She would also speak with the MPS Cultural and Communities Resources Unit (CCRU) to understand the language needs of communities and how best to engage with these communities in the development of the MPS Languages Programme.

26.20 It was noted that the report contained information on using conference calls in custody suites to reduce costs, however the use of body language needs to be considered with this as it will not be identified when using conference calls.

26.21 The Chair stated that the MPS Languages Programme would need to come back to this Sub-committee or to the Communities, Equalities and People Committee in order to update Members of the progress in engaging with communities to develop the services to meet their needs. The Chair requested that the MPS provide a written update on the progress of the MPS Languages Programme Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) to the next meeting of the Equality Diversity Sub-committee.

Action: See appendix 1

26.22 The chair thanked for the MPS for the report.

27. Equality Standard for the Police Service

(Agenda item 6)

27.1 This report provided an overview on work undertaken by the MPS to implement the Equality Standard for the Police Service (ESPS).

27.2 The MPS informed the committee that the report was more of an update on recent activities as the Standard will be a lengthy journey.

27.3 The MPS informed the committee that the National Police Improvement agency (NPIA) are developing advice for Police Authorities to support scrutiny if the Equality Standard.

27.4 Members asked the MPS about the value in the Equality Standard, noting that it will only bring value if it brings positive change. The MPS responded that they were positive about the benefits of the Standard although acknowledged challenges to implementing this across the whole organisation including concerns about resources.

27.5 The Chair of S.A.M.U.R.A.I. requested that the Staff Support Associations are involved in this process given their role and link into communities.

Appendix 1

Actions from the Equality and Diversity Sub-committee of 22nd April 2010.

1. With regards to the Public Attitude (PAS) survey question 133, how will the MPS address that only 56% of disabled people felt ‘very or well informed’?

The purpose of carrying out local surveys is to generate consistent information about what the public thinks about policing in London. The PAS contains many of the key questions that measure performance through the eyes of the public.

Information about local policing activities is key to shaping public opinion. People who feel very well informed are more confident in their local police.

Research has identified differences in how disabled people access their information about the police. They are less likely to get information from national or local newspapers, advertising campaigns, radio, e-mail or the internet. However, they are likely to get information from local newsletters, letters from the police or having contact with police officers/staff.

One of the issues that need to be tackled is how disabled people can access information in a user friendly format. Most documents available at police stations are produced in a single format to meet the needs of the majority. However, there are a large number of disabled people who would find it difficult, if not impossible to understand the documents. Through the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate a system is in place to produce documents in an accessible format if a disabled person should request them e.g. for sight impairments- Braille, Moon , Large Print or Audio Cassette. For people with a hearing impairment- British Sign Language Video. For people with learning difficulties-Plain English/Easy Read guides.

The PAS is undertaken by an independent market research company. For visually impaired participants it is possible to increase the font size of the computer assisted personal interviewing screen. They also provide a large print version of the paper questionnaire. For hearing impaired respondents the company have used text phone or they will employ the services of a BSL interpreter. For those respondents who feel vulnerable then the company invite a carer to assist them or be with them at the time of the interview.

An analysis of the representation of Safer Neighbourhood Panels (SNP) in June 2008 indicated that 44.2% of SNP had members(s) representing the disabled community. Work has been undertaken to improve the representation on SNP ensuring they reflect the local population. Later this year the Central Safer Neighbourhood Unit intends to repeat this exercise.

The Strategic Disability Team has given presentations to all SNT supervisors on meeting the needs of the deaf and disabled people at community meetings. A guidance document on this issue has been produced and is widely available on the Strategic Disability Team intranet site.

A Deaflink Scheme is currently operating in Westminster, Bromley, Barnet, Lewisham, Camden and Waltham Forest. The aim of the scheme is to provide an enhanced and more accessible non-emergency police service to deaf, deafened and hard of hearing people in order to assist in removing the communication and attitudinal barriers that they routinely face in trying to contact their local police.

Lewisham Talking Newspaper provides a free service to blind or partially sighted people who live or used to live within the borough. Each month the local police provide information on a wide range of topics to improve public confidence.

Later this year the Violent Crime Directorate working with Newham Borough will be holding a ‘conversation’ event where local disability groups will be encouraged to attend to highlight the issue of under reporting of hate crime within the community.

DPA have worked with Disability News and British Deaf News and through the Strategic Disability Team have access to key individuals who are able to provide advice for bespoke projects.

The DPA intranet site provides a wealth of information and ‘toolkits’ to assist both DPA and borough staff to access ethnic and specialist media.

This is a snap shot of activity being undertaken across the MPS to engage with and inform members of the disabled community. Through the Safer Neighbourhoods communications network good practice is shared across the 32 boroughs.

2. How does the MPS ensure that the views of transgender people are captured on the Public Attitude Survey (PAS)?

The PAS uses random probability sampling to ensure the sample of respondents is representative of the population of London and is representative at the borough level, including ‘hard to reach’ groups. Probability sampling is the most robust sampling method and means that each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected.

The PAS is representative of the population of London as a whole and is in line with the census data in terms of ethnicity, age and gender. It is not possible to capture the views of all ‘hard to reach’ groups in the survey because as stated above the survey is a random probability sample. That is, we cannot select from a list randomly of those residents in London who are trans gender because we do not have any way of targeting these households randomly.

There are methods of capturing the views of ‘hard to reach’ groups and this generally is by undertaking bespoke research.

3. What work will the DPA undertake with the LGBT community to ensure a focus is retained on women as well as men?

DPA work closely with the LGBT team within the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate and LGBT liaison officers based on boroughs. There is no evidence to suggest that DPA’s activities are focused on one section of this diverse community.

4. What community engagement will the MPS Languages Programme undertake to ensure the services it provides are informed by those that will use them?

The Language & Cultural Services department of the MPS is a new department and is working with the assistance of the Diversity & Citizen focus Directorate to form a diversity strategy. This will include a community engagement plan to address various assemblies and to conduct surveys to determine public attitude to our services.

5. What further information can be provided on how staff will be used as interpreters? How will the concerns around impartiality be addressed if internal staff are enlisted in this way? If staff are providing interpretation services in addition to their normal responsibilities what structures are in place to compensate them for their time?

The MPS has no plans to use staff as interpreters. Interpreters will continue to be used for tasks within the CJ system i.e. interviewing detainees, witnesses and victims. Language & Cultural Services plans to enhance its use of its own staff to perform a variety of appropriate functions.

Some of these are in the specialist field assisting on operations for serious crime and terrorism, whilst others by contrast are of a local nature to assist boroughs to better engage with the public they serve.

The plan is supported by a language training programme to assess staff language skills, provide a skills gap analysis and provide further training where appropriate and necessary - this training will come with accreditation.

6. The Languages Programme is requested to provide a written update on the progress of its Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) to the next meeting of the Equality Diversity Sub-committee.

Savi Bhamra from the Diversity & Citizen focus Directorate is working with Chief Inspector Jon Thomson from Language & Cultural Services to produce a suite of EIA documents for each area of the service.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback