MPA Gun Crime Scrutiny – final report

Report: 9
Date: 26 February 2004
By: Clerk

Summary

This report summarises the findings of the MPA gun crime scrutiny, which were considered by Co-ordination and Policing Committee on 6 February 2004.

A. Recommendation

That members approve the recommendations of the final report.

B. Supporting information

1. This report was approved by Co-ordination and Policing Committee on 6 February 2004 and has been referred to the full Authority at the request of the Chair.

2. In February 2003 Co-ordination and Policing Committee commissioned a scrutiny of gun crime in response to the rising level of armed criminality in London. Cindy Butts was appointed chair of the scrutiny panel, which consisted of eight other members and met five times in closed session, following committee approval of the terms of reference in May.

3. The scrutiny began with a period of research gathering, including a literature review, collation of performance information and a self assessment questionnaire sent out to all borough commanders and the head of relevant units. A report was commissioned to explain current MPS structure and policies and an academic researcher was employed to explore the link between guns and drugs.

4. Over three hundred and fifty individuals and organisations were then contacted by questionnaire. Key themes were explored in a series of evidence hearings - two borough commanders and an academic researcher gave evidence, along with a senior headteacher and two representatives from faith groups working with young people on gun crime. A local authority community safety manager and an outreach worker were also interviewed, along with an MPS officer from Operation Trident, and officers expert in witness protection and support for boroughs. Members attended a meeting of the Youth IAG and four written submissions were also received.

5. The report was drafted using the consultation findings and research information and sent out for consultation to all key witnesses and senior MPS officers. An executive summary of the report and a complete list of recommendations are attached as Appendix 1. The full report has been circulated to members and has been published on the MPA website.

C. Equality and diversity implications

6. The scrutiny set out to make contact with as many people as possible through the consultation process. Individuals and organisations from the community/faith sector were deliberately over-represented in the sample size and made up 65% of responses. The scrutiny identified that gun crime was an emerging problem for a growing number of communities in London. The expansion of the remit of Operation Trident proposed in recommendation three is designed to ensure that all minority communities receive a level of focus appropriate to the scale of the problem they are experiencing.

D. Financial implications

7. There are no additional financial implications arising from this report.

E. Background papers

• Full MPA gun crime scrutiny report (available on request)

F. Contact details

Report author: Sally Palmer, MPA.

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Executive summary

Background

1. Gun crime is currently high on the public agenda. During the scrutiny it emerged that a significant amount of similar work on gun crime was being undertaken by other public bodies including HMIC, the Home Office, the Youth Justice Board, the Greater London Authority (GLA) and the all party parliamentary group chaired by Diane Abbott, MP. The MPS had commissioned a report called Tackling Gun Crime in London, which was completed during the early stages of the scrutiny and also instigated a review of the terms of reference of Operation Trident while the scrutiny was underway. The scrutiny report has been produced during a period of change in the local and national response to armed criminality. The biggest challenge facing the MPS during the implementation of the scrutiny recommendations will be ensuring that all the separate initiatives underway are co-ordinated and form part of a coherent multi-agency response to gun crime.

Key findings

2. Initial research gathering revealed that the responsibility for tackling gun crime was split between boroughs and a number of different pan-London units within the MPS. In general boroughs deal with low level offences with more serious firearms incidents allocated to central units according to the ethnicity of the offender and victim, the seriousness or location of the offence and the likely motive. The response to black on black crimes in the form of Operation Trident was well understood and some guidelines had been provided in the shape of Special Notice 5-02: MPS guide for operational activity to tackle armed criminality 2002/03. However, during consultation a number of officers admitted that the plethora of units involved in gun crime made it difficult to ascertain who was responsible for what. The Tackling Gun Crime in London report initially proposed a single gun crime OCU as a way of resolving this issue. The number of officers processing intelligence was also of concern. The scrutiny has proposed that the MPS clarify which unit is responsible for what as a matter of urgency and that a single policy to tackle all types of gun crime be developed.

3. The remit of Operation Trident was raised during early research and by some key witnesses in the evidence hearings. Although written consultation showed that Operation Trident was the most recognised anti-gun crime initiative among the consultees it was felt that the focus on a single community was no longer helpful. Although gun crime still disproportionately affects the black community boroughs described emerging gun crime problems in other communities. The scrutiny therefore recommends that consideration is given to widening the remit of Operation Trident to include gun crimes on all minority ethnic communities.

4. A separate piece of research was commissioned by the scrutiny panel to look at the link between guns and drugs. Anecdotal evidence suggests that guns are used as a tool of the trade by organised criminals to protect drug markets and that tackling drug crime would reduce gun crime automatically. Most of the respondents to the written consultation questionnaire highlighted drugs as the root cause of gun crime. The research project and other analysis showed that there is some relationship between the spread of drug markets and gun use but that the exact nature of the link could not be quantified using existing information. The panel has recommended that the MPS response to drugs and gun crime, which are at present kept separate, should be more closely co-ordinated.

5. Diversion activities for young people were identified during research gathering as crucial to reducing gun crime long-term with a desire for image and status given as the most popular reason young people carried weapons. However, the lack of long-term financial support for community projects was highlighted as a major concern. The scrutiny panel has decided to build on a proposal originally made by the Not Another Drop team in Brent and work with the Disarm Trust to create a charity capable of co-ordinating and supporting the response to gun crime in London and cross the country.

6. A clear message arising from consultation with interested groups and individuals, as well as many police officers was the need for a complete ban on all replica weapons capable of being mistaken for the real thing. The scrutiny panel does not believe that new Government legislation goes far enough in restricting the danger posed by replicas – evidenced by the fact that nearly 60% of consultees said that replicas were easy to obtain in their communities. The MPA will therefore be strongly urging the government to consider an outright ban on replica weapons.

Implementation

7. The recommendations within this report have been amended following consultation with the MPS and the individuals invited to give evidence to the panel. The MPS will be asked to complete an action plan to record how implementation of the recommendations, along with other gun crime initiatives are being achieved. Recommendations for which the MPA is lead will be added to the progress report. The joint implementation plan will be monitored by the Co-ordination and Policing Committee and will be publicly available on the MPA website at www.mpa.gov.uk

List of Recommendations

Recommendation 1

The MPA recommends that the MPS clarify the roles and responsibilities and terms of reference of central units and boroughs in tackling gun crime and drafts a working guidance manual covering operational procedures by June 2004.

Recommendation 2

The MPA recommends that the MPS tactical assessment is supplemented by a continuing long term analysis of emerging trends in firearm offences, that this should become a fundamental part of any threat assessment and should be linked to the allocation of resources by December 2004.

Recommendation 3

The MPA recommends the MPS consider expanding the remit of Operation Trident to cover gun crime in other minority ethnic communities. The MPS should consult with marketing experts around the expansion of the Trident brand and IAG structure should be extended in tandem with any changes.

Recommendation 4

The MPA recommends that the level of serious firearm offences is considered as a factor in the borough budget setting process and that a process to assess the cost effectiveness of new gun crime operations is developed by December 2004.

Recommendation 5

The MPA recommends an assessment of the resources available to Operation Trident both currently and taking predicted demand into account is carried out by June 2004.

Recommendation 6

The MPA recommends that a feasibility study be carried out to explore the costs of linking the IT systems used to record drug and gun offences and should be reported back to the MPA by June 2005.

Recommendation 7

The MPA recommends that an analysis of the links between the drugs and guns markets should be carried out by November 2004.

Recommendation 8

The MPA recommends that the MPS ensure its response to drug crime is co-ordinated more closely with the response to gun crime and that consideration is given to setting up a joint focus desk by June 2004.

Recommendation 9

The MPA urges the Government to provide sustained resources for a national publicity campaign to provide young people with alternative role models both on a national level and through a programme of active development of role models within the community.

Recommendation 10

The MPA urges the Disarm Trust to expand its remit, becoming a national body co-ordinating a multi-agency response to gun crime as soon as possible. If requested, the MPA will consider what resources it can provide to support this work.

Recommendation 11

The MPA recommends that the MPS facilitate the development of a pan-London gun crime working group as an expansion of existing work on the MPS gun crime strategy by June 2004.

Recommendation 12

The MPA strongly urges the Government to consider an outright ban on all replica weapons capable of being mistaken for real weapons as a matter of urgency.

Recommendation 13

The panel recommends that a review of the long-term viability of witness protection following the introduction of the mobility scheme be carried out by the MPS and reported to the MPA by December 2005.

Recommendation 14

The MPA urges the Government to consider a publicity campaign following the introduction of the minimum sentence, to deter potential offenders by pointing out the lengthy sentence they can expect and the new techniques open to the police to catch them.

Recommendation 15

The MPA supports the Safer Clubbing Initiative and urges the MPS to continue to develop it and report progress to the MPA.

Recommendation 16

The MPA supports the charity Miss Dorothy.com and urges the MPS to consider working with it more closely in future.

Recommendation 17

The MPA recommends that the MPS report progress made on implementing the scrutiny recommendations, as well as other gun crime initiatives, to Co-ordination and Policing Committee every six months.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback