Dispersal of groups and the removal of persons under 16 years (part 4, section 30 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003) – progress report

Report: 12
Date: 25 November 2004
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an overview on, and early use in the MPS of, Part 4, section 30 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, which provides new powers to permit the dispersal of groups of two or more. It also permits the return young people under 16 home who are unsupervised in public places after 9pm.

A. Recommendation

That the MPA note the contents of this report and the ways in which the new power has been used across London.

B. Supporting information

1. In December 2003 the Anti-Social Behaviour Act received Royal Assent and the powers contained within the various sections were introduced over a six-month period. The power to disperse groups and remove persons under 16 years, contained within Part 4, section 30 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, came into force on 20 January 2004.

2. Since January 2004, the dispersal power has been used 32 times in London in order to curtail groups committing acts of anti-social behaviour. These areas are detailed in Appendix A to this report. Dispersal Orders have been made to tackle a variety of significant and persistent anti-social behaviour. These have in the main been related to groups of youths causing anti-social behaviour in and around town centres or in the proximity of schools. This is in addition to youths and adults engaging in crime related problems e.g. associated with drug dealing, begging, street drinking and prostitution. Some examples of the use of dispersal notices are:

• Ealing Borough has used the Dispersal Power in order to prevent problems occurring between two local high schools.
• Islington Borough has enforced the ‘Nags Head Exclusion Zone’ to target the activity of illegal cigarette sellers.
• Haringey Borough has successfully disrupted the anti-social activity (urinating in gardens, noise nuisance, rubbish left, lewd comments) of a group of 30-50 Congolese people, mainly young men who do not live locally.
• Camden Borough have used it in the Somers Town area, to combat historic inter-group gang disorder and in the Camden Town area, to deal with groups of street drinkers, drug users and dealers.
• On Lambeth Borough, Dispersal Areas have been used to deal with street drinkers, drug dealing and the anti-social behaviour of groups in a number of areas, known locally as “Red Card Zones”.
• Westminster Borough have used it three times - the Piazza area of SW1 in response to an escalation in violence by aggressive street dwellers, in the Trocadero W1 and Queensway W2 in response to an escalation in crime and violence by young people.
• Hillingdon Borough has had 4 designated Dispersal Areas that all relate to youth ASB. The first one implemented led to displacement and the need for another Dispersal Area, so this was a good learning exercise for the borough.
• Hounslow. Used the power against a group who were intimidating and victimising a local family who had been subject to sexual assaults.

All of the above orders have so far proved very successful with significant reductions in disorder being reported.

3. The new powers are intended for use as part of a package of measures agreed with partner agencies in circumstances where other approaches have been tried and failed and the where the anti-social behaviour in question has become significant and persistent.

Authorisation

4. An officer of at least the rank of Superintendent (the Relevant Officer) may authorise the use of these powers in respect of a designated area

5. The Relevant Officer must have reasonable grounds for believing that any members of the public have been intimidated, harassed, alarmed or distressed as a result of the presence or behaviour of groups of two or more persons in public places in any locality in his or her police area (Relevant Locality) and that anti-social behaviour is a significant and persistent problem in the relevant locality.

6. Anti-social behaviour means behaviour by a person, which causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more other persons not of the same household as the person. The powers conferred by the authorisation are exercisable for a period specified in the authorisation, which does not exceed six months.

Power to Disperse Groups in a Relevant Locality.

7. Once the authorisation has been granted, if a constable in uniform has reasonable grounds for believing that the presence or behaviour of a group of two or more persons in any public place in the relevant locality has resulted, or is likely to result, in any members of the public being intimidated, harassed, alarmed or distressed he may give one or more of the following directions:

• Require persons in the group to disperse (either immediately or by such time as he may specify and in such way as he may specify).
• Require those persons whose place of residence is not within the relevant locality to leave it or any part of it (either immediately or by such time and in such way as he may specify).
• Give a direction prohibiting any of those persons whose place of residence is not within the relevant locality from returning to it or any part of it for such period (not exceeding 24 hours) from when the direction was given, as he may specify.

(There are occasions when directions may not be given. This is when groups are engaged in conduct under certain sections of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 or Public Order Act 1986.)

Powers to remove persons under16 years.

8. If between the hours of 9pm and 6am a constable finds a person in any public place in the relevant locality who he has reasonable grounds for believing,

• Is under the age of 16, and
• Is not under effective control of a parent or a responsible person aged 18 or over

he may remove the person to their place of residence, unless he has reasonable grounds for believing that the person would, if removed to that place, be likely to suffer significant harm.

9. Police Community Support Officers will also possess the power to disperse groups and remove persons under 16 to their place of residence.

Consultation

10. Consultation with the local authority (or authorities) should be at the level of the chief executive or such other senior officer in each authority as may be agreed with the chief executive in advance. This in no way precludes discussions at local level with elected representatives, community councils, residents/tenants associations, community groups, local youth groups, etc. Indeed, dialogue at this level should already have taken place if anti-social behaviour is an ongoing problem in the area.

11. The Relevant Officer should take full account of the views of the local authority and must obtain their agreement before reaching a final decision on whether to authorise.

12. The formal authorisation must also be made in writing and signed by the Relevant Officer giving it, and must specify:

• The relevant locality;
• The grounds on which the authorisation is given; and
• When the powers are exercisable, that is, the period for which it is valid (including specified days and/or times).

13. While there is no legal requirement for the senior officer to formally consult members of the community, it will be vital that the MPS engages as fully as possible with local authority and communities being affected by the disorder, This consultation should take place long before any consideration for such an authorisation. Indeed, the more that the MPS has engaged with local communities, and has tested what is and what is not likely to work, the better the chances of the dispersal provisions being effective. Intelligence on community views and community tensions will be invaluable in informing the decision on whether or not to seek authorisation.

Information to local people

14. Before any dispersal powers can be exercised by virtue of an authorisation, the Relevant Officer who made the authorisation is required to inform local people. The Act sets out 2 ways;

• by publishing an authorisation notice in a local newspaper (local radio has also been used) and by displaying notices in some conspicuous place or places within the locality. This notice must state that authorisation has been given, specify the relevant locality, and specify when the powers may be exercised.
• Diversity implications should be considered by making sure that all sections of the local community are able to understand the reason for the designation and the type of restrictions imposed.

Management of the order

15. Exercising the powers will require careful management over the period of the authorisation (up to 6 months, or possibly longer if the authorisation is renewed), depending on the number of areas designated. Each borough should have systems in place, which will enable any officers at any time to have up to date information on the persons who have been dispersed, from what location and for what reason. The guidance requires each borough are required to collate and retain such details.

16. The Safer Neighbourhoods Unit is in the process of designing an effective mechanism for gathering in and collating information on all areas of anti-social behaviour including Dispersal Orders and Crack House closures.

C. Race and equality impact

1. The MPS Safer Neighbourhood Unit within TPHQ (Territorial Policing Headquarters) is looking to develop a system to collect and formally evaluate dispersal data. Currently this information is not collected centrally by the MPS in a formalised or systematic way but on an ad hoc basis when required e.g. when the information is requested from the Home Office, MPA, ACPO etc. A form has been designed to capture all of the required information and provide a process for evaluation but this is awaiting approval before being introduced. The form would also contain information on diversity issues considered prior to the granting of any authorisation.

2. There is to date no evidence at this early stage of equality and diversity issues surrounding the use of the dispersal power emerging from any of the areas where the powers has been exercised. However, the MPS guidance from the ASB Team has highlighted the need for the power to be considered as part of a range of available tools to tackle on-going community issues in partnership. It is worth re-iterating the fact that the agreement of an officer of chief executive level in the local authority must be obtained before a dispersal area can be enforced and that this is not therefore a police-only power but a response to genuine community concerns following local consultation.

3. The policy lead for not only dispersal powers but also other ASB-related matters is the Safer Neighbourhood Unit (MPS Anti-Social Behaviour Team). Anecdotal evidence collected by the team suggests that so far in London, the power has been used across a wide range of diverse groups. Full guidance on the use of Dispersal Powers has been produced and is available via the MPS intranet site.

D. Financial implications

1. The first consideration in terms of costs are those of staff time where officers from local authorities, police and other partner agencies consult and problem solve community issues that may result in a dispersal area being authorised.

2. If a dispersal area is authorised there will then be costs in setting the designated area and advertising its existence. The legislation states that the designated area must be advertised in a local newspaper and/or a prominent place.

3. Difficulties have been experienced in some London boroughs over the expense of advertising in local newspapers – this is often up to £1000 and in one case £3000. This expense can often be attributed to a large advertisement on page 2 or 3 of the paper whereas it would obviously be a lot cheaper to have a brief article on page 2 or 3 that refers to a full page spread much later in the paper.

4. There have also been some difficulties in this regard whereby partner agencies insist on the dispersal area being advertised in the local newspaper and local police bearing the costs. This does not appear to take account of the fact that the issue is not a purely police issue and that the whole CDRP has a responsibility to address community problems.

5. Further costs to be considered are those of policing the dispersal area although this can be countered by the benefits to the community in terms of positive perceptions around crime and reassurance. PCSOs can also disperse individuals from designated areas. This also represents potential savings given that the PCSO establishment is increasing and thereby reducing demand on regular police officers.

E. Background papers

Home Office Anti-Social Behaviour website (www.together.gov.uk)

F. Contact details

Report authors: Inspector Mark Jenkins and Detective Chief Inspector David Palmer

For more information contact:

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

Appendix A

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback