MPA Youth scrutiny

Report: 5
Date: 29 May 2008
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report (Appendix 1) presents the findings and recommendations of the MPA Youth Scrutiny 2007/08. It is the product of an analysis of six months of intensive research into young people’s relationships with the MPS and their experiences as victims, witnesses and perpetrators of crime in the capital.

A. Recommendation

That members:

1. approve the findings and recommendations of the MPA Youth Scrutiny;

2. MPA officers, in consultation with the MPA Youth Scrutiny Panel Chair, devise appropriate communication and monitoring mechanisms for the implementation of the recommendations; and

3. the MPS provide a formal response to the MPA Youth Scrutiny at the 24 July 2008 Full Authority meeting, including details on how recommendations approved for the MPS will be implemented.

B. Supporting information

1. The Youth Scrutiny was commissioned by Full Authority in October 2007 with the aim of building a fuller and more comprehensive understanding of how young people themselves relate to the police and of their experiences of crime and victimisation. The Youth Scrutiny Panel was essentially reassured to discover from extensive consultation that the MPS Youth Strategy broadly addresses the concerns and expectations of young people. The MPS Youth Strategy lays out a corporate joined up response to youth engagement, youth victimisation and youth offending and the direction of travel is endorsed by the findings of the MPA Youth Scrutiny.

2. The MPA Youth Scrutiny considered young people's relationships with the MPS and their experiences as victims, witnesses and perpetrators of crime in the capital. The particular success of the Youth Scrutiny was to arrange lively and constructive debates with a wide sample of young Londoners. Approximately 1,000 young people and adults took part. The engagement of young people in these sessions enabled MPA Members and, importantly nine senior MPS officers, including the Commissioner, to hear young people’s views trenchantly and directly expressed, rather than through an adult filter.

3. Young people and adult stakeholders were encouraged not only to focus on problems but were also asked to identify possible solutions and ways forward. The recommendations have their foundations in what was suggested by stakeholders, both young and adult, who took part in the consultative programme. There is nothing earth shattering in the recommendations. Their validity lies in confirming that adult theories are substantiated by young people’s experiences and legitimises current MPS responses to youth crime.

4. A panel of members comprising Richard Sumray, Cindy Butts and John Roberts informed and directed the Youth Scrutiny from October 2007 to April 2008. In order to ensure that the Panel had the necessary breadth of experience and expertise two external partners were invited and agreed to join it: Susannah Hancock, London Regional Manager, Youth Justice Board, and Camila Batmanghelidjh, Director, Kids Company. Rose Fitzpatrick, DAC, MPS, also joined the Youth Scrutiny panel as an expert advisor. This panel was supported by a diverse group of 26 young Londoners – the Youth Scrutiny Reference Group (YSRG) - who were also involved from the outset.

5. In conclusion, MPA Members are confident that the MPS direction of travel is right. What now needs to be considered is whether sufficient resources and energy is being applied to one of the most pressing priorities facing the MPS today.

C. Race and equality impact

1. In preparing the terms of reference for the Youth Scrutiny, expert advice was sought from the MPA Equality and Diversity Unit (EDU). The EDU assessed the various approaches to be adopted and provided clear direction, including, importantly, that the MPA hear from a diverse array of young Londoners.

2. In recruiting the MPA young people’s reference group, consideration was given to approaching youth groups and organisations that worked with young people across all six equality strands and from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds. It is of interest to note that it was difficult to recruit young white working class men to take part in the process, and attempts to engage young Asian women in the process were likewise also problematic.

3. Advice from the MPA EDU highlighted a need to ensure that particular consideration was given to two groups of young people: those that are disproportionally impacted upon by police practice and policy, and those that are unlikely to take up engagement opportunities. In acting upon this advice, two particular approaches were adopted: ad hoc sessions with specialist groups were organised to supplement the overall consultation, and consideration was given to how the MPA could engage with young people who would be less able or inclined to take part in consultations. An example of an extra measure taken to ensure accessibility includes offering a ‘virtual member’ place on the MPA YSRG to young people that were keen to participate but were unable to attend the monthly meetings.

D. Financial implications

The MPA Youth Scrutiny was met from existing MPA budgeted resources. The approximate budget was £50,000. Approximately £40,000 was spent on staff costs, with the remaining £10,000 spent on venue hire, refreshments for the four large consultation events and reference group costs.

E. Background papers

• MPA Youth scrutiny - Young people and the MPS, Coordination and Policing Committee, MPA, 27 September 2007, Report 10
• MPA Youth scrutiny  Young people and the MPS, Terms of reference, Full Authority, 25 October 2007, Report 7

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Hamera Asfa Davey and Andy Hull

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback