Minutes

Minutes of the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 4 February 2010 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Reshard Auladin (Chairman)
• Jennette Arnold
• Toby Harris (Vice Chairman)
• Jenny Jones
• Joanna McCartney
• Caroline Pidgeon
• Richard Tracey
• Cindy Butts
• Valerie Brasse

MPA officers

• Catherine Crawford (Chief Executive)
• Jane Harwood (Deputy Chief Executive)
• Bob Atkins (Treasurer)
• Siobhan Coldwell (Head of Policing Policy, Scrutiny and Oversight)

MPS officers

• Cressida Dick (Assistant Commissioner)
• Dick Fedorcio (Director of Public Affairs)
• Edward Solomons (Director of Legal Services)
• Richard Clarke (Director of Strategy and Improvement)
• Anne McMeel (Director of Resources)
• David Chinchen
• Steve Bloomfield

92. Apologies for absence

(Agenda item 1)

92.1 Apologies for absence were received from Christopher Boothman, Kit Malthouse, Steve O’Connell, Deborah Regal and Tony Arbour

93. Declarations of interest

(Agenda item 2)

93.1 None

94. Minutes

(Agenda item 3)

94.1 The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting held on 3 December. It was noted that it was ‘Joanne’ not ‘Joanna’ McCartney.

94.2 It was noted that a question raised in respect of the professional standards dip sampling paper, had not been answered. The Chair agreed that a response was needed.

Resolved - That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2009 were approved and signed as a correct record.

95. Urgent actions and urgent operational issues

(Agenda item 4)

None

96. Headline performance report

(Agenda item 5)

96.1 The Committee received a report that provided an overview of progress against targets set for Critical Performance Areas and other corporate measures featured in the Policing London Business Plan 2009-12.

96.2 User satisfaction had improved to almost 68% and there were encouraging signs of confidence in local policing. Encouraging trends were also apparent in issues such as residential burglary.

96.3 A member stated that ‘treating with respect’ was below target and had consistently been so in the MPS and asked what work had been undertaken to understand the reasons behind this. AC Dick replied that in terms of respect the focus was on the relationship between respect and confidence and also on working with key drivers, listening to needs and giving feedback. With regard to the key drivers a programme of master classes had been arranged for borough commanders and Safer Neighbourhood Teams in February and March.

96.4 The new diversity structure would lead a cross directorate examination across the whole police service, the respect category had been recognised as important and a national model was being created. The MPS’s comparative position was not positive and more analysis would take place.

96.5 The committee queried whether the issues arose because ethnicity or media coverage drove the results or if they were genuinely behavioural issues. Additionally, the percentage of people who had heard of their local neighbourhood teams was low at 34% and a member asked for the explanation on the SCD2 sanction detection rates being in the red.

96.6 In respect of the SCD sanction detection rate, a more detailed report would be presented to the next meeting. The focus had been the quality of victim care and improving the number of sanction detections. These would improve some time after the work had been completed. Another officer acknowledged that the level of awareness of Safer Neighbourhood Teams had been a disappointment. However, it had risen by 16% from the start. Initiatives were taking place and leaflets had been put through every door in London. There were possible issues with the brand and in the phrasing of the survey questions.

96.7 The deterioration in Wandsworth sanction detections on robbery, knife crime and in youth violence was queried. The member was informed that a response on the issue could be passed on outside of the meeting.

96.8 The committee asked which boroughs were featured in the survey. A member explained that with regard to Safer Neighbourhood Teams the branding was not just ‘Metropolitan Police’, in many cases the local council was on the front of the literature. If the council were viewed negatively it might impact on the survey results.

96.9 It was confirmed that the boroughs involved were Camden, Brent and Islington. The project had been run by the research team with the police and partners and the areas had been chosen because of their different profiles. It was noted that that branding was important, and that the single top-down target from government asks whether the police and local council were tackling crime. It was apparent from surveys that results differed when the question was whether the police were doing a good job locally. Anecdotally the low figures could be because a lot of the awareness-raising activity was partnership based.

96.10 A member requested that information be shared with committee members interested in the individual boroughs. An MPS officer agreed to arrange this.

96.11 The MPS was asked for explanation on the PCSO targets on sick days being in the red or amber. It was noted that every force had been affected by flu (possibly swine flu also) and the officer said that they could examine the reasons and provide an answer to the Chair outside the meeting.

96.13 The members also asked for further detail on the operation detailed in the presentation as it would be helpful to know whether the results had been as expected. This meant specifically whether the results were considered a success and if they could form the basis for the drug strategy. The operation had been included as a qualitative example and was linked to Blunt II. The committee was informed that it had been one of a number of operations across London to disrupt gangs and was a disruption of a drugs market with a known group of offenders.

Resolved – to note the performance against the Policing Plan and the MPS activity underway to improve outcomes.

Resolved further analysis on performance to be brought to the committee.

97. Directorate of Public Affairs – Thematic Performance

(Agenda item 6)

97.1 The report provided the committee with an overview of the Directorate of Public Affairs, comparing its targets and headline measures to its performance. The report also outlined how the DPA is contributing to the new MPS single performance measure of confidence.

97.2 It was explained that the DPA role for MPS was to provide professional communication services. This was carried out by raising awareness about MPS, promoting corporate objectives and achievements and providing 24 hour national and international media service. The Public Attitudes Survey was used to indicate whether the public felt informed about the work of MPS. There were peaks of 79% in Q3 2008 and Q2 2009, which coincided with the delivery of safer neighbourhood leaflets. In comparison the 2004 2005 figure had been at 48%. This increase in awareness had taken place at the same time that DPA resources had been reduced.

97.3 The other large area of work undertaken by the DPA was in advertising and marketing activity. Shortly before Christmas the Bumblebee campaign had been re-launched. 15% of those who had seen the campaign said they went online to get more information and 57% of those who had seen the campaign felt safer compared with 39% of those who had not seen it. The stage had been reached where it was difficult to change the proportion of people feeling informed about MPS without the resources being increased. One method of addressing this could be to use social media. MPS had a twitter account and pilot programmes were underway to assess the management of this. Additionally, an important issue was advice for staff using social media in a personal capacity. Committee members thought greater information was needed about the single patrolling issue. It was asked whether this was something the department could deal with or whether senior officers had to inform their staff that they should not talk about the issue.

97.4 In response to a question from the committee about branding, it was agreed that it would be beneficial for the Metropolitan Police logo to be obvious on the Safer Neighbourhood Team documentation, but the partnership dimension had to be considered.

97.5 The committee found the report helpful and that DPA was necessary to ensure that MPS communicated important messages to London. However, it was noted that some of KPIs used were not what were expected and referred to ‘new murders dealt with’. There was also some concern about how some of the figures could be interpreted e.g. that there appeared to be 50 press officers, answering five telephone calls a day, making two, participating in few media facilities a year and writing a press release every 10 days.

97.6 The Officer explained that some of the figures related to the five people in the press bureau rather than the 50 press officers. The core press bureau worked on a 24 hour timeframe and reallocated calls if necessary. The KPIs used were not indicating that DPA staff had investigated the crimes, but that effective communication had helped to solve them and allowed police officers to concentrate on policing.

97.7 There was a discussion about the MPS’s view on officers signing an online petition against single patrolling. In respect of staff use of social media, DPA’s current guidance was that it should only be on personal activity and should not bring the Metropolitan Police into disrepute. The guidance on this would be reviewed to check how it was managed. When asked if all marketing campaigns were managed by the six campaigning and marketing staff, the MPS confirmed that they were, adding that they were supported by external organisations.

97.8 Asked if press officers received overtime for the 24 hour coverage and if (B)OCUs had their own press officers, the MPS explained that the 24 hour responsibility was on a rota in the press bureau and the 10 staff worked over an eight week period. However, people were paid overtime if it was needed. The DPA overtime budget for the year was £126,000 and was expected to be under £100,000.

97.9 The MPS noted that In addition to the information in the report a number of OCUs had arranged communication meetings and worked on website management locally. Overall there were 70 staff at a local level with communication elements as part of their job. The management of this was that the majority of the reactive work was handled by the DPA and that local boroughs worked with local media and in partnership work with local councils. Significant issues went through a central logging system in the DPA, which was being rolled out locally.

97.10 Members asked if DPA were aware of Black Taxi Cabs offering to post details of illegal mini-cabbing to the officers at Charing Cross via Twitter and that this had not been taken up. It was agreed information would be provided outside the meeting.

97.11 The officer was asked if he acted as line manager for the 70 officers with communication as part of their role. Members then asked how the DPA worked with the department to pick campaigns and have them signed off. It was mentioned that the press release about CO19 officers patrolling the streets had contributed to the press focusing on it. Another member said that paragraph 35 referred to the desire to avoid police officers carrying out communication roles, yet there was reference to two boroughs doing this. It was asked what the implications for the central DPA would be if this took place.

97.12 The reference in the report to communication on the estate strategy was queried. The MPS explained that the DPA was not involved in the estate strategy work, it was a joint piece of work with an MPA officer about ongoing property issues. He acknowledged that the Safer Neighbourhood Team newsletters needed to be improved. The single patrolling issue was being led by the Assistant Commission on Territorial Policing. It was importance that the debate was brought back to the facts. Additionally, it had always been a challenge to stop officers having their say. The media policy states that any Inspector or above could speak about their area of responsibility, anyone below Inspector level needed the Inspector’s approval.

97.13 One possible resolution to the issue was to identify those with concerns and bring them together to address the issues. He then explained that he was not the line manager for those working in the OCUs, but had responsibility for quality of what was produced and an interest in the recruitment and progression of the staff. The DPA work on campaigns started with looking at the police priorities and commissioners were consulted about where the money should be spent. The DPA no longer had the resources to run year-round campaigns.

97.14 It was acknowledged that the CO19 story had not been the DPA’s ‘finest hour’. Members asked what lessons had been learnt. The MPS explained that the story had gone ‘out of control’. It had actually appeared in the South London press two months before and been reported positively. When asked if DPA staff understood the sensitivities about policing, the committee heard that all the aspects in this case had not been understood. It was pointed out that the police officers working on communication were mainly officers on reduced duties. It was noted that there was a great deal of interaction between the OCUs and DPA and a good working relationship. Additionally, they worked very hard and were highly motivated and sensitive to policing and community issues.

Resolved – To note the report.

98. Update on Human Rights Act 1998

(Agenda item 7)

98.1 The report explained what was being done within MPS in relation to implementation of the Human Rights Act, and was focused on the new requirement on authorities to make that they were clear on the actions taken. The paper outlined the decision to mainstream human rights activities, partly because the position had been reached where every new constable received dedicated training.

98.2 Committee members stated that the paper was interesting and demonstrated that a clear process was in place. They then asked how senior management checked the outcomes and asked if was linked to the police being compliant. It was felt that the complaints process could not be run through a human rights filter. The chair welcomed the paper, but disagreed with the paragraph that suggested monitoring compliance by the by authority was an additional bureaucratic burden, as the cost of non-compliance could be high.

98.3 The provision of extra training was provided to keep people up to date, in particular, a concern that Human Rights were barely mentioned in Public Order policing. A question was raised about whether the all the recommendations from HMIC were likely to be implemented or only a selection. The MPS responded that the question was whether the range in place was having the impact they wanted. The issue was primarily one of compliance and there had been discussion around the way quality impact assessments were handled and work would take with those designing the policies.

98.4 The same issues applied to the standard operating procedures and complaints. Tracking human rights issues in the complaints process was complex. It was agreed that it was important that bureaucracy was not used as an excuse. The Director of Legal Services explained that the matter was partly one of terminology around Human Rights. To a lawyer a human rights issue was one where specific breach of the rights preserved by European Convention on Human Rights had occurred. In terms of the complaint process this represented perhaps one or two claims per year.

98.5 This was not surprising because the Act had initially been written to reflect UK law, although it had since moved ahead of UK legislation. There was a great deal of work which could be done in categorising complaints and litigation. The Chair stated that the environment in which policing took place had changed and that the Human Rights Act had to be at the centre of policing. The MPS should be able to show their compliance through monitoring. Members concurred with this view and said that it was necessary before they could sign off the report.

98.6 The Chair suggested that recommendation 2 on page 25 be changed to say that MPA members agreed that a process started where MPS officers worked with MPA officers to determine a system. Another paper would be brought to committee in 6 months time.

Resolved

1. To note the extent of the work carried out within MPS to embed the Human Rights Act into everyday policing.
2. Further work to take place between MPS and MPA to organise a system for monitoring compliance.
3. A report to be presented on this in six months.

99. Cautions for carrying offensive weapons

(Agenda item 8)

99.1 The report had been produced as a result of the discussion following the Commissioner’s Report at the November 2009 Authority meeting and outlined the current situation with regard to cautioning offenders for carrying offensive weapons (as opposed to prosecution through the courts). The discussion at the November meeting was in relation to CS gas, but the report focused primarily on knife crime, so the committee could not be reassured that the OCUs were following policy.

99.2 It was noted that there was a rigorous quality assurance process and the rate of prosecution versus cautioning was monitored on a central and weekly basis. There were also management meetings on each borough. Since Operation Blunt II had commenced there had been dialogue with CPS on individual cases. The prosecution rate was around 90%, which was comparable to the start of Blunt and officers were reassured that the issue was being managed appropriately.

99.2 The report indicates that 50% of firearms possession cases resulted in cautions, and asked if this was a blanket policy. In response it was explained that it was not; the majority of firearms offences resulting in cautions were for CS spray, and it was often foreign nationals that unaware of UK regulations. He emphasised that cases where someone was in possession of for example 50 CS sprays would certainly result in prosecution.

99.3 The ethnicity data in the report was challenged. A separate paper detailing the equality impact assessment had been sent circulated to the committee. The proportionality differences between males and females receiving cautions 6% of males were cautioned compared to 26% of women. This was likely to be explainable on a case by case basis. Females were more likely to be carrying or storing offensive weapons for others.

99.4 The committee was concerned that the MPS did not collate details of knives and other weapons seized asked why MPS were not using the data to understand which types of weapons were being used. The MPS noted that it did know how many knives were recovered each day, but dip sampling was used to analyse the weapons. Particular types of weapons were highlighted, such as stealth weapons and that weapons were sent for forensic examination if certain elements were present.

99.5 There was a brief discussion about the work between the MPS and Trading Standards on underage purchasing of weapons. A member asked what was meant by ‘other offensive weapons’.

Resolved – To note the report and Appendix 1.

100. Main findings of the evaluation of the MPS youth engagement activities and next steps to be taken by the MPS as a result of the evaluation

(Agenda item 9)

100.1 The report provided the committee with an overview of the main findings of the Tribal Report, which would inform the MPS Youth Strategy action plan for 2010. Initially MPS had allocated £4 million to this work and with matched funding and other contributions believed £19 million had been raised.

100.2 There were benefits from the unique position of MPS and the depth of understanding they could bring and the support they could offer. The lessons from the evaluation were to identify the contribution model and the best activity to do this while looking at the value and benefits to communities. It was recognised that they would not be able to deliver the full range that they had done in the past, and therefore exit strategies were being worked on for some areas. However, the aim was still to work with the contributor model to encourage more partnership Premier League, Rugby Football Union and the Athletics Association had indicated their support.

100.3 The committee was supportive of the work MPS had carried out with young people. The main questions the MPA had always had were over the outcomes, the need to avoid duplication and the quality and result from the investment. Questions asked were why the examples provided did not refer to work taking place within boroughs and whether this was taking place in a coordinated manner. It was also not clear from the report whether Tribal’s work had focused on if/how young people were engaged with Safer Neighbourhood Team and Safer Neighbourhood Panels.

100.4 It was explained that the list did not cover the totality of MPS’s engagement and contribution. The youth engagement strand was about avoiding duplication, identifying issues and defining programmes of work. The Tribal Report was about adding value and the benefits including offering learning to projects at the local level and assist in the creation of the new children’s trusts across London.

100.5 Additionally, work had been carried out to discover the best practice within youth engagement and building trust and confidence. When asked if engaging with young people had been identified as a priority for Safer Neighbourhood Teams. The Tribal report didn’t appear to consider this aspect. The key issue was listening to views and responding. The results of the youth survey had been fed back to individual boroughs and each school that participated had received a letter. The work had also been fed back to the London Antisocial Behaviour Board.

100.6 The universal coverage of the MPS’s the youth engagement was discussed and whether financial constraints would mean that MPS would withdraw from targeted coverage. The MPS were keen to support a range of both and the fiscal challenges meant that it had to take place where partnership and community support could be engaged. Secondly, when the report talked about the activities which offered the best value for money it said that that was what communities wanted. The level of engagement with the BOCU funding for youth engagement and was highlighted and it appeared that a great deal of the engagement was focused on boys. It was noted that there had been a two way challenge on funding for the last three years, the new system was that the funding had to be reported into the MPA before funding was released.

Resolved – To note the report.

101. Domestic Violence and Child Protection

(Agenda item 10)

101.1 The report outlined child protection cases where domestic violence was a factor, MPS management of serious case review recommendations where domestic abuse was a factor and an overview of the joint working arrangements.

101.2 It was felt that the report highlighted the complexities of the relationship. The difficulties in obtaining the information from the MERLIN system were raised and further detail was requested outside the meeting. The MPS noted that information was not easily extracted from MERLIN. However, it was clear that MPS recognised the clear link and the risk children were at and that this was based on credible data from other sources and was built into risk assessments. A strategic MERLIN users group had reconvened and raised the issue that they were seeking the facility to extract the sort of information. The project was being scoped and initial indications were that it could be accomplished for the relatively minimal cost of £15,000. In depth research was taking place on the synergy between MPS work and the CSU. It was crucial that there was effective working and sharing of information.

101.3 The committee was concerned at the suggestion in paragraph 12 that the domestic violence might not be noticed by SCD5 staff and that few staff had relevant CPD training. It was noted that the first people on the scene were often from TP. It was critical that identification at this first stage was not wrong as it formed the MERLIN report. Members were told that that comprehensive training was given at all levels, although the committee had been told at a local level very few on the team would have undergone child protection training. The officer agreed to take this issue to TPHQ for further discussion.

101.4 The figures in paragraph 26 were also of concern as they did not appear match with figures that the majority of child sexual abuse took place within the family. It was explained that with regard to SCD 2 child victims, the majority of these were child on child offences. It was noted that this appeared to be increasing and that it was hoped that the paper presented on 4 March would have greater understanding of that.

Resolved - To note the report.

102. SCD Mediation Project

(Agenda item 11)

102.1 The report outlined the work carried out by the project to date, described the governance in place and raised some important issues, for example that there had not been as many referrals as envisaged and that there were some changes to make, such as ensuring that Trident could make direct referrals and building in further assistance from SCD3.

102.2 Members expressed their disappointment about the low numbers of referrals and asked about the dissemination and the organisations link to local groups. In some boroughs there had already been groups conducting mediation work, but they had not fitted the criteria. The Chair recalled that there had been significant debate on the funding for the project and that assurances had been made that there would be significant results. He foresaw difficulties arising when it returned for funding for 2011.

102.3 It was explained that the work was piloted in six priority boroughs and that the slow rollout had been planned to avoid overwhelming the company carrying out the work – since they were a new company. Internal and external reviews were planned for June to assess the impact. Additionally, the group were willing to link to mediation taking place in other boroughs. It was explained that the operation manager worked for the company carrying out the work and that it was not the police that were cold-calling facilitators. Members registered their concern about this and were told that it had been used as a last resort, and in the majority of cases had proved successful.

102.4 In response to a question about payment and whether the low workload meant reduced bills, the committee was told that the company was paid on a quarterly basis for a defined amount of work, which if it wasn’t delivered could be rolled over into the next quarter. If the stage was reached where they were not being used then a review would take place.

102.5 Referring to the discussion at this committee when the project had been agreed, there was a reference to the company concerned having had experience in Northern Ireland and Birmingham. The committee was told that it was a new company in London, which had taken information from work in other locations. It was stressed that it was a long process because it was necessary for the workers to be respected within the community. There was recognition that progress was slow but it was emphasised that it was a high risk business. It was not anticipated that MPS would return to the authority requesting a similar sum of money. The initial funding request had been for start up funds, if it proved to be a beneficial technique then MPS or MPA might be approached for a proportion of the money. Some of the work had been very effective and it was pointed out that if it avoided one murder then it was worth the cost of the entire project. The Chair stated that further details on this should be provided at a future meeting. It was also agreed that members would want to attend informal briefings on the work. A further question was raised about what links were being made to mediation projects already in place in boroughs.

Resolved – To note the report.

103. Blue Light Feasibility Study Report – Key findings and recommendations

(Agenda item 12)

103.1 A feasibility study had been carried out to establish whether the Mayor’s commitment to establish a ‘Blue Light’ Museum was achievable. The consultants had recommend that a Heritage Lottery funding round one bid be developed. It was unclear whether GLA family had relevant specialist experience to carry this out. Consultants had also made a recommendation that a Blue Light brand was grown by starting a web presence as assistance for the setting up of a possible future museum. It was suggested that this could cost up £250,000. Members were asked for guidance and their thoughts on the feasibility study and next steps.

103.2 The Chair said the main issue was whether in the economic climate they could afford the expenditure. If not then the issue was whether they should be engaging in the process. It was doubtful that they would have the capital stated in paragraph 14 and there were concerns that the conclusions in the appendix were unsupported.

103.3 Comparative information about other Museums showed that they relied on subsidy, even the Transport Museum in Covent Garden (i.e. in a prime location), required support from TfL. The proposed locations for the Blue Light museum were Greenwich or East London, which could create difficulties in attracting the visitors required to break even. The Chair summarised that all the members agreed that it was not a plan that could be supported in its current form, although they agreed with the principle.

Resolved

1. Members noted the content of the report
2. Members agreed the MPA should not support the completion of a round one London Heritage Fund bid.
3. Members agreed the MPA should not support the development of a Blue Light partnership and Blue Light online, unless the Mayor could provide the funding.

104. Appointments to outside organisations

(Agenda item 13)

104.1 This report asks the Authority to make appointments to MPA committees and to outside bodies and other representative appointments.

Resolved – Approval was given to appoint members to represent the MPA at several outside organisations. It was agreed Jennette Arnold would represent the MPA at the London Strategic Migration Partnership.

105. Report on the sub-committees of strategic and operational policing committee

(Agenda item 14)

105.1 This report is a summary of reports received by the sub-committees of the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee.

Resolved – The report was noted.

106. Exclusion of press and public

(Agenda item 15)

Summary of exempt items

107. SCD Mediation project (Part 2)

(Agenda item 16)

107.1 Members considered a report giving an update on the SCD mediation of conflicts since its September 2009 inception.

108. Exempt minutes of the meeting on 3 December 2009

(Agenda item 17)

108.1 Members considered the exempt minutes of 4 February 2010 and found them to be accurate.

The meeting finished at 16.31.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback