MPA Safer Neighbourhoods Scrutiny

Report: 6
Joint meeting of the Strategic and Operational Policing and Finance and Resources Committees
Date: 17 February 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report provides an overview of the MPA Safer Neighbourhoods scrutiny.

A. Recommendation

That Members note the

1. Safer Neighbourhood scrutiny recommendation
2. contents of this report

B. Supporting information

1. Met Forward, the MPA’s strategic mission was agreed by Members at a meeting of its Full Authority Committee in April 2009. A key commitment in Met Forward was to undertake a Safer Neighbourhoods (SN) scrutiny. In Met Forward it is outlined that the MPA would: consider whether SN resources are being deployed effectively; and, ensure maximum impact is being achieved from the investment made.

2. In March 2010 the MPA began to consider a primary focus for the proposed MPA SN scrutiny. The following two issues had to be taken into account:

• A great deal of research work had already been undertaken into the delivery of the SN programme in London by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Strategic, Research and Analysis Unit (SRAU). In addition there had been a number of national reviews. Any work the MPA undertook would need to build on this existing research.
• A new Territorial Policing (TP) Assistant Commissioner (AC) had recently been appointed. The AC was planning to undertake a review of TP. This review was likely to impact on the way Safer Neighbourhoods operated. Work undertaken by the MPA on Safer Neighbourhoods would have to be relevant to the TP review.

3. It was agreed a scoping study would be initially undertaken in order to determine issues for the future MPA scrutiny. Having considered existing research and the gaps in this research, it was decided that the principle focus of the scoping study would be: ‘What do partners and partner agencies need from Safer Neighbourhoods policing?’

4. The findings of the study were presented to the Strategic and Operational Policing (SOP) Committee in July 2010 www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/committees/sop/100701-09-appendix01.pdf One key finding was that a majority of interviewees were keen to explore how SN policing could be enhanced to better meet the needs of Londoners and partner agencies. Suggestions on ways forward included moving away from a ward based structure to a neighbourhood basis or ward cluster basis. Some interviewees also suggested a possible way forward could be to explore how resources could be better shared with Local Authorities (LA).

5. As a result of the scoping findings, it was agreed at the July 2010 SOP committee meeting that the MPA SN scrutiny would consider the existing SN ward based structure and the allocation of PCs and PCSOs to this ward based structure. The terms of reference were presented and agreed at the September 2010 meeting of the SOP Committee.

6. The consultation for the MPA SN scrutiny coincided with the MPS SN review - a key strand of the TP Development Programme. The MPS will be presenting the analysis, key findings and proposed ways forward from their SN review to the SOP committee in the coming months.

7. The full scrutiny findings are attached. The findings provide a comprehensive balanced analysis of what the MPA were told by participants – both community representatives and police respondents. The findings have been clustered under a number of themes, for example:

• the ward-based one size fits all approach
• role of SN teams
• role of SN Sergeants and SN PCSOs

8. Each theme explores how participants view the current SN policing model and how they would like the SN policing model to work in the future.

9. It is possible to condense the MPA scrutiny findings to two key points:

1. SN policing has been a huge success for the MPS. SN teams have bought a change to how Londoners relate to and perceive their local police.
2. A wholesale revision to how SN policing is delivered in wards is not required. Rather a majority of the participants requested the flexibility for Borough Commanders alongside LA partners and residents to devise a SN response that best met the needs of their boroughs.
   

10. The latter point is crucial as it supports the original intention behind the MPA scrutiny which was not to recommend a radical overhaul of SN policing, but to determine how the current model could be made more effective and efficient.

11. The MPS are in the process of analysing their borough consultation findings. The MPA understands they have had a strong response to their public consultation [1] . Initial feedback from MPS officers indicates a strong synergy between the MPA findings and the MPS review. For example:

• When asked what improvements they would like to see in relation to their Safer Neighbourhoods teams, the vast majority of MPS online respondents said they required SN teams to focus on tackling crime and anti social behaviour in their neighbourhoods; they required visible SN patrolling at particular times of the day/evening and night; and, they required SN teams to tackle priorities focused on community concerns. Community volunteers who took part in the MPA consultation also indicated they required SN teams to focus on visibility and dealing with locally agreed priorities.
• A majority of the MPS online survey participants feel that the ward based location of SN teams is best placed to deal with the needs of the local population. This concurs with the MPA findings. The MPA found the ward based approach is working in many London boroughs. A wholesale revision to the ward-based approach therefore would be unnecessary and excessive. Nevertheless where there are anomalies – such as town centers – it is equally important that SN teams along with LA and residents have the opportunity to explore whether there is a more effective approach than the ward based one.
• In regards to the Chief Executive meetings, representatives stated Safer Neighbourhoods policing should continue to be managed within boroughs. There was an agreement that a more flexible approach was required which allowed teams to work together in clusters or under joint tasking supervision.
• Feedback from Borough Commanders indicated every borough required flexibility to deliver according to locally identified needs. This response echoes what a number of police and some community participants told the MPA. MPA participants emphasised a need for local decision making and flexibility in the delivery of SN policing.

12. The MPA scrutiny and the MPS review found that throughout London, boroughs have adopted variations to the fixed ward-based approach to better meet local need. The Enfield example in the MPA scrutiny report is a good example of this. Therefore the MPA scrutiny and the MPS review provide an opportunity to formalise these arrangements and ensure that boroughs are operating within agreed parameters.

13. Finally, over the last few weeks there has been considerable press speculation about the future of Safer Neighbourhoods. The stories in the local and regional press appear to indicate that decisions have already been made by the MPS about the future of Safer Neighbourhoods and that these changes will undermine the confidence that Londoners have in the MPS to deliver and respond to local concerns effectively. Whilst it is inevitable that a review into Safer Neighbourhoods would cause concern amongst Londoners who have grown used to their local SN teams, the ways forward suggested in the MPA scrutiny (and the MPS review for that matter) have been devised to increase the effectiveness of SN policing.

14. SN policing has been a positive investment and way forward for the MPS and these benefits are still being realised. Ultimately the SN policing programme was introduced in London to increase reassurance and confidence in the police service and to address local crime and disorder concerns. The MPS needs to continue to build on the success of the SN policing programme and in order to do this they must be given the opportunity to regularly review the SN policing model and act on what they learn so that the SN policing model remains fit for purpose.

C. Other organisational & community implications

Equalities Impact

1. Any possible change to the existing Safer Neighbourhoods structure is likely to have perceived adverse and beneficial effects for all Londoners.

In making any changes to the Safer Neighbourhoods ward-based model, it will be imperative that the MPA and the MPS can provide a clear evidential framework to support why changes are required. The previous MPA scoping study and the scrutiny will be part of this evidential framework as will the MPS SN review and existing MPS data and analysis.

Met Forward

2. The MPA SN scrutiny was a key commitment outlined within Met Forward.

Financial Implications

3. There are no financial implications in regards to the MPA SN scrutiny, however, it is expected that there are likely to be financial implications in regards to the MPS SN review.

Legal Implications

4. There are no legal implications.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental implications.

Risk Implications

6. None

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Hamera Asfa Davey, MPA

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback