Co-opted Members

Report: 12
Date: 24 April 2003
By: Clerk

Summary

The report reviews the arrangements for appointing co-opted members to the Committee and invites members to make appointment for the new Authority year, which starts with the Annual Meeting on 26 June.

A Recommendations

That

1. the arrangements for the appointment of co-opted members be reviewed (see paragraph 4); and
2. if the Committee wishes to continue to have co-opted members to agree which co-optees and whether they are appointed in a personal or representative capacity. The proposed co-optees will be recommended for appointments for 2003/4 to the Annual Meeting of the Authority on 26 June.

B Supporting information

1. The Authority at its meeting on 23 May 2002 established the Consultation Committee as part of the new committee structure for the Authority. At that time the Authority agreed that the names of any co-optees to committees be approved by the full Authority. Committees can nominate co-optees on either a personal basis or as representatives of organisations but it should be clear in which capacity each appointment is made. If the latter, the Committee may wish to ensure that they hold a defined senior portfolio in the organisation.

2. At its inaugural meeting in July, the Consultation Committee decided to appoint co-opted members and at its meeting on 31 October 2002 the Committee agreed that its the co-opted members would be the Chair of the London CPCGs Forum, the Chair of the London Civic Forum, an elected ICV Panel member and a representative from the Enfield CPCG Youth Forum for a term of office up until the annual meeting of the Authority in June 2003.

3. Co-optees do not have a vote and their attendance does not count toward the quorum of the Committee. They are expected to abide by the Authority’s code of conduct for members in the same way as MPA members. The appointments are renewable annually although the membership of a co-opted member will deem to have lapsed if he or she misses three consecutive meetings.

4. The Committee is asked to review its appointment of co-opted members. In particular, to consider whether there is a suitable balance between the appointed and the co-opted members. If the Committee decides to reappoint any or all of the existing co-optees, it would be helpful if the committee formally confirms whether they are appointed in a personal or representative capacity.

5. Should members reach the view that it wishes to retain co-optees, the organisations below could provide added value to the key objectives of the Committee.

6. Youth perspective

Members may wish to consider inviting the Newham Youth Project, a representative from the Greenwich Youth Parliament or the Boyhood-to-Manhood project. Each of these organisations has employees/volunteers who are actively involved in engaging with and working with young people. All have staff who will be able to attend meetings of the Committee and all will be well placed to assist the Committee on its youth engagement agenda and advise on proposed consultation events.

7. Local authority representatives

Members may wish to consider whether a local authority representative, such as the chair or a member of the Association for London Government Community Safety Panel should be invited. This could provide an important link and assistance for the Authority in planning its consultation for the Annual Policing Plan. Such representation could also provide an invaluable overview of local authority consultation and engagement initiatives, which it currently lacks.

8. Independent Custody Visiting (ICV)

Although the current ICV representative has not been able to attend meetings, it is proposed that representation by an ICV should be retained. Steps are underway to seek a new MPA ICV representative. This should be confirmed shortly and details of the individual elected by the ICV Panels will be made available to members by means of a briefing note.

9. Faith representative

The Authority’s engagement with faith communities is not as well developed as are other areas. The Chair and Deputy Chair of the Authority, however, continue to attend meetings with key faith group representatives, who continue to have an interest in developing more purposeful engagement with the Authority. There are established organisations such as the Evangelical Alliance through which the Committee could seek a representative. The Commissioner already holds meetings with representatives from the Alliance, and other faith leaders. An approach by this Committee for a co-optee from the faith communities is likely to be met with a great deal of interest.

10. Subject to members’ view, officers will work up a proposal for how this could work to enable to Authority to have greater access to the work of these organisations and the ways in which they could assist the Authority in the delivery of its consultation strategy.

11. It is open to the Committee to appoint for a shorter fixed period - for example, to assist in a particular piece of work being carried out in accordance with the Committee’s work plan. Members will also wish to consider whether there are areas that are not covered by the current co-opted members.

C. Equality and diversity implications

The appointment to the co-opted members to the Committee enables the Committee to appoint representatives from a range of groups including those under-represented amongst the membership of the Authority and traditionally discriminated against.

D Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: John Crompton, Secretariat, and Julia Smith, Consultation, MPA.

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

London BME cracking crime partnership board

Vision

To be finalised

Role of the board

• To co-ordinate joint action on a London wide level to address the concerns of the BME voluntary sector working on crime reduction and crime prevention at a grassroots level.
• To provide a strategic overview and input into the BME crime reduction network run by Black Londoner’s Forum and London Action Trust.
• To act as a direct link between the London BME crime reduction network and statutory agencies ensuring that issues raised by the network are given due consideration.
• To receive and consider quarterly reports from the Management Committees of the respective organisation in relation to the BME crime reduction network.
• To look at emerging issues arising from the service and identify appropriate action.
• To evaluate the success of the BME crime reduction network in meeting original objectives.
• To work at a strategic level to increase the funding streams and bodies that could be accessed by the network.
• To ensure that there is an effective communications and media strategy in place to publicise the work of the appointed organisations and the community groups.
• To support an annual event/seminar at which the BME voluntary sector working on crime prevention/reduction, funding organisations and statutory bodies can learn about changes in the sector and emerging issues.
• The partnership board will not have a contract management role in relation to the London BME Crime Reduction Network, this will be the responsibility of GOL. Those providing the service in BLF and LAT will be accountable to their management committees.

Appendix 2

Membership

Chair

Lee Jasper, Policy Director – policing and equalities, Mayor’s office

GLA

Claudia Webbe, Mayor’s Advisor, Helen McDonough, Community Safety Manager GLA

GOL, Crime reduction unit

Ellie Roy, Crime Reduction Director, GOL, Lucy Dawes, Crime Reduction Advisor, GOL

MPA

Julia Smith, Head of Consultation and Diversity

MPS

Carl Bussey, Diversity Directorate

London Probation Service

Ann Divine, Chief Executive’s Office

ALG

Michell Adiyenka

London Federation of Black and Asian Drug and Alcohol Workers

Viv Ahumen, Chair of Black and Asian Drug and Alcohol Workers

Representative for BLF cracking crime sector

TBC

LDA

Luna Frank Riley

TfL

TBC

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback