Review of Independent Custody Visiting

Report: 7
Date: 13 November 2003
By: Clerk

Summary

Custody Visiting (formerly Lay Visiting) has been taking place in London for over 21 years. The ways this service has been provided across the local Panels has varied considerably. In July 2002, Independent Custody Visiting (ICV) became a statutory function of the MPA. The Home Office has subsequently developed a of Code of Practice outlining the responsibilities of the Authority for the operation of the scheme in order to ensure a consistent and effective custody visiting service in London and throughout the UK. This report proposes there be a review of the service and that detailed discussions be undertaken with Panels and other key stakeholders in order to progress this review.

A. Recommendations

That

1. members agree the proposal to initiate a review of Independent Custody Visiting in London;
2. agree the proposal in paragraph 14 to appoint a consultant to undertake this review;
3. agree that a detailed proposal be developed for consideration by this Committee at its next meeting; and
4. note the community reassurance and equalities implications for the service and agree that this report be considered by the Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board due to the relevance to the Authority’s overall equalities agenda;

B. Supporting information

Race and community reassurance imperative

1. Independent Custody Visiting (Formerly Lay Visiting) was established by the Home Office as a direct response to the racial and community unrest in Brixton and other inner cities in 1986. The initiative was introduced in order to reassure the black, minority ethnic communities about the treatment of detainees who were arrested and detained in custody by the police. The first scheme was set up as a pilot in Brixton and was overseen by the Community and Police Consultative Group (CPCG). Following the ‘Brixton experiment’, Lay Visiting schemes, as they were then known then, were established in every borough in London, some were aligned to local CPCGs and reported the outcome of their work to the local community through the CPCG, others established more ‘independent’ ways of working. Overall there remains a lack of clarity and consistency in the processes for meeting the reassurance objective of the scheme, and the service provided to those detained in custody it remains somewhat unclear.

2. The service was established on a voluntary basis, and has continued to operate in this way, with many local authorities providing some administrative support to ICV Panels. The Metropolitan Police Service funded the scheme, until 2001 when the MPA assumed this responsibility, along with that of funding of CPCGs.

The accountability of ICV service to London

3. Independent Custody Visiting in London has been very effective and the Panels have, over the many years provided the service with little or no overall supervision or guidance, except that provided by the Home Office (which many Panels continue to rely on to inform the ways in which they operate at a local level). Although the MPS previously provided funding for the Panels, it exerted no influence on the operation of the local schemes, so that the Panels might maintain their independence of police influence. This has continued to be the main strength of the scheme.

4. Until the establishment of the MPA in 2000 and the passing of the Police Act 2002, there was no organisation with overall statutory responsibility for the delivery of independent custody visiting service in London. The Home Office Code of Practice for Independent Custody Visiting has provided clear guidance to all police authorities, outlining the requirements for the organisation of the service. The MPA is committed to implementing these and has been incrementally doing so for the past two years.

Administration

5. Whilst the scheme has continued to be delivered, there remain widely varying practices and performance. A recent analysis of the level of administrative support that Panels receive has highlighted this variance, with Panels receiving anything from 6 to 14 hours per week administrative support. Some administrators are appointed by the Panels, others by the Local Authority to service the Panels; others undertake the same work on a purely voluntary basis and therefore receive no salary. The salary ranges from £16.00 per hour to no salary. The quality of the work of the Panels does not appear to differ significantly whether administrators are paid or unpaid.

6. Probably the greatest differential can be seen in the level of funding received by Panels. This ranges from £16,000 to £2,500 for similar sized Panels, who largely carry out the same level of visits (54 per year, excluding special visits) and hold Panel meetings (approximately one per 4 – 6 weeks. That being said, it is apparent that the higher cost primarily relates to the salary cost of the Administrator to the Panel.

7. The local Panels have all developed slightly different ways of carrying out their roles and delivering the service in their local communities. Whilst much of this is to be welcomed, it has presented challenges, which the Authority has been progressively addressing over the past three years. This Committee has received previous reports outlining the progress that has been made in this area.

ICV and the MPA’s equalities agenda

8. The service provided by Independent Custody visitors continues to be valuable one for community reassurance, although the levels of deaths in police custody and the mistreatment of detainees has seen vast improvements since the introduction of the scheme over 21 years ago. However, it is apparent that this aspect of the Panels’ work has been given less importance over the years, and it is one that could be a component of one of the Authority’s key functions to ‘maintain public trust and confidence in the police’.

9. There are other aspects of the Authority’s work that impact on the delivery of the ICV service; these are the recommendations arising from the Best Value Review of Equalities (2001) and the development of the MPA’s Service Improvement Plan which outlines some key performance measures for independent custody visiting and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. The MPA Race Equality Scheme (RES) also outlines the ways in which the service will enable the MPA to meet the statutory General Duty and Specific Duty of the Act.

10. The Authority and the MPA Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board have agreed that the Authority should work towards achieving the Local Government Equality Standard, it is likely that the independent custody scheme will be identified as one of the key services that is delivered by the Authority, and therefore may be subject to a higher level of equality scrutiny than it has to date.

11. In light of the above, members are asked to support the suggestion that this report be referred to the Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board so that it is aware of the work that is being proposed.

Proposals for the reorganising the scheme

12. A great deal or progress has been made in the delivery of the scheme since it was introduced, including the need to ensure that the service provided through the operation of the scheme is seen as part of the overall performance of the MPA, rather than an ‘add on’ that it has inherited.

13. The Code Of Practice on Independent Custody Visiting produced by the Home Office and issued to all police authorities in April of this year lays out a range of administrative arrangements that the MPA has now become responsible for implementing; these include:

• organising the infrastructure of the ICV scheme
• the recruitment and conditions of service of administrators as well as volunteers delivering the service
• training for administrators and visitors and
• overseeing the quality of the service.

14. Whilst progress has been made in some areas this has been piecemeal. There is now need for a fundamental review of the operation of all aspects of the operation of the scheme, the ways in which the service is delivered and the community informed of the outcomes. Such a review will take time and expertise, and it is therefore proposed that independent consultants be invited to tender to undertake this work. Panel chairs and administrators have already been informed that this work will need to take place and it is proposed that initial proposals are explored with them at a previously arranged meeting in December. The comments and suggestions arising from that meeting will inform tender proposals.

15. It will be vital to keep Panels fully engaged with the process and it is therefore proposed that, in addition to the regular chairs and administrators meetings that are held, the Panels be given the opportunity to be members of the small project group that will oversee the review.

16. If members are agreeable to the proposals, a detailed proposal will be developed for the full consideration of this Committee at its next meeting.

C. Equality and diversity implications

The introduction of the ICV scheme was one of the first significant race and community relations initiatives aimed at reassuring and developing public trust and confidence in the police. The proposals outlined in this paper will strengthen that aim and assist the Authority in delivering a number of its equalities service performance objectives. An equalities impact assessment will be carried out on any proposal developed to identify any likely adverse impact that the proposed arrangements will have in relations to equalities.

D. Financial implications

The costs of consultants to review the service are expected to be affordable within the budgeted resources. The review should lead to a more cost effective service, producing savings or the opportunity to improve the service at no extra cost.

E. Background papers

• Code of Practice on Independent Custody Visiting – Home Office April 2003
• The Scarman Report 1986

F. Contact details

Report author: Julia Smith, MPA.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback