Progress report on CPCG funding for 2004/05

Report: 5
Date: 26 July 2004
By: Clerk

Summary

This report summarises the progress being made on the implementation of funding arrangements for Community Police Consultative Groups (CPCGs) for 2004/05 and invites the Committee to agree a number of funding recommendations. It also reports on further development work in line with previous Committee decisions

A. Recommendation

That

1. the Committee note the progress being made on the implementation of funding arrangements for CPCGs for 2004/05;
2. agree the recommendations as set out in paragraphs 30 – 37; and
3. receive a further progress report at its next meeting

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. The last meeting of the Consultation Committee, held on 13 May 2004, received a progress report on Community Police Consultative Group (CPCG) funding for 2004/05. The Committee noted the progress being made on the implementation of funding arrangements and asked to receive a further report at its next meeting.

2. The work of the CPCGs does not take place in a vacuum and must be viewed in the context of the total work of the Community Engagement Unit and the history and background of the MPA’s relationships with the CPCGs

3. This report is therefore divided into 4 parts:

1. A summary of the main areas of the Unit’s current activities excluding the role and function of the Independent Custody Visitors which will be the subject of a separate report to this Committee
2. A brief history of the CPCGs and their relationship with the MPA
3. Progress on the implementation of the 2004/05 funding arrangements. It should be noted that this section of the report contains recommendations for approval by the Committee
4. Further developments in the relationship with the CPCGs

Community Engagement Unit work

4. The Home Office Green Paper, which was issued in November 2003, proposed a move towards increasing community engagement and recognises that accountability is a key issue in strengthening community engagement in policing. It advocates the exploration of ways of ensuring that local people have a greater say in how their communities are policed. This should take place at three different levels: strategic, borough and neighbourhood. The Unit has responded to this by re-expressing its work within this framework.

Strategic

Safer London Panel

5. This is the subject of a separate report to the Committee.

London Civic Forum

6. Follow up to last year’s workshops to establish what further consultation and engagement activities have been carried out by the groups involved since last then and to identify specific policing concerns with respect to those groups.

Public Agency Research

7. There is a wealth of information that can be mined from other agencies’ surveys and the Community Engagement Unit has begun a programme of extracting information from them. Summaries of the intelligence drawn from these other sources will be presented to the Committee as it becomes available.

Equalities Groups

8. The Equalities Groups are: Homeless, Youth, Elderly, LGBT, Disability, BME, Faith Groups and Refugees. To date the Unit’s work has been mainly with the following:

• Lesbian Gay Bi-Sexual and Transgender
• Disability
• Black and Minority Ethnic communities

This work will be ongoing and consultation will be initiated with other Equalities Groups as resources permit e.g. Faith Groups by Spring 2005

Borough

Community Police Consultative Groups

9. This is dealt with in the remaining sections of the report.

Pilot Models

10. Pilot models for community engagement and consultation are underway in Islington and Hammersmith and Fulham and are reported on below.

Neighbourhood

11. The emergence of the Safer Neighbourhood Project is potentially one of the most exciting developments in local policing for a very long time. Each neighbourhood has a dedicated policing team of six led by a police sergeant.

12. There are currently 96 Safer Neighbourhoods averaging three per borough, which will expand over the next four years to 624 or 20 per borough on average. The effect of the growth of the Safer Neighbourhoods on the CPCGs will need to be carefully monitored.

13. The Community Engagement Unit is in contact with the officers responsible for the co-ordination of this initiative and has a standing invitation to attend the Safer Neighbourhood monthly Project Managers Meeting. It is very important that the community engagement and consultation aspects of Safer Neighbourhoods are actively supported.

Linkages

14. The Unit is in the process of establishing and developing the links between strategic, borough and neighbourhood activity and channelling the outcome into the MPA’s strategic planning process. It will also be developing better ways of briefing members on how such activity affects their particular interests and responsibilities

15. We are also seeking to network with other Police Authorities to map and develop good practice in community engagement and consultation. This will mainly be done through the Association of Police Authorities and the Home Office supported Citizen Focussed Practitioner Panel.

Community Police Consultative Groups and the MPA

16. The MPA on its inception in July 2000 inherited responsibility from the Home Office/MPS for the recognition and funding of the CPCGs, which had been set up in the mid 1980s. Little if any development work had been carried out with the Groups prior to the advent of the MPA.

17. CPCGs have their origins in the disturbances in Brixton and elsewhere in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Scarman Report concluded that the 1981 riots represented an “outburst of anger and resentment against the police” stemming, in part, from the adoption of policing methods which did not command the support of the local community.

18. Under Section 106(3) of PACE it had been the role of the MPS to make consultation arrangements acting on the guidance of the Home Secretary. This responsibility was then transferred to the MPA and has since been reinforced by a number of other Acts and HMIC reviews and recommendations.

19. Although CPCGs were the natural outcome of PACE and Home Office guidance, nowhere in the act is there any stipulation as to the creation of CPCGs or what their form should be.

20. It may be that this lack of clarity, coupled with the outcome of the 2001 MPA/MPS Best Value Review of Consultation caused the MPA to seek Counsel’s opinion as to the nature of its relations with the CPCGs. Counsels Opinion, which was reported to members in October 2002 seemed to suggest that CPCGs were established to fulfil the statutory obligations of the police authority and were to be regarded as the agents of the MPA.

21. The Authority went on to seek to impose a model constitution on the Groups and other related reforms. It was during the ensuing period of discussions with the Groups that the validity of the legal advice was questioned and a second Counsel’s Opinion sought. This was received in July 2003 and came to the opposite conclusion from the original advice; that is to say that the CPCGs are not agents of the MPA but unincorporated associations. That is to say, that they are voluntary and community sector bodies which the MPA chooses to fund. With hindsight, it seems regrettable that the MPA took such a legalistic attitude to the CPCGs rather then investing in community development support for the Groups and thereby strengthen community police consultation.

22. In the first quarter of 2004, the Community Engagement Unit carried out a rigorous grant application and assessment round for the 2004/05 financial year. The Consultation Committee agreed the Unit’s recommendations on 18 March 2004. Since the establishment of the Community Engagement Unit and the last funding round it has be possible to begin a dialogue and to begin giving such support to the Groups.

Progress on the 2004/05 funding arrangements

23. The Consultation Committee at its meeting of 18 March 2004 agreed the funding arrangements for the Community Police Consultative Groups (CPCGs) for 2004/05. The Committee’s decisions on funding can be divided into four categories:

• Band 1 – Twelve months funding
• Band 2 – Six months funding extended to 12 months subject to conditions
• Band 3 – Three months funding extended to 12 months subject to conditions
• Those Groups where it was agreed that no funding would be made

24. All Groups were notified of the Committee’s decisions by letter on 24 March 2004. They were also notified of their right to appeal against those decisions. Six Groups exercised their right to appeal. These were Barking and Dagenham, Brent, Havering, Hillingdon, Kensington and Chelsea, and Waltham Forest. The Appeals Panel met on 24 May 2004 and the outcome is reported below.

Groups in Band 1 – (twelve months funding)

25. Funding for 12 months – nine months to be paid in advance and the final three months (final quarter) to be paid upon receipt of accounts and progress report by end September 2004. These include Barnet, Bromley, Haringey, Harrow, Hillingdon, Kensington & Chelsea, Kingston, Lewisham, Merton, Richmond, Sutton, Waltham Forest and Westminster.

26. Three Groups from the above category appealed with the following result:

• Hillingdon received an additional £2,000 towards its work with young people and subject to the submission of its Service Level Agreement
• Kensington and Chelsea will receive an additional £5,000 to support the work of its Community Panel. This is subject to the Group obtaining matched funding from the Local Authority or an alternative source
• Waltham Forest received an additional £2,000 for special project work with young people

Groups in Band 2 – (six months funding)

27. Funding for an initial 6 months – to be extended to 12 months subject to satisfying conditions as agreed by the Committee These include Bexley, Brent, Camden, Enfield, Hounslow, Redbridge, Tower Hamlets and Wandsworth. One Group from the above category appealed with the following result:

• Brent had its appeal disallowed

28. An officer of the Community Engagement Unit has visited all Groups in Band 2 and it is anticipated that all of them will satisfy the conditions required to release the remaining 6 months funding.

Groups in Band 3 – (three months funding)

29. Community Engagement Unit staff have been in consultation with all the Groups in this Band to ensure that conditions are satisfied in order to release further funding. These include Croydon, Ealing, Hackney, Lambeth, Newham and Southwark. The following recommendations are made for the Committee’s approval.

Croydon

30. A further 3 months funding be provided to allow for the resolution of administrative arrangements.

Ealing

31. A further 3 months be provided subject to the satisfactory resolution of the current staff situation.

Hackney

32. A further 3 months be provided to allow for the review of administrative arrangements.

Lambeth

33. Further funding to be provided upon receipt of a satisfactory work plan and the MPA being confident that the Group can carry out the work plan in an effective manner.

Newham

34. That a full years funding be provided as soon as documentary evidence is supplied that conditions have been met.

Southwark

35. That a full years funding be provide on receipt of a satisfactory work plan.

Barking and Dagenham

36. Based on the Appeal Panel’s decision, it is recommended that no further funding to be provided until the Group has restructured its membership and executive and a satisfactory work plan is submitted. A review to be carried out in September 2004.

Havering

37. The Appeals Committee upheld the Committee’s decision that no grant be made to this Group but allocated a sum of £ 3,000 to assist with restructuring.

Greenwich

38. Work is continuing on arrangements to restore a borough based consultation process. Once the arrangements have been finalised a request for funding will be put forward.

Hammersmith and Fulham/Islington

39. In both boroughs funding and recognition was withdrawn from the original CPCG. A proposal to establish a Community Safety Board (CSB) of about 20 people from relevant community and voluntary sector groups has been agreed between the MPA and key players in both boroughs. The size of the Board will permit rational discourse and the development of a strategic approach to policing and community safety issues. A further development will be that both Community Safety Boards will be much more outward going in terms of ensuring that diverse community interests are reflected in their discussions and recommendations. The inaugural meeting of the Hammersmith and Fulham CSB will be held in September and the Islington CSB in October 2004. Progress reports will be made to the Committee on a regular basis.

Developments in the relationship with the CPCGs

40. Not all of the March 18 Consultation Committee decisions concerned the direct funding of CPCGs. There were a number of decisions concerning future development work some of which required officers to consult with the London Chairs' Forum. Progress to date is set out below.

Good Practice Guidelines

41. An officer of the Community Engagement Unit has been working with the London Chairs Forum to assist in the production of updated Good Practice Guidelines for the CPCG.

London Chairs Forum

42. A meeting took place in April between officers of the London Chairs' Forum (LCF) and of the Community Engagement Unit to discuss possible joint development planning. We are awaiting a response on the training and development needs of the Groups as expressed through the LCF.

43. A proposal has been made for a joint meting between officers of the LCF, Community Engagement Committee and Unit to discuss the future role of the LCF and possible funding support for that role. It may be best to plan such developments in an incremental manner allowing both parties to assess progress at each stage.

CPCG administration

44. When the CPCGS were set up in the mid – 1980s the majority of Groups made arrangements with their borough councils to provide administrative support via the committee clerks. A number of problems seem to originate from that decision. These include:

• A disparity of cost not easily correlated to levels of service
• A concentration on administration rather than community development support
• An isolation from developments in the voluntary sector including diversifying funding bases and in the case of the ‘independent’ Groups taking proper responsibility for staff employment

45. Officers will review the current support for the CPCGs in consultation with the London Chairs Forum and make their recommendations to the Committee in time for them to be implemented during the 2006/07 funding round.

Good practice

46. As well as supporting general development there continues to be a need to take one or more aspects of the Groups’ work and showcase good practice. This good practice should be widely shared and could form the basis of an annual conference that records and celebrates this work.

47. The CPCGs are part of the MPA’s multi – layered vision for community engagement and the move towards local accountability for policing. They have their place at the borough wide level in the Green Paper 3 tier model, and are encouraged to adopt a positive approach to the Safer Neighbourhood Key Individual Networks.

48. The Community Engagement Unit staff have embarked on a more a positive developmental approach rather than being entirely dominated by process - important as that is. Ideally, such activity should not take place at the same time of year as the funding round but might involve an annual meeting between the MPA and the CPCGs in the early summer of each year.

C. Race and equality impact

A major component of the improvements that are being encouraged in the work of CPCGs that officers have met with, relate specifically to ensuring greater integration of equality and diversity provisions in their governance processes and work activities.

D. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications from this report. Funding for the CPCGs is included in the MPA 2004/05 budget.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: Christopher Calnan, 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