Terms of reference and objectives of Community Engagement Committee for 2004-05

Report: 11
Date: 26 July 2004
By: Clerk

Summary

This reports proposes key strategic and policy objectives for the Community Engagement Committee for 2004-06 and invites members to confirm its terms of reference and to discuss how they want to operationalise its priority areas.

A. Recommendation

1. members comment and agree the proposed strategic priorities for the Community Engagement Committee for 2004/05; and

2. agree that further progress on the priority areas be brought back for members’ consideration at its next meeting of 14 October 2004.

B. Supporting information

1. The Committee’s terms of reference as agreed by the Full Authority at its meeting of 8 July 2004 are attached as Appendix 1.

Governance, monitoring and review

2. These terms of reference provide the MPA with a clear focus for the implementation of its community engagement agenda. While they cover broad areas of activity, the challenge for the Committee is to receive and consider issues on key areas of concern in such a way that, rather than overloading members with information, reinforces its governance and scrutiny role. The terms of reference identify the following areas upon which the Committee will wish to receive regular reports and performance information.

Towards an MPA Community Engagement Strategy

3. The MPA is charged by statute (GLA Act 1999, Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Local Government Act 1999, Police Reform Act 2002 etc) by mandate and guidance (HMIC, Audit Commission etc) and by its own objectives (to hold the Metropolitan Police Service to democratic account and to ensure trust and confidence in the police service) to consult and engage effectively with all Londoners – including those who live and work in the metropolis, visit and study here, and those who work for MPS itself.

4. The work of the Metropolitan Police Authority is already moving the nature of the community engagement agenda from not just consultation and passive consent but to real involvement. It is important in this context to emphasise that the community, is not merely an additional resource to the police to help them do policing. Community interest, engagement and influence upon crime and disorder priorities and resource allocation are an essential part of the community accountability and partnership processes that the Metropolitan Police Authority is actively pursuing.

5. One might presume that the purpose of community engagement is self-evident. However, even the most cursory review of the existing plethora of community-police consultative arrangements demonstrates a huge array of different purposes and multiplicity of different outcomes. What this suggests is that more effort should be spent on strengthening existing methods and structures and ensuring clarity in identifying the nature of participants, intent and intended outcomes of each community engagement and partnership mechanism.

6. Different community engagement and accountability mechanisms therefore need to be applied to different community objectives at different organisational levels. For example:

• Strategic level - force wide, pan London
• Operational level - borough level
• Community level - neighbourhood and ward level

7. A number of recent reports have identified the present confusion around what should be ‘the division of labour’ between the MPA and the MPS – who owns the processes of public consultation and engagement? Should the MPA lead on (for example) the gathering of Londoners’ views on overall strategic priorities while the MPS leads on local more tactical issues with the public it serves? Or should the MPA seek to own all consultation, partnership and engagement arrangements – sharing the information gained, increasing its profile with the London public – at all levels and local and pan London, strategic and tactical? Alternatively is the role of the MPA merely to set standards and scrutinise against these standards – leaving the MPS to carry out all consultation activity, reporting back on key issues emerging.

8. How does the MPA set a boundary between governance and public consultation? For example, in considering devolving responsibilities to a local level, are the existing CPCGs, CDRPs or other local bodies, mechanisms for consultation or governance at a borough level? What scope is there for experimenting with more local forms of governance (as explored in the Home Office Green Paper)?

9. The above noted challenges and others, which have been sparked by the MPA’s work over the last few years, require resolution. It is therefore proposed that a draft Community Engagement Strategy, including actions plans and targets be presented to the Community Engagement Committee for its review and adoption by December 2004.

MPA communications and public relations

10. As noted in a separate report to the Committee on the Home Office report “Involving the Public the Role of Police Authorities”, police authorities generally suffer from an appalling low level of visibility and public awareness.

11. This report found that:

• There is no widespread understanding of how the police are accountable. Some believe they are accountable to the Home Secretary, others to local authorities, a few that the police are accountable to none but themselves. The truth is that the accountability is shared. But almost no one understands the current arrangements. For example, very few had heard of the Police Authorities, let alone understood how they worked.
• There was a consensus that the public does not currently have a say in policing decisions.
• Only a few members of the public wanted to know how to give their view on how the police force is run, mainly because they generally felt that no-one would listen to them.

This presents a significant challenge to the MPA.

12. The challenges posed above therefore, need to be examined through the prism of urgently addressing the public awareness and visibility of the MPA. It is therefore proposed that a much fuller public education and awareness strategy of the role and function of the MPA be developed for the review and adoption by the Community Engagement Committee by December 2005.

Serving diverse communities

13. London’s diversity includes characteristics not only of race, ethnicity, language and immigrant refugee status. It also includes huge differences in crime and safety experiences, and thereby different policing needs based on age, gender, sexual orientation and mental and physical ability. Further layers of over ever increasing diversity that impacts upon policing – and thereby methods of community engagement and accountability processes – include the complex and overlapping differences and divisions that exist in terms of people’s values and beliefs, lifestyles, life chances and levels of disadvantage and deprivation.

14. The dramatically changing and mobile nature of the population clearly creates greater urgency for more purposeful community engagement processes and accountability practices that are accessible and equitable for all sectors of the population. An integral part of the MPA’s community engagement activities and strategies therefore will require diversity and equality impact assessments.

Community Police Consultative Groups

15. In 2001, the MPA took the decision to work through local Community Police Consultative Groups (CPCGs) to undertake local consultation. Funded by the MPA, the Committee will wish to receive regular reports on the evolving partnership with CPCGs as well as provide the CPCGs through its London Chair Forum, the opportunity to bring forward concerns and issues on a regular basis.

Independent Custody Visiting Panels

16. The MPA has a statutory responsibility for custody visiting, and as such the Committee will wish to receive regular reports not only of the present review of the programme and the implementation of recommendations but also of emerging issues and concerns that have been identified by the Independent Custody Visitors.

Committee priorities

17. In summary, the proposed priorities for the Community Engagement Committee are:

• To adopt and publish a comprehensive Community Engagement Strategy including action plans and targets for implementation by December 2004
• To increase the visibility of the MPA by establishing an MPA public education and awareness strategy.
• To oversee the development of processes and procedures that ensure the viewpoints of Londoners inform the whole of the MPA decision – making and planning process including the annual policing plan.
• To assume the MPA’s governance responsibilities with respect to scrutinising the community engagement performance of the MPS and to h old the MPS to account for continued improvement.
• To review and promote a robust range of community engagement processes at the local, borough and pan-London levels that strengthen the level of Londoners involvement and influence over policing.
• To oversee and monitor the community engagement budget and performance of the MPA and MPS.

18. Clarification of roles and relationship with the MPS and establishing an MPA Community Engagement strategy cannot but strengthen community accountability and awareness. Implementation of a robust range of community engagement processes cannot but strengthen the level of community trust and confidence in policing. A more purposeful public education role for the MPA can only encourage a greater interest and willingness on the part of the public to become actively involved in policing issues. The Community Engagement Committee, in order to ensure that the MPA is able to reflect and represent the views of the public in vigorous and robust fashion must be able to play a strong visible community development and advocacy role.

Committee’s relationship with Londoners

19. The MPA has instituted a ‘Link Member’ role for MPA members with particular boroughs. It has also instituted the ‘Lead Member’ role for particular programme areas such as CPCGs and ICVPs. In addition, committee members have taken key roles in various community engagement programme initiatives and activities. To ensure representation and input into its decision-making process from all sectors of the community, the Community Engagement Committee has also co- opted non-voting community members to its meetings.

20. In order to encourage greater visibility, transparency and accessibility in the affairs of the Committee, it is recommended that officers report to the next meeting, for members’ consideration:

• A proposed timetable for meeting with key stakeholder groups and organisations, including CPCGs and ICVPs as part of the Committees’ regular schedule of meetings over the coming year.
• A proposed list of different sectors and organisations (i.e. faith groups, disability etc) that could add value to the Community Engagement Committees’ agenda and a timetable of meetings that can only be scheduled outside the formal Committee meeting cycle.

C. Race and equality impact

Both the content and process proposed for implementing the Community Engagement Committees work reflects the realities of London’s diversity and more purposively ensures that this work is more inclusive and representative of all sectors of London population.

D. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications to this report.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: Tim Rees, MPA.

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Community Engagement Committee - Terms of Reference

1. To develop a community engagement strategy and policies for the MPA and to promote and monitor the development of effective arrangements for MPS to engage with local communities in the delivery of local policing services and in building safer neighbourhoods.
2. To lead on all matters relating to the Authority’s communications and public relations strategies and systems.
3. To advise the Authority on ways of raising the profile of the MPA and making the community and partner organisations aware of its role and work.
4. To consider all matter relating to MPA and MPS consultation strategies and processes, in consultation with other committees as appropriate.
5. To ensure that where consultation is carried out it engages with, and reflects the views of, London’s diverse communities.
6. To review the results of consultation undertaken to inform the policing plan before consideration by the Planning Panel.
7. To ensure that best value is achieved from the various consultation initiatives.
8. To consider all matters relating to Community Police Consultative Groups and Independent Custody Visiting Panels, including approval of their annual funding.
9. To have due regard, in exercising the committee’s responsibilities, to equal opportunities generally, the general duty of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and the requirements of any other equalities legislation.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback