Minutes

Minutes of the Co-ordination and Urgency Committee held on Thursday 31 May 2001 held at Romney House, 43 Marsham Street, Westminster SW1P 3PY.

Present

Members

• Toby Harris (Chair)
• Reshard Auladin
• Richard Barnes (Deputy Chair)
• Nicholas Long
• R. David Muir
• Richard Sumray
• Graham Tope, and
• Rachel Whittaker

Also in attendance

• Cindy Butts

Staff

• Catherine Crawford (Clerk)
• Peter Martin (Treasurer)
• Julia Smith (Policy Officer)

MPS staff

• Ian Blair (Deputy Commissioner)

Also in attendance: 5 members of the public and MPS/MPA staff.

Part 1

65. Apologies

(Agenda item 1)

Apologies were received from Peter Herbert.

66. Minutes: 22 March 2001

(Agenda item 2)

Resolved:
that the minutes of the meeting held on 22 March 2001 be agreed and signed as a correct record.

67. Draft proposals for Recommendation 61 Consultation Report

(Agenda item 3)

The Committee agreed to receive this report noting that it had been circulated late as the consultation process was ongoing and that several key responses to the consultation had only recently been received.

The report outlined the process for preparing an interim response to the Association of Police Authorities (APA) on police stops and gave details of the MPA’s consultation process on police stops that had included seeking a wide range of views from London’s community within the timescale provided.

The Committee welcomed the consultation process and the high profile, initiatives used in the process, and progress made by the MPA. In doing so, Members commissioned a further report to a full Authority meeting in the autumn that carried forward the work already undertaken on Recommendation 61 and that addressed wider issues, including considering the comments and responses received from key groups.

Members briefly discussed the work progressed by a small forum, which included; Dr Richard Stone (who was an adviser in the Lawrence Inquiry) Ian Blair, Deputy Commissioner and the Deputy Chair of Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee, Cindy Butts, on the definition of a ‘stop’. Arising from the discussion and the draft definitions outlined in the report, Members’ requested that, whilst this had been a good starting point, further thought on the definition was required. In particular, Members requested that consideration should be given to: police officers indicating why a person had been stopped; training implications for police officers, and further clarity on the nature of a written record of a stop.

Members welcomed the number of responses to the consultation by people using the questionnaire posted on the website and Members agreed that it was important that feedback should be given to those groups and people who had responded.

In conclusion, Members thanked officers of both the MPA and MPS for their continuing work on this issue.

Resolved:

1. that Members noted the proposed content of the initial draft submission to the APA;
2. that Members approved the process outlined in paragraph 19 of the report for approving the finalised responses to be submitted to the APA by 7 June 2001; and
3. that Approval be given to a further more detailed report which highlights the comments and responses from key groups to be considered by the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee in the first instance and then to a meeting of the full Authority in the autumn.

68. Progress for monitoring and reviewing MPS responses to HMIC recommendations

(Agenda item 4)

The Committee considered a report that outlined the current process operated to respond to HMIC recommendations. Whilst acknowledging that the current system for responding to those recommendations worked reasonably well, the report informed Members that as each MPA committee operates different processes and practices when responding to HMIC recommendations, the adoption of a proforma to enhance tracking and monitoring of responses to HMIC reports was suggested.

Members agreed that the Co-ordination and Urgency Committee would continue to determine which MPA committee would consider what HMIC recommendations.

Resolved:

1. that the Committee note and approve the process outlined in the proforma and to refer the paper to Chairs of Committees to consider the process outlined for monitoring and reviewing MPS response future to HMIC reports; and
2. that the process and proforma is reviewed, in consultation with MPS Inspection Unit, in twelve months.

69. Nominations of members to develop the MPA’s racial equality scheme

(Agenda 5)

Members were informed that the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 requires all public authorities, such as the MPA, to develop a racial equality scheme which details the actions and processes that the Authority would put in place to satisfy the requirements of the Act.

The report informed Members that the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach Committee (CDO) had considered the proposal for a small working group to be established to take this work forward and asked Members of this Committee to approve the groups membership

Clarification was given on the proposed format of membership of the working group, and in particular that the group would consist one Member from the Human Resources Committee and an officer from the Human Resources Department and that the representative from the Commission for Racial Equality would be in an advisory capacity.

The Committee agreed that as the issue of membership of all MPA committees would be discussed at the June 2001 MPA annual general meeting, membership of the working group should be deferred until after the MPA annual general meeting. It was also agreed that nominations should then be submitted to Chair’s of committees for consideration at the next meeting of this Committee.

Resolved:

1. that Membership of the working group be deferred until after the MPA annual general meeting and that following the annual general meeting nominations be submitted by Chairs of committees to the next meeting of the Committee;
2. that the proposed dates of meeting of the working group be noted.

70. Review of members’ remuneration and expenses

(Agenda item 6)

The Committee considered a report that informed of the proposal by the Greater London Authority’s Bureau of Leaders to commission a consultancy to review and make recommendations to the respective organisations in the GLA ‘family’ on the remuneration packages for Members of the five organisations

The report recommended that any review should include the MPA and to allow the Treasurer to assess the reasonableness of any costs the Authority would incur. Members were also asked to consider other implementation points including that the review be carried out by way of a single contract, as opposed to five separate contracts and MPA officers be delegated to participate assessment of tenders.

Resolved:
that the Committee agreed to participate in the review of Remuneration and Expenses for the GLA family, on the basis outlined in paragraph 5 of the report.

71. Respect festival

(Agenda item 7)

The Greater London Assembly, in partnership with such bodies as the National Assembly Against Racism and the Trade Union Congress, have organised a Respect Festival. The report informed Members that the aim of the festival was to create a day of celebration of the cultural contribution made by London’s diverse population and in doing so challenging prejudice and racist attitudes.

The report informed Members that the Mayor had invited the MPA and other functional bodies to participate in the festival. Members noted that this would be an opportunity to promote the MPA and its commitment to diversity.

Members also suggested that as part of the future budget process consideration should be given to an allocation for such events.

Resolved:
that the Committee agreed to contribute £10,000 towards the cost of the Respect Festival.

72. Members’ attendance at conferences

(Agenda item 8)

The Committee agreed to receive a tabled report on Members’ attendance at conferences and seminars as several key conferences and seminars were forthcoming and there was an urgent need for a process on how most value can be achieved.

Members supported the criteria for attendance to conferences and seminars as outlined in the report.

Members also agreed that where more than one Member wished to attend a particular conference that exceeds the total cost threshold of £1,500 and any conference that involves international travel would require approval from the Co-ordination and Urgency Committee.

Resolved:
that the proposed process for Members’ attendance at conferences and seminars as set out in paragraph 3 of the report.

The meeting closed at 4.05 pm.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback