Minutes

Minutes of the Equal Opportunity & Diversity Board held on 2 February 2006 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Kirsten Hearn (Chair)
• John Roberts (Deputy Chair)
• Cindy Butts
• Damian Hockney
• Aneeta Prem

MPA officers

• Catherine Crawford (Chief Executive and Clerk)
• Annabel Adams (Deputy Treasurer)
• Laurence Gouldbourne (Head of Race and Diversity)
• Hamida Ali
• Doug Lewins (Policy Development Officers Race and Diversity Unit)
• Bennett Obong (Project Manager, Race Hate Crime Forum)
• Gemma Walters Performance Analyst
• John Crompton (Committee Services)

MPS officers

• Deputy Assistant Commissioner Rose Fitzpatrick (Diversity and Citizen Focus)
• Commander Rod Jarman (Territorial Policing)
• Commander Sue Wilkinson (Diversity Lead Specialist Crime Directorate)
• Claire Appelby (Director, HR Services)

Also present:

• Lee Jasper
• Nicky Grant, Vice-President Welfare & Student Affairs, University of London Union
• Dave Farrington, LGBT Youth and Mental Health Project Worker, Consortium of LGBT voluntary and community organisations
• Pinakin Patel, Principal Corporate Equalities Officer, Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Partnership) Department, London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham
• Lynn Strother, Director, Greater London Forum for Older People
• Marion James, member, Commissioners Women’s Focus Group
• Lindsay River, Project Co-ordinator, Polari in Partnership
• Marion Thom, Chair, Association of Greater London Older Women, AGLOW
• Nicola Humberstone, Development Worker, Older Lesbian Project, AGLOW
• Antony Smith, National Development and Policy Officer, Older Lesbians, Gay Men and Bisexuals, Age Concern, England
• Gordon Deuchars, Age Concern, London

44. Apologies for absence

(Agenda item 1)

An apology for absence was received from Cindy Butts. A number of apologies from members of the invited community organisations were also received.

45. Declarations of interests

(Agenda item 2)

No interests were declared.

46. Minutes – 1 December 2005

(Agenda item 3)

Resolved - That the minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2005 be agreed and signed as a correct record.

47. Chair and member’s update

(Agenda item 4)

John Roberts reported that he had taken up an invitation to join the MPS Volunteer Programme Board. His remit would be to ensure that diversity issues are imbedded in all areas of recruitment and training of volunteers. He had represented the MPA at the multi-faith holocaust memorial day held by the GLA As the link member for Lambeth he had taken part in the presentation from Lambeth at the Race Hate Crime Forum.

John also said he had represented the MPA at Home Office meetings on i) recruitment and retention of black and minority ethnic communities (BME) and ii) recruitment of BME communities to the high potential and development scheme. He had been asked by the Home Office to be on a board to look at race and diversity through impact assessments for the proposed restructuring of the police service of England and Wales

Resolved – That the report be noted.

48. Follow up to previous meeting

(Agenda item 5)

The Board noted that the MPS had provided answers to all the outstanding points from the discussion at the previous meeting. These appeared as an Appendix to the minutes of the 1 December minutes.

49. Reports on focus item

(Agenda item 6a and item 6b)

And

50. Discussion on focus item

(Agenda item 7)

Standing Orders were suspended for this item to enable contributions to be made from non-members.

The MPA Performance Analyst outlined some of the main areas of criminal activity where older people (defined as aged 60 plus) were most likely to be victims. The most important areas were theft and handling of stolen goods and burglary especially distraction burglaries. Indeed 87% of all victims of distraction burglary are aged over 60. The numbers of older people reporting hate crimes were low - for example, only 3.5% of victims of racist crime and 2% of victims reporting homophobic crime were aged over 60.

Introduction

The Chair said it was good that the representatives from the community present covered a wide age range and would suggest that the meeting look at urge from the viewpoint of compound discrimination. She felt that the MPS was to be congratulated on producing a well researched and interesting report.

Opening presentations from community groups

Lindsay River, Project Co-ordinator, Polari in Partnership gave a short presentation. Lindsay explained that Polari was a is a very small organisation which worked on policy issues in relation to older members of the LGBT community and how particularly how services were provided. There seemed to be an assumption that older people were always heterosexual and it could be quite intimidating to challenge this. She had done some work with groups on policing issues. The main finding was that homophobic harassment and other hate crimes were more likely to take place in or near the home rather than for example at or near a gay venue. The need for good liaison arrangements between the police and housing providers and social services had been flagged up. The work had also revealed other settings where homophobic crime was committed such as hospital wards. She would urge that whenever community safety issues were being considered by a public body it was important that the concerns of older members of the LGBT community were taken into consideration (see also below on reporting of crime.)

Antony Smith, National Development and Policy Officer, Older Lesbians, Gay Men and Bisexuals, Age Concern England said that it was noticeable that most of the older members of the LGBT he spoke to made the point that they appreciated the vast changes in attitude which the police and this meant that thee community in turn now saw the police as people who protected rather than persecuted them. The police would need to maintain the momentum for change to reassure all members of the LGBT community that this was all ‘for real’ and not a marketing exercise.

There were three things which came up consistently in discussion with older gay men in particular.

He stressed the need for records relating to criminal offences that were no longer offences to be expunged. This included the pre-1967 situation where men were criminalised just for being gay. Until that issue was properly addressed, there would be a residual body of men who felt criminalised no matter how the law might stand today. Example of how this continued to affect the lives of older gay men was the reluctance to do any voluntary work that involved a criminal record check and a reluctance to report hate crime . He also felt there was a need for the police to give out clear messages about things like changes in the gross indecency laws.

It would be very helpful if there was continued encouragement and support to report crimes and reassurance that if crimes are reported they would be taken seriously and the person reporting it would be treated with respect.

There was then a short theatre presentation from the drama group drawn from older lesbians in the Association of Greater London Older Women (AGLOW), which challenged stereotypes and preconceptions relating to ageism and lesbians.

Reports from MPS and MPA

In introducing the MPS report, DAC Fitzpatrick (Diversity and Citizen Focus) stressed that her Directorate was determined to look at age across all the diversity groups. Commander Jarman (Territorial Policing) said that preparing the report had been a very useful reminder for everyone of the importance of bearing in mind issues around age. Commander Wilkinson Specialist Crimes said the Directorate was particularly keen wherever possible to retain the service of officers after they had completed their 30 years of service. The training courses at the Crime Academy did pick up issues relating to elderly victims and these aspects had been prepared in consultation with relative organisations.

In introducing the MPA report the Policy Development Officer, MPA said that it would assist the Authority to do its work in scrutinising the MPS if it knew more about community concerns.

Terminology

The Chair asked the representatives of community groups for guidance on terminology for this subject area. The meeting felt that the phrase ‘older people’ was the most acceptable term with the word ‘elderly’ being restricted to those who were becoming infirm and/or over the age of 80.

Various speakers also spoke of the importance of breaking down silos and of promoting ways of working across age groups. Lee Jasper felt that there still needed to be an identifiable focus on each diversity strand.

Reporting of crimes and reporting mechanisms

Lindsay River, Project Co-ordinator, Polari in Partnership, said that older lesbians and gay men often cited previous bad experiences with the police as a reason for not reporting a hate crime.

Antony Smith, National Development and Policy Officer, Older Lesbians, Gay Men and Bisexuals, Age Concern England agreed that this was a major concern and that that older gay men in particular had a residual fear that if they reported any crime they would be made to feel like the criminals themselves. He would urge the police to look at innovative ways for people to report crimes and his evidence was that there was very little knowledge of existing third party arrangements. It needed to be promoted more effectively.

Commander Jarman confirmed that there had been technical difficulties with the MPS website last year but these had now been resolved and it could be used for reporting crimes.

John Roberts pointed out that there had been an extremely low take-up of self-reporting packs for the lesbian and gay community and felt it might be appropriate to carry out some sort of review/scrutiny of the practice. Also, perhaps we should be looking at the safer neighbourhood teams for new ways of reporting crimes.

Aneeta Prem said she had been an advocate of using computers to report crime but it would appear that this was not always the answer and it would be useful to consider a variety of ways of reporting crimes.

Commander Jarman confirmed that there had been technical difficulties with the MPS website last year but these had now been resolved and it could be used for reporting crimes.

On the point about low reporting rates Damian Hockney said that with such small numbers there was a need for clarity on whether the offences were indicative of a larger problem or just reflected a particular local problem.

DAC Fitzpatrick confirmed that third party facilities had been introduced to help facilitate the reporting of crime from specific communities. These were expensive in terms of resources and the position was that take up was generally low and detailed work would have to undertaken to investigate why this might be. It could be that the phrase ‘3rd party reporting’ was misleading as it erroneously implies that the victim has to get somebody else to report a crime. The rollout of Safer Neighbourhoods gave the police the opportunity to engage with people at a less formal or confrontational way.

Dave Farrington, LGBT Youth and Mental Health Project Worker, Consortium of LGBT voluntary and community organisations suggested that some older people might have less confidence in using the internet to contact the police or in any case might have less access to the internet than younger people.

Marion James, member, Commissioners Women’s Focus Group said this was not necessarily the case and pointed out the recognised phenomena of ‘silver surfers’ and computers were often now available in day centres. She felt a choice of reporting methods would probably be the best solution. It was the case however that older people were often unwilling to report the crimes that particularly affected this age group such as distraction burglary either because of fear of repercussions or an expectation that nothing would happen. Clearly this was not satisfactory.

The Head of Race and Diversity referred to a piece of work he would be doing with DAC Fitzpatrick in association with GALOP on a LGBT/ police project. This particular organisation reported high levels of third party reporting so there cold be learning which could be shared.

In summing up the discussion on this aspect the Chair asked for a report to be submitted to a future meeting on 3rd party reporting – the various schemes and other options.

The MPS as employer and training

The Director HR said updates could be provided on the various current reviews HR was also keen to work with the staff Associations and the MPA in raising greater awareness of issues around age.

Gordon Deuchars, Age Concern, London asked about the retirement policies of the MPS and how this would relate to new provision for staff being allowed to work beyond the normal retirement age.

Dave Farrington, LGBT Youth and Mental Health Project Worker, Consortium of LGBT voluntary and community organisations asked about the extent of training on specific age issues.

The Director HR said the situation at present was that requests to work beyond 60 were decided with reference to service need. The new legislation would mean that people would have a statutory right to work until they were 65 but they would still be able to leave from age 60 onwards as provided for in the pension scheme. She undertook to respond to the questioners personally after the meeting with the position with regard to any training specifically for older workers.

Damian Hockney referred to the Safer Senior Project in Kensington and Chelsea which had done some very successful inter-generational work and asked whether there whether there were plans to introduce other schemes which involved inter-generational work.

Commander Jarman confirmed that there were other schemes in several boroughs. In Southwark there was a scheme where a community nurse visited old people with a crime prevention officer and were able to give support and practical advice.

Lynn Strother, Director, Greater London Forum for Older People said there were particular issues about reporting when family members or carers were the perpetrators of violent acts against elderly people. This included the fear that to create a fuss amounted to an admission that a person could no longer look after themselves in their own home and it could be adjudged that they should be placed in a residential home. She referred to useful work that had been carried out in Day Centres with the community police officers visiting on a regular basis and this also included the local schools. This would typically involve having regular contact with the same person and hence building up confidence to raise concerns which might otherwise go unreported. She felt that there was a lot of benefit from this sort of approach. There could be opportunities for PCSOs to do something similar so that general fears and concerns could be raised rather than specific incidents.

Peter Herbert said that the health authorities in London had a lot of well developed expertise in this field which could be tapped into.

Liaison with groups

Gordon Deuchars, Age Concern, London said that he was sure that he and others would be happy to assist the police in identifying relevant groups both large and small which especially represented older LGBT and ethnic people.

DAC Fitzpatrick said that she would be very pleased to receive details of these organisations, particularly ones based in London, after the meeting.

Summing up

DAC Fitzpatrick said it has been a very useful discussion and there would be a report on third party reporting. The points about working with the health authorities and a range of organisations would be taken forward . Commander Jarman said he would now be exploring ways in which the various examples of good practice which had been identified when drafting this report could be share between all the boroughs.

The Chair thanked the representatives of the community organisations for attending and for their contributions.

Resolved – That

1. the reports be noted;
2. the critical success factors as outlined in paragraphs 10 – 21 of the MPA report be agreed; and
3. key issues and concerns be referred to the Oversight Group.
4. a report be submitted to a future meeting on third party reporting.

51. MPA Race Equality Scheme

(Agenda item 8)

A report was submitted which presented an update on the MPA Race Equality Scheme 2005 – 2008. In reply to questions from members the Head of the Race and Diversity Unit confirmed that the Service Improvement Programme had been factored in.

Peter Herbert referred to the fact that all of the Authority’s own grievance cases which had been carried through to the Employment Tribunal stage involved BME staff. He wished to suggest that in accordance with current recommended best practice a means be found of seeking to resolve these cases at an earlier stage by means of less formal procedures involving members of the Board. His suggestion was that members would consider, in a private session, all registered disputes.

The Chief Executive said that proposals would be submitted to members on how to progress the suggestion made by the member.

Resolved – That

1. the progress made on the recommendations in the MPA 2005-2008 Race Equality Scheme be endorsed; and
2. a progress report be submitted to the Board at its January 2007 meeting together with an update on progress on the MPA’s Generic Equality Scheme

52. MPS Race Equality Scheme

(Agenda item 9)

This report provided a six-monthly details progress on the MPS Race Equality Scheme.

Lee Jasper requested that a report be submitted on the action being taken, including options for positive discrimination, to ensure that the BME recruitment targets would be met. Members also raised questions concerning the recruitment and retention of PCSOs.

Resolved – That the work in progress be endorsed.

53. Report from sub-groups

(Agenda item 10)

The following oral reports were given:

Domestic Violence

Noted that the first meeting of the MPA Domestic Violence Board was due to be held on 5 April.

Stop and Search

John Roberts as Chair of the Scrutiny Board undertook to provide a report following the meeting. This is attached as an Appendix to the minutes.

Race Hate Crime Forum

Peter Herbert Chair of the Forum reported on recent meetings, including a well attended session which had focussed on Lambeth. There was a programme for work with other boroughs but he had to report that particular difficulties were being experienced in trying to engage with Newham.

The Chair said it was important that a way be found to engage with Newham not least because there would be an increased focus on all aspects of that borough as it was the main venue for the Olympics in 2012. Furthermore, it would be useful for the Board to have the Olympics as a focus item for a meeting so that there could be certainty from the outset that the various equalities and diversity implications were being addressed. She also suggested that the Forum may wish to have a meeting specifically on the Olympics.

The Project Manager for the Forum said that consideration had been given to a suggested way forward in which issues relating to other hate crimes would be dealt with as part of a parallel process. The intention would be that some aspects of hate crime might be dealt with at a morning session with race hate crime in the afternoon.

The Board noted that a report would be submitted to a future meeting of the Board concerning the arrangements for the Forum including funding. In this connection, Peter Herbert and Lee Jasper said they whilst fully recognising the importance of other forms of hate crime would not be in favour of diluting the existing focus of the group. The Chair said she would reiterate her support for a single forum to deal with all hate crimes.

The meeting closed at 12.42 p.m.

Appendix 1

MPS Stop and Search Steering Committee

MPA update

MPA Stop and Search Review Board (SSRB)

• The MPA Stop and Search Review Board met on 26 January 2006.
• The focus of the meeting on 26 January was around the scrutiny recommendations associated with the theme: ‘Raising Awareness’.
• A presentation was given by the Home Office on pilot work with seven police authority areas working to widen publicity available on people’s rights under stop and search (outlined below).
• ‘Sign-off’ of MPA scrutiny recommendations – the SSRB was clear that the MPS Stop and Search Steering Committee could propose recommendations to be ‘signed-off’ as completed to the SSRB for consideration by the MPA.
• Section 44 stop and search statistics - Andy Hayman attended the SSRB on 6 December to explain why borough-by-borough section 44 data cannot be shared at this stage and to propose an alternative measure of monthly publication of London-wide section 44 data as part of the MPS Monitoring Mechanism. However, MPA members and community members through the MPA Community Monitoring Network continue to request this data, on a retrospective basis e.g. quarterly to ensure that localised disproportionality can be assessed. The Home Office recognise the MPS’ specific concerns however, they have an expectation that police services will engage with communities around what section 44 stop and search is used for.
• The MPA facilitated an event Together Against Terror? on 12 December 2005 designed to engage with communities, around how they can work with police to counter terrorism. There was significant discussion around counter terrorist tactics including section 44 stop and search where concerns were around low arrest rates, lack of understanding of there being no need for ‘reasonable grounds for suspicion’ and the danger of alienating communities through inappropriate use of the power. A clear message from communities was the call for section 44 information disaggregated according to borough.
• The Senior Marketing Manager at the Home Office gave a presentation on work being piloted in seven police authority areas around publicising people’s rights under stop and search more widely. A dedicated campaign has been developed to increase awareness. The target audience are ‘young urban males’ and their family and social networks (the intention is not to focus on one ethnicity or religion), voluntary organisations, the media and the police. The campaign includes:
  • poster campaign,
  • radio advertising,
  • dedicated advice line in 10 languages
  • dedicated website.

The cost of the campaign is £400,000

The MPA is one of the pilot sites. The lead for the seven police authorities in relation to this piece of work is John Roberts who has raised concerns, since the beginning of the project, about duplication between Home Office work and work by the Association of Police Authorities (which has its own dedicated publicity around stop and search called ‘Know Your Rights’). The Home Office presentation to the SSRB set out the latest poster design. Concern was raised by the SSRB regarding the slogan:
“You can be stopped. You can be searched. But did you know you have rights? Know your rights. Pass it on.”

Members had concerns around raising awareness of having rights through the written literature without reference to what those rights are. Suggestions were made to include signposts to where this information can be found.

• Future SSRB meetings:
  • 30 March – ‘focus item’ will be the scrutiny recommendations grouped around the theme: Training
  • 25 May – ‘focus item’ will be the scrutiny recommendations grouped around the theme: Feedback and Complaints Resolution

MPA Stop and Search Community Monitoring Network

• The MPA Stop and Search Community Monitoring Network (CMN) met on 18 January 2006
• 10 boroughs were represented with 25 people in attendance
• BPA gave an impressive presentation on the work of their Youth Leadership Programme
• Boroughs without monitoring groups are:
  • Barnet
  • Enfield
  • Hammersmith and Fulham
  • Havering
  • Islington
  • Merton
  • Waltham Forest

Future Stop and Search Community Monitoring Network meetings:14 March and 9 May

MPA Stop and Search Borough Visits

• John Roberts, MPA lead for stop and search, is developing an itinerary of borough and OCU visits specifically to discuss local work to improve stop and search practice
• John attended his first visit to Royal Parks OCU on 15 February.
• Other visits are provisionally scheduled for:
  • 10 March – Lewisham which will include observing a session on stop and search in a local school
  • 13 April – either Enfield or Barnet
  • 9 May – either Sutton or an OCU (TOCU or TSG)
  • 5 June - Hammersmith and Fulham.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback