Annual report from the Race Hate Crime Forum

Report: 09
Date: 25 September 2008
By: the Chief Executive

Summary

This report provides members with an update from the Chair of the Race Hate Crime Forum.

A. Recommendations

That Members consider the recommendations made by the Chair of the Race Hate Crime Forum (see Appendix 1).

B. Supporting information

1. Attached at Appendix 1 is a report from the Chair of the Race Hate Crime Forum (RHCF) outlining the work of the forum over the last 12 months. The report also outlines the remit of the new Hate Crime Forum. Copies of the Annual Report are enclosed with the papers for this meeting for members of the Board. It is also available on the MPA website and copies will be available at the meeting.

2. The MPA has been a consistent and significant supporter of the RHCF since its inception and fully endorses its objectives to help reduce and prevent hate crime, to improve the service receive by victims from the police and to improve the co-ordination of the key agencies responsible for supporting victims of race hate crimes and bring perpetrators to justice.

C. Race and equality impact

The RHCF is an integral part of the MPA’s commitment to ensuring that all London’s diverse communities gain and retain confidence in the policing of London.

D. Financial implications

The financial implications are addressed in the attached report .

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author(s):

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board 25 September 2008

Reports to Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board, Race Hate Crime Forum

Report by the Chair of the Forum

Summary

The purpose of this report is to introduce the final Race Hate Crime Forum (RHCF) Annual Report for 2007 - 2008 and to provide members with an update of progress in its fourth year. The report highlights how the RHCF links with business areas of stakeholders, legislative changes and the Home Office commitment to address hate crime. The report also shares the move to change the RHCF to a more inclusive Hate Crime Forum, bringing it in line with the MPA, MPS and local authority Equality Schemes.

A. Recommendation 

That:

1. Members note the report

2. Members give feedback on the final RHCF Annual Report

3. Members consider what support can be afforded to support the development of the new Hate Crime Forum.

B. Supporting information

Background

1. The RHCF was established in response to recommendations 15 to 17 of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report and commenced its formal business in May 2004.

2. The aims of the RHCF being to:

• help reduce and prevent race hate crime, improve the confidence and satisfaction of victims in reporting crime and to promote consistency of service delivered across London.
• improve the co-ordination between the key agencies responsible for supporting victims of race hate crime and the effectiveness with which perpetrators of race hate crime are brought to justice.

MPA Key Priorities

3. The MPA priorities relating to the work of the RHCF include:

• supporting, challenging and enabling improved performance and monitoring in relation to race, faith and homophobic crime.
• working with borough partnerships to explore how the needs of disabled people in relation to hate crime can be addressed.

4. Over the past four years the work of the RHCF has made a significant contribution to focus the work by the MPS and local authority partnerships in addressing hate crime. In doing so, the RHCF has acted not only as a body that scrutinises partnership activity, but also facilitates a consultancy relationship in supporting boroughs to meet the expectations of the Equality Standard for Local Government (ESLG) in respect of hate crime.

5. In its final year, the RHCF has held presentation meetings with the remaining seven borough partnerships. Where possible, representation from the local community perspective has informed the process.

The borough partnerships presenting of the year were:

• The Royal borough of Kingston upon Thames – 29 May 2007
• Hammersmith & Fulham and Harrow – 31 July 2007
• Hillingdon and Redbridge – 25 September 2007
• Kensington & Chelsea and Sutton – 27 November 2007

Other activities

6. The Annual Report gives feedback on the activities of the RHCF outside of its formal presentation and business meetings. This has included:

• an examination of the trend in hate crime disposals and the use of cautioning as it relates to increases in sanction detection rates
• an examination of current Third Party Reporting methods and their value in relation to cost effectiveness and
• a London wide proposal to introduce a 24-hour Third Party Reporting line.

In November 2007 the Foreign and Commonwealth Office invited a delegate of the RHCF to Atlanta and Washington USA to share expertise in relation to hate crime.
One of the highlights of the visit was the RHCF Chair being invited to debate the issue and importance of hate crime laws with the Atlanta State Senate at a public debate as part of the visit. (Atlanta does not currently have any hate crime legislation).

Feedback on the visit is detailed under a separate report.

RHCF to Hate Crime Forum

• At the MPA Full Authority meeting of 31 January 2008 a report was presented to address the issue of maintaining or disbanding the London Race Hate Crime Forum (RHCF). The report discussed a number of options and considered the wider implications for London’s communities and the business impact on the MPA of each option.
• At this meeting the deputy chair of the Authority reminded members that the primary duty of the MPA was the scrutiny of the MPS (Metropolitan Police Service). Accordingly MPA members decided to await the arrival of the MPS Hate Crime Strategy before making any final decision on the future of the RHCF.
• The MPS presented a hate crime strategy statement at the Full Authority meeting of 27 March 2008 and a further MPA report was presented that made proposals for the creation of a new MPA Hate Crime Forum (HCF). Members agreed to a continuation, or perhaps more accurately – redevelopment, of the ‘forum’ conditional to an expansion in its remit to include all hate crime.
• The widening of its remit will bring the HCF into line with Government attempts to integrate various hate crime legislation. Both the MPA and MPS are establishing generic equality schemes, which look to integrate the diversity strands of age, gender, race, religion &/or belief and sexual orientation across all business areas.

Support and Advice

7. Boroughs continue to request support from the RHCF following presentations in terms of developing their action plans. The Annual Report reflects on the work being done by boroughs to address local issues in relation to hate crime.

8. The Annual Report maintains the recommendations in relation to improvements and considerations for partnership working, data collection, the sharing of information, third party reporting and issues for engagement with voluntary groups.

Future work

9. The new HCF remit is under consideration and a project initiation document is being completed to reflect the future challenges for the MPA in addressing hate crime across all strands.

10. The equality objectives of the MPA are reflected in the Generic Equality Scheme across all diversity strands. The new HCF will build on the learning gained over the past four years to support its focus of continued scrutiny; effective delivery and response, across borough partnerships for all hate crimes.

11. The HCF will need to reflect and ensure consultations take place across the diversity strands. Key to its delivery will be its new board structure and membership. This is currently under discussion and is scheduled for the 30th October Full Authority meeting.

C. Race and equality impact

1. Hate Crime and Equality Standards for Local Government (ESLG) is a best value tool for local authorities, which helps them ensure council policy and practice at all levels mainstream across all diversity strands: age, disability, gender, race, religion or belief/non-belief and sexual orientation. Therefore, borough performance is also measured in relation to its effectiveness in dealing with hate crime. Borough partnerships are expected to work within the equality planning process, participate in scrutiny and extend knowledge of the Equality Standard within the community.

2. The work of the new HCF will remain an essential contributor to this process, as it seeks to hold borough partnerships to account, and like the former RHCF, will make recommendations for the development of local hate crime action plans.

3. The new HCF will also maintain its engagement and feedback from voluntary groups and the views of the wider community. A vital aspect of the wider HCF will be its ability to ensure representation in its membership from a broader spectrum of diverse communities.

4. The new HCF will need to demonstrate equality of focus across all diversity groups and the requirements of both the MPA and MPS in meeting the expectations of new legislation. The previous work of the RHCF has had a positive impact on borough partnerships in terms of being the catalyst for the focus on race, faith and latterly homophobic hate crime issues.

5. The HCF will build on this and will have a renewed focus on homophobic hate crime, a focus on age and gender and will specifically focus on disability hate crime.

D. Financial implications

1. Members may wish to consider the work programme of the new HCF is likely to have financial implications in order to reflect its wider remit.

2. Since the MPA is fully funding the HCF, the wider remit will require greater consultation with a broader cross section of the community to ensure appropriate representation. One of the objectives of the new HCF is to consult with communities, organisations and agencies across the diversity strands and in particular those with specialist knowledge of disability, sexual orientation, age and gender.

3. Not to do so would render the MPA bias in favour of the areas in which it already has a knowledge base and may be perceived as tokenistic in terms of other diversity strands.

4. Members may also wish to consider the current capacity of the Forum’s officers to achieve the work as set out in the MPA Generic Equality Scheme, with 2 members of staff; currently 1 Project Manager and 1 Project Assistant. The Project Assistant is due to cover a Policy Development Officer (PDO) role, within the Equality and Diversity Unit, over a period of maternity leave of the current post holder.

5. Whilst it may be possible to recruit or identify, where possible, admin support from within the existing MPA staff, there may be distinct projects of work required to meet the RHCF objectives, as such there may be a need for additional staffing support. Where possible consideration will be given to working with HCF member organisations but where this is not possible, members will need to be aware of the possibility of additional cost to the MPA.

Background Papers

None

Report author: Bennett Obong, Race Hate Crime Forum, Equality & Diversity Unit, MPA

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback