Drugs and crime

Report: 13
Date: 8 December 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an update on various areas of drug related ability in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), as requested by the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA).

A. Recommendation

That members consider the report. (All questions have been answered individually.)

B. Supporting information

Overview

1. London is, of course, a leading world city and, as such, is associated with all the major issues in respect of health, diversity, criminal engagement and the harm caused by illegal drugs. Although there has been a number of key achievements in respect of the Drugs Strategy ‘Tackling Drugs: Changing Lives’, our strategic assessments still show that, overall, the supply and demand of controlled substances is still causing significant impact to our communities. In terms of harm reduction, it is essential that a robust enforcement policy is fully integrated with both treatment and education, and that this should be happening both within the MPS and with all our external agencies and partners.

Q1. Identify how the MPS is organised with respect to tackling drug crime and the priority given to any future organisation

2. The MPS comprises approximately 30,000 police officers and 15,000 police staff. Within these numbers, the following units have specific responsibility for addressing drug crime:

• Drugs Directorate
• Middle Market Drugs Project
• Central Task Force
• Controlled Delivery Unit
• Territorial Policing (32 x Borough Operational Command Units (BOCUs))

Drugs Directorate

3. This comprises twelve (12) staff and deals with intelligence, prevention and limited aspects of enforcement. Most of the work is policy orientated with a limited enforcement capacity. However, it does serve to co-ordinate successful crackdown campaigns and ad hoc operations where appropriate.

Middle Market Drugs Project

4. This comprises seventy-two (72) officers made up of staff from the MPS, Customs, City of London Police and the National Criminal Intelligence Service. The unit responds to intelligence in order to dismantle networks that operate within the middle level of the Class 'A' drugs market. The unit has enjoyed phenomenal success this year with over 138 arrests, of which 108 have been charged with drug trafficking offences.

5. Seizures include 266 kilograms of cocaine, 6 kilograms of crack cocaine, 58 kilograms of heroin, 42 kilograms of amphetamine and 3 tonnes of cannabis.

Central Task Force

6. The Central Task Force is based within the Specialist Crime Directorate. Whilst its remit includes all aspects of criminal activity, it has produced spectacular results regarding drug trafficking.

Controlled Deliveries Unit

7. This Unit is based in SCD3(4) and was set up in 2002. In fact, the name ‘Controlled Deliveries Unit’ is misleading. The tactic the Unit employs is more accurately described as a ‘clean delivery’. Briefly, the Unit investigates cases where controlled drugs have been imported via the postal system and detected by postal operators and Revenue and Customs. Once detected, the drugs are removed from the package for analysis and replaced with an innocuous substance. The ‘doctored’ package is then delivered to the addressee. Although the Unit comprises only two staff members, it has engineered over 200 successful ‘clean deliveries’ which have resulted in the arrests and imprisonment of 150 persons.

Territorial Policing

8. There is no incentive for Borough Operational Command Units (BOCUs) to take proactive enforcement action as they are not subject to meaningful performance targets. Based on research carried out by the Drugs Directorate (SCD3(3)) on the back of the last two Crackdown campaigns, it is apparent that only four (4) of the thirty two (32) BOCUs have dedicated drug units with an operational capability. Sixteen (16) BOCUs formally claim to have set up drugs desks but the reality is that the staff employed in these areas also have other responsibilities, which effectively means that their capacity to exploit and develop intelligence is limited.

Q2. Highlight the variety of activity across Boroughs drawing on any trends

9. Whilst it is not possible to make detailed comment in respect of the long term impact of operational activity regarding price/availability, etc, it can be said that where enforcement application is made, the results in term of arrests, charges, and community impact assessments can be both emphatic and spectacular. The Middle Market Drugs Project and the Central Task Force do impact on Borough level. However, their operations and resources are finite and, perhaps more importantly, at no time in recent history has any co-ordinated support or central policy been directed at Borough Commanders in respect of taking a co-ordinated proactive approach to localised problems. Extremely effective investigations and test purchase operations do take place but more often than not on a fragmented and ad hoc basis.

10. Highlighting or establishing trends can be difficult as the 'victimless' nature of the crime means that statistics are police activity generated. Coupled with poor reporting and recording standards and the fact that there is no central database on quantity of drug seizures or related operations, crime pattern analysis remains difficult.

11. That being stated, Home Office findings on drugs seizures show that MPS seizure figures have been in decline since 1999 (see Chart 1).

Chart 1:  Met & City of London police - seizures of controlled drugs per million population (see supporting material)

12. In terms of offences, over the last five years annual offence levels have remained fairly stable (see Chart 2).

Chart 2:  Yearly comparison - total MPS drugs offences (see supporting material)

13. Whilst the graphs indicate stability, there is no reason to suppose that the drugs market is going to contract of its own volition. Indeed, Drugs Directorate research shows evidence of increased activity in the following areas:

14. Precursor chemicals are an issue in their own right. Since August this year, chemical companies (of which there are 950 in London) will be required to disclose suspicious transactions involving specified chemicals. Although impact has yet to be registered at territorial policing level, with raised awareness SCD3 (3) are already seeing an exponential disclosure through the MPS Controlled Drug Inspection Team. It should be noted that an increase in clandestine laboratories will have an impact on operational effectiveness in terms of specialist expertise.

15. Methamphetamine is the latest of synthetic drugs. The United States have been warning us of the dangers of the drug for the last two years, and there is every reason to take these warnings seriously. According to numerous American law enforcement experts, Methamphetamine is leading to the same type of problems for the United States (US) as crack cocaine did in the 1980-90s. There is credible intelligence, which suggests the drug is being illicitly manufactured in London and Hampshire.

Hydroponic cultivation of Cannabis

16. The link between Organised Criminal Networks (OCNs) and cannabis factories was formally established through intelligence and has now been proven by arrests and prosecutions. Vietnamese groups are setting up 'cannabis factories' on an unprecedented scale; since April of this year more than 300 of the factories have been detected in London. The chosen method of production in the majority of cases is hydroponics. This trait mirrors a similar pattern to that which occurred in Canada two years ago when Vietnamese OCNs set up hundreds of cannabis factories in order to facilitate large-scale cannabis distribution to Canadian and US cities. Any activity closing cannabis factories takes place under targets for disrupting OCNs. No objectives or targets are in place to deal with wholesale cannabis production first hand, despite the threat to our communities and the funds they generate for criminals. In response to a demand from BOCUs, the drugs directorate has produced standard operating procedures for the closure of cannabis factories.

Q3. Discuss how SCD and TP operate together and the support it seeks. Are there appropriate resourcing or are teams working in silos

17. It is acknowledged that there is room for improvement in respect of tackling drug trafficking across the MPS. Overall, the current approach is fragmented, inconsistent and lacking co-ordination. Where Specialist Crime Directorate (SCD) and Territorial Policing (TP) do co-ordinate activities, the results, in terms of arrests and seizures are impressive. Half a dozen (or so) prominent BOCUs continue to provide meaningful returns and the results of the two Crackdown campaigns concluded over the last year demonstrate clearly that significant arrests for trafficking can be made as a result of an intelligence led and co-ordinated approach. The October 2004 campaign resulted in over 200 arrests with over 100 being charged with Class 'A' supply offences. Similarly through our support for the National campaign in 2005, 600 people were arrested for Class 'A' supply offences, with over half that number being charged.

18. Further evidence of TP/SCD co-operation reaping results is evidenced by the CIDA (Concerted Interagency Drug Action Group) Street Level Up initiative through Operation MARTEL in North London.

19. The success of the pilot has been ratified by the Prime Minister's Office and the scheme is to be extended by up to 30 sites at National level.

20. Although resourcing will always be problematic, the issue of working in 'silos' can, to a significant degree, be addressed by more effective and co-ordinated working practices. This could involve a reassessment of the existing Drugs Directorate, and a closer and more co-ordinated operational relationship between SCD and Territorial Policing. It would need to be complemented by a Memorandum of Understanding regarding proactive operations and necessitate effective enforcement at Levels 1 and 2 of drug trafficking through a sophisticated COBRA (Covert Operations Borough Response Advisors) style approach.

21. Currently there are no meaningful MPS/MPA performance management indicators in respect of drug trafficking, and if they were to be introduced, consideration would have to be given to the viability of other priorities.

22. A Central Drug Trafficking Database (CDTB) is currently being pioneered within the Drugs Directorate. It is anticipated that by July of next year (2006), SCD 3 will be able to provide every BOCU with a profile of drug trafficking within their borough.

Q4. The effect that drug crime has on other crime areas

23. There is a nexus between drugs misuse and crime. In fact there is now a wealth of information, both qualitative and quantitative, which demonstrates these links.

24. Many addicts and other Problem Drug Users (PDUs) rely heavily on money generated by property crime to finance their addiction and use. Theft, burglary, selling stolen goods, benefit and other forms of fraud, and 'low-level' drug trafficking, form the mainstay of their criminal activities. Not surprisingly, the costs sustained by victims of drug-related crime are substantial: according to 1996 estimates, crimes committed by heroin addicts alone may involve losses of between £58m and £864m annually.

25. The costs to the criminal justice system of dealing with PDUs are similarly substantial.

26. The Home Office NEW-ADAM Programme ran from 1999 to 2002. The Programme's key findings include:

• 2000/01 - 66% of all arrestees' illegal income came from property crime.
• 2000/01 - on average, 79% of heroin/crack/cocaine users believe their offending habits are linked to their drug misuse.
• 2001/02 - The Programme recoded the median illegal income of those arrested across eight sites (custody suites). Arrestees that had taken heroin, crack and cocaine in the last 12 months had a median illegal income of £14,875 per annum. Those that had not taken any of those drugs or no drugs at all had a median illegal income of £1,590.
• Recent research provides ample evidence that offender populations are composed of large numbers of PDUs - and that drug addicts commit substantial numbers of reported and unreported crimes.
• National surveys of arrestees and prison populations, and smaller self-report studies, urine and other forms of drug testing, indicate that increasing proportions of offenders are drug misusers and that cocaine and opiate use is increasing rapidly.
• According to recent Home Office research (Drugs Interventions Project), 50% of 'volume crime' offenders use heroin or cocaine, 70% Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPOs) use heroin or cocaine, 88 out of 102 OCNs are involved in drug trafficking.

Q5. Highlight the speed at which MPS deals with Crackhouses and any issues arising from this

27. Table 1 shows the level of MPS activity in this area. It is important to note that enforcement activity against occupiers committing offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act (particularly section 8) continues to take place in addition to legal action taken under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003.

Table 1: Crackhouse data July to September 2005

Q6. Discuss whether the Drug Testing and Treatment Orders (DTTO) scheme is working

Drugs Intervention Programme (DIP), Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRRs) and DTTOs

28. DIP is the Drugs Interventions Programme. This is the government’s programme through the Criminal Justice System (CJS). It was launched in 2003 as the Criminal Justice Interventions Programme (CJIP) and renamed by the Home Secretary in 2004. DIP is designed to target drug misusing offenders and encourage them towards treatment. Treatment will reduce drug use and therefore associated criminality. 'Out of Crime into Treatment' is DIPs catchphrase.

29. There is a distinction between DIP and DRRs. DRRs are the responsibility of the Probation Service and while DIP can and should help where possible, there must be a clear understanding about accountabilities.

30. DIP starts with a drug test on charge for detainees charged with a “Trigger Offence” (e.g. theft, burglary, robbery). If an Inspector believes any offence has a link with specified Class A drugs they can authorise a drug test on charge. Drugs are specified by statutory instrument and currently cocaine and opiates.

31. The drug test result is highlighted at court. The sentencer will consider some form of treatment based sentence for those testing positive. If the offender is awarded a community sentence that treatment element would be a DRR. The court awards DRRs and the Probation Service supervise them. Police involvement is limited to providing the initial drug test and arresting the offender if they breach a DRR and Probation apply for a warrant. Police have no targets around DRRs or their supervision although the quality of supervision does impact on local crime if an offender is breaching the DRR, committing crime and is not returned to court.

32. The Drug Treatment and Testing Order (DTTO) has become the Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR) of the new Community Order introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The requirement is broadly similar to the order, but can be used more flexibly. Consequently, the need for a specialist assessment of drug use and subsequent treatment has become more pertinent.

33. The community order has superseded all previous community sentences. It is made up of a combination of twelve requirements one of which is the DRR. The DTTO served to both punish and rehabilitate the offender in a stand alone order whereas the DRR (because it is combined with other requirements) can concentrate on treatment exclusively. The DTTO required a considerable amount of contact, which made it appropriate only for serious offenders with serious drug problems. The DRR comprises three levels of treatment intensity which allows offenders who commit offences of low and medium seriousness and have low and medium needs to get appropriate treatment under a court order.

34. There is research evidence that supports drug treatment is a positive provision. Some treatment usually brings some reduction in drug use and a related reduction in crime. In my analysis of research I noted those most successful at staying in treatment tend to be in their late 20s. This would also follow what is known as the ‘age/crime’ curve. This theory states if a person is going to offend they will start at about 15 and reach a peak of offending at around 20. This then tails off as they mature, and by late 20s they are discontinuing (ready to enter treatment).

35. What appears to be shaky is the way DTTOs are administered. On the first instance a warning letter is sent to the offender. On the second occasion, a letter stating they have breached is sent and the case is referred to probations legal department for action. The offender is often summonsed to court and this process can depend on the court space available. This is an area of weakness and there are live recent examples below where offenders have not breached and go on to remain in the community and potentially re-offend. It appears persistent prolific offenders (PPOs) are dealt with more robustly by a dedicated team. An issue could be to link PPO enforcement and monitoring to DTTO/DRRs. The following comments:

“The Probation Service has national standards for the enforcement and breach of orders which is to do with compliance not re-offending. If an offender is committing crimes then the police have to catch them and bring them to justice before the probation service can do anything. We cannot return an offender to court on the suspicion that they are re-offending, or for continued drug use. One solution could be that if the police are concerned about a drug user on a DRR they should get them transferred to the PPO team where the police would have much more opportunity to work with the probation service in dealing with continued offending.”

“The enforcement practice in the probation service has improved a great deal over the past year so I would hope that concerns are a residue of past experience, which needs to be brought up to date. You have asked for examples of good and bad practice. Well I think that probation practice is improving all the time thanks to additional resources this year and improved working relationships with the DIP and the drug treatment providers. Bad practice such as poor assessments, ineffective treatment, lack of communication; delays in procedures are the responsibility of a number of agencies, not just the probation service.”

“DTTOs and DRRs have been a very effective vehicle for getting many drug using offenders off drugs and out of crime. Our target last year was 35% successful completions of DTTOs and we reached it. It is the courts that make the DRRs and DTTOs. Judges and magistrates get monthly reviews of each order and seem to have enough confidence in them to continue to make them.”

Highlight the number of offenders on the scheme and the re-offending rates before and after DTTOS were in place.

36. The probation service monitor offenders on DRRs/DTTOs. A senior Probation Officer will brief the MPA on request.

37. To establish re-offending rates is an extensive piece of academic research. The Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate are conducting a long term study of the Drugs intervention programme through the University of London.

38. In 2003 the Home Office produced research paper 184 entitled “The Impact of DTTOs on Offending: Two year reconviction results. The key points from this report were:

• Overall, two-year reconviction rates were 80% for the 174 DTTO offenders for whom criminal records were located on the Home Office’s Offenders Index database.
• Completion rates for DTTOs were low: of the 161 offenders for whom outcome information is available, 30% finished their orders successfully and 67% had their orders revoked.
• There were statistically significant differences in reconviction rates between those whose orders were revoked (91%) and those who completed their orders (53%).
• Those who completed their orders reduced their annual conviction rate to levels well below those of the previous five years.
• The DTTO sample had more serious criminal histories and was older than a comparison sample sentenced to 1A(6) probation orders, which were forerunners of the new order.
• Those serving 1A(6) orders had significantly higher reconviction rates (91%) and had a higher average number of convictions in the year after the order than they did in the previous year.

39. The challenge facing DTTOs is to improve retention rates, so that the proportion completing their order rises. This will involve the provision of more timely, more responsive and more appropriate treatment than was often the case in the pilot projects.

Q7. Links with Street Crime, Burglary and Drug use

40. Drug testing on charge has provided empirical evidence linking crime to drug use. 50% of drug tests in the MPS are positive for cocaine, opiates or both. Chart 3 is based on 20, 000 MPS drug tests from detailing positive drug test by offence from April 2003 to November 2004. Because street crime and burglary offenders are drug tested on charge they are well represented in the cohort of offenders testing positive. Overlap with the Prolific and Priority Offenders (PPO) is common. Some Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) include those testing positive for key offences in their PPO matrix.

41. It follows that those street crime offenders awarded community sentences under DIP need to be closely supervised as any re-offending by them whilst on a community sentence will impact on police objectives to reduce robbery and burglary. The BOCU Commander at Hammersmith and Fulham provides evidence that poor supervision of DTTO/DRRs has contributed to her street crime problem.

Good practice

42. In one borough the breach process is working well but is bottlenecked by the court time available to hear summonses.

43. Communication appears to be key between agencies to effectively supervise offenders on DTTO/DRRs. This extends to the treatment provider agencies that need to inform probation if clients are not attending. Some agencies are not used because they will not communicate attendances regularly enough for effective supervision.

44. Tensions exist in some areas between police and probation over supervision of offenders. Police perceive offences are being committed on DRRs or offenders should be in another area for their treatment. Where offences are detected and the offender is arrested, charged and brought back before the court the sentence is a court matter. If another DRR is awarded this can be frustrating for local police and ultimately impact on crime committed in the community.

45. If offenders on DTTO/DRRs are suspected of committing crime including them on the local PPO scheme should lead to better, more intrusive supervision.

46. It could be argued that clearer guidelines for breaching and swifter action (using warrants rather that summonses) would lead to more confidence in the DRR by police. It would also send a clear message to offenders that breaches will not be tolerated and action will quickly follow non-compliance.

47. Probation has just appointed a senior probation officer to review its breach process.

Chart 3: based on 20, 000 MPS drug tests from detailing positive drug test by offence from April 2003 to November 2004. (see supporting material)

List of abbreviations

MPA

Metropolitan Police Authority

MPS

Metropolitan Police Service

SCD

Specialist Crime Directorate

TP

Territorial Policing

DIP

Drug Intervention Programme

DRR

Drug Rehabilitation Requirement

DTTO

Drug Testing and Treatment Order

PPO

Prolific and Priority Offenders

CDRPs

Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships

BOCU

Borough Operational Command Unit

CJS

Criminal Justice System

CJIP

Criminal Justice Interventions Programme

OCN

Organised Criminal Network

C. Race and equality impact

Drug enforcement activity is largely intelligence led. Where there is discretion for arrest as a result of stop and search, activity is monitored through submission of stop and search or stop and account form introduced after Recommendation 61 of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. This data is entered into the ‘stops’ database where proportionality is monitored at BOCU and a central level. If intelligence demands action with a particular community this is conducted after a full community impact assessment. A community relations strategy is planned after consultation with representatives of that community and a gold group if necessary.

D. Financial implications

1. The Central Drug Trafficking Database has been financed by Home Office funding. This will run out in July 2006.

2. Other than an ad hoc Home Office budgeting there are no formal funding streams for financing drugs initiatives. BOCUs have their own budgets and prioritise in accordance with local priorities.

3. A move to a COBRA style system of policing trafficking will not require major funding but will necessitate the establishment of a facilitating enforcement arm within the Drugs Directorate. This would comprise one (1) Detective Inspector and six (6) Detective Sergeants calculated on the MPS Ready Reckoner system.

4. Drug testing on charge and the Drugs Intervention Programme is funded by the Home Office. The grant to the MPS was £6.1 million this financial year. Funding as been guaranteed for 2006/2007 but after that it is uncertain.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Assistant Commissioner Ghaffur, SCD

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback