Agenda item

To receive a report from Andrea Clemons, Head of Community Safety.

Andrea Clemons Head of Community Safety presented this report and highlighted the following:

i)                 The MOPAC performance frameworks are still being developed but this report has been structured in advance of the publication of the MOPAC dashboards, which are due to be shared in the next 4-6 weeks.

ii)               The measures reflect the priorities in our own Partnership Plan which are:

·       Reducing burglary and keeping people safe at home;

·       Tackling violent crime – in all its forms

·       Keeping young people safe and reducing their risks from crime;

·       Promoting cohesion and tackling hate crime;

·       Dealing with anti-social behaviour.

iii)              The report analyses the five priorities identified in the borough of Enfield and discusses the performance compared to other London boroughs, over a two year period dated between 01/09/2015 to 31/08/2017.

iv)             Keeping people safe at home had been added as a priority and incorporated figures provided by the London Borough of Enfield. These figures would continue to be provided for future reports

v)               Andrea then went through the priorities in detail and provided figures, data and the proposed measures for each one.

vi)             In-depth discussions then took place around each priority and further clarification was sought regarding the proposed measures and how it was envisaged that these would work.

The Following questions and comments were then raised:

Q.      It would be interesting to see the Fire Brigade Figures broken down further, e.g. private rented accommodation etc.

A.       It was agreed that more detailed figures would be provided.

Action: Andrea Clemons

Q.      How are we measuring our progress with, for example something like Operation Braemont?

A.       The Police have an Action Plan that shows how many knife sweeps take place and how many weapons seized. This data is collected by the Police on a weekly basis and it is also available to the Council. It then gets presented to the Safe and Stronger Board and then to the Crime Scrutiny Panel to scrutinise accordingly.

Q.      There doesn’t appear to be any data included in the report on the number of arrests and successful prosecutions therefore it is quite a struggle to understand the full picture. Although the figures shown are obviously important, it is difficult to draw from them how the Police are using their resources. It was felt that not knowing the number of arrests and prosecutions around Youth Violence was a significant gap.

A.       Arrest figures are available and of course can be provided. If sanction detections are required for all of the crime types they are relatively easy to obtain and can be included in future reports. However, it was not certain that these would reflect on Enfield’s Partnership Plan. As a way forward Andrea suggested that if there is a certain area that particularly could not be explained then further detail could be requested and more in-depth ‘drilling down’ could take place.

Q.      It was felt that it would be useful to see a breakdown of crimes area by area, ward by ward.

A.       Andrea advised that she sees a copy of these figures that go to the SNB, but she wasn’t sure how long it took to produce these figures. We are currently waiting for a new analysist to be vetted and then we will hopefully have access to the Police figures, although at the moment there is no one doing this. The Police also used to have intelligence analysists at a local level that provided figures/trends but these posts no longer exist.

          The Chair felt that where there is an overlap with information provided to the SNB, then it would be useful for the same information to come to the Crime Scrutiny Panel.

          Andrea advised that the figures she had seen from the SNB were based on an old suite of measures, so may not prove entirely useful.

          Tim Fellows, Chair, SNB added that he did not know how practical it would be for the figures to be produced. However if the SNB and the Crime Scrutiny Panel meetings retained a similar meeting pattern then it should be fairly easy.

          Andrea reminded members that the SNB and the Crime Scrutiny Panel have two very different remits.

Further discussions took place around Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) and Knife Crime. Various questions were raised which Andrea and Detective Superintendent Kelly responded to, and further detailed information was provided on these issues.

Concerns were also raised about the problems on the A10 regarding the racing of cars that had been taking place for some considerable time. It was felt that the Police should know about this therefore why can’t this anti-social behaviour be stopped?

Detective Superintendent Kelly advised that ongoing work continues to take place in an attempt to tackle this problem and various measures were being considered in the hope of addressing this issue as soon as possible.

The Chair thanked Andrea for her informative report.