|The draft minutes were agreed as a correct record subject to adding Jeff Evans to the attendance list.|
|(a) Further information would be presented at the next meeting.|
(b) Dave Willingham would provide a list of key points for Councillor's newsletters.
(c) Currently looking at costings/data to calculate if there were any savings to be included in next scheduled report.
(d) The action plan was currently being revised and would be brought back to the next meeting.
(e) SLA has been put together and awaiting feedback. Need to identify 10 practitioners for intensive training in March 2013.
|Eastern Area Partnership Board - Police Inspector Nassar Hussain had met with the Board to discuss crime figures in Thornaby which were positive.|
Central Area Partnership Board - Police Inspector Marc Anderson had provided a presentation to the Board which Members found useful.
|Members were provided with the minutes of the YOS Management Board for 22nd January 2013.|
An update was provided on the HMIP Inspection which nationally was a critical report but locally in Stockton processes were more robust. It was reported that YOS would be included within child protection inspections from now on.
|Members were provided with the action notes from the Scanning and Challenge Group for 9th January 2013.|
Members were informed that an Audit was taking place across Tees on Hate Crime, the results of which would go to the Tees Safeguarding Board then to the Partnership.
|Steven Hume provided a presentation on Anti Social Behaviour.|
Information was provided on Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABC's) which had been introduced to deter anti social behaviour and to hopefully prevent getting to the stage of receiving an ASBO.
Detail was requested on the structure for the ASB Team, this would be emailed to Members.
Discussion was held on funding and whether any funding could be sought from the Landlord Liaison Scheme or Jomast etc.
|Members were provided with a report that considered reoffending data from the 2011 cohort in Stockton on Tees. It focused primarily on|
the local measurement of reoffending (previously adopted by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) until 2011).
It was reported that fewer young people were coming through the courts system but the young people that were seemed to have very complex needs. Of a cohort of 127 young people, 58% became crime free. There were currently 7 young people who were prolific offenders.
Intervention planning meetings had been introduced to try to promote positive engagement. It was felt that in many cases there was a lack of parental guidance. Where there had been positive parental influences many had become crime free and went out to gain opportunities in employment/training.
The Service was looking at linking in with the troubled families agenda. There were also linkages between special educational needs and youth crime.
It was stated that the Police were providing training to their front line staff to provide advice and information on the Restorative Justice Programme.
|Members were provided with the recorded crime and anti-social behaviour figures for April -December 2012 compared to the same period in 2011/12. Overall, total recorded crime had reduced by 4.8% and ASB incidents have reduced by 22.7%.|
|Members were provided with the Community Safety Quarter 3 performance.|
|Members were provided with the Youth Offending Service Quarter 3 performance.|
|The LSCB had requested that other key Partnerships operating within the Borough develop protocols of understanding with them.|
Members were provided with a draft for this purpose which had been developed in conjunction with Pauline Beall, the LSCB Business Manager.
|Members were provided with a copy of the fifth Partnership Strategic Assessment. The assessment had been prepared by the Community Safety team in conjunction with the Police analysts. As mentioned at the previous meeting the production of this document had been delayed following the departure of the Community Safety Partnership Analyst. |
The report provided members with a brief summary of the key findings as well as an update of the progress made following last years recommendations.
The report also provided a number of recommendations for the forthcoming strategic period for members to consider.
Members requested that 'hate crime' be featured within the PSA.
Discussion was also held on how this strategy linked in with other strategies.
|The Ministry of Justice issued a consultation paper on Transforming Rehabilitation on 9th January, the deadline for responses was 22nd February. Members were provided with the key themes.|
Mike Batty would be meeting with Lucia Saiger to produce a draft response to be signed off by the Chairman and a copy would be reported to the next meeting.
|This would be provided at the next meeting.|
|Members of the Safer Stockton Partnership would recall that a report was discussed at the meeting on 14th August 2012 which provided the key points of the Governments White Paper Putting Victims First which was published in May 2012. Following on from the White Paper the Government had published a draft bill on the future of anti-social behaviour (ASB) which will apply in both England and Wales. The bill looks to take forward measures to:|
1. Focus the response to ASB on the needs of victims
2. Empower communities to get involved in tackling ASB
3. Ensure professionals can protect the public through quicker and more effective
4. Powers and proposals to speed up the eviction of the most anti-social tenants
5. Focus on long term solutions
The draft bill consisted of 98 clauses and of these there were two new measures aimed at ensuring the response to ASB focused on the needs of the victims.
|Members were provided with information on the new structures and roles for Cleveland Police.|
|Members were provided with a report by Inclusion North on the project 'Safe Places' which were being set up across the country. It was reported that there was growing evidence of their effective contribution to safeguarding the citizenship of people with learning disabilities and their families.|
Safe Places were designated venues in the community (identified by a Symbol) that people with learning disabilities (or other members of the community) can go to if they were feeling unsafe or need some support. These venues can be local businesses, libraries, community centres and much more.
Inclusion North wanted to support organisations and groups across Tees to work together to develop a unified sustainable safe place scheme across all 4 Local Authority areas.
|Members were provided with a paper that took 100 selected arrests from a specific period in time covering a range of offences that include a mixture of violence, acquisitive and other crime categories. |
The sample of Arrests provided for analysis had revealed a very complex picture. The Arrests were made for a wide range of offences and not just those acquisitive crimes that result in a drug test. Of the one hundred examined, 66% were known to the Drug interventions programme (DIP). Full detail of the findings were provided within the report.
It was noted that methods to identify reasons for their offending behaviour whilst in treatment were being considered. Whilst in custody the offender was still innocent until proved guilty and therefore did not have to have a drugs test and it was identified that the drugs test did not reveal all drugs and alcohol was not included.
It was felt that further work could be done with a cohort of offenders to identify what drives them to offend. A process would be presented back to a future meeting.
|In 2012 a postal survey of residents in seven of the 12 North East Local Authorities (Durham, Gateshead, Newcastle, North Tyneside, Northumberland, Sunderland and Stockton-on-Tees) was undertaken. This method was closely comparable with the last national Place Survey organised by CLG in 2008. Results on key community safety issues were summarised within the report.|
|Georgina Fletcher from the Regional Refugee Forum was in attendance following a matter raised at the previous meeting raised under the item entitled - Criminal Damage.|
It was reported that the UK Border Agency (UKBA) has a Public Harrassment Team and thought that the matter could be raised with them. Group 4 Security (G4S)/Jomast were the contracted housing provider for asylum seekers and discussions would need to be held with them. Concerns were expressed that the public sector was having to pick up the cost regarding community safety and felt that Jomast could be helping to alleviate some of the problems.
Members provided information on any dealings that they had had with the UKBA, no one had heard of the Public Harassment Team. It was suggested that the contract with G4S/Jomast be clarified and further information on the Public Harassment Team be sought.