Agenda item

·        The Metropolitan Police is due to attend and present on their role in managing complex ASB.

Chief Superintendent Andy Carter, Borough Commander, and Superintendent Jack May-Carter, presented to the Committee. The presentation both provided an update on actions taken locally as part of the Metropolitan Police Turnaround Plan in response to the Casey Review, and also noted the work of the Police in responding to anti-social behaviour.

Councillor Woolf, Executive Member for Community Safety, was also present for this item.

The following main points were noted in the discussion:

·        The Police reported strong working relationships with the Council on ASB issues. Regular discussions were held to ensure that priorities were agreed collectively and resourced deployed accordingly.

·        The Police and Council had held joint governance workshops between middle managers and senior managers in both the Police and Council to strengthen working relationships.

·        Superintended Jack May-Carter and the council’s Director of Community Safety, Security and Resilience would be co-chairing a new performance management meeting around crime and anti-social behaviour to ensure effective grip and focus on outcomes. These regular meetings would commence in January 2024.

·        The Police were restructuring their geography to better align to local authority localities. The new focus on North, South and Central areas of islington would allow for better information sharing and link up with local authority colleagues.

·        The Committee noted the Police’s approach to responding to ASB and related governance structures, as summarised in the presentation.

·        A member asked about community “walk and talk” sessions where councillors and residents can engage with the Police on issues impacting their local area. It was suggested that these could be held at a wider range of times to encourage greater and more diverse attendance from the local community. In response, it was advised that sessions were generally held on a Friday afternoon, although some evening sessions had been held to consider the night-time economy around Bunhill, and it was confirmed that the timing of the sessions would be considered in future, in conjunction with local authority colleagues. Sessions were promoted through social media and also through police contact with community groups, resident associations, and other groups. The Tollington session had a turnout of around 50 people, and there were around 15-20 attendees at a recent Finsbury Park session. The Police commented that these sessions were extremely valuable for local intelligence gathering.

·        A councillor commented on police crime data, indicating that this did not suggest a recent increase in hate crime offences, whereas it was widely considered that there had been an increase in both antisemitism and islamophobia arising from the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict. In response, it was considered that there had been increase in hate crime, however reporting levels were low. The data in the presentation, which indicated a 0.6% decrease in hate crimes, was a comparison of the previous two years to December 2023, so it was suggested that the reporting cycle would not necessarily reflect a recent surge in hate crimes. Cllr Woolf commented on the importance of community reassurance work by both the Council and Police. 

·        A councillor asked how high priority wards were identified. In response, it was advised that Finsbury Park, Laycock, Junction and Bunhill were identified as high priority wards, which would be assigned a sergeant, four constables and seven PCSOs. Prioritisation was linked to crime data and other analysis.

·        The Committee asked about responsibility for responding to ASB, and the threshold at which an instance of ASB became a police matter. In response, it was advised that there ASB could be classified as a crime or abuse, then it would be a matter for the Police to respond to. However, through strong partnership work with the local authority, instances were reviewed collectively to ensure that the correct agency responded to local ASB issues.

·        The Metropolitan Police had taken up the council’s offer to provide Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity training to Police staff. A councillor asked if any feedback had been received from Police colleagues. In response, it was advised that feedback had been predominantly positive. The training had been delivered to 261 people. The next stage would be conferences held in January, co-designed between the Police and local authority, to focus on policing issues and also the lived experiences of residents.

·        A member asked how many cases of ASB were linked to addiction or mental health issues, and if the Police took a trauma informed approach to responding to these issues. In response, it was advised that the Police would need to review data and report back to a future meeting, however the Police, working with the Council and health partners, had a focus on drug treatment and diversion. On mental health “Right Care Right Person” had been rolled out in November 2023 and the Police no longer responded to mental health related callouts where a crime was not being committed or a person was not at risk of harm. This reduction in demand had saved 34,000 police officer hours which allowed resources to be used elsewhere. The Committee also asked for further data on which interventions were the most effective in responding to ASB among different cohorts.

·        A member raised an issue around ASB affecting a local business in his ward, and also instances of some key workers and older people feeling unsafe in the evenings. In response, the Police summarised the increased resource allocated to hotspot areas to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour and the importance of reporting crimes.

·        The Committee noted that the local policing unit had responsibility for both Camden and Islington and a member asked about the differences between the boroughs; why did ASB appear to be lower in Islington compared to Camden, if there was an operational difference between the approaches of both boroughs, and if Islington could learn anything from Camden colleagues. In response, it was advised that Islington Council made use of an ASB “early warning system” and, although this would not explain all differences between the boroughs, this appeared to be having a positive result. It was known that Tower Hamlets had a similar system and this had a similar effect. It was commented that Islington and Camden had broadly similar approaches to working with social landlords and case management systems, and there were several similarities between the boroughs. Islington had recently undertaken a major review of its ASB work, and the Police welcomed that Islington was receptive and open to feedback during this review. 

·        A member asked, if the Police could change one thing to improve ASB in Islington, what would it be. In response, it was advised that greater performance management data that made use of both qualitative and quantitative data would allow issues to be resolved in a more effective and timely way. It was also suggested that having greater public awareness over which authority was best placed to respond to particular issues, and clear expectations around outcomes, would help to reassure the community. 

The Committee thanked the Police for their attendance.

ACTIONS:

·        Police to be asked for data on ASB callouts where mental health or addiction is a factor.