Agenda item

Resolved: to note the information from the Safer London Foundation for the review.

4.1      Anna Reilly (Senior Young Person’s Advocate) and Laura Butterworth (Senior Programme’s Manager) from the Safer London Foundation introduced a presentation; the following key points were noted:

• The Empower programme provided intensive support for young women and girls affected by sexual violence and exploitation.
• The programme had also developed training for professionals, workshops for parents and sessions for young men.
• In Lewisham the programme had funding to support six women a year.
• There were common features to the pattern of sexual violence and exploitation:

o   Perpetrators are predominantly male, victims predominantly female

o   Takes place between people who are known to each other

o   Used as a means of boys and young men exerting power and control over girls and young women

• There were also common patterns of exploitation and violence by gangs, groups and peers – for different reasons:

o   Gang-associated sexual exploitation, victimisation and abuse (sexual exploitation is not the main reason the gang is formed)

o   Group sexual exploitation, victimisation and abuse (group exists online or in person for the purpose of sexual exploitation)

o   Peer-on-peer sexual exploitation, victimisation and abuse (sexual exploitation by children and young people on other children and young people)

• The Safer London Foundation had seen a rise in peer on peer violence, as well as sexual bullying in schools
• There was not any particular ethnicity to perpetrators
• It was recognised that there were low numbers of disclosures from young women and very few that led to prosecution of perpetrators.
• There was also very little information about sexual violence towards young men
• Group work programmes had identified that rape and sexual violence were seen as ‘easy’ ways to retaliate against other groups or gangs.
• Experience demonstrated that perpetrators carried out sexual assaults and rape because they could harm other gangs or groups of young people without having to carry weapons.
• There was also an attitude amongst offenders that the police did not prosecute for rape.
• Gang members could also receive status in the form of ‘ratings’ for the number of times they had been stabbed and survived, which limited the significance of stabbing in gang conflicts.
• Safer London Foundation worked in 12 boroughs – young people had no compulsion to work with the foundation.
• The programme had a high engagement rate – with 90% of young people starting the scheme also finishing.
• The Foundation used a trauma based model of support based on therapeutic methods.

4.2      Anna Reilly (Senior Young Person’s Advocate) and Laura Butterworth (Senior Programmes Manager) responded to questions from the Committee, the following key points were noted:

• The Empower programme had a high number of successful outcomes; further information could be provided about the effectiveness of the programme.
• It was not the intent in every case to move women away from their current situation. This might be impractical for a number of reasons. The focus was on improving women’s resilience.
• The programme retained contact with people who had completed it successfully; a substantial number wanted to become programme ambassadors or young advisors – in order to support other girls or young women in similar situations.
• Young women were involved in intensive 1:1 sessions and group work. There were also separate sessions for young women and young men. In many cases young people found it easier to discuss issues separately.
• Young carers and young people who had recently been bereaved were at significant risk of sexual violence and exploitation. The reasons for this were not known.
• Many of the young people who came into contact with the programme had witnessed situations of domestic violence. The risk factors associated with young men involved in violence and young women affected by gang violence were similar.
• Work in schools did not take place consistently. The Safer London Foundation advocated a whole school approach, which incorporated work with professionals, parents and community leaders.
• Some work had also started in primary schools – which was not about sex education or violence – but explored issues of consent and acceptable behaviour.
• Support from the Committee was welcomed.
• The programme could always use additional resources to expand the scope and the scale of the work being carried out.
• Empower had been successful in receiving the MOPAC victims funding in Lewisham.
• There were also 13 Home Office funded positions nationally.
• The programme had been successful at working with young women and girls who were facing complex sets of challenges and were sometimes labelled as ‘difficult’ by others.
• The approach was centred on the needs of engaging the young women and girls where they are safe.
• The programme used a holistic model of support - which was based on an understanding of the effects of trauma and was supported by therapeutic methods.
• Services were confidential, non-judgemental & service user led.
• Engagement with the programme was voluntary.
• Safer London Foundation also offered CSE (Child Sexual Exploitation) coordination in other boroughs.
• It was recognised that prevention was a key part of keeping girls and young women safe.

• Empower workers were able to act as a link between other partners, supporting young women's access to services and developing a stable relationship with victims/
• There were low levels of reporting and conviction for sexual violence and exploitation. Crown Prosecution Lawyers could be encouraged to take a practical view about evidence and support for witnesses.

4.3      Geeta Subramaniam-Mooney (Head of Crime Reduction and Supporting People) highlighted the Council’s ‘wider strategic vision’ for tackling violence against women and girls and reiterated the difficulties faced in bringing cases to conviction.

4.4      The Committee reflected on the work that the Safer London Foundation was doing and highlighted its support for the approach and its effectiveness.

4.5      Members also commented on the prevalence of knife crime and gang violence – as well as attitudes to young women in general.

4.6      The Committee discussed work in schools and questioned whether there was further work that could be done.

4.7      The Chair thanked both expert witnesses for their presentation and answers to questions.

Resolved: to note the information from the Safer London Foundation for the review.