Agenda and minutes

That the minutes of the meeting on the 19^th December be amended at paragraph 4.3 (bullet point 15) to add “as a lack of this data inhibits local government’s ability to scrutinise.”

Cllr Sophie Davis declared a personal interest in item 4 as she worked for the Behavioural Insights Team and the Metropolitan Police and MOPAC were clients of the organisation.

There are no response to referrals due at this meeting.

There were no response to referrals considered at this meeting.

4.1Jamie Keddy, Community Engagement Officer, MOPAC gave a presentation to the Committee, a copy of which will be included in the agenda documentation. During his presentation the following key points were highlighted:

·         The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, was the Police and Crime Commissioner for London. MOPAC as the Mayor’s Office therefore support those duties.

·         The Met Police was the largest Police force in the UK covering 32 London boroughs and 8.7 million people.

·         MOPAC provides Police oversight and scrutinises the Police on a range of issues. In terms of stop and search, MOPAC’s role is to ensure the Police use their powers fairly, ethically and professionally. MOPAC uses the terms “Oversee; convene; deliver”.

·         MOPAC supports the Stop and Search Community Monitoring Groups. There is a strong focus on looking at the statistics on how stop and search is conducted in London. MOPAC uses the Police data dashboard and has also developed its own dashboard which they believe is easier to navigate. A major part of MOPAC’s role was about enabling community members to scrutinise the Police so developing accessible, easy to navigate statistics was really important. The site included outcome rates and was broken down by types of search such as section 60s.

·         The current structure of scrutiny at MOPAC is based around community monitoring networks and groups. The current structure has the Mayor at the top with MOPAC underneath followed by the Community Monitoring Network and under that the local community monitoring groups. The mechanisms feed up and down.

·         28 out of 32 London boroughs currently have community monitoring groups set up including Lewisham.

·         The Community Monitoring Network meetings are an opportunity for representatives from the networks to hear from senior Police officers on changes to policy etc. For example, the officer in charge of Stop and Search for London who regularly attends meetings. It is also an opportunity for local groups to feed into to London-wide policy and share the views and experiences of their local monitoring groups. The meetings take place quarterly.

·         PACE Code from 1984 Act says scrutiny needs to be provided with representatives of the local community. MOPAC have fulfilled this through the community monitoring network and the community monitoring groups. They look at issues such as grounds, stop slips, disproportionality.

·         Community Monitoring Groups are informed when a section 60 is put in place. This is help inform the local communities to help to reduce community tensions.

·         The feedback from the Community Monitoring Networks is that they generally support stop and search as long as it is targeted and intelligence led.

·         Disproportionality is a big concerns for the groups. The question that is usually asked is “why are young black men being stopped more” and the response tends to be that young black males are more likely to be involved as victims or perpetrators of serious violence. This is then followed by the question “does that give the Police the right to target young black males with stop and search and the view  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.1       Councillor Pauline Morrison invited members of the Children and Young People Select Committee to take part in the discussion for this item.

5.2       Geeta Subramaniam-Mooney, Head of Public Protection and Safety introduced the report to the Committee. During the discussion that followed, the following key points were raised:

·         Standing orders were suspended at 8.25pm

·         A comment was made that more needed to be done in terms of preventative work and the root causes of the rise in youth violence. Work should be undertaken in schools and links made to young peoples’ mental health.

·         A comment was made that The London Needs You Alive campaign had not been well received by young people.

·         The CYP Select Committee’s review on exclusions was positive in raising the profile of the key factor that exclusions can play for young people and communities.

·         Focus on the public health approach to youth violence would help embed other factors such as mental health, early childhood experiences etc. in to the picture.

·         Increased focus on building positive relations between the Police and community groups was important.

·         The Council was providing on-going support to the Community Monitoring Group by producing accessible data analytics.

·         The Council was working with a range of voluntary community groups and with the organisation For Jimmy to support community activities.

·         It could be important for the Children and Young People Select Committee to work together with Safer Stronger Communities Select Committee in the future on issues such as serious youth violence.

·         It was important to monitor the success of the Universal Schools Safety Programme to see what was successful and what was not.

·         There were many interlinked issues such as London organised crime networks, county lines, people trafficking and exploitation such as through nail bars. The whole systems/public health approach was key to reducing violence.

5.3       RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

6.1       Winston Castello, Community Enterprise Manager presented the report to the Committee. During the discussion the following key points were raised:

·         The organisation had received £87,000 from the Main Grants Programme. It was important to take a retrospective look at whether anything could have been done sooner and whether there was sufficient monitoring in place.

·         Concerns were raised by members of the Committee that the Main Grants Programme should continue to fund programmes and organisations that supported people with disabilities.

·         The organisation had received advice and support from the Council but the Trustees had chosen not to act on the advice.

·         In the new round of Main Grants funding there was a stronger focus on governance and more detailed monitoring was required.

·         Members of the Committee felt strongly that capacity in the voluntary sector in Lewisham for people with disabilities needed to be maintained and therefore this should be supported and maintained through funding through the Main Grants Programme.

6.2       RESOLVED: That a referral be made to Mayor and Cabinet as follows:

·           The Committee were very concerned about the loss of provision in the borough for services for people with disabilities.

·           The Committee requested that a referral be made to the Mayor and Cabinet requesting that they ensure that organisations with similar expertise who supported people with disabilities were supported and funded through the Council’s Main Grants Process. This was to maintain capacity in the voluntary sector in Lewisham to support this vulnerable group

7.1       Katie Wood, Scrutiny Manager introduced the report to the Committee.

7.2       RESOLVED:

            That the March meeting should start at 6.30pm

That the agenda should be reduced following consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair.

8.1       RESOLVED:

A referral was made to the Mayor and Cabinet on item 6. Lewisham Disability Coalition noting that:

1)    The Committee were very concerned about the loss of provision in the borough for services for people with disabilities.

2)    The Committee requested that the Mayor and Cabinet ensure that organisations with similar expertise who supported people with disabilities were supported and funded through the Council’s Main Grants Process. This was to maintain capacity in the voluntary sector in Lewisham to support this vulnerable group