Declarations of Interest:
None
Witnesses:
Joanna Grimshaw, Anti Social Behaviour Manager, Surrey
Police
Chief Inspector Nolan Heather,
Surrey Police
Jane Last, Head of Community Partnerships &
Safety
Gordon Falconer, Community Safety Manager
Louise Gibbins, Community Safety Officer
Key
points raised during the discussion:
- An Officer began the
item by summarising key points of the report; referring to the Anti
Social Behaviour Crime & Policing Act 2014 as the trigger to
generating a renewed response to tackling ASB across Surrey in a
more efficient and practical way. The Officer explained work was
underway to tackle anti social behaviour (ASB) across Surrey to
provide better outcomes for the residents of Surrey.
- One Member enquired
about dispersal orders, what the order involved and achieved, as it
was noted from Appendix four that these were used
frequently across the county. It was explained that a dispersal
order, under the new Act, was a tool that enables Police officers
to remove people, for example in the town centre for behaving anti
socially. Dispersal Orders allow the Police to order a person(s) to
leave an area if an anti social behavioural situation was about to
rise or was occurring. The Board were assured that a
proportionality test would be carried out before an Order is placed
to ensure that this power would not be abused and only used in
appropriate circumstances.
- These circumstances
include;partnership
working with perpetrators, no knee jerk reactions, never issue for a ‘youth
issue/problem” and the order has
to be very objective i.e. what’s the harm/risk
to perpetrators vs benefit to other
residents.
- The Members of the
Board requested more information on what resources where available
to residents to promote how residents can contact regarding ASB.
The Board were notified that there was a website which contained
all the necessary information and links were also in place to
direct the user to the district or borough that concerned them.
Members’ implied there was a need for information to be more
accessible, in terms of other advertising material and Officers
assured this was a working progress.
- The Chairman queried
what information was available in the public domain and if not what
measures were being carried out to convey the message to residents.
Officers explained They discussed a map of
ASB incidents which was based solely on police data (therefore may
not be full picture) but was not publically accessible
- There was a
discussion around reasonability and how people’s perception
differ in their views with what was acceptable and not acceptable
behaviour. A Member highlighted that Anti Social Behaviour is
usually associated with young people but in reality it’s not
the case. Officers clarified that young people were not the biggest
proportion of offenders and pointed out that the public often
confuse ASB with nuisance and this is why young people are commonly
mistaken for the main offenders. It was addressed that more work
needed to be done on promoting a distinction between ASB and
nuisance, so residents are clear between the
distinctions.
- The Chief Inspector
promoted the new mobile data terminals, which allowed Police
Officers to work more efficiently whilst out in their communities
as the terminals made it easier to process and be granted
authorisation for issuing a Dispersal Order in relation to ASB
powers.
- The suggestion to
reinvigorate Neighbourhood Watches was put forward to the Board, to
empower communities, to make sure residents knew what to be
cautious of and stay better protected. The Cabinet Associate for
Community Safety Services explained to the Board that Neighbourhood
Watches were effective and running well in certain places and that
any person could sign up to Neighbourhood Watches in their
area.
- Members made
reference to the growing problem of fly tipping/littering and
whether there were powers in place to control this issue. The Board
were informed that in anticipation of a growing problem of fly
tipping, the Council’s Environment Service was launching a
strategy to combat this issue.
- The Chairman queried
whether the data in Appendix four was an accurate representation of
the use of ASB Tools and Powers. The Community Safety Officer
suggested that there could be a number of reasons why no legal
enforcement was being carried out in some Districts or Boroughs. It
was explained to the Board that when the new powers came in to use,
staff were trained at a high standard but some Boroughs may not
have chosen to exercise their new powers, continuing with the
former option. Other areas may not have an enforcement officer in
post, and some areas may have been reluctant to use the new powers
because of the costs associated with them. The Chairman advised
that the information shared here to be circulated to Members so
some Boroughs can be more confident in enforcing action, as some
Boroughs showed good practice in using these powers which deterred
further crime.
- One Member referred
to the Surrey ASB strategy group “Putting Victims
First” review and whether there will be an update on this
paper. The Officer made clear that an update will follow in a
year’s time, and it would entail what the CSB will be working
towards in the next few years.
Recommendations:
a)
For Community Safety Partnerships and the Community
Safety Board to keep the victims of Anti-Social Behaviour the focus
of their work in tackling Anti-Social Behaviour in
Surrey.
b)
The Board requests for a list of Borough tools and
powers introduced by the Anti-Social Behaviour Crime and Policing
Act 2014
c)
The Board requests for a link to the Surrey
Community Safety website to be shared to all Members
d)
The Board requests for Surrey Matters to publicise
the work of the Community Safety Team to help provide residents
with information on how to tackle Anti-Social Behaviour.