Agenda item

This report presents annual performance data and achievements since the formation of the service in April 2021.

Neil Thurlow presented the report which set out performance data for the Law Enforcement Team (LET). The report also included an update on actions arising from previous updates presented to the committee.

Councillor Omid Miri welcomed the update and thanked officers for a response provided to his request about the number of female LET officers recruited, and that this had increased by 2. He also welcomed the ongoing commitment to recruit more women to the LET. Councillor Dinsmore also welcomed the progress to increase female representation within the LET and asked what measures were being implemented to support this. Mo Basith responded that there was engagement work undertaken within the H&F community, encouraging the interest of residents who are keen and interested in the work by highlighting vacancies. There was significant value in recruiting officers with local knowledge and awareness.

Councillor Miri sought further details about the frequency of priority patrols, the localities in which they were deployed and the eligibility criteria that determined whether a priority patrol was warranted. There was a concern that the frequency and intervention of patrols depended on officer availability. Mo Basith explained that the priority patrol list consisted of a list of 20 locations, identified out of approximately 900-1000 roads in the borough, and which would increase by up to a maximum of about 25, when necessary. A daily report as to the locations on the list was provided at the start of the day shift, and the relevant ward officer paid particular attention to that area. Close working with council and police colleagues, and residents ensured that the priority list was well informed by reported intelligence on issues such as anti-social behaviour, housing or environmental concerns. This was included as part of the handover to the night shift at 8pm. An area remained on the priority list until officers were satisfied that any problem was resolved. It was confirmed that officers would share the list with members, with the caveat that it was subject to change.

The relevance and justification of implementing weapon sweeps was raised by Councillor Andrew Dinsmore, in relation to employment statistics set out at page 21 of the agenda pack. 864 weapons were conducted, removing 10 weapons, indicating just over a 1% efficiency rate. He asked how this could be improved, although he recognised that the weapons removed represented one less life that could be lost. A second question sought clarification about for example, screwdrivers and how it was possible that these were classified as weapons and assumed that they would be used for any purpose other than domestic. Matthew Hooper responded that items included in the weapons list had been concealed, in places and locations where it was known that weapons were likely to be concealed. It was a reasonable assumption that they could be regarded as weapons due to the nature of the concealment. Referencing his answer to the same point raised at the July meeting, he acknowledged that the find rate was not huge, which was welcome, however, any number of weapons found meant that one less person would be at risk and that there was an exponentially lower risk of impact and cost to police and health services. Weapons sweeps were intelligence led and the LET officers continued to work with the police to find weapons.

Councillor Trey Campbell-Simon referred to section 22 of the report and sought further information about the type of support being provided to the homeless community in the borough. He asked what had been done to reach out to rough sleepers and partners, and which organisations and services had been in contact with rough sleepers. Mo Basith explained that the LET worked very closely with organisations such as Thames Reach, an outreach team that routinely accompanied LET officers. Thames Reach staff often worked in isolation at night, and so the LET provided were an additional resource. A list of known areas where rough sleepers bedded down and intelligence about this was shared with LET officers. Officers would accompany outreach staff and assist by providing safeguarding support. Additional work was undertaken during severe weather, with an emergency protocol implemented ensuring that all known rough sleepers were found. To ensure that rough sleepers and the homeless were able to engage with services, the LET also co-ordinated with the council’s Rough Sleeper Co-ordinator (Housing Services, H&F). Daytime intelligence about any newly identified rough sleepers was channelled through the rough sleeper team and Street Link.

Councillor Miri referenced Ashcroft Square, King Street an Shepherds Bush Green as examples of areas that had experienced anti-social behaviour and where a partial closure order had been implemented with some success. Councillor Miri indicated that he felt reassured that the LET continued to conduct patrols in the two areas and residents had responded positively. Councillor Miri explained that he had seen an email trail that indicated that officers were engaged and responsive to residents’ concerns about reported anti-social behaviour and unauthorised access to their buildings. However, the situation has not entirely been resolved in Ashcroft Square and Councillor Miri asked if this was attributable to the partial closure. Mo Basith acknowledged that there had been offences taking place but that he was not yet in a position to corroborate the assertions of residents, without reviewing the available data and information provided by residents. A multi-agency team meeting was planned to address issues such as access to the buildings in Ashcroft Square to deter unauthorised access, together with the installation of additional CCTV cameras. There had been significant and ongoing consultation and engagement with residents including priority patrols, which residents had welcomed.

Councillor Miri asked a follow up question and using Ashcroft Square to illustrate his point, and asked that if the entry doors were in a state of disrepair, how would LET officers proactively engage with housing colleagues and how would a repair be facilitated with housing building repair services. Mo Basith responded that the LET would liaise with the community safety co-ordinator who would in turn, liaise with the different service areas. In addition, it was explained that walkabouts with the community safety co-ordinator allowed them to identify areas of concern that needed to be quickly and effectively addressed.

Councillor Campbell-Simon referenced the first meeting of the committee in July 2022 and discussions about how the LET engaged with underrepresented members of the community. He asked if there had been any further feedback to report. Mo Basith confirmed that a number of resident engagement events had been held with faith groups in addition to ward panel meetings. Neil Thurlow added that the LET are able to engage with the police, offering a point of contact for residents, and this would also allow them to gain a better understanding of work that the LET undertake. He reported also that the council had worked with an organisation called Navy Lab in order to gain a better understanding of community connectors and engagement.

ACTIONS

1.      For the LET Enforcement Manger to provide further business intelligence information and data about the LET outreach work with organisations such as Thames Reach to support rough sleepers in the borough and the number of rough sleepers.

2.      Members to provide details about which communities would benefit from greater engagement with the LET, and for this to be reported back by the LET Enforcement Manager as part of future area of scrutiny for the committee as to how the LET undertake community engagement.

RESOLVED

That the Annual Performance Report and LET update was noted.