Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence and details of any Councillor (or co-optee substitute) nominated to attend this meeting in place of a member of this panel

There were no apologies for absence from Members of the Panel.

Apologies for absence were received on behalf of the following partners and interested parties:

Councillor Juliet Brunner, Portfolio Holder for Community Safety; Chief Inspector Angela Burnet (West Mercia Police); Mr Jonathan Haywood (West Mercia Probation Service); Ms Nic Adamson (Worcestershire SMAT); Liz Tompkin (Head of Housing & Community Services); Bev Houghton (Acting Community Safety Manager); Emma Clark (Community Safety Analyst); and Rob Morris (Principal Research Officer – Worcestershire County Council).

To invite Councillors to declare any interest they may have in items on the agenda and any Party Whip

There were no declarations of interest or any Party Whip.

To consider and note the terms of reference for the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel.

(Report attached)

The Chair invited the members to consider and note the terms of reference for the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel.

RESOLVED that

the terms of reference be noted.

To consider and approve any co-opted members of the panel.

(Oral Report)

Members discussed the issue of co-opted membership of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel. Officers reported that the Police Authority had contacted the Council with a view to having a co-opted Member appointed to the Panel. It was proposed that a request be made to the Police Authority that the appointee should not be the representative of that Authority on the Partnership. Members noted that co-opted members would have a non-voting role.

RESOLVED that

a representative of the Police Authority be invited to be a co-opted Member of the Panel.

To consider and propose items for inclusion in a working protocol for the Redditch Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel.

(Reports attached)

Members considered items for inclusion in a draft working protocol for the Redditch Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel, referring to protocols developed by other authorities to identify examples of good practice. Members were keen to ensure that the protocol was developed in consultation with the Partnership.

The Panel were keen that the protocol should be clear and succinct. There was also a desire on the part of Members that the protocol should reinforce the message that the process would scrutinise the Partnership rather than individual partners.

In those cases where the Panel was requesting information or responses from or attendance by partners it was proposed that reasonable notice should be given rather than a specified timescale. In order to manage the workflow of the Panel and avoid conflicting meetings it was also proposed that Officers consult with the Partnership when developing the calendar of future meetings for the Panel. Similarly, the proposal that Officers consult with the County Council over its work programme for the scrutiny of crime and disorder was accepted.

The verification of accuracy of draft reports by the Panel was discussed. It was agreed that relevant partners be consulted where appropriate and that the Chair of the Partnership play a role in identifying to whom such draft reports should be directed within the Partnership.

It was agreed that a distinction could justifiably be made within the protocol between the Responsible Authorities who had a duty to co-operate and those partners whose responsibilities towards the Panel were less onerous.

The Panel were minded to review of the contents of the protocol on at least an annual basis. However, the view was also taken that in-year changes might be required as issues arose, particularly in the early period of the Panel’s activities. It was therefore proposed that such review be allowed with the agreement of the partners on the Partnership

Members also discussed the issue of who might be the arbiter in cases of dispute between the Panel and the Partnership. It was proposed that such disputes might be referred to the Government Office for the West Midlands (GOWM).

RESOLVED that

1)         the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel draft Protocol be developed in accordance with the points included in the report submitted and Members’ comments in the preamble, above; and

2)         the draft Protocol be submitted to the meeting of the Panel on 15th April 2010 for further consideration and approval.

To consider and approve standard items for the meetings of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel.

(Report attached)

Members were presented with suggested standard items which they were asked to consider in order for inclusion on the Panel’s Work Programme.

Minutes from the meetings of the Partnership

It was noted that the minutes of the meetings of the Partnership were confidential and would be considered in private session. Officers informed the meeting that Panel Members would be required to sign a disclosure prior to becoming recipients of this information.

The Redditch Community Safety Plan

Officers were supportive of proposals for the Panel to consider aspects of the Community Safety Plan. The Plan included a large amount of thematic and geographical data and it was considered a useful means by which members might develop an understanding of community safety issues. It was proposed that the draft Plan be submitted to the meeting of the Panel in April.

The Annual Strategic Assessment document

The Annual Strategic Assessment was likened by Officers to the Story of Place equivalent for the Borough and, as such, was considered unwieldy and impractical to present to Members. It was suggested that the Executive Summary would provide the Panel with the degree of detail that might readily be assimilated. Officers were to provide this document to the Panel in due course.

Redditch Community Safety Partnership – Chair’s Annual Report

It was agreed that the Chair of the Partnership be invited to present an annual report to the Panel. The Chair of the Partnership proposed that this report be submitted to the meeting of the Panel each April to coincide with the year end for the Partnership.

Local Area Agreement

Officers noted that reporting on the achievement against the targets for the Local Area Agreement was extensive and was scrutinised at a county level. It was proposed that that the Panel receive feedback on performance against Local Area Agreement targets through the minutes of the Partnership.

Comprehensive Area Assessment

Members were advised that community safety issues addressed through the Comprehensive Area Assessment were not directly scrutinised by any other body and so would be a useful area of activity for the Panel. It was proposed that the last published Comprehensive Area Assessment be provided to Members alongside information provided for all the Key Lines of Enquiry.

Standard Redditch Borough Council Scrutiny items

Members considered and agreed to retain a number of standard scrutiny processes as a regular activities for the Panel.

These were:

(i)                 Receipt of an Action List outlining actions requested at previous meetings of the Panel and progress in the implementation of the actions.

(ii)               Use of the Council’s scrutiny scoping document to scope the terms of reference for Policy reviews.

(iii)             Provision of regular updates on the work of Task and Finish Groups;

(vi)              Contribution to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Annual Report.

General matters

Members were advised that legislative developments were arising in relation to the work of Community Safety Partnership and that these changes and revised expectations needed to be considered alongside the current community safety agenda and guidance. The Panel members  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.