PRESENT: Councillors Hashim Bhatti, John Bowden, David Hilton, John Story, Malcolm Beer and Hari Dev Sharma.

Also Present: Superintendent Kate Ford (Thames Valley Police), Parish Councillor Pat McDonald (White Waltham Parish Council).

Officers: Nick Davies, Brian Martin, Claire Gomm, David Cook, Michael Llewelyn, Craig Miller and Gabriel Amahwe (Thames Valley Community Rehabilitation Company).

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN AND VICE-CHAIRMAN

Councillor David Hilton was elected Chairman and Councillor John Story was elected as Vice-Chairman.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies were received from Councillors Targowska and Werner.

It was announced that the meeting was being recorded and that the audio would be published to the RBWM website.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

None.

MINUTES

The minutes from the Crime and Disorder Overview and Scrutiny Panel held on the 14 April 2015 were agreed as a correct record.

ITEMS

5) MATTERS ARISING

Nothing was raised.

6) THAMES VALLEY COMMUNITY REHABILITATION COMPANY / INTEGRATED OFFENDER MANAGEMENT

Gabriel Amahwe, Head of Operations – TVCRC, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Thames Valley Community Rehabilitation Company.

The Panel received a presentation that informed that as of the first of June 2015 there were two probation services agencies:

NPS – manages and supervises mappa cases, high risk of serious harm cases, and court services.

TV CRC – manages high likelihood of re-offending cases, low to medium risk cases, prolific offenders, and a new “through the prison gate” resettlement service across England and Wales.

(Cllr Beer joined the meeting)

The Panel were informed that on the 2^nd February 2015 there was the transfer of ownership of TV CRC to MTCnovo who were a brand new organisation made up of MTC, an American company who were a 50% shareholder and novo, which comprises of Amey, who were a 40% shareholder, with the remaining 10% being held by a group of third sector partners.

Under the new arrangements the there was a transformation programme that resulted in a delivery model that focused on:

Cohort model delivery.
Focus on rehabilitation first and foremost.
Offender management driven by joint venture between public, private and voluntary sector.
Public protection and risk.
Deliver against contract measures.

The new organisation would also look to embed the new probation services structure whilst still preserving or improving services to offender management; and supporting an efficient and effective criminal justice system for the local police area.

It was also important to ensure that strategic partners have links into both new organisations with engagement with key partnership working arrangements which make an important contribution to protecting the public and community safety.

It was noted that the payment methodology was performance orientated and if the delivery model was not achieved then the service would be financially penalised.

Councillor Story asked how often offenders going into probation were seen and who reviewed the companies performance. The Panel were informed that a resettlement plan was established when they went to prison looking at areas such as having a place to live, substance missus or employment. The aim was to reduce the link to re-offending and the intensity of contact would be judged on an individual basis. With regards to judging performance this was done by the National Offender Management Service within the Ministry of Justice.

Councillor Hilton asked how they would ensure partner agencies carried out prescribed services to help reduce re-offending and was informed that they understood the pressure on partner agencies but it was a matter of working with them to help reduce re-offending and also ensuring that the person has access to services. It was noted that reliance on others meeting their obligations when judging your performance had always been an issue but was managed by working with partners for delivery.

The Chairman thanked Gabriel Amahwe for attending the meeting.

7) CHAOTIC LIFESTYLES UPDATE

Nick Davies informed the Panel that progress had been made over the last few months and cases were being looked at in a more detailed and intuitive way. Partners came together under safeguarding procedures and have met twice. They had focused on problem solving and creative ways of engagement to reduce risk. There was also looked at strategic planning such as social investment bonds.

In response to questions the Panel were informed that when dealing with cases you came across a lot of secondary issues and by agencies working together the routes causes can be identified and which service best meets the individuals needs. This new way of working brought together best practises and formalised work that was previously happening in an ad hoc way. It was noted that there were currently 10 active cases and progress would be monitored via this Panel and the Health and Wellbeing Board.

It was agreed that a progress report be brought back to the Panel in 12 months time.

8) REVIEW OF DESIGNATED PUBLIC PLACES ORDERS (DPPOS)

Brian Martin informed the Panel that as per the discussion at the last Panel
Meeting Cabinet had requested a review of existing Designated Public Place Orders (DPPOs) and the report under consideration made recommendations for replacing them, as appropriate, with Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs). In October 2014, Cabinet considered a report on the new Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 and requested a review of existing Designated Public Place Orders / Alcohol Free Zones.

The report recommended that the two existing DPPOs were replaced with one PSPO covering all the locations in the DPPOs. It also proposed that there be an amendment to the Constitution so that the current Alley Gating/Cold Calling Zone Panel was replaced with a Public Space Protection Order Panel to determine all new PSPO applications except for those covering multiple wards that would go to Council.

(Cllr Bhatti joined the meeting)

It was noted that the maps for Windsor did not include the Fox and Castle public house; the Panel were informed that the maps in the report were those that were consulted upon and officers would check the issue, however the maps would be reviewed in 12 months.

In response to questions on how the new order could prevent incidents such as those that accorded recently in Ascot the Panel were informed that there were already exiting legislation to deal with incidents such as this with the local authority and police having legislative powers to act. The local authority could deal with issues regarding the premises and its licence whilst the police could deal with alcohol related ASB. There would be a review of the event, however calls to the police on the night were low and historically a police presence had not been required. It was noted that the licence for the event could be called in fr review at any time if there was concern.

It was questioned if the new orders would lower the house prices of the areas covered because of the negative perception of the areas covered. The Panel were informed that there was no evidence that such orders had had an negative effect on house prices or insurance prices and they should be seen as preventative measures.

Resolved that: The Crime and Disorder Overview and Scrutiny Panel considered the report regarding the Review of Designated Public Place Orders and fully endorsed the recommendations. The Panel noted that the zones shown on the maps would be reviewed in 12 months.

9) Thames Valley Police Update

Superintendent Kate Ford (Thames Valley Police), provide an update on recent police activities. The Panel were informed that:

There was a slight increase in arrests at Royal Ascot.
Overall crime was down; however violent crime was up nationally and locally.
Theft of and from vehicles was down.
Burglaries were up, however since the use of two Integrated Offender Management cases there has been a decrease.
The force were looking at better ways of dealing with domestic abuse and the best use of night time resources.

In response to questions the Panel were informed that TVP were working with the British Transport Police on a regular basis, that there had been an increase in exploitation crime and that the force was having to re-evaluate its resources by looking at what they were statutory responsible for and what they traditionally undertook. Although they would be looking at demand the Panel were informed that community policing would be retained. Proposed changes would be brought to the Panel when they were finalised.

It was agreed that the Thames Valley delivery plan would be circulated to the Panel.

10) Date of next meeting

Members noted that the next meetings were scheduled for (6.15pm start):

Thursday 10 September 2015.
Tuesday 10 November 2015.
Monday 18 January 2016.
Tuesday 12 April 2016.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 - EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

To consider passing the following resolution:-

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on items 9-11 the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act".