CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSAL FOR THE EXTENSION OF THE PUBLIC SPACES PROTECTION ORDERS (PSPO) IN WINDSOR AND MAIDENHEAD
- Meeting of Licensing & Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) Sub Committee, Thursday, 28th November, 2019 11.00 am (Item 15.)
To consider an application for Proposal For The Extension Of The Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) In Windsor And Maidenhead.
Reporting Officer and RBWM Officers
Chris Nash, Community Protection Principal, introduced the proposal for Members to consider. He explained that a PSPO was a geographical way of defining activities causing antisocial behaviour within a certain area and that they were not used to specifically target individuals. The recommendation to the Panel was to agree to extend the PSPOs for a further three years.
Mandy Mann, Anti-Social Behaviour Coordinator, explained the nature of the three PSPOs in the borough. They were; PSPO for alcohol consumption borough wide and upon The Brocas, Eton and a PSPO gating order for Footpath 51 in Eton. Residents had noticed an improvement in the areas which had been given a PSPO. As part of the research into whether PSPOs were effective, RBWM had carried out a consultation with lasted for six weeks. Out of 30 people who responded, 93% were supportive of an extension. Mandy Mann said that they also wanted Community Wardens to have the power to enforce PSPOs, which was not currently part of the agreement. There was a suggestion that the first two PSPO were very similar and could therefore be combined within one simplified order.
Questions to the Reporting Officer
Councillor Cannon asked about the community warden aspect and what powers they currently had. Mandy Mann explained that the power to enforce PSPOs for community wardens would be a new power and would see them more closely linked to the police. With reference to the existing powers granted to wardens via the Community Safety Accreditation (‘CSAS’), Chris Nash highlighted that these were not directly applicable to the PSPOs proposed, but would serve to support – such as the power to require the giving of name and address for antisocial behaviour witnessed.
Another question asked about the CSAS training related to whether Community Wardens were able to enforce individuals that gave fake personal details. Chris Nash confirmed that this power made it an offence not to give these details, able to be enforced by Thames Valley Police. Rachel Lucas, Legal Representative, explained this was up to the Chief Constable of TVP to give authorisation for this power, which they had.
Councillor Cannon commented that there was little difference between the first and second PSPOs. Chris Nash said they were currently two separate PSPOs and that RBWM was looking to extend both of them for a further three years.
Councillor Baldwin queried about the training that community wardens receive and whether this was adequate to enforce PSPOs. Andy Aldridge, Community Warden Lead, said that all wardens completed CSAS training and conflict management training which would also allow them to fulfil the PSPO requirements and also assist TVP in other defined situations. The training included scenarios of approaching a group of youths and how to deal with them, and therefore community wardens had the confidence to challenge and enforce PSPOs.
Councillor Cannon asked how many people took part in the consultation, and was told that 30 people took part from across the borough.
Reporting Officer Summary
Mandy Mann summarised the proposal, which was to extend and maintain the existing PSPOs and give community wardens the power to enforce them. Following a discussion between Rachel Lucas and Chris Nash, the decision was taken to amend the recommendation (i) slightly so that it reflected that the Panel was in effect voting on two ‘new’ PSPOs as the previous timescale for the three referred to had elapsed. The content of the proposed orders remained the same.
Following a discussion with members of the Panel and Rachel Lucas, the members of the Panel were in agreement that the two proposed PSPOs should be granted, as set out in the drafts provided.
The Panel agreed that the PSPO orders were effective in being a deterrent for crime and that empowering community wardens was a good idea.