Minutes:
The Committee received an update on community safety/crime and disorder in the Borough, based on data compiled by the Force Analysis Unit, but with more of a link to how the Neighbourhood Team would be operating in the future.
Inspector Martin Goodwin reported that he had spent the previous 7 months reviewing neighbourhood policing for the whole of the Surrey Police Force. He reiterated the Neighbourhood Team’s priorities, those being to keep people safe, being there when people needed them and relentless pursuit of criminality. Current objectives included reducing public place violent crime and reduce dwelling burglary.
The Force faced a number of challenges which were reflected in Neighbourhood Teams, including a reduction in Police Community Support Officers, though this had been mitigated by increases in the number of constables.
Inspector Goodwin reported that he had an excellent team, with leadership which tackled blockages, there were further resources which were task-able and co-location had proved to be a notable success.
Any potential tasking would be considered against the Team’s priorities and agencies would need to share risk and intelligence. Some areas which would be priorities for partners, such as fly tipping, would not rank high in force priorities, but, as in all partnership arrangements the lead organisation will drive issues forward supported by other partners and his team would support partners where possible.
In response to Members questions, Inspector Goodwin highlighted the following:
(i) Partner Support – There was a need for certain partners to engage more in issues. There was a need for Surrey Police, Accent and Sentinel to have robust arrangements in place. Whilst support for CIAG and JAG was good, there were times when the Police would look for lower tolerance levels when dealing with difficult tenants;
(ii) Gypsies and Travellers – The Team had good links with the Council in respect of the 2 official traveller sites. The difficulty in the Borough was illegal sites. The Police and Borough Council worked closely, dealing with anti-social behaviour and moving travellers on from illegal sites. There were challenges from close proximity to other areas where travellers were also being moved on;
(iii) Drugs – The key target in the Borough was Class A drugs. Whilst the Force looked to give users the opportunity to break dependencies and come of drugs, such as crystal meths, the main driver was tackling the sale and usage of drugs and taking away the proceeds of crime;
(iv) Neighbourhood Watch Meetings – Inspector Goodwin acknowledged that there had not been a police presence at the recent meeting of Neighbourhood Watch groups from across the Borough. This was regrettable, but was the result of a communications error and in no way reflected the support that the Neighbourhood Team had previously provided and would continue to do in the future;
(v) Police Surgeries – The experience of Police surgeries had been that the same people attended with the same single issue representations and the numbers attending were extremely limited and not necessarily the target audience. As such, the resources allocated were disproportionate to the outcomes; and
(vi) Fly tipping in Chobham – Whilst it was recognised that there was a significant issue with fly-tipping in Chobham and the Police had assisted in a recent enforcement exercise, the lead Authority was the Borough Council and fly-tipping was not a top priority for the neighbourhood Team.
RESOLVED, that the presentation be noted and that the Neighbourhood Inspector be invited to make further presentations to future meetings.