Agenda and minutes

Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel
Wednesday 27th January 2016 6.00 pm

Venue: Civic Suite, Solihull

Contact: Democratic Services 

No. Item


Apologies and Substitutions

To receive notification of apologies and substitutions from Members.


Councillor T Hodgson


Declarations of Interest

To receive notification of any declarations of pecuniary and/or conflict of interest from Members.


There were no declarations of interest declared by Members of the Panel.


Questions and Deputations

To answer questions and hear deputations, if any, asked by any resident of the Borough pursuant to Standing Orders.


There were no questions or deputations.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 66 KB

Minutes of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel meeting held on 21st October 2015.


The minutes of the meeting held on 21st October were submitted for approval.



That the minutes be agreed as a correct record. There were no matters arising.



Review of the ministry of justice transforming rehabilitation programme pdf icon PDF 111 KB

This report is to inform the Scrutiny Panel of developments in the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) since the inception of the Transforming Rehabilitation agenda.



In attendance: Kobina Hall, Community Rehabilitation Company

The Head of Coventry and Solihull Community Rehabilitation Company presented the report where he detailed how, in 2013, the Government announced the intention to transform probation services. He explained the Government’s intention was to attract a wider range of expertise in the delivery of probation services, including the private and voluntary sector. It was also detailed how, under the previous system, there wasn’t a statutory requirement for all offenders to receive support, which was believed to have led to further re-offending. The Officer detailed how support for all offenders now started when they were still in custody, and further support was also provided when offenders were released and returned to their communities. Members were also informed that the provision of probation services was now split between the National Probation Service (NPS) and the Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC). The Officer explained that the NPS was responsible for court work and offenders at the higher end of the risk spectrum. It was also noted that CRC was responsible for offenders at the low to middle end of the risk spectrum, with a specific focus upon cases of prolific offending. The Officer detailed how the Reducing Reoffending Partnership had been announced as the preferred bidder for the Staffordshire and West Midlands CRC. He noted the Partnership involved Ingeus, St Giles Trust, Crime Reduction Initiatives and Staffordshire and West Midlands CRC and provided background details of these three other organisations.


The Head of Coventry and Solihull Community Rehabilitation Company explained CRC was looking to introduce a new IT system to enable front line operators to spend more time with their clients. He also detailed how they were aiming to invest in new estate, to ensure a built environment more conducive to what they wanted to achieve in regards to rehabilitation. It was also noted they were going to relocate the existing probation office within the Borough and the Officer explained how they had looked at different premises, including potential hiring rooms at the Three Trees Community Centre in Chelmsley Wood.


The Head of Coventry and Solihull Community Rehabilitation Company detailed how they were currently conducting a consultation with staff regarding a reorganisation, where they were looking to reduce the administrative support. He detailed how the intention was to move to a Contact Centre service, which should reduce the administrative burden on frontline staff, freeing them to be able to provide more support to their clients.


Members highlighted the staff reorganisation and changes in service delivery and queried whether there was any risk of loss of experience. The Officer emphasised that the frontline probation officers were not a risk. He detailed how, if all the enablers worked, such as the Contract Centre Service and IT system, then the service should be sustainable.


Members highlighted the impact upon offenders’ families and queried the support in place for them. The Officer detailed how they were looking to work more closely with the Local Authority Early Help Team, to ensure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.


Update on the ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014 pdf icon PDF 93 KB

To provide an update to the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel on the changes that were introduced in October 2014 around the Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB), Crime and Policing Act 2014. 



The Community Safety Manager explained the principles of the above Act, which included placing more emphasis upon the victim when addressing issues of ASB and crime, as well ensuring more effective responses. She also detailed how the intention of the Act was to allow incidents to be considered within the local community, as well as ensure quicker remedies, without necessarily putting individuals through the criminal justice system.


The ASB Team Leader detailed the work undertaken within the Solihull Community Housing (SCH) ASB Team. She explained how the volume of ASB cases was declining due to greater partnership working, as well as the earlier interventions allowed under the Act. The Team Leader detailed how more complex cases were investigated by the ASB Team and, in instances where underlying issues could not be addressed, they had the power to issue mandatory grounds for possession of a tenancy. It was also explained that, as the Act enabled the ASB Team to intervene earlier and resolve issues within the local community, it meant they hadn’t had to resort to using all the powers available.


Members highlighted that the Act required a number of Partners to work together to address issues. They emphasised that effective communication and information sharing amongst Partners was essential – the ASB Team Leader explained she recognised this and confirmed such information sharing was happening.



The Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel:

(i)  Noted the update on the ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014; and

(ii)  Agreed to receive a further update in 12 months’ time.



Safer Solihull Partnership - 2015/16 Quarter 3 Performance for the period October 2015 to December 2015 pdf icon PDF 2 MB

To provide the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel with the opportunity to review performance for Quarter 3 2015/16 for the Safer Solihull Local Police and Crime Board performance measures.

Additional documents:


The Community Safety Manager presented the Safer Solihull Performance Scorecard for Quarter 3. She explained that a number of monthly indicators had been given Red RAG status and explained the underlying reasons for this. Members acknowledged that the volume of Red RAG indicators was a concern; however they emphasised that, despite this recent trend, Solihull was still the safest location within the West Midlands Area.



That the Safer Solihull Performance Scorecard for Quarter 3 be noted.



Community Safety Plan report pdf icon PDF 87 KB

The annual report is presented to the crime and disorder panel and the safer Solihull partnership each year together with the revised annual strategic assessment to enable the board and panel to review the progress made over the last twelve months and to seek their views on the priorities for the coming year

Additional documents:


The Community Safety Manager presented the report, detailing how the annual report was presented to the Panel and the Safer Solihull Partnership each year, together with the revised annual strategic assessment. The Panel noted the progress made over the last 12 months and also considered the priorities for the coming year.


Members queried the volume of engagement with Neighbourhood Watch programmes. The Community Safety Manager detailed how the Partnership would always attempt to work with the community to support them to be better equipped to help themselves. She explained how the Partnership worked with Neighbourhood Watch schemes and, in many instances, they were well established. It was also emphasised that in other areas there needed to be a greater focus on other issues, such as business crime, and the Community Safety Manager detailed how it was essential to ensure the right scheme for the right location. She also highlighted the introduction of Street Associations and how these had been successful in other areas.



The Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel:

(i)  Endorsed the recommendations at Section 5 of this report.

(ii)  Endorsed the recommendation that, following this review of crime and disorder, the current priorities remain for 2016/17.