The Panel will review the role of the Partnership in the early intervention and prevention of crime and seek evidence of “problem solving” approaches from the Partnership. The Panel will also review the initiatives in place that seek to prevent vulnerable groups from going onto commit crime and ASB.
The Panel will review the Partnerships strategies to prevent reoffending, particularly with young offenders. The Panel will also evaluate what typical percentage and what crime types within Solihull are attributable to reoffending.
In attendance: Inspector Stephen Malone (Partnership Lead - West Midlands Police).
The Panel reviewed the current role of the Partnership in the early intervention and prevention of crime and sought evidence of “problem solving” approaches from the Partnership.
The Panel also reviewed the initiatives in place that sought to prevent vulnerable groups from going onto commit crime and ASB. The Panel considered the Partnerships strategies to prevent reoffending, particularly with young offenders and evaluated what typical percentage and what crime types within Solihull were attributable to reoffending.
The Panel welcomed Inspector Stephen Malone to the meeting who outlined that crime had a massive detrimental effect on communities and had potential to place disproportionate financial and administrative demand on local services. The Partnership aimed to work proactively to tackle reoffending and reduce the risk of reoffending whilst collaborating to reduce the fear and perception of risk posed by criminality reported by Solihull’s communities. The remaining report and supporting information was taken as read.
In summary, the Panel made the following observations as part of their deliberations:
• There was a perceived imbalance in the contributions from health bodies. The Police had a very well established, (circa 16 year) relationship with mental health teams which proved very successful. In comparison, relationships with health bodies (such as NHS) to directly support and promote “physical health” were, by comparison, still in relative infancy. The Panel encouraged further work to strengthen that latter pathway.
• The importance of being able to offer local people, local support was recognised – particularly having sufficient local resources available to support local people with mental health issues and seen as being at risk of committing crime or reoffending.
• The SARA (Scanning, Analysis, Response, Assessment) process was widely supported and several examples were noted where this practice was working well. The SARA model had identified Bilking, particularly, as an area of ongoing concern.
• The importance and benefits of Business Partnerships was discussed and aspirations to develop those further were welcomed.
• Much work was ongoing to understand “people behaviours”. West Midlands Police had some very effective powers to deal with criminality although responses needed to be proportionate. It was noted that the proportionality of responses by Solihull LPU came out very well to closer scrutiny.
(i) Welcomed all the reported initiatives and practices, particularly the SARA and IOM processes;
(ii) Noting that the Partnership had a well-established relationship with mental health services to support offenders etc, the Panel urged the Partnership to further develop its relationship during 2015/16 with the services/teams that promote and support “physical health” to address the perceived imbalance in those two areas of support; and
(iii) Raised concerns at the amount of Bilking that takes place within Solihull and the amount of Partnership/Police resources that crime type takes up. The Panel support further work being done by the Partnership/WMP to consider future options to address this. It was noted that Bilking was a national problem and that retailers had little incentive to address the problem themselves. The feasibility of reporting Bilking as a separate crime type was also requested to enable a more transparent assessment of Business Crime data to be considered.