Agenda item

The Committee received a report and presentation of the Corporate Director Neighbourhoods and Climate Change that presented the draft Safe Durham Partnership Strategy (SDPS) 2024-29 for comments.  A copy of the strategy had already been shared with the Committee as part of the wider consultation exercise (for copy see file of minutes).

The Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships gave a detailed presentation that explained that Community Safety Partnerships had been established 25 years ago to bring local partners together to formulate strategies to tackle local crime and disorder in key priority areas.  She noted that a lot had happened in those years around legislation and guidance from Government to drive this work forward. Under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 it required responsible authorities to meet the statutory obligations collectively under the Community Safety Partnership, this was known as the Safe Durham Partnership in Durham.  She noted that Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC) had also been established 13 years ago by legislation that brought together a range of partners within community safety. 

The Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships gave an overview of crime and community safety in County Durham and the priorities for the Safe Durham Partnership of anti-social behaviour, hate crime and sexual violence.  The strategy also noted assurance areas, for work undertaken by a range of partnerships including Counter-terrorism, the organised crime group and the Combatting Drugs and Alcohol Strategic Partnership. The strategy had been reviewed based on evidence through the strategic needs assessment and developed by the multiagency Strategy Development Group that encompassed the PCC, police, probation, Durham County Council and reflected membership of the organisations within the Safe Durham Partnership.  The strategy looked at where differences could be made, what worked well, accountability and included work that was already happening within the partnership.  Figures showed that 55,000 crimes had been reported in the 12 months up to the end of September 2023, a rise of 21% between 2021 and 2023 with two in five being violent crimes against the person.  Crime rates (2023) are lower in County Durham than the North East but were higher than England.

The key ambition for the Safe Durham Partnership was that Durham was a county where everyone could feel and be safe. The strategy looked at areas of focus and championed areas that required further support.  The strategy provided areas of assurance and recognised that partnership working worked well and provided escalation routes for the Safe Durham Partnership.  The strategy was underpinned by key actions and approaches of supporting victims of crime, prevention and early intervention of crime, increased public confidence within the service to enable more people to report crime and the expansion of partnership working.

The Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships informed the committee that there had been a consultation on the DCC website that asked if the priorities reflected what members experienced locally and if there were any gaps to the strategic response to community safety.  This had now closed but would be extended by a week to include any comments from the committee.  The proposed final strategy would be presented to the Safe Durham Partnership in May 2024 for final agreement.

Councillor L Hovvels felt that this was an important document that brought partners to the table as this work could not be carried out in isolation. She hoped that comments from the voluntary and community sectors would also be pursued and included in the strategy.  She knew priorities in her division and commented that priorities differed across the County as one size did not fit all.  She had seen change in crime in communities with less people coming forward to report incidents as they thought if they closed the door it would go away.

Councillor V Andrews queried how many hospital admissions there were in relation to violence and sexual violence offences.  She asked if these admissions were broken down for figures relating to sexual violence hospital admissions.

The Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships did not have the information at hand and agreed to feed back to committee.

Councillor D Sutton-Lloyd stated that it was vital that there was as much feedback from Councillors as possible.  Councillors should also encourage residents to report incidents.  There was a need for a strategy to show what was happening but more weight was needed to be applied to what councillors said.

Councillor C Lines commented positively that it was important for a partner model to be developed.  He gave an example of a creative project that was being run by Sedgefield Town Council with young people to tackle youth ASB in the East of Durham that included Horden and Sedgefield.  Time was spent in the community to address the issues of ASB and why young people gathered and caused issues. He stressed the need to not stigmatise all young people.  He found the most interested element was the partnership approached to identify the issue and deal with it on the ground which had made a huge difference.  The Town Council were looking to work out what the next steps were and what to do over the summer to sustain the work.

The Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships agreed that local groundwork was important to look at hotspots across the County.

Councillor C Lines said it was really important to go out to Town and Parish Councils to get out and experience what was happening in their areas as DCC and the police had made an effort to get out and explain what they were doing to understand the community and experience what affects it had.

Councillor D Sutton-Lloyd found it helpful to report progress.  He commented that his division had suffered from ASB for 12-14 years and he had been determined to get a task force developed to tackle it.  He felt that it was finally getting there and making a difference. He thought there needed to be more of it.

Councillor D Nicholls thanked the Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships for the presentation.  He was saddened that there was a need to include hate crime but it was necessary to be focused on.  He had witnessed it in his community.  He stressed that sometimes Councillors needed to put their heads above the parapet when trying to deal with these issues.  He felt that the issue could only be tackled collectively. He was glad that hate crime had been included in the plan as the community had become more diverse and people needed to feel safe and secure.

Councillor L Maddison stated that in her area there were a lot of off-road bikes that caused a nuisance in town and in the wooded areas.  She noted that her area had received funding to try to develop and improve the area but these people ignored requests to stop and the bikes churned up the paths and left mud tracks destroying all the good work done to date.  She asked if the police had the facility to put up notices in the area to warn people that if they continued to use their bikes they could be confiscated or if police could be in attendance to stop the bikes destroying the area.  She queried what input there was to have housing associations or private landlords in the Spennymoor area deal with ASB around dilapidated garages where young people hung around and caused mischief.  She asked if DCC officers got reports regarding Housing Associations where people climbed on roofs of redundant garages and destroyed the properties that created an area where people did not feel safe.

The Head of Community Protection Services replied to Councillor L Maddison that the police had a team that responded to off-road bikes.  She was unsure about the signage request.  She agreed to come back with a link about the off-road bikes.  She confirmed that work was being undertaken to liaise with housing associations on ASB but not so much with private landlords as this had proved difficult but was on the agenda to pursue. Reports were received by the Council and data was shared across the sectors to deal with the issues that were raised.

Councillor L Hovvels reiterated that she also had ongoing issues with off-road bikes in her ward where most Sundays were plagued by them.  She added that signs had been put up in her division but they gave no authority to pursue the offenders.  She was saddened by how much criminal damage they caused with a cost to the Council to repair.  She queried how much time and resources was spent to address the problem by partner agencies. She had used some of her neighbourhood budget to target hardening schemes to prevent ASB in the community but that had been a cost to her as a Member.  She felt that all the money spent was a drain on the Council’s finances.  Her biggest issue was the destruction of the football pitch in Ludworth that had been turned over and could not be used by the community that she was tired of putting right.

Councillor P Heaviside confirmed that he also had the same issue in his ward and work was being carried out with garages who refused to sell fuel to children and young adults to slow them down.

The Head of Community Protection Services responded that this was a priority and she would take back to the steering group where they could focus on scanning to see where the hotspots were.

Councillor R Crute agreed with Councillor D Nicholls regarding hate crime.  He asked how hate crime was reported and monitored, especially on social media. He also asked if there was a clear definition of what a hate crime was. He queried whether hate crime was differentiated between types of hate crime eg religious hate crime.

The Head of Community Protection Services thought that all hate crime was included in the reports that the police pulled together via their reporting system that was shared in order for the data to be focused on.

Superintendent N Bickford noted that as a co-opted member of the committee he had insight into these issues.  He stated that off-road bikes were horrifically difficult to tackle.  The police had tried everything they could think of to try to combat the issue.  He understood how frustrating and devasting it was when land was destroyed by the riders.  He himself had the football pitch in his area ruined where the community suffered as the land was then not fit for purpose.  He was open to the challenge if anyone could propose any ways to resolve the matter to let him know.  The main issue was down to some residents and parents who bought the bikes and facilitated the use of them.  He was unsure on how much resources or costs were involved in dealing with the situation but was happy to report back to the next meeting or present on the topic at a future meeting.  He confirmed that all hate crime was included in reporting that came to the board and that theHead of Community Protection Services was privy to the information.  He gave the same offer for his to attend and present at this forum on behalf of the police on this topic.  He acknowledged that there was a lot of hate crime being reported at present resulting from the situation with the Israel – Gaza war and thought it would no doubt get more fractious around the general election.

Councillor P Heaviside agreed that was why Superintendent N Bickford was a co-opted member to provide good firsthand information.

Superintendent N Bickford asked to be emailed as to what the committee would like reported back on.

Councillor R Crute thanked Superintendent N Bickford for his update and his offer to provide presentations in the future.  He agreed this could be aligned with the new work plan for the committee going forward as hate crime would not go away.  He felt that social media platforms like Facebook were a trigger for hate crime and when responded to created even more hate crime. He agreed these offers should be included into the programme for the coming year.

Councillor C Lines confirmed that some Housing Associations like Livin had key projects that referred to hate crime.

Councillor L Maddison asked if there was any information on finances or officers that were trained for drone usage that could be used in areas to target issues.

Superintendent N Bickford did not have figures on finances but agreed to feed back to the Committee.  He confirmed that there were officers trained in each locality within the neighbourhood teams to use drones.

Councillor P Atkinson thanked the Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships for the presentation.  He informed the committee that he had installed a police app on his phone that showed the levels of crime in different areas that he used when attending the PACT meetings.  He had found by far that ASB and violent crime were on the rise.

Councillor P Heaviside thanked the Interim Strategic Manager – Partnerships for an informative presentation.

Resolved:

i)               That the report and presentation be noted.

ii)             That any final comments on the draft SDP Strategy be sent to Julie Bradbrook by 23 April 2024.