Agenda item

The Committee received a report of the Chief Executive which provided an update of the Safe Durham Partnership’s progress in meeting the statutory duties contained within the Counter Terrorism and Security Act 2015 and an update on partnership (for copy see file of minutes).

Detective Constable S Smith and A Bailey Partnerships Team Leader, who provided Prevent support as part of his duties gave a detailed presentation on the Prevent work which included an update on the latest government strategy and guidance in line with the statutory responsibility to have ‘due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism’.

Detective Constable S Smith explained that the UK Counter Terrorism Strategy (CONTEST) had been refreshed on 15 October 2024 but had maintained the principles of the 4Ps with the aim to reduce the risk to the UK and its interests overseas from terrorism so that people could go about their lives freely and with confidence:

·      Prevent: to stop people from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism;

·      Pursue: to stop terrorist attacks happening in this county or against UK interests overseas;

·      Protect: to strengthen our protection against a terrorist attack; and

·      Prepare: to minimise the impact of an attack and reduce the likelihood of further attacks.  

He added that the Prevent Strategy had three strategic objectives:

·      To respond to the ideological challenge of terrorism and the threat we face from those who promote it;

·      To prevent people from being drawn into terrorism and ensure that they are given appropriate advice and support; and

·      To work with sectors and institutions where there are risks of radicalisation that we need to address.

Detective Constable S Smith clarified that Prevent was at the top of the agenda to safeguard vulnerable people to ensure that they did not enter the criminal space and be drawn into terrorism.  The Channel Panel had been established as a key part of the prevent work which was a monthly meeting that looked at those at risk who had been referred to establish the best course of action to deal with the issue and provide advice and support.  He had a limited amount of time to decide on whether an identified issue should be referred to the Channel Panel or if other means could be implemented to move a vulnerable person away from getting into trouble in the future. He stated that it was a challenge as to how to keep people safe online with many online platforms using certain images to entice people in.  Training took place in schools with both teachers and children which targeted students studying history who could easily download unsuitable material innocently and be drawn in.  Vulnerable adults who were lonely and could strike updubious connections and friendships online whilst trying to seek a sense of belonging without realising what they were doing, also required support.

The Partnerships Team Leader advised that the Safe Durham Partnership led on prevent work who hosted the Channel Panel which was chaired by the Head of Adult Care. The Council’s role was to provide training, co-ordinate and attend various counter terrorism meetings, track and update the contest delivery plan and support the development and implementation of new strategies, legislation and guidance related to counter terrorism. He gave an example of Martyn’s Law which had been developed in response to the Manchester Arena bombing making local authorities responsible for the protection of enclosed premises where the public congregated. 

Councillor L Fenwick asked if the Partnerships Team Leader worked with primary school children.

The Partnerships Team Leader confirmed that he worked with primary school children as the youngest case had involved a 5 year old who had mirrored their father.  These concerns lead to the father being referred to the Channel Panel as a safeguarding issue.  He advised that training was given to Designated Safeguarding Leads (DSL) within all schools to ensure they were aware of certain signs to look for.    The DFE Regional Prevent Co-ordinator produced regular newsletters which schools could subscribe to.

Councillor L Fenwick was concerned that some parents may not know what signs to look for when children were online.  She had only recently become aware of issues with content that Andrew Tate put online.

Detective Constable S Smith responded that information put out by Andrew Tate was an example of images being used to draw in young people which was why it was important to offer the right support at the right time for children.  He re-iterated that Andrew Tate was not a terrorist.

The Partnerships Team Leaderadded that training was delivered online and there was information available a website called Protecting Young Eyes which gave advice in relation to any potential safeguarding risks for each app or website for parents.  Parents needed to be aware of algorithms which affected searches which could unearth unsuitable material.

Councillor R Crute was glad that Prevent had moved to the top of the agenda and that the teams were able to act early to ensure the impact was less severe.  He stated that there was a fine line between hate crimes and terrorism and said it was important not to underestimate the challenge and referred to the rise of the far right and information online which was used to divide communities.  There was a need to take back control and it was vital to provide education to young people.

The Partnerships Team Leader advised that adults could also be radicalised if they had experienced a crisis. He gave an example of a veteran who struggled to get help with benefits but had seen on the news refugees coming into the UK apparently getting all the help they needed.  This made him disgruntled and have nasty thoughts.  He sought help from the Armed Services Outreach Support Worker but this showed people could be vulnerable at a young age or later on in life. Any response had to be proportionate and consider whether involvement from counter terrorism was appropriate in each case.

Councillor C Lines thanked officers for the excellent presentation.  He was concerned that the media played a role in dramatizing headlines and asked if the police liaised with the media to lessen their influence.

The Partnerships Team Leader responded from an officer’s point of view he could not influence the media as this would require legislative change however he agreed to feed this back to the Home Office via Counter Terrorism Police North East.

Councillor C Lines understood it would be difficult to stop as money talked but conversations were needed with the media to understand the consequences that certain headlines could have on young people.  Legislation would take a while to come in and people needed to be engaged with now.

Detective Constable S Smith liaised with the media when working through an investigation to pass information on to the public but this was controlled.

Councillor J Clark had found the presentation very informative.  She asked what criteria were followed to warrant school visits and queried if visits followed spikes in certain areas.

Detective Constable S Smith confirmed there would be a proactive response if there were spikes in certain areas althoughhis team would not go directly into schools if there had been an issue identified.  They would initially liaise with the DSL to identify what should be done.  He stated that there should not be an over reaction to the issues as he would not want the faith and trust of a family lost.  He relied on the Cohesion Officer if further concerns came forward. They would go into the school to talk to students and liaise with the pastoral care team.  If there was further belief that there was a vulnerable student the case would then be referred to the Channel Panel for consideration but this would need justification.

The Partnerships Team Leader confirmed that he worked with every school and gave training via the education portal through Teams.  He did not just target schools but also any groups who worked with children. Information was also provided regularly through the Designated Safeguarding Leads meetings.

Resolved:

That the report and presentation be noted