Resources and Sustainable Communities Scrutiny Panel

Minutes of the Meeting held on 9th April 2009

Commenced: 3.00pm
Terminated: 4.40pm

Present:

Councillor M J Smith (Chair)
Councillors Beeley, Brelsford, Buckley, W Downs, Sidebottom, Travis, White and Whitley

Apologies for absence:

-

Please note that Minutes are numbered consecutively throughout the municipal year

40. Minutes

The Minutes of the meeting of the Scrutiny Panel held on 26th March 2009, having been circulated, were taken as read and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

41. Follow-Up Review Of Violent Crime In Tameside – Domestic Violence

The Chair referred to the Panel’s recent ‘night time patrol’ which was organised in order for members to see first hand the night time economy and policing in Tameside. He expressed the Panel’s gratitude to Chief Inspector Finn and Inspector Callaghan for their time taken to accompany the following members:- Councillor M Smith (Chair), Councillor Brelsford (Deputy Chair), councillors Buckley, Travis, White and Whitley.

He welcomed to the meeting; Tracey Austin (Community Safety - Violent Crime Lead Officer); Inspector Derek Weaver and Sergeant Vicky McKinlay (Greater Manchester Police – Domestic Violence Unit) and Lisa Morris (Victim Support) who were present to update members on the progress with implementation of recommendations which related to domestic violence, contained in the Panel’s report on Violent Crime, published in November 2006.

Recommendation 1

The Domestic Violence Forum met on a quarterly basis and comprised of membership from most agencies. As a number of active sub-groups now existed, it was envisaged that the Forum would develop a more strategic role in the future. There was initially a need to define the Forum and its membership for it to be more effective. It was suggested that the Forum should now include provision for male victims of domestic violence.

Although efforts were made to encourage agencies to attend the Domestic Violence Forum, attendance was not compulsory. However, agencies who were not attending could be asked for reasons why.

Recommendation 2

The Partnership had agreed to fund a MARAC (Multi-agency Risk Assessment Conference) Co-ordinator and it was reported that working with health services on risk assessment, referral mechanisms and responses to high risk victims of domestic violence would be a priority for this new role. The recruitment process was currently being undertaken and funding for the role would be determined on an annual basis.

The Domestic Violence Forum included representation from the Primary Care Trust and Midwifery. The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership had nominated the Director of Public Health as Strategic Lead for Violent Crime.

Arrangements had been put in place for intelligence to be received from the Acute Trust with regard to hospital admissions which related to incidents of domestic violence. However, to date no information had been received.

Lisa Morris (Victim Support) informed the Panel of the Service’s representation on the Safeguarding Adults Partnership. This Partnership included representation from health and made referrals to the Service.

Recommendation 3

Although agencies would be encouraged to participate in multi agency domestic abuse training programmes, attendance could not be insisted upon. It was reported that although health professionals did attend, General Practitioners needed more encouragement. Agencies were made aware of acceptable standards, although it was up to each agency to put into place. It was not known whether training throughout organisations was consistent.

In order to identify cases of domestic abuse, it was necessary for health professionals to be aware of the most appropriate questions to ask. It was suggested that although GP’s have a key role in identifying domestic abuse many may not be aware to refer cases to MARAC. To date, one referral to MARAC had been received by a GP.

Recommendation 4

It was reported that work on the implementation of actions contained in the Best Value Improvement Strategy 2005-2008 produced by the police authority had not been progressed.

Recommendation 5

All police in the Domestic Violence Unit were trained in accordance with the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA). Plans were in place for refresher and further training for any new personnel joining the unit.

Officers from the Domestic Violence Unit did not respond to all incidents. Incidents reported via the emergency 999 telephone number would be attended by an on duty local police officer who would have received some training on how deal with incidents of domestic violence. The Domestic Violence Unit provided specialist advice and attended pre-arranged meetings with victims of domestic violence.

Reported incidents were forwarded to the Domestic Violence Unit each day. The Panel heard that incidents should be recorded in accordance with the National Crime Recording Standard (NCIS). A record that had ‘failed’ (not recorded correctly) would show up areas of development for the officer concerned. There were approximately 15 ‘fails’ per week which resulted in those reports being referred back to the Command Unit to either be re-assessed or for an arrest to be carried out. A current performance indicator was to increase reporting of domestic violence by 10%.

Greater Manchester Police did have a positive stance on domestic violence and arrests were carried out. However, efforts by the Crown Prosecution Service to bring charges against perpetrators often proved difficult.

Reference was made to Co-ordinated Action Against Domestic Violence (CAADA). CAADA offered a professional and accredited training programme for independent domestic violence advisors or advocates together with training and implementation support for MARACs in the new Specialist Domestic Violence Court areas to help create a consistent, professional and effective response to all survivors of domestic violence in the UK.

Recommendation 6

Greater Manchester Police promoted how it would respond to reports of domestic abuse through posters and campaigns. One campaign focussed on domestic abuse where there were children at home. With funding of £10,000 received from the Children and Young People Strategic Partnership, the Domestic Violence Unit were able to carry out repeat reassurance visits over the Christmas period to 28 victims of domestic violence. It was reported that incidents had declined during this period.

All victims of reported domestic abuse in Tameside received a letter from the Domestic Violence Unit.

The new MARAC Co-ordinator would promote the role of the Domestic Violence Unit in relation to risk assessment and protection for victims with a range of relevant agencies.

The Panel heard that domestic violence incidents involving a child abusing a parent had increased. In such cases, referrals to MARAC could be made by the Education Service.

Domestic violence within Black Minority Ethnic communities continued to be under-reported.

Recommendation 7

Funding for Children’s Workers at the Tameside Women’s Project continued to be a significant problem.

The Tameside Safeguarding Children Board had a short life working group which aimed to shape services for children (and their families) affected by domestic abuse.

As a charity, Tameside Women’s Project continued to source funding from a range of sources in order to provide all its services.

Services for Children and Young People would decide if it was appropriate to fund the Project’s services for children and whether this fits with the commissioning plan.

This year, the Tameside Women’s Project had applied for lottery funding of £25,000 to provide two Children’s Workers. In order for funding to be mainstreamed it would have to be determined within the Children’s Plan that there was a need for this provision.

It was noted by the Panel that this service was not duplicated within the borough.

Recommendation 8

New Charter Housing Trust Limited had a Domestic Abuse Policy. However, there was no consistency in policies across all the Registered Social Landlords operating in Tameside, and many did not have such policies in place. This was particularly the case for Registered Social Landlords operating across a number of regions.

Recommendation 9

The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership continued to award £10k per annum to help deliver the Sanctuary Housing Scheme. However, the running costs were currently approaching £100k per annum.

The local authority awarded capital funds of £34k. The bid was made as a means of preventing homelessness due to domestic abuse.

From establishment of the scheme to present, 330 properties had been made safe through the Sanctuary Housing Scheme – approximately 6 properties per week. There had been an 86% rise in referrals to the scheme in 1 year.

An application to the charities commission in order for the Sanctuary Housing Scheme to obtain charitable status had been successful, therefore allowing more freedom to source funding. Access to more funding would allow scope to widen the scheme to provide family support. The Scheme was not directly commissioned by the Tameside Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership.

It was noted that the Scheme did not receive any funding from government grants. However, one of the key questions in Best Value Performance Indicator 225, introduced by the government in April 2005, was whether a local authority had developed a Sanctuary Housing Scheme to enable victims of domestic violence to choose whether to remain in their home with professionally installed security measures, where it was safe for them to do so. In order to score 100% against this indicator a Sanctuary Scheme would have to be in place.

It was recognised that there was a need for the Sanctuary Housing Scheme in Tameside to be continued and supported.

Recommendation 10

It was reported that Victim Support had now become a national body and at present local initiatives had been put on hold. Therefore promotional material had not been distributed through schools and the Youth Service. Members were informed that information about Victim Support and what support was available to young people could be found at www.are-you-ok.org.uk 

Members were informed that a pilot scheme working with schools was currently being run in Salford.

Recommendation 11

In March 2009, Tameside Magistrates Court was accredited as a Domestic Violence Court. It was reported that by 2011, there would be 128 accredited Domestic Violence Courts.

Having an accredited court meant that cases could be clustered and heard on a particular day to enable all agencies to focus their specialist resources. In addition, cases could be fast tracked. A specialist advisor would also be available and some additional funding available. However the Court would have to be run in accordance with set criteria.

The Chair thanked those present for their attendance and information provided.

42. Local Government Act 2000 - Urgent Items

The Chair reported that there were no urgent items for consideration at this meeting.

Chair