Agenda item

A report by the Head of Regulatory Services

The Anti-Social Behaviour Officer presented the report confirming the Council’s Community Safety Team used National Legislation and County-Wide Policies and Procedures when dealing with Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB). The team worked alongside numerous partner agencies, particularly the Neighbourhood Policing Team based at Boston Police Station.

 

The Council’s two ASB Officers widely utilised the powers contained within the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime & Policing Act 2014 (see background papers for link to legislation), guided by the Safer Lincolnshire Partnership Strategy’s ‘Intervention and Incremental Approach Policy and Procedure 2015’ when dealing with ASB and other non-criminal offences.  The approach normally had 4 stages.  The statistics throughout the report provided against each stage for ASB enforcement and PSPO enforcement. 

 

As a point of clarification for committee members, the reporting officer confirmed that the enforcing officers were able to enter any of the stages within the stage 4 stage dependant on the nature and severity of an incident or the number of issues with any person.

 

Advising statistics the Anti-Social Behaviour Officers confirmed as follows:

 

Stage1 ASB Advice Letter:

 

§   2019-20 – 61 Letters Issued

 

§   2018-19 – 85 Letters issued

 

Stage 2 ASB Warning Letter:

 

§   2019-20 – 80 Letters issued

 

§   2018-19 – 22 Letters issued

 

Stage 3 Acceptable Behaviour Agreement:

 

§             2019-20 – 17 ABA’s

 

§             2018-19 – 1 ABA

 

Stage 4 Civil Injunction:

 

§   2019-20 – 9 granted by the Court

 

§   2018-19 – 3 granted by the Court

 

For over 18’s –

 

Stage 3 CPNW:

 

§   2019-20 -  2  Community Protection Notice Warnings

 

§   2018-19 - 12 Community Protection Notice Warnings

 

Stage 4 CPN:

 

§             2019-20 - 0 Community Protection Notices

 

§             2018-19 - 3 Community Protection Notices

 

The Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) for alcohol incremental approach also has four stages, PSPO enforcement statistics for the period 1^st April 2019 – 31^st March 2020 and in comparison with the previous year, 1^st April 2018 – 31^st March 2019 are set out within Appendix 2, a summary is provided below.

 

Stage1 PSPO Advice Letter:

 

§  2019-20 – 57 letters issued

 

§   2018-19 – 141 letters issued

 

 

Stage 2 PSPO Warning Letter:

 

§               2019-20 – 7 letters issued

 

§               2018-19 – 20 letters issued

 

Stage 3 Community Protection Notice Warning (CPW):

 

§               2019-20 – 1 letters issued

 

§               2018-19 – 6 letters issued

 

Stage 4 Community Protection Notice (CPN):

 

§               2019-20 – 0 letters issued

 

§               2018-19 – 1 letter issued

 

Breach of PSPO (refused a request by an authorised officer to desist from drinking alcohol within the designated area or leave the area):

 

Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN):

 

§               2019-20 – 0 FPN’s issued

 

§               2018-19 – 0 FPN’s issued

 

FPNs could be used for breaching the Order.

 

A point of clarification was tabled and members were asked to note that on page 47 of the report, March 2019 should have read March 2020.

 

Councillor Paul Skinner portfolio holder tabled his thanks to all the officers and police involved in the working partnership stating he was confident that the various stages served, were relative to those on whom they were served.

 

General committee discussion and questioning followed which included:

 

In response to a request for clarification on increases in both ASB and, in respect of incidents of large groups of youths, the Anti-Social Behaviour Officer and Inspector Harrod advised that during lockdown youth ASB had decreased, but was expected to increase as lockdown eased.  Domestic ASB had increased which was probably due to home confinement for many families. 

Referring to the incidents of large groups of youths, particularly in March, members were advised that despite trying to find a reason for the incidents, no one specific motive had been found.  Those involved had been from different schools and different backgrounds with no commonality, resulting in a rainbow of children who had appeared happy to fight each other.  The suggestion had been the events had been instigated on line and the events very quickly escalated with up to over 50 at the March event resulting in the police taking a very firm stance on the matter.

 

 

PCSO’s had liaised with local schools in identifying those involved and with the incident being so alarming, the ASB team and the police decided to go straight in at stage 2 with warning letters being issued.

The vast majority of those involved in March were unknown to the police and when parents had viewed footage of the event, they had been horrified by the actions taking place.   All those who had been served a stage 2 letter had also been referred to ‘Future for Me’, which was a diversionary activity, and none of the stage 2 letters had resulted in moving to stage 3. 

 

A member suggested that future events could arise via social media Inspector Harrod stated that while the events had been extremely alarming, there had been no resurgence of such activity during lockdown or during the school holidays.  As such, she had a certain degree of confidence that with the action taken and with the referrals to diversionary activity available, that no such further events would arise.

 

Referencing the increase of 50% in ASB noted via the CCTV data a member questioned the significant increase and the CCTV Manager advised that having looked at each incident, he noted that some had been filed under the wrong category

 

Asking what else the Council could do to enforce the PSPO and was a letter the final stage of enforcement, the Anti-Social Behaviour confirmed that the Council was only the administrator for the order and it was the Police, who enforced it.  Inspector Harrod confirmed that in respect of the PSPO and any criminality or ASB activity, the team enforcing it, would be directed to go in at the highest level, starting with the criminal aspect.  Therefore, some incidents involving street drinking could be dealt with as criminal offences and not through the PSCO.

 

A further point of information confirmed that there was no right appeal to a CPNW sent out:  the only right to appeal was at stage 4 (CPN) when a notice was issued and the person then had 21 days in which to appeal.

 

Referring to incidents of ASB and in particular young people riding bikes dangerously within the village of Kirton, a member asked if letters had been issued on such incidents.  The Anti-Social Behaviour officer stated that ASB did arise within Kirton and other villages sporadically.  If a PCSO or a PC in the village dealt with the incidents referenced and advised the Council, then stage 1 letters would have been served.  The member asked if statistics could be forwarded to him.

 

Concluding the Chairman thanked Inspector Harrod for her attendance and her informative appendix to the report, and thanked the Anti-Social Behaviour Officer for his detailed report.

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

That committee members agreed that they have reviewed, commented, and challenged the information presented within the report and its appendices.