Presentation on theme: "Tackling the Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour Issues that Matter Locally Samantha Leahy-Harland Police Reform Unit, Home Office."— Presentation transcript:
Tackling the Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour Issues that Matter Locally Samantha Leahy-Harland Police Reform Unit, Home Office
Background to changes JanFebMarAprMay June JulyAugSeptOctNovDec 2008 Policing Green Paper New deal to give police more freedom and public more power Focus on partnership working Change to performance management– increased role for HMIC; strategic role for HO Single top-down numerical target for forces on confidence PSA 23 (Make Communities Safer) Addressing issues of greatest priority in a local area Priority Action 3 – to tackle crime, disorder and anti- social behaviour of greatest importance in each locality Indicator 3 – public confidence in local agencies dealing with the ASB and crime issues that matter to be in their local area. Flanagan Review Reduction in police bureaucracy Importance of neighbourhood policing Local engagement and accountability Problem solving and partnership working Crime and Communities Review Visible policing and visible justice Community engagement Feedback and local information
Context to the Green Paper Officers should focus their time on doing the right things and using the right processes It is only by engagement with the public that the police service can know where it's targets and priorities should be The police need to move from being risk averse to risk conscious 91% of the public think that standards of service by the police should be the same wherever they live 75% of the public are prepared to play an active role in tackling crime
Sir Ronnie Flanagan’s Independent Review of Policing Sir Ronnie Flanagan’s Independent Review of Policing in England and Wales Published in two stages 12 September 2007 (interim) – 26 recommendations 7 February 2008 (final) – further 33 recommendations Four main themes 1.Sustaining progress made on neighbourhood policing 2.Improving local involvement and accountability 3.Making the most effective use of resources 4.Reducing bureaucracy and promote better business processes Explored through four separate workstreams, informed by a wide variety of people, both internal and external to the police service
Surveys and discussion groups with the public Public call for evidence and events Visits & consultation Existing evidence and literature Commissioned by PM, reporting to 6 cabinet ministers. Led by Louise Casey. To understand how local communities and agencies can work together to: reduce crime in their areas, raise community confidence in local agencies lower the fear of crime Heard from over 10,000 members of the public in total Background to Crime and Communities Review
What the public thought: Crime and anti-social behaviour are major concerns They support the police but are not clear about the policing offer or where to go if they have concerns They are not told enough about what happens in a system that it is remote and impenetrable. That wrong-doers do not face adequate consequences for the crimes they commit and They think that the system isn’t on their side low confidence fear altered behaviour disengagement Less effective response perception Why does this matter? Findings from the Crime and Communities Review
Policing Green Paper – key themes Empowering citizens New Policing Pledge Local crime information New community safety fund Professionalising and freeing up the police Independent advocate for reducing bureaucracy Shortened crime recording process Scrapping the stop and account form £80m investment in mobile data devices New fast track, leadership college and development of future chiefs Performance and strategy Clarity on the levels at which decisions are best made Stronger and more independent inspectorate Streamlined role for the Home Office Single performance target on public confidence
What will this mean for the public?
PSA 23 – Make Communities Safer Priority Action 3 is to tackle the crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour issues of greatest importance in each locality, increasing public confidence in the local agencies involved in dealing with these issues Two indicators under PA 3: Indicator 3 Public confidence in local agencies dealing with the ASB and crime issues that matter to people in their local area Indicator 4 Perceptions of anti-social behaviour Measured by indicators to track by proxy the success of local partnerships in tackling local priorities and illustrate changes in public confidence The single confidence target reflects the PSA indicator from the BCS: “It is the responsibility of the police and local council working in partnership to deal with anti-social behaviour and crime in your local area” How much do you agree that the police and local council are dealing with the anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in this area?
How will the target work? “Whether people think that the police and their partners are dealing with the crime and anti-social behaviour issues that matter locally” Hard edged measure Aim to focus action on dealing with local priorities i.e. providing a good customer service But must not be at the expense of other priorities (such as dealing with serious crime or protective services) Targets will be force specific – poorer performers will be expected to improve more Targets will be based on the national baseline of 45% established from 6 months BCS data 9Oct 07 – Mar 08) Targets will be deliberately stretching – Green Paper has cleared the way for change W/C 15 December – Forces informed of indicative targets Consultation on indicative targets until mid-January End of January - Quarter 4 BCS data received February – targets finalised 8 December - HS WMS on Strategic Policing Priorities February - Place Based Survey baseline available March – LAA agreed 2009/10 Policing Plans issued
What drives ‘confidence’ locally? Actual crime Levels of recorded crime and anti-social behaviour in an area Perceptions of the police Whether they are dealing with the things that matter to people Perceptions of fairness Perception of police integrity Other factors Political views, including views on sentencing policy etc Demographic issues General satisfaction with an area Perceptions of crime and anti- social behaviour People’s perceptions of crime and disorder in their area Confidence that the government is protecting the public Confidence that crime is being dealt with locally Perceptions about whether the crime rate has increased/decreased Feelings of personal safety Worry about crime generally or particular types of crime Personal experiences Direct: Victims and witnesses, reporters of incidents, complainants Indirect: Family members, observers, neighbours Word of mouth ‘System insiders’ – views of the police themselves/internal advocates Sources of information National media: More coverage but more negative Local media: More trusted but less coverage KEY DRIVERS OF LOCAL CONFIDENCE Community experiences Positive perceptions of a neighbourhood Neighbourhood policing: Area visibility, local accountability, responsiveness, problem solving
What do we know that works? More visible and accessible services Better community engagement Action to tackle local priorities Providing better support to victims and witnesses Providing more information about crime and policing
Key actions to improve confidence Actions New Neighbourhood Crime and Justice Coordinators Community Crime Fighters Embedding the Policing Pledge Implementation of Crime Maps New ASB Squad Improved partnership working Contact Management Programme Improve knowledge and understanding of what drives and impacts confidence Outcomes Neighbourhood policing that is integrated with other local services Responsive and accountable police that deliver to a clear and consistent standard Informed and actively engaged public who know what is being done to tackle their priorities and the consequences for offenders Support for victims and witnesses that puts their needs first A workforce (police, local authorities, courts etc) that is properly trained, skilled and supported to deliver a quality service that meets the needs of the public