[Mala Mistry]

Ehammond Wrote:Thanks for volunteering - you'll begin to see drafts come through next week.

I am putting together a section on how CDRP scrutiny can have a constructive impact and want to invite you to let me know if you have any particularly good examples of scrutiny of the police, or other C&D partners, in your authorities. I've got quite a few examples already but I want to be sure I'm not missing anything. I'm particularly interested to hear if you're a district and have done anything on this.

Ed

I would be interested in seeing a cooy of your draft CDRP guidance when it is available to look at

Please find attached a link to the Safer Communities Scrutiny Panel work programme report where the Panel have engaged some partners to come and build a relationship with them and help bring them up to speed with key issues and concerns

http://decisionmaking.wolverhampton.gov....ent=122899

The Panel wish to hold a workshop in the early in the new muncipal year to examine how best they can take forward the new arrangements and inform the development of their work programme. I gave pulled togehter the following report by way of background information

http://decisionmaking.wolverhampton.gov....ent=122455

It would be interesting to hear about the how other Local Authorities are integrating the new regulations. whether they have changed their Constitution in any way and how they are engaging key CDRP Partners to be forthcoming in supporting scrutiny.

Best wishes

Mala

Scrutiny Officer

Wolverhampton City Council

01905 551259

[Nick Beale]

mala.mistry Wrote:It would be interesting to hear about the how other Local Authorities are integrating the new regulations. whether they have changed their Constitution in any way ... Best wishes

Mala

We simply added some words (see italics below) to the terms of reference of our Policy & Resources O/SC:

"To review the implementation of existing policies and consider the scope for new policies for all aspects of the Council's use and management of its resources and to discharge its functions in the scrutiny of authorities responsible for crime and disorder strategies."

[Craig Goodall]

We've amended the remit of our Neighbourhoods SPP (place where CDRP reported anyway) to include the words:

'to review and or scrutinise decisions made or other actions taken in connection with the discharge od the responsible authorities of their crime and disorder functions, no less than twice in every twelve months'

[David Collins]

Interesting to see that no Welsh Authorities have posted yet. Has done any work on developing this here yet? We have spoken to members and partners on where we are and think we are reasonbly well places. Are we all "waiting for WAG Guidance" this side of the bridge or has anyone been more proactive?

[Ed Hammond]

The Home Office have advised that the territorial extent for the regulations and guidance is England only, as the WAG will be putting forward its own provisions on this issue later this year.

To be honest, though, it's difficult to see how the WAG's provisions might be materially different to those promulgated by the Home Office in regulations.

To update more generally, you are probably all waiting on tenterhooks for the final publication of the guidance. So are we. I am chasing.

[Ed Hammond]

The guidance has now been published and can be found at:

http://www.cfps.org.uk/what-we-do/public...al/?id=104

We expect (and rather hope) that a new, properly typeset, version will be produced soon. When it is, it will be uploaded to replace the one already up there. The actual text will be identical.

[Philippa Smart]

Ehammond Wrote:The guidance has now been published and can be found at:

http://www.cfps.org.uk/what-we-do/public...al/?id=104

We expect (and rather hope) that a new, properly typeset, version will be produced soon. When it is, it will be uploaded to replace the one already up there. The actual text will be identical.

Ed

Am finding the guidance useful, but was hoping the paragraphs on two-tier working would provide clear guidance on the P&J Act's reference to councillor call for action not applying to county councillors in two tier areas. This distinction makes sense to me in terms of the different responsibilities of counties in relation to CDRP matters as opposed to those of districts. Maybe I'm alone in this ??

Am wondering if other two tier areas have started putting joint CCfA protocols together, to reflect this difference, but within the wider spirit of developing a joint approach ?

Philippa, Scrutiny Officer, Hampshire County Council

[Simon Evans]

Just in response to Philippa's comments, my understanding is that Crime and Disorder Councillor Calls for Action will apply to County Councils.

Section 19(3) of the original Police and Justice Act 2006 stated that: 'In this subsection and subsections (4) to (6) "local authority" does not include the county council for an area for which there are district councils'

However, section 19(3) and other subsections have been amended by Section 126 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. The above provision in 19(3) has been removed.

The suggestion for joint protocols and informing working arrangements is a good one.

Does any one feel that there is a bit of contradiction in the legislation and guidance? On page 27, only order making powers of the Sec of State are cited as a means for formal joint crime and disorder committee working (Why?). At the same time we have references to informal joint working in the guidance as an example of good practice, which is good, but again why only informal?. Then we have section 123 (4) of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act which forbids a joint o&s committee from making reports and recs on crime and disorder matters. Does this not send a confused message about joint working?

[Cllr Susan Watson]

I did some training with councillors last night on CDRP scrutiny and two questions came up that I wasn't sure about - hoping someone can help!

The first was around whether a councillor could be co-opted onto the crime and disorder committee if they have particular knowledge of a subject e.g. if they're a magistrate or something. The act allows for co-option of employees or officers, but doesn't mention members, so I assumed not but wanted to check.

Also, the Act says that the responsible authorities have to respond to requests for information and attend meetings, but what if they refuse? Where are we supposed to go if they won't co-operate?

Thank you!

[Mala Mistry]

HI all

Wondering whether anyone can help - has anyone come accross Scrutiny Members playing a role on their Crime and Disorder Partnership (CDRP). If so, how did this work?

Also has anyone developed a protocol guidance for members/partners on how crime and disorder committee plans to work with Crime and Disorder Partnership?

Also does anyone have any examples of engaging partners who are difficult to engage in the CDRP Scrutiny and attend scrutiny meetings and how this has been managed?

Best wishes - Thank in advance

Mala

Scrutiny Officer - Wolverhampton City Council