Dispersal order on Rose Hill
I spoken before about the problems we have with antisocial behaviour on the estate I represent - mostly, but not wholly, caused by young people. So I’m really pleased to report that as of 31st July, there will be a brand new dispersal order covering the two focuses of trouble - the Oval and environs, and Iffley Lock. It seems draconian, giving the police the right to disperse any group of more than two people between noon and 6am, but it’s necessary to help residents on the estate feel safe again. They’ve put up with abuse, criminal damage, underage drinking, noise and intimidation at all hours for years, and it’s not fair.
We had a fair old job convincing senior police officers of the extent of the trouble, though the local community team knew all too well; we also had to overcome the opposition of the Lib Dem portfolio holder, who made her ambivalence clear in the minutes of the last full council in answer to my question (link to minutes helpfully unfindable in the dreadful city council website, sorry). The large photo of said portfolio holder chatting happily with police officer about dispersal order illustrating an otherwise excellent article in the Oxford Mail is slightly galling, though.
So I’m really glad that it’s come off at last, and looking forward to the full implementation of the order. It’s a real tangible success for the first weeks of neighbourhood policing, showing that the police listened to residents’ concerns and acted on them. Of course, it’s only half the solution - the stick, if you will. The carrot is getting the county council to fund increased opening hours for the youth club, to give the dispersed kids somewhere to disperse to, and I reckon that will be harder.
Just cos I’m posting about councilloring (or counselling, as one letter to me had it last week), though, doesn’t make this a councillor-blog!
Lib Dems taking credit for something that they didn’t do? Shocking!!!! Next there will be a bar-chart about the success of Lib Dem dispersal orders.
Wow… I’m not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, I’m not so keen on the gangs of kids who loiter around the local fish-and-chip shop or smoke and drink on the green behind my house. On the other hand, the kids I’ve met down at the Lock have always seemed like a friendly lot, and I’ve never had a bad experience with them down there (I go running there five days a week for the past year.) I’ve always thought it was really good for them to be getting out of those rotten estates into the fresh air by the river, on their bikes or fishing or recently in the heatwave, swimming! (Devoutly hope they’re not letting the water in their mouths though… ugh.)
Hopefully the police will be judicious with their dispersal orders, and not tar all the kids with the same brush… It would be a shame.
Tam - I’m surprised you haven’t seen the trouble at the Lock. There have been at least two older people pushed in the river, fights between pleasure boaters and young men, and abuse of passers-by. The young people causing the trouble are known by name and appearance to the officers, so other young people won’t be unfairly tarred with the same bruch. Having spoken to our local police team, I know that they view the order as one more tool, and not *the* solution.
Dispersal orders do work. The council uses them in Manchester along with ASBOs and investing in facilities and working with young people they can make a real difference for the whole community.