Neighbourhood policing
Today I went to the monthly meeting of the Rose Hill neighbourhood action group, convened by the police to respond to the priorities set by local people about improving our area at the public meeting back in June. Then, local residents said that cutting down antisocial behaviour and getting more things for young people to do were their priorities. SEEDA have just funded a large doorstep survey of residents’ views on the estate, and the early results confirm that opinion: of the 175 interviews so far, the vast majority name those problems as the top two that need to be dealt with.
Getting a dispersal order implemented in two of the flashpoints was one of the early successes of the NAG. The strength of resident feeling gave the police the authority to go ahead and agree it with the city council. It’s now been in operation for just over a month, so I can safely attempt a comment on how it’s working.
I think we knew that this was going to be a long process, that it might get a bit worse before it got better, and that it is certainly very clear that the dispersal order is only part of the solution. Our beat team know all the local names and faces of our persistent troublemakers, so they are only targeting the specific group who have caused trouble in the past, when they are gathered in large groups, in certain designated public places. It’s a good example of intelligence-led proactive policing that really does target the troublemakers.
Having said that, our local gang is rather taking the order as a challenge, and whilst within the zone things have calmed down, particularly around a local shop which was the location of much excitement, there has been an increase in criminal damage and other ASB outside it. In addition to the usual RHP (Rose Hill Posse) and OX4 tags, we’ve a new one going up everywhere - LRG, which stands for Little Rosehill Gangsters, apparently. There have been a few burnt-out cars, and in a particularly lively night on Tuesday, there was a violent assault and six car windscreens were smashed. People - like me and Jo - who live just outside the zone have found that some of the trouble is being dispersed to where we are - lots of noise and disturbance on the Parade, and the lovely experience of a glass bottle being smashed on our front door. I gather people living just outside thezone in other directions have had some similar problems.
So, what’s next? Well, the neighbourhood action group agreed a review of the boundaries of the dispersal zone sooner than the scheduled six-monthly review in January - I certainly hope that we can get the whole estate covered, rather than just part of it. The police are aware of the problems and are stepping up their presence on the streets; our PCSO team will be starting on the estate in the next couple of months; and the streetwardens are now at full strength. And tomorrow, a delegation of us from the NAG are off to meet Councillor Louise Chapman, the county council portfolio holder for children and young people, to attempt to get funding to keep the youth centre open for an additional 15 hours a week - that’s every weekday evening. I think we’ve got a pretty good case - wish us luck.
So, what’s next?
Shoot the little bastards?
Been at tenants’ and residents’ association this evening, and whilst they didn’t quite suggest that, everyone was pretty furious…
Thick ears Sam?
Any chance of a curfew? No?
Yes, I am serious. I was horrified when I first found out that my American husband’s hometown had a curfew for all under eighteens set at 10 pm on weeknights… but by God, it works.
(Every time I see those ‘Your in OX4′ tags, I suffer from the urge to fetch a can of spray paint and put in the apostrophe and the missing ‘e’. I suppose this would be considered criminal, yes?)
Britblog Roundup # 83…
Welcome once again to that listing of posts you have nominated as being something we should all have a look at. You can add to next week’s extravaganza simply by sending the URL to britblog AT gmail DOT com. First…
Antonia,
This makes interesting reading but why isn’t there a more joined up approach to this and where are the Youth Offending Team with regard to your NAG?
They should be providing targetted activity to prevent offending behaviour but from reading your blog it appears to be the police and the local authority.
Every Child Matters talked about co-ordinated work, the news today has said it’s not abut more funding it’s about better targetted funding. Your proposed solutions are from the police move the problem elsewhere and from the local authority provide a youth centre but the point of the YOt is that they shoul provide expertise about what works in these circumstances.
Nick - there is a joined-up approach. We have representatives of the primary and secondary school, youth service, Positive Futures, education-welfare, streetwardens, police, CANACT, residents’ associations, Sure Start and city council (officers and members) at every NAG meeting. Unfortunately, not every agency attends. One that doesn’t is the YOT. Oh, and it appears to be the police and the city council because we have the drive to make things happen. Not always the case at a strategic level for the other council on our patch (the county) nor for all the other agencies.
Finally, whilst I’m signed up to ECM like we all are, just thinking about the young people doesn’t work. The community as a whole has said they want more youth provision, specifically not targeted at “at risk” young people but for the whole community of young people who, whilst they may not be in trouble, do live on a pretty deprived and disadvantaged estate. I’m a councillor for the whole community, so I’ll advocate for targetted work (like the Football Foundation money that’s just come onto the estate, like the Positive Futures work, etc) and for generic provision for young people, to keep them off the streets and to give them leisure and development opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have had.