Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Aron.

Councillor Martins had sent apologies that he would be delayed.

There were no disclosures of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2014 to be submitted and signed.

Copies of the minutes of this meeting are usually available seven working days following the meeting.

(All minutes are available on the Council’s website.)

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2014 were submitted and signed.

A representative of the Probation Service will be attending the meeting to give an overview of their work.

The Chair welcomed Mr Tom Moreton, a manager for the Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire Community Rehabilitation Company (BeNCH CRC).  Mr Moreton made a presentation to the Task Group.

During the presentation he covered the following areas:

• The changes which had taken place in the structure of the probation service, which had been split into the National Probation Service (NPS) and a number of Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs).
• The roles of the different organisations in managing high-risk offenders (who were the responsibility of the NPS, and low to medium risk offenders, who were the responsibility of the CRCs.
• Details of the programmes run by the BeNCH CRC.
• The timeline of the changes to the service.
• How the risk levels for different offenders were determined.  The risk factors taken into account included age, substance misuse and offending history.
• The changes brought in by the Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014 which included the extension of rehabilitation provision to offenders released from custodial sentences of less than 12 months.

Councillor Mills asked about the youth offending team.  Mr Moreton explained that this was still in existence but was a separate entity.

Mr Moreton explained that BeNCH CRC was now owned by Sodexo who would be running the service.  However this was a very recent development.  In the long-term, there would be an element of performance related payment. Councillor Bolton asked about Sodexo’s background.  Mr Moreton explained that they were a French outsourcing company and they ran Peterborough prison.

The Chair asked how the terms of reference were different for the NPS and the CRCs.  Mr Moreton advised that the scope for each organisation was different as they worked with different types of offenders.  He explained that the tendering process had been considered by the National Offender Management Service and the contract had been won by Sodexo.

The Chair and asked for more details about the supervision of offenders by the service.  Mr Moreton explained that conditions were set for the offender, such as not being permitted to leave the country. Failure to comply with these conditions during the licence period, were more strict than during the period of post-sentence supervision.

The Chair noted that the increased supervision of offenders who had served short sentences would place heavy demands on the service.  She asked about the impact on staffing.  Mr Moreton responded that that there had not be an increase in resources but the changes were just coming in.  It was anticipated that there could be approximately 600 additional cases to manage in the County each year as a result of the changes.  He noted that there was scope for the more parties to be involved in rehabilitation programmes.

In response to a question from the Chair about training, Mr Moreton explained that qualifying as a Probation Officer took some time.  The training function lay with the NPS.  He highlighted the different skills involved with the rehabilitation work and the risk management work undertaken by the NPS to supervise high-risk cases.

Following a question from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The Task Group is asked to review the attached list of actions and sign off all which are complete.

The Task Group received a report of the Committee and Scrutiny Support Officer updating members on outstanding actions from previous meetings.

It was agreed that a number of actions could be signed off.

ACTION - Committee and Scrutiny Support Officer

RESOLVED –

that the action sheet be updated.

The Community Safety Manager will be in attendance to discuss the draft plan with the Task Group.

The Community Safety Manager introduced the draft Community Safety Plan.  She explained that the Responsible Authorities Group had been merged with One Watford as a trial to encourage creative solutions from a wider range of partners.  Partnership working on community safety in Watford had been well mainstreamed and the focus was now on creative solutions in the longer term.  She explained that there were three priorities proposed for the Community Safety Partnership from 1 April.  These were: updating crime, protect our communities and reassure and inform.  She explained that updating crime related to how crime figures were reported and understood following the changes to the way incidents were reported.  Protecting our communities related to focusing on the victim and vulnerability and ensuring that the authorities understood the make-up of the community.  Reassure and inform involved the development of a communication strategy looking at targeted campaigns and case studies to illustrate successes and to be more interactive. She summarised that a new approach was being taken alongside the usual approaches to tackling criminality.

Following a question from Councillor Martins, the Community Safety Manager explained that work was being undertaken to ensure that the authorities had a good understanding of the demographics of the community.

The Chair asked about the increase in partnership working. The Community Safety Manager explained that the partnership was always looking for ways to develop their work with new groups.  She gave an example that an A&E triage had been funded for the town centre over Christmas and they were hopeful that the Health Authority would fund this in future now the benefits had been proven.

Councillor Williams asked whether communities would be involved in the work on the Prevent Strategy.  The Community Safety Manager explained that a plan would be developed and training would be provided to raise awareness.   It was hoped that as many people as possible could contribute to the process.

In response to a question from the Chair, the Community Safety Manager provided more details of the aims of the updating crime priority.

The Task Group asked for more details of forthcoming meetings of the Antisocial Behaviour Action Group.

ACTION –  Committee and Scrutiny Support Officer to circulate the dates

RESOLVED –

that the update be noted.