You are here:

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room 2 - Waltham Forest Town Hall. View directions

Contact: Cameron MacLean, Democratic Services Officer  Tel: 0208 496 4328 Email:

No. Item




Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Roy Berg, and Shabana Dhedhi; and Kate McCabe (Victim Support), Molly Irene Samuel-Leport (Board Secretary), and Michael Verrier.




Members are required to declare any pecuniary or non-pecuniary interest they or their spouse/partner may have in any matter that is to be considered at this meeting.  Interests are defined in the front cover of this agenda.


There were none.



To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21st October 2015


The Board considered the minutes of its meeting held on 21st October 2015.


Regarding accuracy of the minutes, it was noted that Jane Brueseke’s job title should read, “Youth Engagement and Participation Officer”. The Clerk to the Board stated that the minutes would be suitably amended.


There were no matters arising out of the minutes.


Resolved: That, subject to the agreed amendment, the minutes be approved and the Chair authorised to sign them as a correct record.



Mid-year report of the Chair

Additional documents:


Philip Herlihy, Chair of the SNB, presented his Chair’s report which had been circulated with the papers for the meeting. Presenting his report, the Chair referred to the following matters –

(i)        Most of the Board’s time to date had been taken up with administering the various project groups and, therefore, it was disappointing to report that the groups were still waiting to receive funding which had been allocated to them. However, it was anticipated that the funding would soon be available, and that it had been possible, notwithstanding the lack of funding, for the SNB to submit a mid-year project report to MOPAC.

(ii)       Regarding the Custody Suite project, it was reported that Simon Bartlett, Waltham Forest Council Community Safety Programme Manager, would be the consultant for this project. This was particularly fortuitous as Simon’s team would be able to provide information that would assist another one of the project groups, Spark2Life.

(iii)      He had attended a number of various meetings in his capacity as Chair of the SNB, including the last meeting of Waltham Forest’s & Search Group. Following on from this meeting, there was a proposal that the SNB might want to consider providing an advocacy service similar to those that had been trialled in other London boroughs to assist persons stopped in the borough by the police and who wished to make a complaint regarding the way in which the stop and search was conducted.

(iv)      Other meetings attended by the Chair included a recent meeting of the London Communities Policing Partnership (“LCP2”); the MOPAC SNB Forum at City Hall with the Vice Chair, Philip Dundon; and the SafetyNet meetings, along with Board Member, Sheridan Mangal.

(v)       The new data dashboard, which would replace the MOPAC data packs circulated to the various SNBs, and the possibility of the arranging a workshop for members who might be interested to familiarise them with the use of the dashboard.

(vi)      Progress in developing resident networks, including ward panels and Neighbourhood Watch (“NHW”).  It was noted there would be a meeting of London NHW Association (“LNHWA”) at City Hall on 16th December 2015 which the Chair would attend.

(vii)    Measures taken to contact the British Transport Police who operate in Waltham Forest to what assistance they might be able to provide to the SNB.

Response to the Chair's report the following points were made –

(i)    Detective Inspector Mike Cowie stated that, the policing of buses was the responsibility of Safer Transport and that the contact person at Safer Transport was Caroline Mitchell who worked from uplands patrol base.  British transport police covered the rail stations, while Safer Transport, soon to become Roads and Policing, which were part of the Metropolitan Police, were responsible for buses.  The Chair asked that Caroline Mitchell be informed of the Boards work.

(ii)  The Chair informed the Board that advisers to the YIAG would be welcome to attend the MOPAC training session on the use of the new MOPAC dashboard.




Annual report of the Board Treasurer updating the Board on funding matters and project funding.



Julie Gilson stated that she had prepared a written report which would be appended to the minutes of this meeting.  She stated that the Board had been allocated £34,650 for this year, the same amount as the previous year, and that all of these funds had now been allocated.  Julie then referred to the problems there had been a receiving and allocating funds, noting that letters had now been sent to all applicants and templates had been prepared for monitoring projects. She stated that it was hoped that regular monitoring of the projects would allow the Board to see progress of projects and would provide the opportunity for advisers to assist project managers in implementation as well as giving an indication of the success of individual projects.

It was also reported that a midyear report had been submitted to MOPAC regarding the Board's various projects and that this had been accepted by MOPAC.  Regarding future funding, Julie noted that there would be a workshop later in the meeting to discuss possible project and she proposed that, given the uncertainty regarding funding, the Board should be ambitious in its projects and its applications for funding.

In the subsequent discussion of the Treasurer's report it was noted that the YIAG had received their funding but that a number of other project had still to receive project funding.  The projects still to receive funding included African Heritage and Education Centre, Tender Arts, Spark2Life (which had been the subject of independent evaluation), HEET.  Jane Breuseke noted that the YIAG had yet to receive its funding.  Julie Gilson stated that the paperwork had been forwarded to Committee Services and she asked that it be confirmed that the purchase order had been processed.  It was noted that YIAG funding would be processed through an internal requisition.








[Deferred from the start of the meeting while waiting for members who had given apologies for lateness]

The Chair proposed that, as it appeared that there would be no late comers, all members present having arrived at the start of the meeting, now was an appropriate time for the various parties present to introduce themselves and to say who they represented.  The various parties then introduced themselves.




Additional documents:


(i)    YIAG Update Report

Jane Brueseke stated that, although funding had still to be received, YIAG projects had started in March of this year and, therefore, the update report would cover work from that period to the present.  She proposed to hand over to the YIAG representatives present at the meeting.  The YIAG representatives then took it in turns to present the report that was before the Board.  In response to various questions, the YIAG provided the following information –

(i)    Jane Brueseke informed Board members of arrangements for the celebration drop-in event to be held on Tuesday 15th of December 2015 at 4:45 p.m. in Committee Rooms 2 and 2 A where the Mayor and Councillor Rustling, portfolio holder for Children and Young People, would be hosting the event which would provide an opportunity for councillors and others to meet members of the YIAG.

(ii)  In response to approaches from other boroughs to the Waltham Forest YIAG regarding best practice, Jane Brueseke stated that the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) had invited representatives of the YIAG to visit Kensington and Chelsea Town Hall and share their experience and knowledge and to give a presentation to the local police.  This was done with a view to RBKC setting up a YIAG.

(iii) Other boroughs, including Redbridge, Brent and Tower Hamlets, had all expressed an interest in setting up a YIAG and had approached Jane Brueseke or the YIAG seeking advice.  However, it was believed that Waltham Forest was the only YIAG that was still in existence and operating successfully.  DI Mike Cowie confirmed that, from his experience of working in a number of different London boroughs, the Waltham Forest's YIAG was the most successful in his experience.

Jane Brueseke stated that she felt that the success of the Waltham Forest YIAG was due, in part, to the YIAG receiving police funding whilst being administered by the local authority.  She added that the Commissioner for the Metropolitan police, Sir Bernard Hogan Howe, was aware of the Waltham Forest YIAG which he had mentioned in briefings. The Chair noted that the Waltham Forest YIAG enjoyed a high profile in police safety matters.

In response to a question by the Chair regarding FGM, and the fact that victims would be very young children making intervention difficult, and that the persons closest to those children would be their immediate family and relatives, representatives of the YIAG provided the following information on how the success of FGM presentations might be measured –

(i)    The YIAG had worked with, amongst others, Hibo Wardere, a FGM victim and campaigner against, and educator on, FGM who spoke in schools and in the media about FGM.  From her, they had learned that the most effective approach in educating children and young persons about FGM was not to hide the reality of what FGM entailed.

(ii)  Educating very young children was made difficult by the fact that the perpetrators of FGM were the people that very young  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.



Supt. Tania Coulson, Metropolitan Police Service, will make a short presentation on Police matters and take questions from Board members.


The Chair introduced Chief Inspector Mike Cowie who was here to answer any questions that Board members may have regarding police matters in relation to the work of the Safer Neighbourhood Board.  Before starting the Q & A, the Chair invited CI Cowie to address the Board members on any matters of interest.

Referring to the recent stabbing at Leytonstone station, CI Cowie stated that there had been no immediate backlash as a result of this incident and that, in fact, meetings he had recently attended indicated a greater unity and cohesion within the community as a result of that incident.  However, although there had been no negative feedback from the local mosques or local community, it had been decided that two police officers would remain on duty at the station in addition to British Transport Police officers as a means of reassuring the public.  It was noted that British Transport Police, who were responsible for crime at railway stations, had provided additional officers at Leytonstone station and that the two Metropolitan Police officers were in addition to those British Transport Police officers, and that the Metropolitan police and's British transport police shared resources as necessary.

In the subsequent Q & A, the following matters were raised –

(i)            The description of Waltham Forest as a "terrorist Borough” was a creation of the media and could not be attributed to anything said or done by the Metropolitan Police Service, the local authority, or any other public authority.

(ii)           It was dependent upon the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Counter Terrorism Command, known within the Met as SO15, whether or not this incident would be declassified as a terrorist incident, now that it was known that the perpetrator was someone with mental health problems.

(iii)          In response to the news media coverage of the incident as a terrorist incident based it would seem on the perpetrator's references to Syria, it was proposed that any Metropolitan Police announcements should have countered media coverage of the incident as a terrorist incident, particularly as it was now known that the perpetrator had mental health issues and that his actions may, or may not, have been instigated by others with more sinister motives.

(iv)         The police had no control over a free press and coverage of the incident was a result of how the media wish to report the incident.  Further, that the police very often would not comment on an incident until the facts were ascertained and it was possible to issue an accurate and informed public statement.  In addition, a premature press release by the police could potentially interfere and compromise the future investigation of that particular crime.

(v)          Decisions on what information the police press bureau would release were taken at a senior level and were beyond the control of any Borough commander.  In addition, the police press bureau comprised highly trained individuals who may, for whatever reason, decide to withhold information from the press until such time as it was deemed safe and/or necessary,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.



To consider the MOPAC data pack for December 2015


The Chair referred the members of the Board to the MOPAC information that had been sent out with the papers for the meeting. He suggested that, as many of the issues in the data pack had been addressed by CI Cowie in the previous item, that the Board simply note the contents of the data pack.





Nominations are sought for the following positions -


1.    Independent Chair

2.    Vice Chair

3.    Treasurer

4.    Board Secretary


Members of the Board who are unable to attend the meeting can nominate a member or members of the board by contacting Committee Services no later than the day before the meeting.




At this stage in the proceedings, Philip Herlihy, vacated the chair and handed over the proceedings to the Clerk to the Board.  The clerk stated that, as this was the Board's AGM, the four Board officer posts became vacant and it was necessary to fill those posts for the coming year.  Accordingly, it was stated that members would be asked to nominate who they wish to fill each vacancy and, if necessary, a vote would be held to determine which nominee would fill each particular vacancy.

Election of Chair

The clerk stated that he had received one nomination for the vacancy of Chair of the Board for the following year.  That nominee was Philip Herlihy, the immediate past Chair of the Board, who had indicated that he was willing to stand for election as Chair of the Board for the following year.  The clerk invited nominations from those members of the Board eligible to vote who were present.  As there were no other nominations, the clerk asked if Philip Herlihy's nomination was seconded.  Three members of the Board seconded Philip Herlihy's nomination.  As there were no other nominations, the clerk declared Philip Herlihy duly appointed Chair of the Board for the following year.

Philip Herlihy stated that, before taking the Chair, he wanted to afford Board Members an opportunity to vote on his appointment.  To allow Board Members to vote with complete candour, he proposed that he withdraw from the meeting room when the vote was taken.  The Board agreed to vote upon the nomination.  In the subsequent vote, the results were, as follows

FOR: All


RESOLVED: that Philip Herlihy be elected Chairman of the Board for the following year.

Election of Vice Chair

The clerk stated that he had received a nomination from Molly Irene Samuel-Leport nominating herself for the vacancy of Vice Chair.  Accordingly, he now invited nominations from Board Members.  Philip Dundon, past Vice Chair, stated that he was willing to stand for re-election as Vice-Chair.  As there were two nominations for the post of Vice Chair, the clerk asked if either nomination was seconded.  The only nomination to be seconded was that of Philip Dundon.  Accordingly, Philip Dundon was elected Vice Chair of the Board for the following year.

Election of Treasurer

The Clerk invited nominations for the post of Board Treasurer.  As there were no nominations, the Chair asked Julie Gilson, the past Board Treasurer, if she would like to stand for election as Board Treasurer.  Is Gilson stated that she did not wish to stand for Treasurer for the next year.

As there were no other nominations, the clerk stated that the vacancy would remain unfilled and that nominations for the post of Board Treasurer would be sought with a view to appointing a Board Treasurer at the next meeting of the Board.

Election of Board Secretary

The Clerk invited nominations for the post of Board Secretary. As there were no nominations, the clerk stated that the vacancy would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.



Practical Workplan exercise led by the YIAG


The Chair stated that the YIAG would be conducting a workshop that would set the priorities for the SNB’s Workplan for the coming year. At this stage, he invited the YIAG and Jane Brueseke to introduce the workshop proposals and to arrange the SNB members into the groups required to conduct the workshop.

The YIAG then proceeded to conduct the workshop and, at the conclusion of the various practical and group exercises, to summarise the items that had been identified for inclusion in the SNB’s Workplan for the following year.

The Chair, on behalf of the SNB members, thanked the YIAG for preparing and conducting the workshop which had been a great success, and which had identified various priorities and responsibilities.

The Chair then drew the meeting to a close.