You are here:

Agenda and draft minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - Waltham Forest Town Hall. View directions

Contact: Anthony Jackson, Democratic Services Officer  Email: anthony.jackson@walthamforest.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

Minutes:

Ms Aimee Farquhar chaired the meeting.

 

The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting and asked for introductions. 

2.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Minutes:

No apologioes for absence were received. 

3.

MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 400 KB

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on Monday, 7 October 2019.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting, held on 7 October 2019, were approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record. 

4.

ACTION LOG pdf icon PDF 93 KB

Minutes:

The Group noted that the majority of actions sat with the Metropolitan Police and would be be picked up at a later date or outside of the meeting. 

5.

ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR

Minutes:

Ms Farquhar confirmed that she was proposing having Co-Chairs of the Stop and Search Group.  The Group noted that Sandra DaCosta and Aimee Farquhar were both nominated to act as Co-Chairs.  No objection to the proposed arrangement was made by the Group. 

 

Sandra DaCosta and Aimee Farquhar were duly appointed Co-Chairs of the Stop and Search Group. 

 

The Group also noted that Kamahl Sami-Miller (a YIAG representative) had been nominated as Vice-Chair by Ms Wendy Baah in advance of the meeting, however neither Ms Baah nor Mr Sami-Miller were present at the meeting. 

 

The Group agreed to wait to see if there were any further nominations and to take elect the Vice-Chair accordingly at the next Stop and Search meeting.  

6.

YIAG UPDATE

Minutes:

Representations from the YIAG provided an update on the work undertaken since the last Stop and Search Group meeting on 7 October 2019.  The update is electronically available on the Council’s website as an appendix to these minutes.    

 

Mr Hinds stated that young people were keen to know their rights around stop and searches and made the point that many young people were afraid to engage with the Police.  He said that h hoped the YIAG were aware of that and attempted to try and break down that barrier.  Mr Hinds also asked whether members of the YIAG were aware of their rights around stop and search so that they were able to advise those young people with which they engage and whether they had appropriate hand out materials to circulate to young people.  Ms Brueseke confirmed that the YIAG undertook peer to peer workshops and developed ‘Y-Stop’ material.  She said that they were young people so had to acquire the appropriate permissions to operate in the way they did.  A member of the YIAG agreed and gave the example of the YIAG engaging with young people at St. James Street.  She said during one such engagement the Police had arrived and the young people’s, which the YIAG were engaging with, first instinct was to run but as they were engaging with the YIAG they chose not to run.  She impressed the importance of good communication  between young people and the Police. 

7.

BODY-WORN CAMERA ISSUES AND REVIEW OF 5090S

Minutes:

Ms Farquhar informed the Group that MOPAC were challenging the view that members of the Group cannot watch body-worn camera footage as viewing the footage aids transparency. 

 

Mr Hinds referred to the fact that MOPAC had undertaken a survey of CMG monitoring groups and their thoughts about not being able to view body-worn camera footage.  He confirmed that he would circulate a link to the survey to all members of the Group. 

 

Inspector Walton confirmed that the Metropolitan Police were keen to show the footage as they wanted to be accountable, however explained that their legal department had advised that it would be a breach of data protection regulations.  He explained that it would be difficult to obtain permission from the parent of the young person concerned.  He added that it would not be realistic to edit the footage. 

 

Ms Farquhar said that she hoped a way forward could be found and reported to the next meeting. 

 

A member of the public asked if there was a way for members of the public to view their own body-worn camera footage.  Inspector Walton stated that a member of the public could make a complaint.  He said that 92% of stop and searches were recorded and that the footage needed to be kept for a month after which it was deleted.  Ms farquhar asked whether a member of the public had the right to see their own footage as it would be viewed as a subject access request under DPA regulations.  Inspector Walton said that he was not certain but that he could not see why that would not be the case.  Ms Farquhar asked if the point could be confirmed, as an action point, and reported to the next meeting.

 

 

 

 

8.

UPDATE FROM ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR TEAM

Minutes:

Mr Temitayo Oketunji, ASB Team Manager, provided an update of work undertaken in the Anti-social Behaviour Team and, in summary, the following points were made:

 

·         Information is received from about how many complaints in relation to ASB behaviour which inform the work of the team;

·         That the ASB team work closely with the Metropolitan Police;

·         That a challenge for the team is how to identify those individuals causing problems;

·         The intention of the team to try and engage people causing ASB and sign post them to interventions and appropriate schemes, especially when concerning those people with possible gang affiliations;

·         Work closely with families of the perpetrators, schools and other agencies and offer assistance, such as moving individuals from the area and working with partners including Social Services; and

·         That patrols are based on intelligence and complaints received by the team.

 

Ms DaCosta asked how many patrols the ASB team had undertaken and what the outcomes were. Mr Oketunji confirmed that 4 operations had been undertaken over the last year.  He gave the example of the sort of behaviour which the team tackled which was the issue of moped drivers at the junction of Hoe Street, many of whom were dealing drugs.  He said that the Team tried to engage with the riders and pointed out that it was important to separate genuine delivery drivers from drug dealers for instance. Mr Oketunji also gave the example of street drinkers around Tescos in Leytonstone.  He said the ASB team, together with ‘Change Grow Live’ (CGL) charity tried to engage with the drivers.  He said that, working together, they managed to get some of them put into hostels and rehabilitation.  Mr Oketunji said that some of them would not cooperate and, consequently, public protection orders had been issued in efforts to stop them drinking on the streets, especially if they were causing ASB.  He went on to explain that protection warnings were issued first and then protection orders in instances of continued non-compliance. 

 

An attendee asked how officers identified whether someone was a gang member.  Mr Oketunji explained that officers worked closely with housing providers, families and other partners to ascertain which individuals might have gang affiliations.  In response to a question from an attendee, Mr Okentunji explained that intelligence was collected from family members and members of the public. 

 

Ms Farquhar asked, if someone was identified as a gang member, what was done with that information.  Mr Okentunji explained that the first thing to do would be to offer support as such individuals were usually seeking help.  He added that the team were working to identify schemes that might help such individuals. 

9.

QUESTIONS TO THE METROPOLITAN POLICE pdf icon PDF 189 KB

Minutes:

1.    Section 60s

Please provide a list of all the section 60s put in place in Waltham Forest between 7th October 2019 and 27th January. Providing dates, times and location. The number of individuals stopped, detail of the racial demographics of those stopped and outcomes.

 

Response

Inspector Walton circulated a document which detailed the use of Section 60s over the last two months. 

 

Ms Farquhar asked why Section 60s were in place where officers mostly found small quantities of drugs when there were real incidents of violence taking place in the borough.  Inspector Walton confirmed that officers would focus on the section 60 however stated that if officers received intelligence about the possession or supply of drugs, they could not ignore. 

 

Ms DaCosta made the point that section 60s were often put into place and officers sometimes did not appear use it.  She asked why stops were conducted under section 1 when they could use a section 60.  She added that there were instances of young people being stopped where a section 60 was not in place.  She said that fact made it difficult to educate young people.  Inspector Walton explained that senior officers would make the decision of what was most appropriate. 

 

2.    Recording and sharing of young people’s data – proposed pilot

We note that Stop Watch have written to Superintendent Tucker highlighting concerns which were also echoed in Alice Richardson’s article in the East London Guardian. Both this group and others have been asking for more detail on this proposition but we are not aware of anything being provided. We would again ask for an outline of the proposal and an update of dates for any pilot. Sight of guidance for officers and details of how the police intend to store and share the personal information of these young people. We would also like to see what is being put in place to prevent this list becoming a racially discriminatory system that stigmatises young black men in a similar way to the Met’s gang’s matrix.

 

            Response

            Inspector Walton confirmed that no further action had been taken in relation to the pilot.  He said that the purpose of the data was to assist the Police in identifying people at risk.  He said that if someone at risk was identified then the Police had a legal obligation to share that information with appropriate partners, especially if there were concerns for a young person’s safety.

 

            Inspector Walton said that the Gangs Matrix had caused some contention and explained that it was of keeping intelligence on who to target and support.  A member of the public raised the point that the Gangs Matrix had been challenged by the Information Commissioner’s Officer and they had confirmed that it was unacceptable.  Ms Farquhar expressed concerns that victims could be added to the matrix who may not be perpetrators.  Inspector Walton explained that existing legislation allowed the Police to hold the information as they are required to have a level of accountability.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

GROUP STRATEGY AND MEMBERSHIP MEETING

Minutes:

Ms Farquhar explained that there was a need for ideas/proposals on how to recruit additional Group members.  She confirmed that Stop and Search meetings were open to anyone and said that she would circulate an email to suggest a date for a Strategy meeting to discuss Group member membership and to improve the work of the Group.

11.

ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Minutes:

None.

12.

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Stop and Search Group is scheduled to take place on 20 April 2020.

Minutes:

The Group noted that the next Stop and Search meeting would take place on 20 April 2020.