Agenda item

Sam Barstow, Public Protection and Anti-Social Behaviour Service Manager

a.    presented the report to address the remaining DPPO which covered the Arboretum.

b.    advised that the ASB Crime and Police Act required that all DPPO’s made under the old legislation needed to either be converted or repealed within three years of the enactment. 

c.    referred to paragraph 3 and advised on the background to the report highlighting the reasonable grounds that must be met to make a PSPO order.

d.    referred to table 4.4 of the report which set out the level of issues, broken down to total ASB and alcohol related ASB incidents over the previous 3 years.

e.    summarised that the data did not represent a compelling case which could support the introduction of a PSPO.

f.     further advised that the enforcement of a PSPO would be challenging to justify and deliver based on the limited levels of reports. It would not be currently practical for Council officers to deliver the enforcement within the resources currently available.

g.    advised that consultation had taken place through local boards and the Park Advisory Group and is was clear that members of these boards would like to see the introduction of a PSPO however most accepted that the evidence did not exist.

h.    advised that the figures would be kept under review and the position could be revised at any time.

i.      further advised that agencies had a frequent established meeting structure to discuss both individuals and areas of concerns and it would therefore monitor through its partners, relevant issues in the area.

j.      invited member’s questions and comments.

Question – What were residents views based on when they expressed concern about repealing the order?

Response – It was based on anecdotal views as they had seen people drinking in the Arboretum.

Question – There were regularly people sleeping in the Arboretum, was there any evidence of drinking and drugs?

Response – The reporting of incidents in the Arboretum needed to be encouraged, if the reporting of incidents rose it would provide an evidence base.

Question – Why was there a lack of people reporting incidents?

Response – There could be a number of reasons why people did not report incidents including a perception that nothing would get done. Reports needed to happen to find a solution.

Question – Would a PSPO cost the Council extra money?

Response – It would cost for extra signage and also the Council would have to enforce the PSPO as the Police would not put any extra resources into enforcing it.

Comment – A multi-agency response would be more effective than enforcement, issues may be resolved more effectively.

Question – Had responses been received from the ward Councillors?

Response – Ward Councillors had been consulted with and given the opportunity to comment on the proposal.

Question – What was the process for putting a PSPO in place?

Response – There needed to be an established evidence base, a consultation exercise would need to take place and it would then go to Policy Scrutiny Committee and Executive.

RESOLVED that the proposal to withdraw the DPPO and to monitor the Arboretum area be supported.