Enforcement Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee - Monday 5 October 2026, 7:30pm

Enforcement Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee
Monday, 5th October 2026 at 7:30pm

Speaking:

Start of webcast

Share this agenda point

1 Welcome and Introductions

Share this agenda point

2 Declarations of Interest

Share this agenda point

3 Questions to the Cabinet Member

Share this agenda point

4 Investing in a Dedicated Policing Team (Paper No. 26-243)

Share this agenda point

Police + IET - Enforcement OSC 2026-10-05 FINAL VERSION

5 Spending Review (Paper No. 26-244)

Share this agenda point

6 Work Programme (Paper No. 26-245)

Share this agenda point

Work Programme

7 The Council's Plans to extend CCTV coverage across the Borough

Share this agenda point

Webcast Finished

Select an agenda point

Scroll with video

Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.

Okay, so welcome everybody to the first meeting of the Enforcement Overview and Scrutiny Subcommittee.

My name is Councillor Claire Davis and I am the chair of this committee.

As you all know, this is a new committee and this evening that gives us a good opportunity

to establish a constructive and focused approach,

the scrutiny of the enforcement of community safety matters.

So I look forward to the conversation.

As a reminder on meeting protocols,

members wishing to speak, please raise your hand.

When invited, then please switch on your microphone

and switch off again when you have finished.

So item number one, welcome and introductions.

As this is the first meeting of the subcommittee,

1 Welcome and Introductions

I will invite cabinet, committee members, sorry,

to introduce themselves briefly,

and then we're going to spend a bit of time up front

from the cabinet member and officers,

giving a slightly longer than normal introduction,

just sort of setting the scene.

And one point to note, thank you very much

for those of you who submitted some questions

in advance for the cabinet members.

Some of those sort of directly relate

to the scope of enforcement.

So I've asked the cabinet member and the officers

to cover that off as part of the introduction.

So they'll be covered off at that point.

In particular, one of the ones was about,

will this OSC oversee the work

of the regulatory services partnerships?

We'll cover that off in the introduction.

All right, hopefully that's clear.

So I will go round in the following order.

So, Councillor Aps.

Good evening.

It is very good to finally be given the opportunity to meet after a very long delay in scrutiny.

Thank you.

Good evening, Councillor Graham Henderson, I am a Councillor for O 'hampton.

I am also the opposition spokesperson on enforcement and community safety.

again. Very pleased that we now have the opportunity to delve into these essential questions affecting

any residents.

Good evening, Councillor Kirsten Botting, Conservative Councillor for Trinity Ward.

Councillor Tom Mitten, I'm Councillor for Wandsworth Common and ECHO. It's really great

that we've got a committee dedicated to enforcement.

So looking forward to the debates that we're going to have.

And then if I can turn to the cabinet member for enforcement

to introduce herself and then maybe set a bit of context

for this new subcommittee, and then I'll turn to officers

afterwards.

Cool, thank you.

Councillor Caroline de la Sougia,

I represent St. Mary's Ward in Battersea.

And I'm delighted to be here with you

all tonight to this new overview and scrutiny committee.

and we thought before discussing the paper

on the agenda tonight, it'd be helpful to briefly

set out the scope of the enforcement portfolio

and the services at fore, wasn't it?

I think it's fair to say enforcement is a very broad

area of council activity.

I've been surprised myself at how much it encompasses.

It includes things like community safety,

environmental enforcement, antisocial behaviour,

licencing, trading standards,

various nuisances, CCTV, regulatory services,

emergency planning, and a range of other functions

delivered through public protection

and various partner organisations.

I've probably missed some bits here,

in here is such a broad portfolio.

But the point is, much of this work involves

lots of close collaboration with the Met Police,

with businesses, residents, and other agencies.

And one of the reasons we've created

this enforcement portfolio is because

of those services are really interconnected.

And a key theme of tonight's report,

which delivers on our manifesto pledge

to hire more police officers,

is how can we create a more coordinated

intelligence -led approach across those services.

And that's sort of hopefully what we'll be discussing

further tonight.

And to the key officers supporting this work,

this includes Mr. Evans, who's the Assistant Chief Executive,

he's the one on the left over there,

and Mr. Neil Thurlow, who's a recently appointed

Director of Public Protection.

I think he's been with us for just over six months now,

just shy, or six months, and has done a huge amount of work

in that short period of time.

So I'll let both of them introduce themselves.

Thank you.

John.

Good evening, committee.

Thank you, Chair.

I'm John Evans.

I'm Assistant Chief Executive of Wands of Council,

and the wider public protection services fall within my area.

And actually Neil has only been here three months, not six, and I think he's achieved

an awful lot in that three months.

Sorry, thank you.

Good evening, Neil Thurlow, the Director of Public Protection.

As has been said, relatively new to the organisation, it's my honour and privilege to be the director

of this new directorate.

As Councillor Sajjour has explained, we brought together a number of services into this new

service area to allow us to better coordinate our efforts and work in regard to high risk

vulnerable people enforcement and intelligence.

I look forward to speaking to you through the report and taking any questions you may

have and working with you all over the coming years.

Thank you.

Thank you very much and welcome to Wandsworth.

We're delighted to have you.

Very good.

Okay, so we will move on now to item two

2 Declarations of Interest

declarations of interest so members are reminding reminded of their duty to declare interests

Relevant to the business being considered. So are there any

declarations of disposable

pecuniary interests other

registrable interests or non -registful interests

Very good. All right, we shall move on

Okay, item number three is questions to the cabinet member.

3 Questions to the Cabinet Member

So this item provides an opportunity for members to put questions to the cabinet member for

enforcement under section 310 of the overview and scrutiny committee procedure rules.

So thank you to those of you who submitted questions in advance.

As this is the first meeting, a few questions related to scope, maybe we've covered some

of those, but I will make sure that you've got those questions answered.

In addition, I've had some questions that relate to the paper that we're going to discuss,

so if it's okay if we can just hold off the questions related to that until we get to

the paper, otherwise we're just sort of doubling up.

That's all right.

So we intend to spend about 10 to 15 minutes on this item.

I'll try and alternate between members so everyone has a fair opportunity to contribute.

I just ask that any questions and follow -ups are concise.

I might cut you off otherwise.

I don't want to do that.

So please, if you could be somewhat concise in your questions and follow -ups.

Anything, is everything clear on the questions to a cabinet member procedure?

Councillor Henderson.

I thought we were standing in order,

so it's like 25 minutes potentially to look at in November.

Yes, not at the overview and scrutiny committee.

I think you're thinking of full council, yes.

So in order to keep the agenda somewhat focused,

that's why we've been in all the OSDs,

I think, suggesting 10 to 15 minutes.

I think that's been the general rule.

But obviously if there was a lot of questions

that aren't about the paper,

I'm happy to continue to for a while.

All right, okay, so just on some of the questions

that have been asked in advance,

so I just want to cover some of those things off.

So one of them was a request around an organogram,

so who to speak to about what.

So just on that, we will follow up on that particular point

and deal with that offline.

As members know, there's members inquiries,

and that will direct you to the right place.

And the reason I just mentioned that point

and deal with that offline is because,

as you know, one of the things in this paper

is about changing the organisation.

So I just thought we can deal with that

as administrative point offline.

In addition, there was a question

about Northcote Road closures.

And so I was proposing that that was covered,

not in this, but it was going to be covered,

because the question was quite broad in the opportunity subcommittee,

which is where I understand that will be reviewed.

So, just any other comments, maybe just on that one?

Chair, to give context, wouldn't it help

if the people who pose the questions actually ask them?

I'm very happy for you to answer them.

I think in this particular one,

we thought it was better to go into opportunity,

but please do ask the question, no problem at all.

Councillor Apps.

Thank you.

In that case, I've got some other questions

that I'd like to ask instead.

I was not told in advance that our questions

would be kind of dealt with in other ways like this,

which would have been polite,

but I'm quite happy to ask other questions instead.

Thank you.

No problem.

And all the rest of the questions we're going to cover,

I just, they were sort of,

it felt like that's something that we could email to you.

That was all.

I was just trying to be efficient with time.

On Northcote Road,

do you want to go ahead and ask the question, Graham?

I appreciate this ease between opportunities

and enforcement community safety.

I mean, during the summer I did raise

some quite extensive correspondence,

primarily with officers, and then luckily

with cabinet members in terms of the precautions

that were taken to prevent, in particular, vehicle attacks.

And I do actually think there are issues.

I'm not gonna go into details because this is broadcast

and it's probably, I did raise some quite legitimate

concerns having worked in civil contingencies.

And I do think those aspects of safety and community safety

do need to be looked at quite separately

from the broader issues of opportunities

and business impact.

Okay, so maybe we have to question the government.

Yes, and I think you have raised very fair points.

I would like Mr. Thurlow to come back to you on the security aspect

that were considered ahead of the scheme.

Thank you. So, in advance of the scheme starting,

the local authority engaged with the Counter -Terrorist Security Advisors,

CTSA, who are the specialist Counter -Terrorist Police that cover each borough.

Our local one was engaged and worked with colleagues in the preparation and gave a thorough

report that made several recommendations that needed to be adhered to and which were adhered

to in regard to the preparation and the opening of the road each weekend as a pedestrian area.

And yeah, by undertaking that work with the CTSA, we were able to get that specialist

expert advice to ensure that that risk of you know it's hostile vehicle

mitigation or the such considerations was considered looked at and responded

to in the best way I was practical at the time.

Yeah, Councillor Inters

Sure, in the best way I'm practical at that time and I appreciate that.

I don't want to make a huge move here because I think it is rather than for the review and

and I said I intend to go into specific details.

But suffice it to say that three years ago,

you received what may appear to be a very different report

from the Counter -Terrorist Security Advisor

of Metropolitan Police, who indicated that,

should this be a permanent arrangement year on year,

that a very substantial amount of money

money into between 2 and 3 million pounds should be spent in order to safeguard that.

So I'm quite happy to leave this until the actual review comes forward. But there is

considerably more that wasn't necessarily took place during the summer. Thank you.

Another question? Councillor Abbs.

Thank you. And this is a question for the cabinet member, because it's really about

kind of thinking about the framing of the issues. So I'm interested that you've chosen

to make it a sort of enforcement department or enforcement directorate with all the emphasis

on that. And rather than say something like community safety, which is the way it was

previously most of the work around that was badged. And it's obviously a big difference

and tone. I don't have any particular problem about it, but interested in what the difference

means to you and why that particular tone has been chosen. I'm slightly concerned with

things like free bulky waste being abolished and kind of some of the carrots that were

put in place to try and make the kind of our public realm a more positive and friendly

and safe place to be, that some of that is being lost to kind of greater stick rather

rather than having the balance between the carrot

and the stick, and sort of making sure

there was lots of ways to help residents,

whilst also making sure that we did crack down hard

where people did fly tip, et cetera.

So I hope it won't mean too much of a move

towards in that direction.

But it'd be interesting to think,

and if you can outline how you're

going to bring in things like safety for women, which

obviously came through very strongly in the kind of data

as part of that enforcement role.

Thank you.

I guess the first point to make is,

as the new conservative administration,

we created this portfolio which didn't exist before.

I think that shows how committed we are

to this issue of community safety

and the border aspects that I spoke about earlier,

which obviously was not the case before.

You have a single point of contact on that.

In terms of your point about bulky waste,

that's not one for me, that's one for Councillor Brooks

as an environment cabinet member, so I won't take that.

But I think there's a broader point is,

yes, there's enforcement, there's prevention,

and they'll go hand in hand, right,

in terms of how do we do this.

But if we think about why are we doing this,

one of the most frequent sort of comments

that we got on the doorstep,

and I'm sure you got on the doorstep

when you were campaigning ahead of the elections,

we're fed up about crime going on

and no one seems to be doing anything about it.

Why is that?

And we need to be much stricter

in terms of enforcing the law.

And that's what we're doing here,

sort of saying, look, this is a new

evidence of fed up of this.

Only a few weeks ago,

in the shoplifting where Niawara live,

and it's just outrageous,

these things happen quite regularly.

Where people sell, yes, normal,

it's M &S, there's always people shoplifting.

It's got to a stage where people think,

oh yeah, it's normal, it's fine, this is happening.

And what we're saying is no, this is not fine,

and we want to do something about it.

And that's our approach.

Does that answer your question?

Yes, pretty much.

I mean, I'd say we're all politicians,

so we should all answer questions

that kind of feed across.

Because I would say that things like cutting back

on mega skips, cutting back on free bulky waste

will have an inevitable consequence on our public realm,

which you are then responsible for enforcing

the cleaning up of.

So I do think we need to look at these issues in the round.

But yes, of course, and crime and public safety

is incredibly important in my patch.

There's been two murders in my ward in the last year,

and there's been more before that,

so it's certainly very high on my priority.

So I'm very keen to work with all councillors

to make sure that we make Wandsworth as safe

and feel as safe as we can for everybody,

and also lawful as well.

Thank you.

If I may follow up just quickly.

I think you answered spot on.

So as we have to be working together as a team

and across all the various portfolios,

and actually as an enforcement portfolio straddles

there's a lot of other portfolios.

So transport is one of the device and enforcement,

et cetera, how do we get involved with that?

You mentioned vogues of violence against women and girls.

Again, that's one way Councillor Hedges leads on that,

but obviously is an enforcement aspect,

is prevention and enforcement on that.

Environment is another one you just mentioned.

So we are, that's how we're trying to think about it,

not solving it in silos,

but how do we work together to come up?

So I think your point is that is entirely valid on that.

Councillor Pottinger.

I've been going to the SMT meetings for 20 years now and what I have discovered is residents

don't know how to report.

There might be the odd person on the SMT, they know the roots of reporting, but residents

don't and they will come to a Councillor, maybe send them an email at six o 'clock in

the morning to say there's a rough sleeper on the common.

and that can get delayed by the time the council picks it up

because they might not be awake at six o 'clock

in the morning, are you looking at ways

that residents can be more informed

on how to report and make it simple?

Yes, is a short answer to that,

but I think it just depends on which areas, et cetera.

So for example, I think we haven't answered

to Councillor Hanson's question about RSP actually,

which if I may answer that first,

and then, because we haven't really answered it.

I'm sorry, I'm just trying to talk.

I don't know what you mean.

Okay, what was the other thing?

I think you said it was RSP.

What we, okay, well I guess the answer on RSP,

and you're asking, does this come under this committee,

and what do we do about it?

It's, yes, and indeed it is a key part of the portfolio,

and as any committee, we'd be able to scrutinise

performance outcomes, et cetera.

And one of the things we've been working with RSP

is how to make it easier for residents to report problems

and interact with the council.

So the RSP is training standards, licencing,

noise, nuisances, et cetera.

So that's one area we're working with.

That specific part of the portfolio

on ease of contact with the council.

So I think a lot of people don't understand

how to get in touch and how to solve problems.

Yeah, thank you.

I shall say something else that

So, you're relieved and pleased that the administration has certainly taken our plans for a directorate

of public protection and are now actually in the process of carrying it into effect.

This was clearly for the direction of travel and it was our decision to appoint a director.

So, certainly, you're very welcome your experience, I'm sure, will certainly serve you well.

standards in exceptionally good stead.

We also looked at a whole range of different services, which

was spread over a disparate range of different departments,

which frankly didn't make sense at all.

I was a little bit surprised and disappointed

that in to do with the paper scrutiny work programme,

that there was no mention of the regulatory services

partnership, which I do think at some appropriate point we need a deep dive on.

And also, the critical work of emergency planning, and we all know what's going on in the world.

We all know what's going on in this country, both natural disasters as well as things from

our side.

And again, I think emergency planning is another area where something like at some appropriate

point in the future have something of a deep dive. So I was a bit surprised not to see

a scrutiny work programme. They certainly were intended to be integral parts of the

director of the public protection. I want to say thank you for retaining that because

I think it is potentially a very good force for good.

I'll just come back to the point about work programming in a moment, but I don't know

if you, Councillor Di Ciano, if you want to talk about the scope and regulatory services

partnership.

It's in scope of this committee.

Yes.

Well, on the emergency planning, whilst that falls under Mr. Thurlow's responsibilities,

currently it sits in terms of reference

for the finance committee, which is a bit odd,

and I think we all agree on that.

We can agree on something, and so that's always something

that we're looking at, a bit of housekeeping

that needs to be done there, but I guess a key point

is Mr. Sutter's in charge a bit, he's here tonight,

so we can ask him questions about it.

If you have any sort of follow -ups,

you can go directly to him and ask about that.

Just on that, sorry.

What do you want to say?

Being very polite here.

Yeah, I mean it doesn't make sense.

I mean finance accumulated a whole range of functions

which were very painless.

I mean they obviously had a finance related issue

because you have to pay for services

but it really doesn't make sense.

The Finance Committee paper,

these are the papers for the Finance Committee.

It is overloaded, and it makes sense to bring in

things like emergency planning into a specialised committee.

You can actually look at it properly, thanks.

I think we have an agreement on that.

I'm just sort of reflecting on what the committee is saying.

Obviously, the Finance Committee is also sort of

wider corporate services as well,

it's not just finance and it's reaming.

I think that's why, sort of historically,

that has been there, reflecting the importance

and cross -cutting nature of emergency planning

and civil contingencies.

I mean, ultimately, Committee terms of reference

are a matter for Council to change,

so it's probably something we'll need to take away

and reflect on, but hearing what people are saying

at this Committee.

Thank you.

Further questions?

It's just that the paper talks about a lot of cross departmental crossovers where, you

know, we're working together, but there was no mention about using the traffic wardens

to report.

Or was that, did I miss it?

Was to where, you know, they can report flight shipping or whatever.

is that something that could be considered?

Because they're out on the streets every day

and it could become part of their contract.

I will start the answer now,

and let Mr. Sutter finish the answer.

And hopefully it will be a coherent answer.

But I, because clearly that's a question about the paper,

which is coming up shortly,

but the traffic wardings are separate

to what we're doing here.

but it's the broader point you're making about having people who are out on the street,

not being shy and reporting what's going on, and not just being focused on hierarchy.

I'm just doing environmental.

No, look at the big picture.

If you see any sexual behaviour and you see graffiti on the walls, report it.

And it's about cultural change, which is why it is not going to be easy, but that's exactly

what we're driving towards.

That's the ambition.

Mr Thirlow, we'll finish that.

Thank you.

So, I agree completely with what Councillor Di Ciano said.

The parking offices are additional eyes and ears,

so they should be able to report things in to us,

explain what's going on.

They aren't obviously named in the report

because in regard to the wider scope,

which we'll talk about in due course,

they have a very specific and very important role to play.

But you are right to ask that question of,

can they or should they or how would they be involved

in that wider intelligence piece?

So that's taken and noted and we'll explore that.

Thank you.

Yes, can I say something?

Then finally, question five,

which I don't necessarily expect an altitude out

because having looked into it,

it is incredibly difficult.

Why it's difficult is another question,

but it is apparently incredibly difficult.

And what are the current regulatory controls

can be used to ensure commercial deliveries

to shops and businesses in residential areas

do not occur at antisocial times,

e .g. in the earlier hours of the morning.

It is something which does concern us.

And obviously,

commercial organisations thrive, they need work,

but some of these deliveries...

And I appreciate the delivery companies.

Traffic at two or three o 'clock in the morning

is obviously a lot easier during the working times.

But we must look after our residents and our times.

That's a fair point that you're making.

I know we have received complaints about that

and I think you're referring there

to quite a specific case.

And I think this is a really good example actually

of how we can work across different teams

in the council to come up with a solution for residents.

I think so far your crew has been responded by the transport team.

And I think Mr. Thurlow can look at it from an enforcement point of view

and look at the wider range of tools that could be available to us,

which other parts of the council may not be aware of.

And also, so maybe licencing of premises might come into play here.

So what I suggest we do is come back to us, Mr. Thurlow,

and we will help in those specific cases.

I think we're all in agreement in terms of we need to be thinking about our residents

and nuisance at two o 'clock in the morning is not acceptable.

Any further questions?

Yep, probably last one or two now.

So the thorny issue of noise, which

is something which will continue to be a council issue forever, I'm sure.

But when I've had resonance

with noise nuisance problems, it's much easier if those

problems occur on, say, a Thursday or Friday or Saturday night than it is if they occur

on a Monday night when it's harder to get the noise team out, et cetera.

Whereas obviously, sometimes your Monday nights and your Tuesday nights are incredibly important

to your sleep, so early in the week.

So I realise it's something for the whole council, you know, but it would be good to

have a look at this at some point and see if there's ways that we can make sure that

our noise complaint services very responsive

and very agile to community and resident needs.

So something that perhaps the,

not expecting a full answer right now,

but it would be nice to kind of put a marker on it.

Yeah, and I think, again, you're absolutely spot on

to mention that.

I think it is a complaint that we do get from residents

and what I was saying earlier is how to make it easier

for residents to report it.

But your question is more about sort of availability

of the team and flexibility, et cetera.

And that's something that we are working on with the ISP.

So how can we improve services to residents?

And I think we have to be more nimble

and be available when the issues actually occur.

Final question?

Nope.

Okay, so let's thank you very much for questions.

Thank you to Cappalemba.

So let's move on to item four,

which is the bulk of our discussion today,

investing in a dedicated policing team.

4 Investing in a Dedicated Policing Team (Paper No. 26-243)

This is paper number 26243.

So this report asks the subcommittee

to undertake pre -decision scrutiny of proposals

that will be considered in cabinet

on Monday the 12th of October.

Any findings, views, or recommendations,

we agree we can report to the cabinet

alongside the consideration of this paper.

The proposals concern funding 25 dedicated

met police officers and developing an integrated

enforcement team combining police and council powers

through visible, intelligence -led,

and community -focused action.

So I will first invite the cabinet member to introduce

the policy intended behind the report,

and then ask officers to present

the main operational financial elements.

Clearly everyone's read the paper,

but I thought in the interest of this being a new committee,

we'd just do a little bit of preamble beforehand.

So over to the cabinet.

Thank you. I'm actually really excited to be presenting this paper tonight.

This paper puts forward one of the biggest investments in community safety

and neighbourhood enforcement in this council's history. It's one of the most

ambitious programmes across the whole of London, so very excited about that.

Just a background to it, I think we've spoken about this already in some of the comments

that have been made here tonight, but I think residents expect us to take more

visible action on a number of issues that affect the quality of life,

anti -social behaviour, environmental crime,

nuisance, flight tipping, et cetera.

And too often, enforcement is fragmented

and residents are left feeling

that nobody's taking ownership.

And I think we've all come across that

in a role as councillors.

So this proposed change that we're seeing

that we're speaking about tonight,

it really backs the commitment to safer,

cleaner neighbourhoods with a major investment

in both policing and enforcement.

And that will ensure more officers on the ground,

more proactive action, and stronger consequences.

So the proposal delivers two things, or suggests two things.

25 additional dedicated police officers focus on one's worst priorities.

This is additional, a keyword here in the sentence.

And secondly, a new integrated enforcement team which will bring together council and

police powers to tackle the issues residents complain about the most.

So just to give any additional main topics, Mr. Furlough.

Thank you, Chair.

So, if you allow me, I'll pick out a couple of headlines.

So, the report, as Councillor Stroud introduced,

talks around an additional 25 police officers

that will join the borough,

constituting 22 police constables and three sergeants.

As has been mentioned, these officers will be able

to provide the visible, dedicated support

to address the local priorities that we set

based on our residents' needs and our residents' concerns.

It allows us to task those police officers and also to work alongside the wider public

protection directorate, the local safe neighbourhoods teams, other enforcement services and the

broader IET which is also mentioned in the report and comes at a cost of £3 .1 million

a year for an initial 12 months with the option to extend by a further 24 in line with standard

in terms of contract.

The IET, Integrated Enforcement Team,

will be developed and looked at to combine

police and council powers through single,

physical, and intelligence -led models of operation

and allow us to ensure that we have the right officers

in the right places at the right times.

We'll also comprise that service

of integrated enforcement officers

with a head of service, a number of enforcement officers

that will be out on the ground,

a data analyst who will be able to analyse

and tell us what's going on where and for whom,

and technical support to ensure that enforcement

is carried through from the moment of issuing a fine

all the way through to and including potential prosecution.

The officers, as I mentioned, will be based within

the Public Protection Directorate,

work closely with CCTV based in the Town Hall Campus

and to ensure that we've got fast information

showing and joint tasking.

Why this investment matters and obviously why we've been taking this work directly

aligns the Manifold Pesto commitment to invest in policing and also ensures that our residents

aren't impacted by wider metropolitan police abstractions and other incidents that take

place that draw officers off of the Borough Command Unit day in, day out.

The appendices in the report provide illustrations of how we envisage the Section 92 officers

and the integrated enforcement team to work,

and also includes the ENA to show you

and to consider how we view the benefits

and the implications across all of those

with protective characteristics within the borough itself.

As Councillor Di Giorgio says,

it's a really exciting opportunity,

and one which the borough should be

and will be very proud of,

and one which our residents will see,

high visibility policing in neighbourhoods,

and as I say, at the times that are important to them,

addressing the issues that are important today.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Okay, let's start the questions.

So, Councillor Mitten.

I think we probably all welcome this investment locally.

I suppose just touching on one point,

which is really important from a resident perspective,

is obviously dealing with crime,

but how they have the confidence

that this is actually having an impact.

So, it'd be great just to get some clarity

on how we as a council are gonna be tracking improvements

dealing with crime, antisocial behaviour,

and other environmental enforcement,

and other levels of enforcement as well.

Thank you.

So, really important questions,

and obviously ones that we need to be

completely transparent with our residents for,

so that they understand what these services are delivering.

So we're gonna have a really robust range

of key performance indicators that will allow us

to track everything from numbers of service requests

from a local authority office perspective,

numbers of fines through to numbers of patrols,

number of operations around them,

and the arrests that the police will take for us.

We're developing that full suite of KPIs at the moment

as we go through this process.

And what we would expect is that over time,

we'll be able to illustrate and discuss that journey

quite clearly for residents,

where we can talk about crime up to the point of which the police arrive and subsequently on that regular basis so they can see

quite clearly the direct impact that it has

and again

We'll be using lots of clear communications on a regular basis to make sure that residents can also

See through our social media e -news etc. What's going on and where it's taking place

Thank you councillor Henderson

Thank you

Sorry in principle

and we want to work with you on this,

and we want to make it a success,

and we want it to be sustainable.

I have to say we do have a considerable number of questions,

many of which we posed to Mr. Evans at our pre -meeting,

because the paper sets out, essentially, an objective.

I appreciate the sudden things

in the Bondsworth Conservative Manifesto,

and it is substantially a manifesto pledge.

But, as I say, we do have quite a lot of detail.

How much of that would be out in Catholic is another question.

But I am going to start off with what I think is the key issue.

And it has actually created quite a bit of debate

in various public pod site groups,

which is to do with the financing of this.

And certainly, as I understand it,

for ones with a conservative manifesto,

so I pledge that this would be at no cost to residents.

First of all, there is a question to be asked

about whether it is legal or appropriate to use civil money.

I simply ask that because it has been a question posed,

and in fact, Councillor Moritz in the public,

or Zach Boop, she specifically mentioned this meeting,

and this is where the question can be posed.

Certainly from our view,

we would certainly like a very clear statement

on that particular point.

It's all a considerable amount of money, £15 million,

and we don't want to get you wrong.

We certainly don't want to do anything

which is from opening legal because campuses could be

search up for that.

Not being alarmist, I think we need absolutely

clarity on that.

And certainly I'd be grateful, outside of this meeting,

to be given a legal explanation of how

silmon, particularly in silmon, can be used to finance this.

And I have to say, in that context,

I did find the paper a little bit confusing.

So, recommendation, it would approve additional positive general fund revenue budget variations.

Paragraph 2 talks about your manifesto commitment, early sure that we pay for through developer

lending funding.

There are various other references to sell, but significantly take into account all the

costs involved.

It certainly is not clear that cell would be used, or there would be sufficient cell

available to actually fund full cost of this.

I think that is quite clear.

He's stated, I think, by the director of finance, he seemed to suggest that ENSIL would be used

as much as it possibly could.

Thank you.

Mr. Thurnau. Or Mr Evans.

Actually, sorry. Mr Evans.

Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the question.

So in terms of the funding and reference to NSL,

so it's important that the Council establishes a budget for the work that's set out

on the IET and the section 92 here,

which is what the recommendation is.

In terms of how that budget is contributed to,

I think the intention is certainly in the first,

the remainder of this year, that NSL is a major contributor,

if not all of the contributor to that funding.

But going forward, we know that the levels of NSL

and SIL particularly can sort of wax and wane a little bit,

and I think the idea is that, you know,

if there isn't enough SIL available,

then that will fall more broadly to other forms

of capital funding that the council has access to.

But I think the first call on ENSIL.

So it is about making sure we establish a budget

so the budget is there to ensure that this project

can happen for the next whatever years it is on here.

How that is funding and the contributing capital pots

to that, or revenue pots, is to be worked out

by our finance colleagues.

In terms of the legality of it, then ENSIL has actually

quite broad definition in terms of

being able to be used for provision improvement,

replacement, operational maintenance of infrastructure,

or other activities that address the demands

that development places on an area.

And actually the use of ENSIL for law enforcement

and wardens and things like that is a fairly common thing

I think through London and certainly we're aware

of some London boroughs that do similar.

So I think that legal test has been established

and past really from our perspective,

and we're confident that this is a relevant

and lawful spend of events in the borough.

No, I just want to say,

A, thank you for your comments about,

maybe we want to work together on this,

totally on board with that,

and supportive of what we're doing, that's great.

In terms of the proposal tonight,

on the IET side of things,

this is very much setting our ambition,

and the plan is that we will come back to the committee

with a more detailed, thorough plan

for the committee to discretize.

I did get my numbers wrong earlier.

Mr. Thurlow has only been with us for three and a bit months.

I think this is a good sort of phase.

Lots of work's been done already,

and there'll be more work on sort of the IT side

of things specifically.

On the funding, it's worth paying mind

not all of it is new money,

as in some of it is just a reallocation

of staff across the council.

Obviously police officers owe you money,

but that stuff isn't.

So I think that's worth putting that in mind.

Councillor Apps.

Thank you.

I was listening with interest, actually.

Councillor Boating brought up traffic wardens,

which actually I'd kind of triggered something

because I meant to bring up in this paper.

And I was just very mindful of the discussion around it,

that the kind of phrase which what you don't measure

doesn't count.

And I kind of found the whole thing about how

traffic wardens were going to be brought into

kind of reporting graffiti or reporting fly tipping

a bit vague and kind of needs a lot more pinning down

to make it work.

We need to kind of incentivize it or make it part of

the kind of, of their kind of KPIs.

and just looking at that as well,

looking at the KPIs coming up,

I mean, this is the perfect opportunity.

This is a new committee looking at a new area,

or sort of expand, you know,

kind of looking at this new police team.

This is the perfect time to involve counsellors

in helping to kind of really scrutinise

and dig into some of those KPIs.

And for me, it's really clear that this is a very good area,

given the work that other boroughs have done,

which is well ahead of where we are on it.

And it was partly what kind of inspired our police wardens

and looking at some of those issues,

neighbourhood wardens in Ballum,

where we had a very good trial,

which was very helpful for local people.

This is a really good opportunity

to have a task and finish group

to look really in detail at what other boroughs have done,

what we can learn from, what KPIs they've used,

where those have worked, where they haven't,

where we think we can expand the remit,

where we think we can bring in other role functions

so that they can help to contribute to this.

I mean, get us involved, use our energy, use our power,

and we can help make this a better programme.

Thank you very much.

And we're also going to come to work programming

after this paper, and you may bring that point up again,

I suspect, yeah.

Thank you very much.

Any other, yeah?

It's just following on from what Councillor Apps said.

I mean, one of the questions I wanted to ask,

my residents in Trinity didn't think very much

of the Ballin wardens.

I mean, I've had reports of them,

well, they've just wandered around the estates

chatting to each other.

They're not actually doing anything.

So, you know, how have we monitored them?

What have they actually done?

You know, what are the results?

I know it was a trial, but what were the results?

and will they be staying or will we be having

the police officers, how would that work be divvied up?

Did they get any arrests, anything?

You're looking at me.

Okay, on the sort of the Ballon -Morden's,

I think the stats will show that the actual

enforcement activity was limited,

as in there were, I'm not sure I got this right,

there was no ASB notices issued,

there were very few community protection orders issued,

there's very little tangible, measurable data

to support any comments that this worked.

So that would be the short answer to that question,

but Mr. Thurlow wants to follow up on that.

Yeah, so you're right, Councillor Stu

in regard to what you say.

So we do have a number of engagements

that have come back as positive from the residents.

We do have understanding of visibility.

The officers were tasked by quality and public protection

over the course of the pilot period.

However, there were no community protection warnings

There were no fines issues.

The level of enforcement was extremely low during that period of that pilot, which was

funded for that period of time as well, whilst the scheme was launched.

Visibility, yes.

Engagement, yes.

There is learning we can take from that.

In regard to the enforcement, however, there was very little that took place.

The Councillor Misan did actually have his hand up. So Councillor Misan.

So just leading on from that then, it would be good just to get some high level clarity

then of how the, what the wardens were and then how this differs from what they were

task we're doing.

There we go, try again.

Thank you.

So I think fundamentally the Ballin Wardens were for a very specific area of the borough

for a very specific targeted period of intervention, operating not for seven days a week, for four,

operating for not a broad period of time for set hours

and was done to test what could be done as a warden scheme.

The Intermated Enforcement Team,

working with the police, will deliver a service

that covers a much broader range of hours,

a much broader range of days,

and have very broad enforcement powers

and a much stronger ethos on tackling those

who choose to commit crime in ASB,

and those who choose to make ones with a dirtier

or choose to make residents of ones who feel unsafe

by their antisocial behaviour.

So I think, yeah, to break it down,

Alan Wardens, high visibility presence,

engagement, support, focus, pilot,

integrated enforcement team, broader service,

much broader powers, and much stronger ethos and approach

with a broader range of enforcement powers to take action.

Councillor Apps.

Yeah, just on the issue of the wardens,

I mean, under most circumstances,

I wouldn't be able to tell you much

about the views of Trinity residents,

but right at the moment, I probably could,

because I spoke to a good number of them during August,

and I have to say, I found there was a good response

to the warden scheme.

I had a number of people who were very pleased

that kind of the issue of kind of community safety

was being kind of escalated.

And, but I'm not saying that was necessarily,

you know, where we would have ended up,

where we would have finished.

You know, I think it's really important to build on it.

Yes, and it was a trial.

But just coming back to the points

that Councillor Henderson was making about the costs.

The thing that's confusing me about the paper,

and I hope I'm not being a simpleton,

is it sort of shows the cost in different budgets.

What I really want to know,

and it's not to say that it's necessarily a problem,

but I just want clarity on it,

what is the total cost of this whole piece of work?

What are the capital costs that are projected

for the changes to the building?

What I want are figures so that once we've got

a year into this work, we can go back and we can look

and we can say, did this fall within this budget head?

Were there any overspends?

If they were, could we have foreseen them?

Were there any underspends?

And if so, is that a cause of concern or celebration?

But we really, really need more clarity on the figures, please.

It's just too spread out between Ensel, a bit of general fund

here.

Tell us what the overall figures are

and then tell them which budget you are taking them out of after that, please.

Mr Evans, do you want to comment on that?

Yeah.

So I think what we're setting out at the moment is the overlying budget

that will enable us to enter into the agreement with the police

for the 25 police officers.

I think the budget needed for the supporting staff that Mr Furlough mentioned.

mentioned. The other side of that paper is the work we need to do in terms of the integrated

enforcement work and we've kicked off that work in terms of a wide review of looking

at enforcement activity across the council and we need to do that discovery work first

before we determine what that model looked like and as Councillor Di Suggio said, to

some extent we would hope that by making a more efficient use of that wide resource across

of council in terms of people being able to enforce

for multiple types of issues,

that the total cost at the end of it won't be,

will be less than the total cost currently

that the council spends on enforcement.

But we need to do that work,

so I think there's an important thing here about,

sort of, you know, this committee is ongoing,

scrutiny and role in this, I think,

and maybe perhaps we can get to that

under the work plan section.

Please do, yeah.

Yeah, when do you think we can have those figures?

Because obviously we want to measure them

against things that happen in the future,

not just things that have happened in the past?

So we're busy, Chair, we're busy working on that

at the moment, as you, so as I said,

some of the costs are fixed.

We are looking at the costs of the premises work as well.

I'd hope by into the, I think when the next cycle

of this committee is into the February period next year,

we will be at that thermal view.

So if you can allow us to do that work in that meantime,

we can come back with that detail.

I'm very happy to take these points

as part of the work programming.

Councillor Henderson.

Yeah, thank you.

I think this sort of discussion

certainly reinforces Councillor Abst's suggestion

that the task in the finish group

would actually be very, very useful indeed.

Because different Councils

have adopted different procedures.

We obviously want to learn from the best.

We want to ensure our practise forms the best.

And then I take up the meeting with a long list

of questions.

But we do actually have a long list

of issues which we don't feel is addressed in this paper.

And I accept that he's essentially

setting the scene, this paper.

But it doesn't, for example, sort

question of obstructions. I mean, I think some of your literature promised no obstructions

by own understanding, having been the cabinet member for community safety for the previous

four years, that I think that's highly unlikely. In fact, being as I was saying, it's likely

to be completely impossible. Then this question of health will be arranged and obviously minimised.

There is also an issue which I raised with Mr Evans, is if the police know that wonderful

police are substantially not available for obstructions, if we get to that position,

there may be a tendency to obstruct existing neighbourhood police resources, etc.

I mean, I did have a...

Can I say anything?

Should we just try and answer that question?

It sounds like you've got quite a few, and I also know

there's some questions here.

So, should we just start with the question, the very good question

about abstractions, so if we could just deal with that one to start with.

Yeah, so,

it's a good question. It's a conversation that we've been

having with the police in quite a

level of depth. So, the police

have what's called eight red days.

So, that includes things like Notting Hill,

New Year's Eve, as well as Monday through training

days. But when it comes to engaging police through the Section 92 contract, the eight

days are what we'd expect to lose officers for, as per the contract. We would then not

expect to lose them at all unless there was significant issue around the counter -terrorism

attack, for instance, where obviously every officer will be taken to where they need to

to respond to that. It is then down to how I and my officers manage that contract so

that if any officer is removed, we don't pay when they're not on borough, and that's in

contracts and that's what we're managing quite clearly. And they will be managed by their

inspectors as part of their terms of employment and in terms of conditions. In regard to the

wider point around the additional impacts of abstractions and safety of neighbourhood

officers, obviously the Met have their own way in which they abstract officers. I can't

and we can't control that but what we can control is those that are under contract to

being in the borough when we need them

and not being outside of Buckingham Palace

for guard change, for instance,

they can only go for those eight days

of which contractually they're entitled.

Thank you very much.

Next question, did I, any other questions?

Yep, Councillor Anderson.

Yeah, Chair, what I was going to use to suggest

is rather me asking a whole load of questions

and just a fair load of answering them.

I don't know if that's going to be helpful if I just run through some of the broad issues

that we feel could be addressed, particularly bypassing the Finnish group, maybe a lot quicker

that way.

So, I would just focus on, so this is a paper going to the Cabinet on the 12th, and there

are three specific things that are the recommendations, which is a little bit, as Mr Evans was saying,

is to sort of get it moving.

One is to get delegated authority,

the second is to go ahead with the funding

to get things set up,

and the third is really the vision for the team.

So I'm very happy to take the issues.

I assume that they are in relation to those three things.

And are there questions embedded within it,

or is it more general observations around it

that you want to have recorded?

I don't get the both. As I said, the paper sets perhaps a vision. It doesn't actually

deal with a lot of the detail. And certainly one of the key recommendations which we would

like to see would be that the cabinet agrees to establish a task in the finished group

in order to be able to consider these type of issues.

And that is quite key to us,

because I think it would demonstrate a clear willingness

on the part of the administration

to work across all parties

to achieve a sustainable and successful statement.

So that would be our fourth recommendation.

But to justify it, if I just run through some of the issues

that we're concerned about.

I gave a raised couple, finance, abstractions.

There is an issue on how the officers will work

with an APEC teams.

And I'm also rather intrigued about

the use of professional issues impacting

all these 25 police officers,

because the paper seems to suggest

that they will report to a council officer.

Now, really, are the Metropolitan Police

likely to be content with that?

So, where will the Met Police actually come into

a particular structure?

And there are whole issues around CPD,

and a lot of things.

And police officers have a career.

They all want to move elsewhere.

There are so many issues.

That's the point I'm trying to get at.

I understand.

So, let's just take the question a little bit about where,

because I think there's some clarity provided on this,

on where the police officers report.

Perhaps, Mr Lowe, you could pick that point up.

Yeah, so it's a good question.

So the Metropolitan Police will remain

on the Metropolitan Police contract

in terms and conditions.

So even though we're buying them to be deployed

as we need them to be deployed by,

in regard to the day -to -day management,

their management responsibility is staying in the Institute.

So an officer reports them to a sergeant,

a sergeant to an inspector, and so on and so forth.

Within the work and the programme

of which we're commissioning,

we will have an Interagency Force of Manager

who will be the local authorities lead tasking manager and they will ultimately work with

the chief inspector and inspectors to make sure that with their intelligence piece they

deploy where they need to go. So there will be a tasking meeting that takes place, the

officer will chair it, the officer will identify where they are going to today, tomorrow, next

week and then we will work to ensure the officers are there. If there are any issues around

PDP or performance, sickness etc that is managed by the police under the current terms of employment.

Does that help address, answer the question?

Well, in general terms, yes.

But I think it's more of the specifics

which you certainly want to delve into.

I'm certainly not content with a broad brush approach.

I think there are issues there.

They're resolvable, but I think we need sort of clarity

in relation to it.

And obviously developing integrated enforcement structure

is something we were working towards

in terms of the director of the public protection.

I do know, I think it's average,

I've seen so many silos in this council

that breaking some of those down

can be quite sort of challenging.

But very quickly, if I just run through other issues,

which we really do feel we need to resolve

through something like a task of Finnish group,

which really this committee meetings every few months,

you know, it would struggle to actually address.

Again, I understand for the administration,

the police should be located in the town hall,

which I do suspect is partly for political reasons

and for presentation.

But I also haven't been accounted for,

and as I said from the previous cabinet member,

for community safety.

The police do have very specific requirements

in terms of premises where officers work.

The Toronto Police State Services, I think they're called,

do have quite exacting standards,

which is why the questions that have answers posed

in terms of cost in particular are so important.

And relative to that, once we've got the full financial

envelope, then we should at least consider

whether the whole range of issues,

financial or efficiency issues,

that the police should actually be educated

close to the town hall, perhaps somewhere like

onto a police station.

And I just put that out there,

not saying that should be necessarily the case,

I think we need to look at that in far greater detail.

We were also going to ask about the

Neighbourhood Ordinance Association, et cetera.

And we'll particularly sort of please that.

It would appear that you have at least

preserved the IDPA post in relation to fraud.

Not entirely certain about MARAC.

But I think it's also like, and then we'll get back to the main issue, I think it's also

like to understand far better how the EIT is actually going to work.

And again, this is yet another issue that I think is probably solved through a task

at the finish group rather than trying to discuss it in committee.

Can I just summarise to make sure I understand the issues?

Because we are going to come to work programme later.

I want to make sure that we have the opportunity for everyone to ask questions on the paper.

So I'm hearing is one is around premises

and the details around that.

And the second was about the technology.

Might need you to be a bit more specific.

Is it the technology that those people are using?

Is there anything in particular or overall technology?

Sorry, in relation to the location of the police.

Sorry, I didn't quite catch your point.

So there were a couple of issues

you wanted to make sure are covered.

One was about location.

And then we talked about technology.

I'm sorry, there were a whole number of issues.

Some of the professional or traditional police

in terms of who they report to,

obviously career planning, CPD, continuous training,

et cetera, very specific around the accommodation

for the police.

I mean particularly since in this paper,

it does seem to be a little bit sort of vague

as to how bad is, you know, you find that spirit

But all I'm saying is my experience, particularly in relation to the O 'hampton hub and the Tooting

hub, which we're only hubs, not police stations, simply hubs.

Metropolitan Police District services have very specific and particular requirements,

which I think may perhaps surprise people, but there are good reasons for it.

So, those I think are, and I think we need to understand how this enforcement integrated

service actually comes together because, as I said, I, you know, the past four years we

were in control of the council, we worked hard to reduce sidewalks.

The unfortunate accounts we inherited, I'm not trying to say our political point, but

it was really difficult with site -based,

in which departments rarely talk to each other,

even though their functions overlap.

So there is a real challenge there.

I think if we can change the culture in this council

to make it much more efficient,

it's far better if we work together on that.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Councillor Henderson.

Councillor de Siori.

Yeah, so just following up on the premises question

that you've asked,

we've actually had a number of detailed conversations

was in that police about that.

Which for me was an eye -opening actually,

but Mr. Ferlow, I don't know if you want to give

a quick overview of our thinking on that.

Sorry, it's about timing.

So in regard to co -location, sorry, yeah.

So the intention is that we co -locate

based within the town hall complex.

We're working with the police,

the Police Management Team at this time

to identify those specific needs.

I think what's happened over the years is that the Met have been able to adapt and use

technology better.

So if you go back a number of years, you'd have to have a specific police broadband line

installed that took a long time to get that in.

They now use laptops with 4G, 5G, so we can move certain technologies quicker than that.

There are certain elements of their personal protective equipment that has to be of a higher

security and conscious, as you mentioned earlier on, about the nature of OSC, which maybe is

better for a more discreet conversation around that.

But we are working with them to ensure that we understand what they need, how they need

it and where they need it, and that we get to build that into our design.

Because obviously, as we develop the Integrated Enforcement Team, they too will have certain

needs to be securely stored at the end of their shifts as well so that we can look to

maximise efficiencies and minimise costs by doing it together at the same time as opposed

to trying to retrofit and instal separately, which sometimes is a curvy because of the

nature of business.

5 Spending Review (Paper No. 26-244)

paper 26 -244. So this item presents the elements of the Council spending review that falls

within this subcommittee re -knit. It is an initial overview with further detailed reports

expected to come back through the Council's decision -making process. So I will invite

the relevant officer to introduce the report and take any members questions and comments.

My handing to Mr Evans on this one or Mr Burdo.

I'm just finding the papers. 26244, isn't it? Yeah, 244. I'll give you the page number

in a second.

This is page number 39.

242, yeah, apologies.

Sorry, it's not 39.

So I don't think this needs too much introduction,

so it's an extract of the spending review

that relates to this committee.

So it's got the paragraph six,

which includes the relevant elements

So this committee's remit and the actual extract is also set out in the appendix.

So obviously one of the big core elements of the spending review was the paper we just

discussed.

So we just had that discussion on there.

But there are other elements as well that I mentioned there.

So it's put forward here for the committee and of course to welcome any questions on

it, any of that as well.

I misspoke, it's page 37 for those of you who have lost.

Councillor Henderson.

Yeah, just an observation really, and it comes about to my initial point around some of the

confusion as to how this is being funded.

So again, on page 37 of the Pentax A,

I appreciate it's been taken from the final review.

Community safety, this could be revenue service part,

which is 4 .9 million for, you know,

2027, 2028, et cetera.

Absolutely no mention of SIL or MSIL whatsoever.

Okay, you know, you could say it's,

I'm just simply pointing out that if it's service priorities, police, and to be funded

by itself, it would be nothing at all clearer to people.

I think I could just refer to my earlier answer that the papers created a revenue budget for

funding the developments set out in terms of the IAT and the police.

What underpins that money is not necessarily a matter for this committee.

This committee has been asked to recommend, or for the cabinet to recommend, creating

a budget and the finance colleagues will work out what funding contributes to that under

usual financial and delegating authorities.

Councillor Apps.

Thank you.

Well, Mr. Evans rightly pointed out paragraph six

as the key paragraph, and I wanted to ask about,

I think it's the second bullet point on that,

which is strengthening local enforcement.

And it really was kind of like, it really made me think

about how we shape these services going forward,

because it says something which sounds very straightforward,

which it says that it's going to focus on the issues

that residents raise most.

Very straightforward, of course.

that's what you focus on.

But to what extent should we be focused on the issues

that residents raise most, or to what extent

should we be focused on the issues that are most serious,

or most could have the biggest impact on those communities?

For example, there's been a new transport hub

opened in the borough, as we all know,

the Battersea Power Station Station,

as it's so wonderfully renamed.

It has created a lot of drugs around,

drug selling around it, which unfortunately,

because of the high level of policing

on the side of the Batsy Power Station,

is focused largely in my ward,

where there is a much lower level of policing.

There's also a lack of trust in the police,

because that community do not feel

that they have been properly and appropriately protected

from some of these new crimes.

and so there's likely to be a lower level of reporting from them.

Now to what extent does that become a smaller issue,

because it's not one of the issues that residents have raised most,

compared to say a much smaller antisocial behaviour disorder issue,

which maybe does not result in violent deaths elsewhere,

but perhaps where residents do feel supported by the police.

So I think we have to be really careful about this

and about how we're measuring data and about where our focus is,

because otherwise we're going to continue to see growing distrust in some communities

and growing trust and probably a greater level of safety in other communities.

So I'd really like us to think about that

and whether or not that's actually phrased correctly.

Thank you, Councillor Apps.

Any further questions on the spending review?

Thank you.

Councillor Holmes.

I'm sorry, I'm very happy to give a pause

for somebody else to ask a question,

but I do have another one.

One of the other issues is protecting work

on violence against women and girls,

targeting resources where they have greatest impact.

I'd like to know from the cabinet member

where she thinks those resources

would have greatest impact.

I'm actually not the leader involved.

It's cancer hedges as I think you know.

So I will actually defer to to to miss him.

Mrs Hibbert who's with us tonight and we

lead some involved from an officer's perspective.

Thank you to introduce myself.

My name is Miranda Hibbert.

I'm the vulnerabilities manager

in commute and public protection,

so I can speak to the full question.

We focus have taken a move recently

to focus more towards prevention.

So that is bringing in the VAWL Community Safety Officer,

which was brought in a few years ago.

And that was moving away from just responding

to victims of crime, but also then seeking

to prevent violence against women and girls

in the first place.

In terms of the spend review, it's

important to note that the provision for keeping women

and girls safe in the borough remains

sufficient to respond to the issues with our partners.

Yeah, sorry, if you could repeat the question.

Well, it's where you think those resources

would have greatest impact.

Where we'd have greatest impact, yeah.

I mean, it is the prevention piece really,

and we are keeping the funding associated with that.

And then we do have the adverse services as well,

so we have both a proactive and a reactive

provision available.

Back briefly on that and just say

some of these phrasings very nice, nicely framed,

but maybe we need a bit more,

kind of bit more flesh on the bones.

Thank you very much, the officer.

But perhaps we could invite,

you know, obviously, we know Councillor Henderson well,

not Councillor Henderson, sorry, Hedges.

We know Councillor Henderson may be better,

but we know Councillor Hedges very well as well.

Perhaps we can invite her along to a future meeting

so that we could actually talk to her about VORG,

because it does fall into...

There's a lot of intersections with the work of this committee. Thank you.

Yes, you're spot on.

I mean, Councillor Hedges is in Birmingham right now.

I'll let you guess what she's doing up there.

But I think when we discuss the work programme,

and if VORG is on there, absolutely, she should be there,

because she'd be much better suited to answer the questions than I am.

is a lot worse on the prevention side of things.

Yeah, very quick. I might just make the last question on the spending review

because I think we should really move on to the work programme

because I know that's important to everybody here. Go ahead.

Thanks. Since we're talking about fog,

it does actually relate to a paragraph in the police paper,

page 7, paragraph 23.

Very pleased to say that the paper includes provision for the long -standing IDVA post,

which did appear to be a threat on the initial financial spending review.

However, there's no mention whatsoever of the MARAC post, which was also on that list

and potentially a threat.

So can I ask what is happening about the MARAC post?

Okay, thank you.

Thank you for the question.

Yes, so we are in the process of getting

a case management system.

So that is gonna relieve the responsibilities

on the MARAC coordinators.

There's a very admin heavy role at the moment,

so by utilising a new case management tool,

it's gonna hopefully not have the need

for having two MARAC posts and reduce

that administrative burden down to one post.

So as a follow up to that, can I ask how you plan

to monitor that to ensure it does actually happen?

We try and keep the questions focused on the spending

room, get that one through.

But yeah, we will be monitoring it.

So it's important to highlight as well that the case management

tool we're using is being used across many other London boroughs

as well. So it's tried and tested.

and we're keeping up with what other London boroughs are doing,

but we will have a tight contract management process in place as well.

Okay, I am proposing that we move on now to item number six,

the work programming.

6 Work Programme (Paper No. 26-245)

So this is paper 26245, which is on page 39.

So as this is the first meeting of the subcommittee,

this report sets out how we will develop our work programme.

The intention this evening is really to begin the discussion,

I think we have begun some of that,

rather than attempt to fully settle.

So we will arrange for an informal work programming session

for members to consider priorities

with the relevant officers.

It's worth noting, of course, we have to test the topics,

but also we need to ensure that those things can be resourced.

Members can send suggestions offline

after this meeting as well,

outside of the meeting that we're proposing

as an informal setting.

When suggesting an item,

it will help to identify the issue,

why scrutiny would add value,

the evidence available and the outcome members

are looking to achieve, just so that we can have

a balanced discussion and we can understand

what we can focus on during the work programming.

So a few things might have emerged already.

I've made a few notes here.

I guess if there's any things that people would want to bring up,

but my proposal is that we have an informal session.

Happy to bring the topics that we've already touched on this evening.

I think there's a few things that have been raised,

but I wasn't proposing that we complete that here,

because I think probably gives people opportunity to think about it

and also for officers to join with us as we plan out that work.

Mr Evans, were you going to say something?

Happy with the proposal to run an informal meeting

of this committee to develop a work programme?

A work group?

Yes, as a work group, basically.

Yeah, sure.

Soren's proposal for the task of the finish group

at Thorne on the police doesn't get lost in the process.

Very happy to discuss the issues that you're raising.

We do want to do it together.

That's very important.

I hope that I've made that clear.

It's a cross -party group,

and we will develop the work programme collaboratively,

and noting issues you've raised tonight,

and also anything else you come up with subsequently.

Anything else, and we'll do that, I think,

in a couple of weeks, in a couple of weeks,

two to four weeks' time, so noting the point,

I think you were saying about timelines and things like that,

so we want to make sure we do that.

And that will obviously inform the timeliness

of the follow -up meetings that we schedule.

Anything else on work programme that anyone want to raise

at this point?

Because we have one, I think, final topic to cover,

which was item number seven, so the Council's plans

7 The Council's Plans to extend CCTV coverage across the Borough

to extend a CCTV coverage across the borough.

So this discussion item has been placed on the agenda

at the request of the members of the subcommittee.

So I'll invite Councillor Henderson,

the opposition speaker, to introduce the item,

or Councillor Rapps, to introduce the topic

and explain the particular issues

that you would like these subcommittee to consider.

Thank you so much for the opportunity.

I think we're all finding our way with this.

But I would say that probably the top request

I've had from residents in my patch is for CCTV.

It often comes up sometimes for short -term CCTV,

sometimes for longer processes.

I'd also say that some of my biggest successes

have come about through CCTV.

Ancathas Road, for example, was a prime example

where I asked for CCTV because it was a fly -tipping hotspot.

Some temporary CCTV was put there

and it did absolutely massively reduce

the amount of fly tipping that was placed in that area.

And I think that part of the reason it was so successful

is because a lot of that was vehicle fly tipping,

so it kind of had the effect,

and people learned that it was there,

and then they stopped going there.

And it took probably another six months

before people started dumping it again

and had to go through the process again.

So the spending review itself

sets out some really big ambitions.

So I would really like a chance

to hear some more details about that.

I mean, one of the things that you say is that you want to use new technologies to improve

the effectiveness of the Council's CCTV in detecting and preventing crime.

I'd like a bit more fleshing out on that and maybe a couple of examples of where that could

happen.

Can I ask, is that Mr. Fairleg to pick that up?

I'm happy to.

So I think as technology improves and changes we have to look at what we're doing with that.

So there are opportunities potentially around the use of AI and how we use AI to allow our cameras to be smarter

so that they can identify to operators where crimes are taking place at the time that they're happening.

that they can in essence self -rotate

to where they learn over time that those,

that direction generally supports or delivers

greater engagement and activity.

But equally, those sort of things obviously

always come at expense.

And then we'll also be expanding the nature

of the CCTV provision with the IUT itself

because our IUT officers will have body cameras

and they will be live streaming.

So where there are incidents that take place,

those operators can be out on the ground,

setting that through to the control room,

and the control can then patch that through to the police.

And we'll also be working on and developing

greater use of the CCTV vans so that we can, again,

increase our overt surveillance and use of those

to maximise impact.

So there is always a lot of potential around with CCTV.

Those potential opportunities don't always come at

no cost of course because you invest in technology,

et cetera, but we have a very robust and very efficient

CCTV service now, but we might want to look at,

or members may wish to consider a more formal

conversation around that when you reconvene

for your informal group and set that forward

working time together.

Councillor Anderson.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you for that.

I certainly believe there are plenty of opportunities

in relation to AI and monitoring CCTV.

So I'd be interested in exploring those in greater detail.

We invest quite heavily in both in the CCTV

and also the operation of the joint control room,

which is absolutely vital to monitor the 1 ,300 cameras

we have across the entire borough.

So, given the exigencies of finance,

I would certainly like a guarantee

that the staffing of the JCC will not be affected.

I would appreciate the JCC covering a multitude

of different issues, housing issues, et cetera,

emergency issues as well as monitoring CCTV.

In fact, CCTV is probably a smaller part of their work.

The other issue of allocers to me,

and certainly was on I -RAID,

if we had retained control of the council,

was the fact that a number of CCTV cameras now

must be nearing eight or nine years old.

And probably are due for replacement.

Now, you've got 1300 cameras,

I don't need to tell you that comes as

at a very substantial cost.

So I'm particularly interested to know

what your plans are for the modernization

or maintenance of those cameras.

Thank you.

So yeah, another really good example,

and one that in my few months I've been here,

I'm trying to obviously get under the detail of

what the cameras are, their age,

whether they are coming to the end of life

within what you would deem as a safe time parameter, etc.

So obviously when it comes to CCTV investments

and it can be by CCTV strategy,

as you would expect in the new administration period,

you look at what we're doing and plan that through

for the coming administration's time.

And we need to ask those questions around

where do we have cameras that need to be replaced

or broader infrastructure, because obviously

it may include things around fibre, servers, et cetera,

that all go to delivering a safe and stable service.

So I would say to you, Councillor Henderson,

that in my short time here, that's a piece of work

that I've started to explore, but not to be able

to give you clarity and a detailed answer at this time, if that's okay. But with that,

again, that commitment and with reference back to the working group that when or if

CCTV comes, then I'll come to you with that more solidified thinking exploration so that

as a committee you can obviously scrutinise and challenge myself around how we're making

sure that the CCTV provision, which as you know, 1232 cameras, is a lot of cameras within

in the borough, how we're maximising our use of those,

and how we're making sure that they are being used

to their maximum, considering their age, et cetera,

that they are at this time.

Councillor Apps.

Thank you.

Another thing that I'd like us to look at,

either now or in the future,

is the use of personal technology as well.

So to what extent can we use the kind of

data that's collected by residents,

but also looking at the other side as well.

And then perhaps this should be looked at

in terms of our own CCTV as well,

but is the need to safeguard privacy

and human rights at the same time.

You know, there's a lot shared on WhatsApp,

on Nextdoor, et cetera, which kind of potentially,

you know, might make people very embarrassed

or might put people in a difficult position.

We want to make sure we get the right balance

between encouraging lawfulness,

but also making sure that we safeguard people's rights.

But I do think there's potentially a lot of possibilities,

a lot of potential with so many people

having their own data that they're collecting.

And a lot of those are recording crimes

and antisocial behaviour.

And then another thing is around residents' requests

for CCTV, making sure we're responsive to that.

And one thing that residents won't be aware of,

is what we now have a single email,

which is something I've wanted for a long time,

which is like help at wandsworth .gov .uk,

where we can get in touch with officers

and they will direct the query to the right person.

Now I've had the problem with CCTV,

that sometimes residents all myself

have ended up in the wrong queue.

We've ended up in applying for a crime CCTV camera,

when actually we should have been applying

for a fly -tipping one.

And so you kind of get to the end of the process

and they say, oh no, this isn't the right queue

for your CCTV, you need to ask this person instead.

And that can be very frustrating.

And I think that really, as a council,

we should be doing the kind of triage,

not asking residents to do the triage themselves,

and have to direct themselves to the right place.

So making sure that as a council,

we're being really straightforward,

and really direct, and really responsive with residents.

Thank you.

So to take those questions, hopefully I'll capture them all.

So the piece around personal technology is a piece around personal responsibility.

So the Information Commission's office, the ICO, set the frameworks and the guidance around

personal and private CCTV.

Obviously, anyone that has a private CCTV camera needs to be cognizant of it not recording

on the street and not impacting on their neighbor's privacy.

This is a change for all local authorities around how you manage that when they're not

council tenants.

I think if they are council tenants it's easier to manage and so our work would always go

to the ICO and seek their support around that.

The piece and the question around how would we then best access or make use of people's

private CCTV cameras and the various doorbells that would be around the place is one that

again requires thinking and development.

So there are legal pathways to request and secure

that footage.

Obviously, every single interaction

requires service space, et cetera,

around how you secure that footage.

But also being clear that we don't

want to replace what the police responsibilities are.

So footage that is for a crime will always go to the police.

If it's around ASB or perceptions of ASB,

then maybe that's the way in which local authority can

enter that space, but not something

which we're able to do at this time.

And then in regard to the requesting of CCTV,

you're right, the resident should not be negotiating

across the local authority for CCTV support.

And part of our work around the inter -agency enforcement team

and has been mentioned a few times tonight

around the silo working potentially

or how do we break down that process

so that the resident journey is easier

and we are thinking about that in that conversation

because if I'm asking for flight at camera and it goes to the JCC and I respond and say

it's not my job, that's not acceptable public behaviour and that's not something which I

expect of my services and not something which residents will be unsure of, not something

which members will.

So we will work on that and you are right.

It's important that we get that right for residents and we tell them what we can and

what we can't do and we tell them what the law says as well if they're asking us questions

around their own private CCTV for instance.

Councillor Mitten.

So I just had a question generally around the CCTV.

Is the issue the CCTV itself or is it the lack of capacity to act on the intelligence

that we're getting from an enforcement perspective, so either to the cabinet member or Mr Thurlow?

I guess it depends on the nature of that question.

So the CCB capacity, we have capacity in the network, we have a strong network, the cameras

work and we don't have outages that last longer than I would expect in any CCB control room.

We have a contractor that goes and fixes those cameras when we raise those tickets. I suppose

Because where we can be better is on that intelligence piece.

So I may go, you know, without repeating myself too many times, it goes back to that review

again actually.

CCTV will get intelligence, as will parking officers, as will members when you're walking

around the street, as will residents.

And so if we are to make this enforcement investment the best it can be, one of the

biggest nuts to crack for officers is that, because we think about how do we get that

intelligence through together.

So there is no capacity to do CCTV.

it can do what it does, and we deliver a lot of good outcomes

for residents through that.

Maybe as a local authority, how do we capture that intelligence?

That is one thing that we know we can do better

and that we're working on to make sure it is better.

So have we answered the question?

I think I wasn't totally going to.

Yeah, go ahead.

Yeah, so thanks very much.

It's been a good start, and I think

that CCTV is something we want to continue to monitor

as a committee and develop.

Thank you.

Very happy to consider that in the work programming.

Okay, I think unless there's anything else,

so thank you very much everybody for your time,

the cabinet member and officers for your contribution.

For this first meeting, I think we've got lots of things

I'm going to put onto our work programme for the future.

And so we look forward to having that.

And thank you very much, the meeting is now ended.

Thank you.

Interactive webcast player

Enforcement Overview and Scrutiny Sub-CommitteeMonday, 5th October 2026 at 7:30pm

1 Welcome and Introductions

2 Declarations of Interest

3 Questions to the Cabinet Member

4 Investing in a Dedicated Policing Team (Paper No. 26-243)

5 Spending Review (Paper No. 26-244)

6 Work Programme (Paper No. 26-245)

7 The Council's Plans to extend CCTV coverage across the Borough

Enforcement Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee
Monday, 5th October 2026 at 7:30pm