December 17 MQT policing questions
Crime prevention or design out crime officers
Question No: 2017/5164
Andrew Dismore
How many crime prevention and/ or design out crime officers are there in Camden and Barnet; and how does the public best access their advice?
Written response from the Mayor
The Met has 32 Design Out Crime Officers managed by 3 sergeants. These are ‘hubbed’ in 4 locations across London – North East, South East, South West and North West. They are a central resource and are not allocated to individual boroughs. Camden and Barnet are both covered by the North West Design Out Crime Officers based at Ruislip police station. They can be contacted on 0208 7333465 or by email DOCOMailbox.NW@met.police.uk for specialist advice.
In addition, all of London’s 629 wards have two Dedicated Ward Officers [DWOs] & 1 PCSO. They have had up to date training in crime prevention and should be the first point of contact for routine crime prevention enquiries from the public. You can locate your DWO using the ‘find your area’ search facility on the MPS website https://www.met.police.uk/ The public can also access crime prevention advice via https://www.met.police.uk/crime-prevention/
Social media and Oxford St incident
Question No: 2017/5165
Andrew Dismore
Social media has been blamed for the public panic during the Oxford Street incident on 24/11/2017, when shoppers panicked as armed police cleared the streets with the Police warning people on Oxford and Regent streets to stay indoors while officers assessed the scene. However, the Met said it had found no evidence of shots being fired. What social media messages were put out by the police to reassure the public and to try to counteract the impact of other social media?
Written response from the Mayor
From 5pm onwards a series of Tweets were issued from the @metpoliceuk account. Messaging included confirmation officers were on the scene, advice to stay inside, an update explaining there was no evidence of shots fired or casualties and finally at 6pm a Tweet saying the response had been stood down. Individual Tweets are not responded to because it is impossible to verify information while an incident is ongoing.
Around 1.1 million people now follow @metpoliceuk and I welcome your continued support in getting the message out to Londoners – if an incident occurs in London, the Met should always be your first port of call for timely, trusted information on what is happening and what you should do to stay safe.
Mobile phone theft
Question No: 2017/5166
Andrew Dismore
Have you seen the report in the 23rd November ‘Ham and High’ newspaper, of the theft of a mobile phone by a moped thief? The owner called 101, waited a long time to get through, and then gave the police the address of to where the phone had been taken, identified by a tracker device. The report states that the police did not act promptly and the phone could not then be recovered as the tracker went silent after 24 hours. This report is very similar to the previous one I raised with you by MQ, of my constituent who had his motorbike stolen, found where it was and reported this to the police who failed to act to recover the vehicle. Once, may be regarded as a misfortune; twice looks like carelessness. Is this a symptom of the consequences of the merged Borough command’s poor response times; the failure yet again of the 101 system; or the inability of to allocate scarce resources effectively to catch an elusive moped thief?
Written response from the Mayor
This incident was not a consequence of the new Basic Command Unit (BCU) arrangements. The response times for BCU Central North during the period this incident took place were actually slightly higher than the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) average.
The MPS have assured me that the decisions around this incident were appropriately made in line with their policy that prioritises resources based on risk.
The victim called police over an hour after the incident took place. The operator ascertained that the victim had used ‘Find my iPhone’ to locate the phone in a built up area of Islington. This only gave an approximate indication of where the phone could be located. In a densely urbanised area this isn’t sufficient to locate the phone.
This incident was reviewed by Central North, supported by MPS Command and Control, just after the report was made. It was determined no unit should attend as the phone was not realistically retrievable and that the case be passed to the Telephone Digital Incident Unit.
This was not due to resourcing issues or response times but a carefully triaged risk assessment model whereby a telephone report and investigation was considered appropriate and proportionate.
The MPS have however identified learning on the basis that the victim should have been contacted and advised sooner. The MPS have assured me that this will be manged internally.
Security at the Peel Centre
Question No: 2017/5167
Andrew Dismore
Further to your answer to Question No: 2017/4574, I believe you have missed the point. The issue I raised was in respect of the new development next to the Peel Centre, on land that was previously owned by the Met as part of the centre, and sold off for private development. There are tall buildings overlooking the site being constructed. What action has been taken to ensure the integrity of security at the Peel Centre, in light of this private development neighbouring it; and indeed the other tall building developments in the immediate vicinity which overlook the Peel Centre complex?
Written response from the Mayor
Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.
Police mergers: feedback consultation with Camden Safer Neighbourhood Board (SNB)
Question No: 2017/5175
Andrew Dismore
Camden SNB have now been asked to provide a view on ‘lessons learned’ from the BCU process, though a face to face meeting with the BCU Commander is not to take place. The consultant who has been assisting in the feedback process has provided a set of questions to be answered to the BCU Commander, who has passed them to the SNB, with only a week’s notice allowed for a response. These are as follows:
Topic area 1: Planning and management of the BCU implementation
– was the rationale clear?
– Was a clear plan provided that enabled you to plan your own activities?
Topic area 2: Communications
– frequency and effectiveness
– rationale for the change clear in advance
– appropriate medium;
Topic area 3: Engagement
– were you / your functions engaged in a timely manner, by the appropriate people?
Topic area 4: Governance and leadership
– clear lines of responsibility; appropriate meetings; clear leadership?
However, the SNB has not been asked to comment on their views concerning the overall success (or otherwise) of the merger; nor of the police performance in terms of, for example, emergency response, visibility, call answering, or the effectiveness of the four service categories in which the command is broken down. Why haven’t they been asked for their views on these and other issues to reflect local experience of the merger on the ground; and do you consider this a fair way to consult the SNBs, in both the questions selected and the short timeframe for a response, with no time for a meeting with the borough police leadership, either?
Written response from the Mayor
Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.
Moped thefts by Postal district
Question No: 2017/5176
Andrew Dismore
How many moped enabled thefts were there in each postal district in a) Barnet b) Camden C) Islington D) Westminster in the year to date?
Written response from the Mayor
Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.
MOPAC policing offer
Question No: 2017/5177
Andrew Dismore
How many boroughs have taken up the offer that they and MOPAC each fund half the cost of additional police officers?
Written response from the Mayor
The Met Patrol Plus scheme essentially offers police constables to local authorities on a ‘buy one get one free’ basis.
As of end of November 27 boroughs are part of this scheme.