Agenda item

Report of the Commissioner of Police.

The Sub-committee received a report of the Commissioner of Police that provided Members with a summary of the performance of the City of London Police for Q1 of 2018.

Measure 3 – Cyber Attacks

The T/Commander of Economic Crime explained that Cyber Crime figures were solely measured from victims within the City of London.  He explained that CoLP were the only force nationally that responded to 100% of cases.  A Member noted that Cyber crime was a significant national issue with rising crime rates and falling prosecutions.  The T/Commander of Economic Crime explained that there was a distinction between “Cyber” crime and “Cyber-enabled” crime, noting that cyber-enabled crime was very cheap and easy to deploy from global locations where law enforcement have no jurisdiction.  The Assistant Commissioner explained that 70% of this type of crime originated overseas, and that building relationships with foreign agencies was integral.

The Chairman requested Project Servator data to be produced in a simple table that illustrated a month-by-month breakdown of deployments and results by major category. (4)

Measure 5 – Safeguarding and Vulnerable People

The Assistant Commissioner explained that suicide and mental health remained challenging despite significant work carried out to address this area.  He noted that the figures were often affected by reports based outside the City limits, and therefore greater care was needed to ensure that these are an accurate portrayal of the position.

The Police Committee’s SIA Lead for community engagement thanked Superintendent Lee Presland for his introductory briefing and work around this area.  He noted that the challenge of the significant daytime population in the City posed a unique challenge but suggested that it would be good to be able to shift away from close monitoring in this area.  He explained that this would be an area of focus for him going forward.

A Member noted that the use of language claiming that 15% of reported rapes were “false reports” was not suitable.  The Assistant Commissioner agreed, noting that false reports would imply that action would be warranted on the accuser.  The Commissioner explained that not deterring victims from reporting sexual offences was very important, and therefore this area had to be treated with great care. However, the T/Detective Chief Superintendent of Economic Crime emphasised that a number of reports were falsified and this had been substantiated following investigation.

The Chairman asked if the figure for the number of suicides (17) included attempted suicides and the Head of Strategic Development confirmed that it did.

Measure 6 – Violent Crime

The Assistant Commissioner conceded that violent crime figures had increased but noted that this was in line with the national trend.  He explained that dedicated Police Operations were taking place in areas with the highest rates of violence, notably Operation Sceptre and Operation Wimpole.  He also noted that the reporting system had been significantly improved.

A Member asked how the City of London compared with other boroughs when population was taken into account.  The Assistant Commissioner noted that the City of London had the largest daytime population and three times as many licensed premises as Westminster with policing demands around the night-time economy proving challenging.  He noted that one advantage that the City of London had in terms of prevalence of violent crime was its relatively small youth population.  The Chairman noted that it would be useful to have per capita figures rather than absolute figures to allow a useful comparison with surrounding boroughs.

The Assistant Commissioner explained that the City of London had more licensed premises per hectare than any other borough.  A Member noted that over 300 of these were open later than 1am and this was significant.  The Assistant Commissioner explained that the Transform programme was placing great efforts into resourcing to tackle the challenge posed by the night-time economy.

A Member asked if detail on the times and days of the week that crimes were committed could be included in future reports.  The Chairman agreed, also requesting that it be presented in a simple manner. (5)

Measure 7 – City Roads

The Head of Strategic Development explained that some data was not available due to the timings of quarterly data release falling after this meeting.

Members discussed the monitoring of cyclists.  The Head of Strategic Development explained that when the measures were initially set up HGVs were a priority area of focus following a number of fatal incidents across London reported in the media.  He explained that although the threat around cyclists was recognised, the threat around HGVs was still a greater one.  A Member noted that cyclists were a particular focus of his and, although lots of work was being done it was not always visible. He explained that public perception was a big issue in this regard and a means of illustrating the Police focus would be beneficial.  The Assistant Commissioner explained that the Commander of Security and Operations would be producing a regular newsletter on issues such as ASB, cyclists and rough sleepers which would provide a medium for this.  The Member illustrated their approval of this but noted that City workers who aren’t residents may be harder to reach in this way.

A Member asked if the number of cyclists receiving fixed-penalty notices could be included in future. (6)

Measure 8 – Security and Public Order

The Assistant Commissioner noted that capability issues suffered in this area were now being addressed.

Measure 9 – Acquisitive Crime

The Assistant Commissioner explained that burglary figures were challenging due to the recording of multiple victims in multi-occupancy premises.  A Member asked if multiple companies were present in an office then would multiple crimes and multiple victims be recorded.  The Head of Strategic Development confirmed that this was the case and noted that victim management was very time consuming as a result.

A Member asked if 5-10-year trend graphs could be produced to illustrate longer-term trends.  The Assistant Commissioner explained that altered recording methods over time had sometimes led to inconsistent and increased crime rates when there was necessarily a link to increased instances of crime so looking at trends in this way was not advisable.

A Member asked if CoLP attended all burglaries and the Detective Chief Superintendent confirmed that they did.

The Chairman noted the reduction in acquisitive crime due to the significant efforts in preventing moped-enabled crime and congratulated CoLP for their work in this area.

Measure 10 – Victim Satisfaction

A Member asked what determined the measure of “ease of access”.  The Assistant Commissioner explained that new methods of taking in contacts directly, rather than via the Metropolitan Police Service meant that CoLP were able to more pro-actively manage and increase the efficiency of reporting to resolve issues at the front line as far as possible.

RESOLVED – That the report be received.