BOROUGH OF REIGATE AND BANSTEAD
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
COMMUNITY SAFETY SCRUTINY REVIEW PANEL
21ST DECEMBER, 2004
Held at 6.30 p.m. in the Front Committee Room at the Town Hall, Reigate.
Present: Councillor B.A. Stead (Chairman); Councillors M.A. Brunt, S.P. Colvin and
Mrs. F.D.M. Dixon.
Officers in Support:
8.
Kevin Hetherington, Head of Housing
Debbie Stitt, Community Safety Manager
Chris Cook, Democratic Services Manager
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Councillor J.M. Ellacott.
9.
NOTES OF LAST MEETING
The notes of the Panel held on 13th December, 2004 were received.
10.
COMMUNITY SAFETY STRATEGY 2002-05
Further to the meeting held on 13th December, 2004, the Panel continued its scrutiny
review in accordance with activity 1 of the agreed scoping report. In this respect, the
Panel had before it the Community Safety Strategy 2002-05, a report submitted to the
Executive on 6th May, 2004 on the Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003 and dispersal areas
and the Government White Paper “Building Communities, Beating Crime – A Better
Police Service for the 21st Century”. At the meeting, the Chairman circulated schedules
detailing Press Releases, Statements (for the period 1st November, 2003 to
20th November, 2004) and articles in Borough News from Autumn 2002 to Winter 2004
on community safety, partnership and transport.
(a)
Review of the Community Safety Strategy 2002-05
The Panel reviewed the effectiveness of the Community Safety Strategy 2002-05
concentrating on whether or not the strategic aims had been met by the Council.
21st December, 2004
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
21st December, 2004
COMMUNITY SAFETY SCRUTINY REVIEW PANEL - Continued

Strategic Aim 1
In relation to the implementation of a media strategy, the Panel considered the schedule
of press releases etc. referred to above. Whilst a number of press releases had been issued
it was noted that information on related published articles was not available. In this
connection, it was suggested that some sort of monitoring arrangement should be put in
place.
It was reported that there had been an increase in “good news” stories through various
agencies under the Strategy although the Panel noted that there had been no articles in
Borough News on crime prevention for 2 years. It was suggested that the Police should be
encouraged to write press articles.
The Panel considered that the aim on a media Strategy promoting reassurance was still
relevant and the general consensus was that more could be done on this matter.
Concerning support of crime reduction projects, the Panel noted that the Council had
been successful in this area of work.
A Fear of Crime survey had been completed during 2003. The Panel was also unclear as
to what action had been taken following the survey and considered that a more positive
response should have been triggered. Disappointment was expressed at the usefulness of
the Crime and Disorder audit report.

Strategic Aim 2
The Panel noted that this aim had been reviewed as part of deliberations at its last
meeting. Nevertheless, the operation and effectiveness of CCTV was discussed and it was
agreed that greater publicity should be given to related successes. In general, it was
considered that the existence of CCTV in combating crime should receive greater
promotion/publicity. The Panel noted the position on truancy patrols and the junior
citizen programme.

Strategic Aim 3
It was noted that, in the main, this strategic aim was lead by partner agencies. The
implementation of restricted alcohol zones within the Borough was discussed with
particular emphasis on problems related to Redhill. Work in the area was to continue
although the difficulty associated with people moving on to other locations was
highlighted.

Strategic Aim 4
As previously recorded, it was considered that this strategic aim had not progressed as
envisaged and consequently it was worthy of review as part of work in drafting a new
Community Safety Strategy. The Panel noted that a number of issues now fell to the
Local Strategic Partnership and, as such, would feature in the Community Plan rather
than the Community Safety Strategy.
However certain aspects were still within the remit of the Strategy and would be
incorporated into other aims/strands. In this respect, the Panel noted that the intention
was to draft the next Strategy around three central strands that were the focus for
Government monitoring. Based around Prolific and Priority Offenders the strands were
21st December, 2004
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
21st December, 2004
COMMUNITY SAFETY SCRUTINY REVIEW PANEL - Continued
Prevent and Deter, Catch and Convict and Rehabilitate and Resettle.

General
In conclusion and in addition to the comments set out above, the Panel felt that the
Community Safety Strategy could benefit from greater publicity, linked to a clear
demonstration of how the Council was working with (and influencing) partner agencies.
(b)
Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003 and Dispersal Areas
The Panel noted a report submitted to the Executive on 6th May, 2004 on the Antisocial
Behaviour Act 2003 and Dispersal Areas. It was noted that Council had authorised the
Director of Policy and Environment to act in relation to the designation of dispersal areas.
(c)
White Paper “Building Communities, Beating Crime – A Better Police
Service for the 21st Century
The Panel considered the above White Paper. The Panel noted it was requiring a stronger
commitment to inform and consult the public on local policing issues, to enable the
police and other agencies to be held to account for their performance, and to give the
public a say in local policing priorities.
The Panel also noted that the White Paper was proposing greater community advocacy
through the enhancement of the involvement of Members as well as Community Safety
Officers in local policing matters. In addition the role of Police Authorities would be
strengthened to enable them to oversee the relationship between CDRP’s and
neighbourhood bodies. To meet this requirement the Surrey Police Authority had already
agreed to formally link the police -led Neighbourhood Panels to their Police Community
Support Groups (PCPG’s) and was hoping to improve the communication between the
CDRP and PCPG’s. It was unclear how this would be addressed in the Community Safety
Strategy.
The Panel noted that Surrey Police considered that they were already well placed to meet
requirements as set out in the White Paper.
11.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
The Chairman thanked Kevin Hetherington and Debbie Stitt for their work, to date, on
the scrutiny review.
12.
FUTURE MEETINGS
It was AGREED that meetings of the Panel should be held on:
Monday, 31st January, 2005; and
Tuesday, 22nd February, 2005.
The meeting closed at 7.55 p.m.