Issue - meetings

To receive the Task Group’s report and recommendations following scrutiny of the Partnership Enviro Crime Enforcement Contract (report of the Partnership Scrutiny Task Group enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Partnership Scrutiny Task Group which asked the Performance Monitoring Panel to receive the Task Group’s report and recommendations following scrutiny of the Partnership Enviro Crime Enforcement Contract.

The Chairman of the Partnership Task Group, Councillor E Mossop (East Lindsey District Council), and the Scrutiny and Policy Officer attended virtually to present the report. The item was also supported by attendance at the meeting from the Assistant Director – Regulatory and the SHDC Portfolio Holder for Public Protection.

Councillor Mossop introduced the report and highlighted the following main points:

• Members of the task group had been drawn from across the partnership area with the majority of appointed members attending every session;
• Appointed members were thanked for their input and major contributions had been received from SHDC Performance Monitoring Panel members Cllr Barnes and Cllr Woolf;
• The report of the Task and Finish was at Appendix A which outlined the following:
  • Participants: including Task Group membership, officers, the contractor (Kingdom) and other guest witnesses;
  • Background and context: notably that the partnership contract agreed in 2022 had grown from an existing Enviro Crime contract set up by Boston Borough Council and to this effect,  members acknowledged that Boston Borough Council had taken a lead and key role;
  • Key facts and information of the contract;
  • Research and evidence gathering;
  • Task Group review and analysis; and
  • Recommendations: including police support, community engagement, publicity, consistency of advice and working methods, level of Fixed Penalty Notices, improved use of covert CCTV and contract sustainability; and
• The agreed Project Scoping document was at Appendix B.

Cllr Mossop summarised the task group’s findings by stating that the contract had provided results however it was recognised that future improvements in performance could be achieved.

Task Group member Councillor Barnes stated that:

• The task group discussions had been in depth;
• Boston was leading the way with a dedicated officer to publicise the contract and an alignment of working practices would be beneficial to SHDC and ELDC;
• The Fixed Penalty Notices needed to align across districts; and
• The pairing up of contract workers limited the areas that could be patrolled and impacted negatively on rural areas. Nonetheless, Kingdom had confirmed that dual staffing was in place for safety reasons in South Holland as the police were not able to provide support should a problem be encountered.

Task Group member Councillor Andrew Woolf stated that:

• The aspect of whether councils were receiving ‘best value’ had been questioned;
• The high turnover of contract staff was identified and the challenges relating to the required tasks were acknowledged;
• Members had suggested that Kingdom provided job specific training for new employees rather than induction training being carried out by council staff;
• There was a requirement for the contract staff to be active and visible in the wider reaches of the district;
• The main findings were that:
  • Community education and engagement would lead to prevention;
  • That Boston had benefitted significantly from a dedicated individual. Could a resource be in place/shared  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68