Notice of Motion
To consider the following motion from Councillor Tindall:
Proposed Public Space Protection Order
a. have regard to the opinions and comments of council members expressed in the debate on 15th November, and
b. take note that :-
i. the proposed PSPO addresses some behaviours which are already covered by existing criminal legislation and as such fall under the proper remit of the police,
ii. the PSPO plans would need to be evaluated based upon actual implementation plans for enforcement, including who will do the enforcement and what training will be given and what powers would be used,
iii. In addition to enforcement of the PSPO, the practicality of using fines or court summonses to individuals with no means and no fixed abode, and the times of day when enforcement will take place
iv. a PSPO should not be used when there are alternative steps that could be taken to address the behaviours disapproved of, some of which are clearly the result of seven years of austerity
Decision:
The following motion from Councillor Tindall was lost:
Proposed Public Space Protection Order
1. This Council notes that the Cabinet is concerned about the level of anti-social behaviour and it is clear from the number of responses to public consultation (which ended 13th October) that residents of Dacorum have been engaged both with the subject and the proposed remedy.
2. The members of Dacorum Council, having debated the issue of anti-social behaviour and the proposed remedy, request that before the Cabinet makes its decision on the introduction of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) in Dacorum they :-
a. have regard to the opinions and comments of council members expressed in the debate on 15th November, and
b. take note that :-
i. the proposed PSPO addresses some behaviours which are already covered by existing criminal legislation and as such fall under the proper remit of the police,
ii. the PSPO plans would need to be evaluated based upon actual implementation plans for enforcement, including who will do the enforcement and what training will be given and what powers would be used,
iii. In addition to enforcement of the PSPO, the practicality of using fines or court summonses to individuals with no means and no fixed abode, and the times of day when enforcement will take place
iv. a PSPO should not be used when there are alternative steps that could be taken to address the behaviours disapproved of, some of which are clearly the result of seven years of austerity
3. The PSPO, when drafted, would need to identify the issues that it was aiming to restrict. There is a general principle that where an Act criminalises an activity the scope of the activity must be clearly defined. The proposals cannot therefore actually be judged on their proportionality and practicality until the draft PSPO is available.
4. Therefore, this council requests that a further consultation process is carried out once the draft PSPO is publicly available and that the outcomes of that consultation and the proposal to adopt the draft PSPO is brought to full Council for approval or otherwise.
Minutes:
The following motion was proposed by Councillor Tindall and seconded by Councillor England:
Proposed Public Space Protection Order
1. This Council notes that the Cabinet is concerned about the level of anti-social behaviour and it is clear from the number of responses to public consultation (which ended 13th October) that residents of Dacorum have been engaged both with the subject and the proposed remedy.
2. The members of Dacorum Council, having debated the issue of anti-social behaviour and the proposed remedy, request that before the Cabinet makes its decision on the introduction of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) in Dacorum they :-
a. have regard to the opinions and comments of council members expressed in the debate on 15th November, and
b. take note that :-
i. the proposed PSPO addresses some behaviours which are already covered by existing criminal legislation and as such fall under the proper remit of the police,
ii. the PSPO plans would need to be evaluated based upon actual implementation plans for enforcement, including who will do the enforcement and what training will be given and what powers would be used,
iii. In addition to enforcement of the PSPO, the practicality of using fines or court summonses to individuals with no means and no fixed abode, and the times of day when enforcement will take place
iv. a PSPO should not be used when there are alternative steps that could be taken to address the behaviours disapproved of, some of which are clearly the result of seven years of austerity
3. The PSPO, when drafted, would need to identify the issues that it was aiming to restrict. There is a general principle that where an Act criminalises an activity the scope of the activity must be clearly defined. The proposals cannot therefore actually be judged on their proportionality and practicality until the draft PSPO is available.
4. Therefore, this council requests that a further consultation process is carried out once the draft PSPO is publicly available and that the outcomes of that consultation and the proposal to adopt the draft PSPO is brought to full Council for approval or otherwise.
R Tindall made the following statement to support the Motion:
We have brought this motion before Council in order to allow Councillors to fully debate what is a new approach to Community cohesion that I am not particularly in favour of. Although we have not seen the ‘Order’ in all its glory, we have heard enough to understand that the Administration is proposing to turn our council officials into enforcement officers and send them on to the streets to do what police officers should do. Indeed, is this proposal coming before us simply because the police cannot cope – that they have too much to do – or is is about plugging the gaps left after the Police Commissioner’s cuts.
It is my understanding that there has been over 800 contributions to the Consultation and I am very interested to find out ... view the full minutes text for item 17