Agenda item

Invitees:

Gareth Price – Head of Law and Regulation
Rhys Thomas – Regulatory Services Manager
Michelle Tett – Community Protection Manager
Inspector Jodie Davies – Gwent Police

The Regulatory Services Manager thanked the committee for accommodating the movement of agenda items. He explained that the report presented asks for a continuation for the PSPO in place. He reminded committee that the PSPO expires on 23 August 2021 and this report still seeks to consult on the continued need of a PSPO and on whether the restrictions of the City PSPO are still relevant.

The City PSPO is a local order made by local authority and is an additional tool not only tool to combat the issues set out in the report; he advised that partners across the service board have various other processes that are also used.

The Regulatory Services Manager advised the committee that they could opt to renew without consultation but that public should be consulted before doing so. He stated the option to renew with same restrictions, to renew with added, varied or amended restrictions, or that committee may decide that there is no continued need for the City Centre PSPO and discharge it.

The Regulatory Services Manager noted that the Pillgwenlly PSPO was recently renewed and says that the “lessons learned” during that have been taken on board in relation to the current PSPO at hand. He recommended that consultation takes place over one month through August 2021, and noted the pre-meeting suggestion that business owners be included in the public consultation.

The Regulatory Services Manager said that PSPOs form a foundation for other work within an area and has been cited in processes used for wider anti-social issues.

The Chair then opens the floor for questions.

·         The committee thanked the Regulatory Services Manager for his presentation and thanked him for inclusion business districts in the consultation. The committee member went on to question the numbers of incidents presented in appendix 2, specifically the anomaly of 25 in 2020 and queried whether the anomaly was related to or caused by Covid-19. The committee member acknowledged the effectiveness of the PSPO in and of itself but acknowledged also that when the numbers drop, it potentially has previously served to be effective as it was. The committee member went on to expand and ask specifically what happened in 2020 for the large increase in numbers and is there a potential that the pandemic has skewed numbers?

The Regulatory Services Manager responded to say he didn’t know of any specific reason, but notes that from February 2020 onward as restrictions came into place, there was a trend of numbers lessening. He explained that the PSPO first came into place in 2018 and saw a phasing in period, during which they sought to advise and engage before enforcing any complaints council received. He advised it was likely lower due to COVID. The Regulatory Services Manager added that it is a reactionary order and that may be a cause for the lower number. He also reminded committee members that trends were only reflected over 3 years which is a short reporting period.

·         A committee member commented that as ward member, he supports the continuation of order. He acknowledged that the PSPO had made a difference in discontinuing reoccurring previous issues such as unauthorised drinking in the city centre and the resulting littering. The committee member observed that as a result of the order in the last three years, some changes in these issues were noticed. He reiterated his support for its continuation and commented that the report itself was well set out, though a summary at the beginning would be preferable. Finally, the committee member expressed concern as to why it had been left so late to review the need for the continuation of the City Centre PSPO and called on officers to confirm the period between end of current and the start of new PSPO. The committee member questioned what would be done in the interim.

The Regulatory Services Manager responded that it was purely down to timings and having to get to council to implement. The reason for the PSPO coming to Scrutiny Committee late is COVID pressures on the department. He reiterated that it is right to allow consultation period to go ahead and consideration to be allowed. The Regulatory Services Manager reassured the committee that between the Local Authority and the Police, there were powers to deal with any issues in the interim and reminded committee that the PSPO was not the only order. The committee member responded to this reassurance and was proud that the city centre had a “new look”, not wanting “bad habits” to return. The committee member reiterated that during the period between PSPO’s, the committee wanted to showcase the “new look” for the city and prove its confidence. The committee member finished by saying that hopefully the issues can be address during the consultation, and that Council decide on the continuation of the City Centre PSPO.

·         The committee expressed concern regarding Fixed Penalty Notice numbers for begging as they seemed to greatly understate the number of complaints made by members of the public. The committee questioned the process of making complaints and expressed concern that potentially rather than having to make a complaint, members of the public instead just “put up” with the behaviour. The committee member questioned whether more awareness could be raised for members of the public should they need to raise an issue and/or make a complaint as the committee member felt it was an ongoing issue.

The Regulatory Services Manager explained that the process was that if Officers or Wardens didn’t immediately deal with an issue at the site, that members of the public could report issues either by telephone, via the website or in person. He advised that Officers do attend the location and to try and move on offenders and reminded committee that this PSPO was about preventing and combating aggressive behaviour. He expanded on the engagement between CCTV Team and Officers, who direct Officers on the ground if they are in the vicinity. Additionally, the Regulatory Services Manager advised that Gwent Police colleagues might do things in similar manner. Sergeant Butt added that regular surveys and surgeries were carried out in the city centre by local Police, advising that three a week were running in Friars Walk using a new building gifted to them where CSOs were visible, and members of the public were encouraged to report crime and anti-social behaviour. Sergeant Butt added that CSOs and Wardens have issued Fixed Penalty Notices where necessary to key offenders, as well as Community Protection Notices and Criminal Behavioural Orders which may be resulting in helping reduce numbers. He noted that these are only given to prolific offenders and make use of the conditions and map of the PSPO to restrict movement of such offenders. He advised committee that thirteen Criminal Behaviour Orders are held, eight of which are specifically aggressive begging, but these orders ensure that offenders leave the city centre, which also reduced numbers.

·         A committee member noted the issue of begging only being banned near cashpoints and called for a blanket ban on begging due to issues with begging in car parks and around the City Centre.

Sergeant Butt noted that a number of other measures have been put in place to discourage begging and that harassment can be dealt with by police outside the remit of the PSPO. Sergeant Butt also noted that there are ethical and public concerns in begging being totally banned. The Service Area Manager agreed to include a question on a blanket ban on begging within the public consultation.
 

·         A member of committee raised the issue of e-bikes and e-scooters, stating that they were a nuisance in pedestrian areas, with emphasis more so on electric scooters. The committee member had hoped for a more definitive answer from the Head of Law and Regulation but noted that it seemed to him from a number of wards and reports that electric scooters were the favoured method of “small time drug dealers”.  The committee member thanks the Chairperson and commented that it should be discussed what goes into consultation.

The Regulatory Services Manager advised that as explained in the report, e-scooters, cycling and skateboards have restrictions implemented.  He furthered this to explain that to be included in the PSPO, it would have to be evidenced, and as such he has tried to provide this. He concludes that the best course of action would be to review the consultation before going forward. The Regulatory Services Manager added that in his review of some records, there had been a number of mentions to this in texts from members of the public associated with the report. He also advised that it is a possibility to restrict e-scooters, as there was precedent in an adjacent PSPO relating to Cardiff road, where wording used could be adopted to ensure consistency. The committee member asked Sergeant Butt to comment. Sergeant Butt commented to say that the Police does have powers relating to e-bikes/e-scooters under Section 59 of the Police Reform Act 2002. He reported that they have seized three e-scooters between Pillgwenlly and the city centre. He also advised that Section 165 of the Road Traffic Act held content as to whether insurance is required for e-scooters, and Sergeant Butt reported that e-scooters should have insurance, therefore seizure took place under that act. He advised committee that the biggest issue Police face is getting “hands on” due to the nature of the e-bike/scooter when Officers are on foot, but reassured committee that the Police and Wardens rely heavily on CCTV in these instances to identify and seize them.

·         The Committee supported a question regarding e-scooters and e-bikes being raised in consultation.

·         Committee raised a point regarding the blanket ban of begging wherein the degrading experience of homelessness/the need for begging was acknowledged. The committee member reminded committee that it was an issue that has been discussed full previously. The committee member acknowledged the potential for a lot of support in favour of banning begging altogether but argued that it would not be addressing the issue comprehensively as they had done previously, which had resulted in the current situation and order. The committee member went on to comment that looking at data in report, not much had changed regarding the validity of banning all together. The committee member expressed support in putting the question forward but acknowledges that this wouldn’t consider all issues in relation to begging.

·         A committee member commented that the city is in an odd situation wherein cars cannot be driven more than 20mph on road but 30mph could be reached by e-scooters on pavements, which was concerning.

The Regulatory Service Manager voiced his support of Sergeant Butt and the Police’s view on e-scooters but also acknowledged it would be appropriate for the PSPO to be evidence-based and mindful that Newport City Council as a corporate body has responsibility to active travel and environmental protection. He added that the issue of e-scooters has been flagged and discussed within the Pillgwentlly PSPO and was happy to include a question regarding this as part of anti-social behaviour for the PSPO at hand but reminded committee that active travel could not be criminalised for legitimate travellers. The Regulatory Service Manager also reassured committee that Police make sensible and risk-based decisions, not targeting ordinary community members who use electric bikes and scooters legally.

A committee member voiced their contentment that the question of e-bikes/scooters would be raised as a question.