Is this Barnet's next big scandal?

I have just fired off an email to the Leader of the Council, Richard Cornelius and the CEO Nick Walkley.

Why you may ask? Well it looks to me as if they are trying to be rather sneeky. I will say no more until I get the clarification, but for those of you who like a puzzle, read this DPR

http://barnet.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s5326/1721%20-%20People%20Changes%20for%20Childrens%20Directorate.pdf

 

And consider this tweet from the Metropolitan Police on 18th June

 

#MPSBarnet‬ other crime figures. Domestic violence up 3% Youth violence down 18% Racist/Religious crime down 15% & Knife crime down 1%

Metropolitan Police release crime figures for Barnet by twitter

There are some very interesting tweets this morning from the Metropolitan Police in Barnet. These reveal some (on the face of it) encouraging trends in crime figures in Barnet.

https://twitter.com/MPSBarnet/status/214636996101029889

Barnet MPS‏@MPSBarnet

 

‪#MPSBarnet‬ crime figures for the year so far. Robbery down 19% Burglary down 12% Vehicle crime down 14% Assault with injury down 19%.

‪#MPSBarnet‬ other crime figures. Domestic violence up 3% Youth violence down 18% Racist/Religious crime down 15% & Knife crime down 1%

Even the figures which are up, for domestic violence, may actually indicate a positive trend as people are becoming less inclined to cover up abuse. Of course, there is much analysis to be done to make proper sense of the figures, but it appears that the Met are doing something right in Barnet.

Good news all round it seems. The Barnet police twitter feeds is one of the more interesting to follow, Highly recommended. There are also a couple of interesting tweets regarding internet fraud.

https://twitter.com/MPSBarnet/status/214625920919683073
New week on ‪#MPSBarnet‬ & a new week people will pay thousands of pounds to internet scammers. A Transfer direct to a bank account is risky!


https://twitter.com/MPSBarnet/status/214627407490060288‪
#MPSBarnet‬ financial unit holding thousands of pounds seized from internet fraudsters. But probably many more have been conned & lost money!

A tale of two Barnets - Freedom of Information requests - ASBO's in Barnet Part 1

In this Dickensian anniversary year, we have a tale of two Barnets. We have the world of Barnet Council, in their Halcyon towers of North London Business Park and we have the rest of Barnet.I am currently researching an article on ASBO's in Barnet.

I sent two FOI requets off on the 31st January. One to Barnet Council

----- Original Message -----

From: Roger Tichborne

To: Freedom of Information Act

Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2012 9:29 AM

Subject: Freedom of information request

Dear Freedom of Information at Barnet Council,

 

Please can you provide me with the following information for the years 2007-2011 (ie last five years)

 

a) The number of Asbos applied for on a year by year basis by Barnet Council

b) The number of Asbos granted on a year by year basis by Barnet Council

c) The number of complaints of persistent anti social behaviour complaints referred to Barnet Council

 

I would appreciate an answer ASAP.

 

Regards

Roger Tichborne

-----------------------------------------------

 

 And one to the Metropolitan Police. 

The Metropolitan Police in Barnet have responded. Here is what they said :-

TICHBORNE 2 Final Reply Borough Commander

Barnet Council also replied. This is what they said :-

From: L******, C****

To: Roger.Tichborne@btinternet.com

Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 4:53 PM

Subject: Freedom of Information Act 2000

Dear Mr Tichborne,

 

Thank you for your request received on 31st January 2012. We are processing this request in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I am writing to ask you to clarify the third point of your request. This is because we need further details from you in order to identify what information you are seeking.

 

Therefore I should be grateful if you would be able to further explain what you intend by 'c) The number of complaints of persistent anti social behaviour complaints referred to Barnet Council', specifically how you are defining 'persistent'.

Please note the 20 working day response period will only begin once we have received your further clarification. Please contact me if you need assistance with this.

Regards,

C***** L*******
Administration Assistant
Environment, Planning and Regeneration
London Borough of Barnet, North London Business Park, Oakleigh Road South, London N11 1NP

---

From: Roger Tichborne

Sent: 31 January 2012 09:30
To: Freedom of Information Act
Subject: Freedom of information request

Dear Freedom of Information at Barnet Council,

Please can you provide me with the following information for the years 2007-2011 (ie last five years)

a) The number of Asbos applied for on a year by year basis by Barnet Council

b) The number of Asbos granted on a year by year basis by Barnet Council

c) The number of complaints of persistent anti social behaviour complaints referred to Barnet Council

I would appreciate an answer ASAP.

Regards

Roger Tichborne

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now I have redacted the name of the poor unfortunate who sent me the email as I'm sure she was "just following orders" from her bosses.  I would like to draw their attention to the answer to section D from the Metropolitan Police and particularly this sentence  - However, Section 16 of the Freedomof Information Act 2000 (the Act) places a duty on us to assist where we can   -  a section which has clearly escaped the attention of Barnet Council.

I will keep you informed of this. I would like to commend the Metropolitan Police for their prompt and helpful response. I will let you know how my complaint to the ICO against the "obstructiveness and delaying tactics" used by Barnet gets on.

Dickens wrote A Tale of Two Cities. Any price on A Tale of Two Barnets? Surely there is a book and a film in that?

 

The porkie pies of Brian Coleman, GLA member for Barnet and Camden exposed

Last week I received a leaflet from the Back Boris campaign. In it there was this piece of "information" (apologies for the poor quality of the copy) :-

I was intrigued to read the claim that Brian Coleman had "worked tirelessly" to drive down crime in Barnet. It occurred to me that this is fantastic news and I should be reporting on this achievement as a responsible blogger. I immediately sent a Freedom of Information request to the Chief of Police in Barnet, to make sure I had the full details to make a proper report on the issue. I asked the following questions :-

I have just received a leaflet from the Conservative Party stating that "Boris Johnson and  Brian Coleman have worked tirelessly to drive down crime in Barnet. I would be interested to know how many meetings you or you predecessor have had with Brian Coleman to discuss crime reduction strategy in Barnet. I would also like to know how many anti crime initiatives have been instigated by Brian Coleman in Barnet since 2008. Please could you provide me with details of these as an FOI response. Please forward this to the appropriate department or furnish me with their details.

Now as regular readers of this blog will know, Barnet Council invariably answers FOI requests way beyond the statuatory time of 20 days, in which they are supposed to answer such requests. Usually there is no reason given for the delay. Even worse, the responses are as obtuse as possible. Information is not revealed, because the completely exact question was framed in a way which allowed a degree of interpretation and Barnet have chosen to interpret it in a way which means they don't give you the information they clearly know you are seeking.

This is the first time I've had reason to send an FOI to Barnet Police. I was wondering how their response would measure up to the quality of service I usually get from Barnet Council?

Well, I sent the request on the 22nd January and received the response today. That is a working week. Barnet Council should take note. And what did it say? Well, here is the full response :-
TICHBORNE Final Reply Borough Commander

So what does this tell me? First and most obviously that Brian Coleman was telling porkies when he stated he'd been "working tirelessly" to drive down crime. As a GLA rep he's actually held no meetings that the Metropolitan Police can find any trace of. In fact the only meeting the Met can find on record is one to discuss licensing issues in his Council ward of Totteridge.

Now if it was just a question of a politician over egging the pudding in the run up to an election, in an attempt to preserve his £52K a year salary, I suppose no one would be too surprised. The trouble is that it is fundamentally more serious an issue than this. By printing such a misleading document, Brian Coleman has inadvertently drawn our attention to his complete lack of interest in engaging with the Metropolitan Police in his area. Why is this important?

Coleman gets paid £52,000 per year by the taxpayer to advise and assist the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson in his role as Mayor. Brian Coleman represents Barnet. Boris Johnson recently abolished the committee that oversees the Police and brought them under his direct control. It is clear that the priorities of Barnet Police will not be brought to the table, because Brian Coleman hasn't discussed them.

Every Borough has different issues. Barnet is a very diverse Borough. We have the largest Jewish population, so one would think that there may be the occasional meeting between our GLA rep and the Police to discuss issues relating to hate crime. We have many major road networks in Barnet (A1,M1, A406, etc) , which also fall under Brian Coleman's remit as the Council cabinet member with responsibility for roads. Barnet is plagued with traffic accidents and injuries. Most of these are caused by speeding vehicles, surely this would warrant the odd discussion with the Police. Then there are issues related to poverty in Barnet, Coleman has the Environment portfolio at Barnet. It is no secret that a bad environment breeds crime. Badly planned estates are hotbeds of crime. Given that Barnet has major redevelopments, and the Mayor has the final say on many of these, surely Coleman should at least canvass the views of the local Police on whether the plans are going to have an impact on crime in the Borough? It is not the job of the Police to tell the Police how to do their job, but they can help set priorities. They control huge budgets, which if spent wisely can bring crime down and if spent badly can send crime soaring.

Let us consider the current "growth" crime in Barnet. This is theft of mobile phones. Barnet has seen a 10% rise in crimes related to mobile phones in the last 12 months. It is becoming a major concern for the police as stolen phones have become a tradable commodity. What has this got to do with Brian Coleman and his policies? Well he is the man who brought in the "pay by phone" scheme. This requires people to stand on the street, talking on their phone, often with wallet and credit card in their hand. Did Brian Coleman consider the impact of his scheme on phone related crime? Well if he did, he didn't discuss it with the Police.

One final note about the FOI response. It is refreshing to see a response which is clearly in line with the spirit of the FOI act. It was on time and answered the question. It also provided additional information, which was clearly related to the inquiry and has forestalled the need for a follow up question. In short, the Metropolitan Police in Barnet have given the council a timely lesson in how to do their job. I suppose that the point Brian Coleman and Barnet Council should learn from this is that if you do your job properly, there is no need to tell porkies, no need to claim credit where none is due and no need to waste everyones time with silly follow up enquiries.

Barnet Eye Special - Coppers with Choppers !

The theme for today is policing in Barnet. I try not to criticise the police too much, because they have a tough job. Last year I had a chat with the chief of police and he agreed that Barnet was probably the safest and most pleasant Borough to be in charge of. That doesn't mean that it doesn't have its challenges and issues. In fact Barnet has challenges because it is probably the most economically diverse Borough in the country. The issues for policing the leafy mansions of Totteridge, where gated mansions and private security firms aim to deter burlgars are completely different to issues facing those living in Grahame Park. I was having a chat with a less esteemed member of the constabulary over a pint and he said a very interesting thing. If a millionaire in Totteridge gets burgled and his house gets ransacked, he expects the chief of police to personally conduct the investigation. If a single mum in Grahame park gets burgled and her house gets ransacked, often she's amazed if anyone actually shows up. Even more interesting was his view that criminality pervades every level of society, it's just that those at the bottom of the pile are not as proficient at it and get caught.

He made the point that the crack addict who robs his local off license has a high chance of getting caught sooner or later and will probably end up in prison. The company director engaging in corporate fraud will most likely never get caught. It isn't just such financial crimes where the expectation of justice is so different. When it comes to issues of spousal abuse and wider sexual crimes, this isn't just the domain of the poor in the borough. The difference is that women in the higher levels of society also feel "shamed" and so are less likely to report. The likely remedy is likely to be financial in the form of a divorce settlement or some cash to "shut up and go away".

Then there is the issue of drugs. Is substance abuse less or more common in the towers of Totteridge or the crack dens of Colindale? As a percentage of the population, it is probably pretty similar. Again, there is probably a disconnect between what justice one could expect if caught. A working class person caught with drugs, will probably just accept the punishment, whatever that may be. For the more well heeled members of society, a bevvy of lawyers and implausable excuses will be deployed. The more well heeled, the more it costs the police to persue even the most trivial of issue.

We have a bit of a schizophrenic attitude to the police. Half the time (when we get a speeding ticket) we moan that "they haven't got anything better to do, but if a speeding driver runs over our child we say "why don't they do something". I discussed the seeming obsession with traffic offenses with the police and they pointed out that you are far more likely to get injured or killed by a speeding driver than be murdered or maimed by a maniac.

We all feel safer when we see bobbies on the beat. They add a general feeling of security to us. Last night, as I played football at Powerleague in Pursley Road, we had a Police helicopter hovering nearby for about 10 minutes. I've no idea what they were up to, maybe monitoring traffic on the M1 or A1 after and incident? To me Coppers in choppers always make me feel a tad uneasy. When I watch Police, Camera, Action ! type documentaries and they show helicopters stalking villains with night vision, it reminds me that the big brother society is moving ever closer. Helicopters are expensive toys, which I've never been entirely convinced deliver value for money.

One of my friends who is a policeman (with old school attitudes to crime) tells me that the big problem is not the police at all. It is the fact that criminals are not locked up quickly enough, for long enough or regularly enough. He tells me that in Barnet, most burglaries are caused by no more than a dozen people. To lock each one up costs a fortune and then they are released, with the police knowing full well that there will be a spike in burglary cases, almost immediately. Of all the crimes, burglary is the one which people feel the justice system is most out of kilter on (with the exception of paedophiles). The police tell me they take the issue seriously and can, with justification, claim that it is not their fault if the courts don't lock people up for long enough.

Last year we had the sad spectacle of a murder in a brothel in Burnt Oak. For many Barnet residents, this seemed like a window to another world. I doubt that many of our local politicans have ever ventured out into Burnt Oak for a night out. The delights of a  pint at the Bald Faced Stag on a Saturday night is a pleasure I cannot imagine Brian Coleman savouring. Sadly it is something I believe all of our politicians should do. Last year on the campaign trail in Mill Hill, I had a friendly chat with Tory Councillor John Hart. The subject of Burnt Oak and his colleagues came up. It may surprise you to hear me say it, but I think John is one of the very few Tories who recognise the value of Burnt Oak and its citizens. John told me he always buys his fruit and veg in Burnt Oak. He told me that the Tories should be courting the small traders who run the shops, the hard working Asian community and everyone else working to earn a crust. He told me that if Matthew Offord won in Hendon, it would be because he'd got out and about in Burnt Oak (at Johns suggestion apparently) and that the 2-300 votes he'd gained as a result of talking to people there may be the difference. As it turned out, Offord won by 106 votes. John was right and it "woz Burnt Oak which won it for Souperman".

It is interesting that in the midst of the riots last year, unlike many working class areas, Burnt Oak didn't see large scale rioting. I suspect that this is because there is a sense of community there. I believe that this is a lesson for the Metropolitan Police in all of this. It is easy to retreat to our bunkers when cash is tight. There is a tendency to return to the squad cars and the choppers to police the Borough. This would be a mistake. I believe that the opposite should be the policy. More engagement with the community and more efforts to get people to work with the police. As Matthew Offord won his seat in Burnt Oak, I'd like to see him start to champion the area and put himself at the forefront of efforts to build bridges between the community and the police. There is no easy solution to keeping Barnet safe. The most important thing is for the Police to ensure that ALL SECTIONS of society see the Police as part of the solution and not part of the problem. Last year I was talking to another friend who is a Met Police officer. We were discussing drug dealers. She said that she'd had to go and tell the mother of a 19 year old drug dealer that he'd been murdered. The mother was devastated, she felt it was her own fault for letting her son ever get involved in gangs and drugs. She said she wished she'd turned him in to the police, the first time she'd found him with drugs. Would you? Would I?


I hope to god it's a decision I never have to make and I never have to regret.

Burnt Oak Murder - Metropolitan Police respond to Barnet Eye Concerns

Earlier this week, I emailed Barnet Police, detailing some serious concerns regarding  the background issues to the recent murder in Burnt Oak. The text below are my questions and the responses from the Police. 

The responses from the Police are in Blue italics.
-------------------------------------------------

Following the two stabbing incidents in Burnt Oak, I am seeking some clarification on a few issues and concerns which have been raised. I understand that as these are active inquiries you may not be in a position to answer these questions at this time. I am intending to write a blog on the subject. If you reply but do not wish the information to be included, please state specifically what is for public consumption.

 

a) It has been suggested to me that brothels in Barnet are run by organised gangs

b) It has been suggested that there are links between gangs involved in brothels and gangs involved with sale of drugs

c) It has been suggested that the gangs involved in brothels are involved in people trafficing and procurement of underage girls

...we keep active and open minds in relation to all the points you raise...but to answer them specifically

 

a), b) and c) obviously this can't be ruled out, however, the last intelligence assessment we had indicated that these were not drivers in Barnet. In other boroughs they are. This is why we keep alert to the issue and our Safer Neighbourhood teams gather information and intelligence.  Where intelligence does support organised crime the Borough will work in partnership with the MPS's dedicated team who deal with Trafficking and Prostitution. We do need the help of the public in this and other crime related matters as it is the public who hold the information. Safer neighbourhood teams can be contacted by the public with information, but if they wished to remain anonymous, they can use CrimeStoppers on 0800 555 111 or the MPS Trafficking Freephone number 0800 783 2589. We are determined to curb creation and growth of gangs in Barnet as we do see the impact in other parts of London.

 

 

d) There are over 50 brothels known to the police in Barnet

e) Safer neighbourhood teams are not enforcing the law with regards to laws on prostitution

 

d) and e) The number can be subject to change depending on all sorts of factors including police activity. We look to work with partners and use a problem solving approach, such as management of premisies through licensing procedures and issuing closure notices on landlords who allow properties to be used for prostitution. We do undertake quite a bit of activity with regard to such premises having taken into account the impact on the people who live and work in their locale.

 

I think it's important to note that we have to prioritise activity and target those that are most problematic from a crime and disorder perspective and the links to more serious crime. The big challenge in all this is that we simply displace activity to another location. Without being flippant, prostitution is often referred to as the oldest profession ( I think farmers argue that they are!) and the issue of enforcing the laws relating to it have been problematic since the inception of formal policing....enforcement alone simply moves the problem or drives it from the street into premises. Clearly, another challenge is around the supply and demand. There is a huge demand for sexual services and since time immemorial there has been a supply of women offering sexual services otherwise these places wouldn't be viable.

 

There is a much wider debate about how to tackle this in a way which safeguards women in the sex industry as well as preserving quality of life issues for residents and enforcement activity from the police is only one strand of activity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I hope that the response offers some degree of reassurance that organised crime is not perceived as major problem in Barnet.

More comment from the Police on this story  in the Times - 

http://www.times-series.co.uk/news/9148452.Burnt_Oak_murder_brothel_was_closed_by_police_in_mid_April/

As with many things, the view of the Police is that whilst Barnet has problems, they are nowhere as serious as those in some other London Boroughs. I believe we need to see visible Policing in Burnt Oak as a priority to reassure local people of this. I find the Police helpful and approachable when discussing such issues. I really think that these messages should be being communicated by the people elected to do it, but they seem to have outsourced responsibility for keeping the people informed to the Bloggers of Barnet as part of the OneBarnet cost savings program.

Policing in Barnet

I had a rather interesting private chat with a couple of the top cops in Barnet last week. It was really interesting for me to discuss various issues with them such as their views on what the main challenges and priorities in Barnet are. I think that this is one subject which has probably been rather neglected by the blogs in Barnet.

This time last year, I was spending most of my waking hours out on the streets canvassing for the Lib Dems in Mill Hill (how long ago that seems now). In hindsight (given the abject failure of my campaign), it is perhaps surprising that I took so many positives out of the experience. The one thing which came over time and time again was that the ordinary voters of Mill Hill were far more interested in issues of policing than of local politics.

It was quite illuminating to hear different peoples perception of local crime. I knocked on the door of one gentlemen who told me there was a vicous local gang making everyones a misery in one street. They detailed horrible tales of drug dealing, gang fights, robbery and extortion. I asked "have you personally been a victim?", the answer "Not yet". I asked another neighbour, five doors down about this "Oh, they are just a bunch of teenagers who hang around on the green over there, because they are bored". What about the drug dealing? "Yes they do have the occasional spliff, but they aren't really a problem.". Two people, two completely different perceptions. Even more interesting was the fact that both people had been canvassed shortly before by my Conservative adversary, Councillor John Hart. The person living in fear said "That John Hart had the right idea, he said he'd put yobbo's in the stocks if they terrorised the neighbours" (of course, sadly even for a Jedi Knight like John, this is pure fantasy). I suspect they were big fans of John. My cautious observation that "You can't actually do that" went down like a lead balloon. Mr Hart hadn't made such a good impression on the neighbours - "He seemed completely out of touch" they said.

So what is the view of the local Police. Barnet doesn't have the social problems of certain other boroughs. There are trouble hotspots and low level gang activities, but not on a scale comparable with some Boroughs. They are not complacent, because if they were, what we see as isolated experiences would risk becoming more commonplace. The biggest worries are the effects of budget cuts.

In the 1980's there was a  huge disconnect between the Police and the general public. The Police and the Politicians recognised this, got them out of the squad cars and back on the beat. Efforts were put into community engagement and building bridges. The Met has put an enormous amount of effort into modernising the attitudes of the men and women on the front line. Has it been successful? Well according to our top cops in Barnet, yes. I do however regularly chat with quite a few lower ranking police. I'm not sure that they see the world through the same eyes as their bosses. If you have a few beers with any of the coppers I know, at some point they will hush their voices and say "I'd get the sack for saying this, but....."

In many cases this is because they see the worst of humanity on a daily basis. When it comes down to it, the Police are a thin blue line. I suspect that if ever London went up in flames, due to anarchy and insurrection, Barnet would be the last Borough to go up. It's probably one of the reasons we pay such hugely inflated house prices to live here. Most of the time, the Police do a good job. I suspect that most of the time, when they don't it's because they are stretched.

My advice, for what it's worth, to our local Police is to actively participate in local community forums such as the residents forums. Make themselves available to local people and local blogs for dialog and interviews. Policing works in London by consent and publictrust and acceptance. When incidents, such as those we've seen at certain protests occur, this can damage trust. It is important for all of us that this doesn't happen. Anything which adversely affects the ability of the police to prevent bad things from happening, makes us all less safe. That is why the Police need to maintain our trust and we need to support them.

The role of the Police at Barnet Town Hall

I emailed one of our local senior police officers to convey my frustrations and concern about the way public order arrangements were made for the recent Barnet Council meeting. His response certainly cleared up a couple of misapprehensions I had about their role and responsibility. I thought I'd share a few comments with you (with his permission).

our role is explicit in that we were present to prevent crime and to prevent a breach of the peace. Not to control how the meeting is run, or who gets to be where or to deal with safety issues. I'm not normally one for drawing lines in the sand but those are strictly a matter for the chair of the meeting and his agents. In this case the LA. (clearly, we would advise, but there is no obligation for advice to be heeded and the decision is always that of the premises. This is the same principle in football stadia/concert venues etc). We could be asked to assist in removing a person from the premises, but it would have to be at the request of the chair and when that person had behaved in a disorderly way etc.

It can lead to some confusion in that people expect the police to lead, but as I say, we confine ourselves to preventing crime and preventing breaches of the peace. Happily there was no crime and a breach of the peace must include violence or damage to property (or likelyhood of) to empower us to intervene. Shouting is not enough to cause a breach of the peace