The Scottish Government

Listen

Building Strong, Safe and Attractive Communities:
Consultation on Wardens and other Community Based Initiatives to tackle Anti-Social Behaviour
Summary Report on the Consultation

This document is also available in pdf format (1mb)

INTRODUCTION

1 In March 2003, Margaret Curran, MSP, then Minister for Social Justice, published a consultation document on wardens and other community based initiatives to tackle anti-social behaviour. The full text of this document "Building Strong, Safe and Attractive Communities" is available on the Scottish Executive website at www.scotland.gov.uk/consultations/social/wcbi-00.asp. Consultation closed on 30 May 2003. This report provides an overview of the consultation responses.

2 Over 700 copies of the consultation document were distributed to all local authorities, a wide range of public bodies, police organisations, voluntary and community groups and given out at relevant events. The document was made available on the regeneration pages of the Scottish Executive website. Consultation meetings were held with the following stakeholders: Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, Association of Scottish Police Superintendents, Scottish Police Federation, Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, the Anti-Social Behaviour Officers' Forum, Chartered Institute of Housing in Scotland and COSLA.

3 The Scottish Executive wishes to thank everyone who participated in the consultation process.

4 Scottish Executive guidance to local authorities and their community planning partners on the submission of proposals under this programme is now available. (This can be viewed on the Executive's website - www.scotland.gov.uk - and/or obtained from Suzanne Rennie at the Scottish Executive on 0131 244 5573). This guidance has been prepared following careful consideration of the points made during the consultation process. The commentary below briefly explains the main comments received and how the guidance has sought to reflect them.

RESPONSES

5 There were 69 responses in total. These came from a wide range of organisations which can be broken down into the following categories:

6 A comprehensive list of respondents is attached in the Annex. Copies of the responses are available in full for inspection at the Scottish Executive Library (Saughton House, Broomhouse Drive, Edinburgh, EH11 3XD). For an appointment please contact Alan Gold (0131 244 4553).

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS

Main Issues

7 In addition to general comments, the Scottish Executive invited specific feedback on four questions.

Consultation question 1:

Are the mandatory indicators we propose using for measuring the impact of warden schemes and the other anti-social behaviour initiatives the right ones?

• Crime (both recorded and survey based)
• Percentage of residents surveyed who feel "fairly safe" or "very safe" during the day and after dark outside in the local area (survey based)
• Percentage of residents surveyed who are satisfied with their local area as a place to live (survey based)

8 Opinion on the proposed indicators was mixed. While some respondents felt that the mandatory indicators were appropriate overall, others felt that these were too general, and suggested setting additional indicators which could capture the social and environmental success of schemes. A significant proportion of respondents considered that indicators should be set at a local level to reflect the priorities of communities. It was also suggested that the mandatory indicators selected should complement other data gathered at a national level, such as the Scottish Household Survey or the Scottish Crime Survey.

9 There were also differing views on the role and value of resident perception surveys as a monitoring tool. Some respondents argued that such surveys were a useful means of capturing community opinion on the success of schemes; underlining the commitment that communities should be in the driving seat. Others considered that perception surveys were an unreliable means of measuring a scheme's effectiveness and can be skewed by a number of factors, including recent events.

10 Specific views included:

• Recorded crime as an indicator is unsatisfactory as this does not take into account crimes which go unreported and not all forms of anti-social behaviour can be classified as "crimes".
• The types of crime to be monitored should focus on those sorts of crime on which wardens and the other initiatives are most likely to have an impact.
• The success of warden schemes and local anti-social behaviour teams may result in an increase in the reporting of crimes and anti-social incidents.

How the guidance reflects this: In the guidance we respond to these points by offering local authorities greater flexibility over the mandatory indicators they can use. Rather than requiring all schemes to monitor the same indicators, we ask councils and their partners to select a number of indicators from a menu of options. Local authorities will be required to provide a mix of indicators covering both the views of residents, as captured in surveys, and also more statistical data, such as information on crime levels and incidents of anti-social behaviour.

We point out in the guidance that by requesting different types of indicators, and examining those indicators in the context of a thorough evaluation programme, it will be possible to produce a valid assessment of the impact of schemes. The guidance also asks for examples of good practice relating to schemes funded under this programme which could be made available on the Executive's website.

Some of the survey based indicators set out in the guidance are modelled on those used in the Scottish Household Survey.

The guidance acknowledges that reported levels of crime and anti-social behaviour could actually increase in the short term as residents become more confident about reporting incidents.

Consultation question 2:

Are our proposals for the allocation of these resources appropriate?

11 Most respondents welcomed the allocation of these resources, but noted concern about the need to ensure the sustainability of schemes beyond the two year funding period set out in the consultation paper.

Other views included:

• That the investment of resources in these schemes may generate greater demands on other agencies and services.
• Some respondents requested more flexibility in the allocation of funding between warden schemes and the other anti-social behaviour initiatives.
• Respondents in some rural areas highlighted concerns that there may be additional costs in areas with widely dispersed populations.
• Some respondents argued that the indicative allocations for their area as set out in the consultation document were insufficient to meet their requirements.

How the guidance reflects this: On considering the responses received the Scottish Executive did not consider that there was a strong enough case to alter the pattern of resource allocation between each local authority area as set out in the original consultation paper. The guidance therefore confirms the indicative funding allocations as previously set out. The guidance also confirms the split between wardens and other measures, which arose from Ministerial decisions linked to the Spending Review 2002. The concerns expressed about the long term funding of schemes have been noted, however, we confirm that funding under the current programme is limited to the period 2004-06.

Consultation question 3:

Is it appropriate and feasible to use community warden schemes as part of community disposals and restorative justice approaches?

12 The majority of respondents felt that if wardens were to be involved in restorative justice approaches, their role should be confined to identifying types of work which could be undertaken by offenders, for instance pinpointing areas requiring litter or graffiti clear ups. Most respondents considered that wardens should not be responsible for the supervision of offenders carrying out this work.

Other views included:

• Existing restorative justice projects should be fully evaluated to determine whether these should be extended.
• Involving wardens in reparation and community disposal schemes on a formal basis could conflict with their "community development" role and the need to gain the trust and confidence of the whole community.

How the guidance reflects this: The guidance notes that Community Wardens have a potentially useful role in identifying suitable activities for offenders within community reparation programmes, such as those linked to the Community Reparation Orders proposed in the Executive's consultation on the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill. It points out, however, that wardens may lack the specific skills and training required to supervise young people on such programmes and that such a role may compromise their position in local communities.

The draft guidance also notes that there are a range of other ways in which wardens can engage positively with young people and gives examples of these from schemes in England, for example, school visits and organising "walking buses" to reduce bullying and truancy. The City of Edinburgh Council is developing a youth justice pilot programme funded by the Scottish Executive to examine links between wardens and specialist youth workers which is planned to include a restorative justice element. The Executive will carefully examine the results of this pilot.

Consultation question 4:

We propose that the managers of warden schemes funded by the Executive should either be local authorities, the police, Registered Social Landlords or voluntary/community organisations, depending on the nature of the scheme. What are your views on the range and appropriateness of possible management agents?

13 The majority of respondents considered that local authorities should be the management agents for warden schemes, particularly those focusing on crime prevention. It was noted that authorities had the necessary accountability, expertise and structures in place to oversee schemes, and would be best placed to deliver common standards, monitor quality and ensure effective integration with other initiatives such as Community Planning.

Other views put forward included:

• Management arrangements should be determined by the nature of the scheme and the needs of the community.
• Registered Social Landlords should be able to manage some types of schemes, particularly those with an environmental focus.
• To avoid confusion over roles, warden schemes should not be managed by the police.
• Committed partnership working, particularly with the police, will be vital to the successful running of schemes.
• Some respondents felt that private security firms should not be permitted to run warden schemes with a crime prevention focus.

How does the guidance tackle this: The guidance states that schemes with a crime prevention focus, should be developed and managed in conjunction with the police, and require the legitimacy that is given by being run directly by a publicly accountable body, such as a local authority. It points out that while Community Wardens will be required to work closely with the police, they will not have any police powers and their management is not therefore considered to be a core task for the police. In practice, we expect most schemes with a specific crime prevention focus to be run by local authorities, while environmental schemes could be run by other agencies.

The guidance includes a specific section on the importance of partnership working and asks local authorities to state how they have involved other agencies in developing submissions and why they have chosen a particular agency for delivering schemes. This is in addition to the requirements for multi-agency working set out in relation to Neighbourhood Compacts.

OTHER ISSUES

14 A number of other issues were raised which do not fall exactly under the headings of the consultation questions listed above. The Scottish Executive has noted these and in forming the guidance has taken into consideration all views raised by the consultation. Some of the main issues highlighted by respondents are discussed below.

• What is anti-social behaviour? Some respondents requested further clarity of the term "anti-social behaviour" and the respective roles of wardens and the police in tackling such behaviour.

The guidance gives further examples of the sorts of activities wardens can perform in order to tackle anti-social behaviour and help to prevent crime. It stresses that wardens will complement the police, but are not intended to be a substitute for them. It includes guidelines drawn up by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and the Scottish Executive on local agreements or protocols on the operation of warden schemes.

• Evidence base. Some respondents questioned the evidence base for the effectiveness of warden schemes and requested that further evaluation of pilot schemes should be conducted.

While warden schemes in Scotland are relatively new, where pilot schemes exist they have been popular with local communities and schemes have often been extended into neighbouring estates. Evaluation material from schemes in England and elsewhere is also available and has been drawn on in shaping policy. Evaluation of the warden schemes in Renfrewshire funded through the Scottish Executive's Better Neighbourhood Services Fund will be available in due course. The programme of funding for wardens and other initiatives to tackle anti-social behaviour will be subject to a rigorous programme of monitoring and evaluation.

• Involvement of young people. Some respondents requested that local authorities and their community planning partners should consider the views of young people in setting up warden schemes given that wardens may be engaging with young people as part of their duties.

The guidance requests that local authorities and their partners consult with organisations representing young people and/or young people themselves in setting up schemes. It suggests that local authorities could use youth forums, pupil councils and where appropriate the Dialogue Youth initiative to do this and highlights examples of wardens working positively with young people to benefit the local community.

CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS

15 This consultation process has confirmed that there is general support for the proposed initiatives to tackle anti-social behaviour, the poor quality of the environment and build strong, safe and attractive communities.

16 The Scottish Executive has issued guidance to local authorities and their community planning partners in early July which will assist them with the preparation of their submissions. Outline submissions will be required by the end of August, and finalised submissions will be with the Executive by 30 November 2003, allowing schemes to commence in April 2004.

Kathleen Marshall
Neighbourhood Services Team
Scottish Executive
Victoria Quay
Edinburgh EH6 6QQ
Tel. 0131 244 0360

ANNEX: CONSULTATION RESPONDENTS

Aberdeenshire Community Planning Partnership
Aberdeen City Council
Aberdeen Youth Justice Strategy Group
ACPOS
Angus Council
Apex Scotland
Association of Scottish Police Superintendents
Ayrshire North Community Housing Organisation
Barnardo's Scotland
Bridgewater Housing Association
Ms Marlene Butler
Canmore Housing Association
Chartered Institute of Housing in Scotland
City of Edinburgh Council
Clackmannanshire Council
Communities Scotland
CoSLA
Dalmuir Park Housing Association
Dumfries and Galloway Council
Dundee City Council
Dundee Federation of Tenants' Associations
East Ayrshire Council
East Dunbartonshire Council
East Lothian Council
East Lothian Tenants & Residents Panel
East Renfrewshire Council
Falkirk Council
Fife Community Safety Partnership
Glasgow City Council Cultural/Leisure Services
Glasgow City Council Development & Regeneration Services
Glasgow Housing Association
Grampian Housing Association
Group 4 Securitas
Haldane Regeneration Group
Highland Council
Horizon Housing Association Ltd
Inverclyde Council
Keep Scotland Beautiful
Mearns Community Council
North Ayrshire Council
North Lanarkshire Council
Northern Constabulary
Orkney Islands Council
Perth & Kinross Council
Perth & Kinross Tenants & Residents Federation
Pineview Housing Co-operative Ltd
Princes Trust Scotland
Scottish Borders Community Safety Forum
Scottish Federation of Housing Associations
Scottish Grocers Federation
Scottish Police Authorities Forum
Scottish Police Federation
Scottish Retail Consortium
Shelter Scotland
South Ayrshire Council
South Lanarkshire Council
Stirling Community Planning Partnership
Strathclyde Police
The Craigmillar Partnership
The Law Society of Scotland
The Moray Council
Trossachs Community Trust
Victim Support Scotland
West Dunbartonshire Council
West Dunbartonshire Partnership
West Lothian Council
Western Isles Council
Mr Bob Young
Youthlink Scotland