International Women's Day: We all have a duty to stop domestic violence

Cllr Clare Hilley of Croydon Council is proud of the practical work in her borough to protect women

Today marks the 102nd International Women's Day where people from around the world will celebrate female success and achievement. Over a hundred years ago Emmeline Pankhurst helped women win the right to vote and even though Women's Rights have progressed somewhat since these days, a stark fact remains that only 19 per cent of women hold the world's parliamentary seats.

The theme of this year's International Women's Day is calling for action to end violence against women. The UK Government has taken this on board and on Wednesday announced a series of initiatives that will help to reduce female genital mutilation (FGM) worldwide within a generation.

Closer to home, the Government has provided nearly £40 million of ring-fenced funding for specialist domestic and sexual violence services, and national support helplines. They have also invested heavily in changing attitudes and behaviours towards domestic violence, including tackling online abuse through social media. Recently, legislation has been reformed by introducing two new stalking offences. These tough measures send a clear signal to better protect victims and support the police and prosecutors who bring about justice.

Labour councils weak stance on evicting "neighbours from hell"

As I noted recently, the Government is giving councils and housing associations more power to evict those who have engaged in anti social behaviour. If someone is convicted of various offences - such as criminal damage or assaulting a neighbour - the landlord will be able to seek a speedy and straightforward conviction on those grounds. They will not have to go through the same case twice - with all the delay and anguish for the victim.

Also the law is to be toughened from the present vague grounds, written into tenancy agreements, of being able to evict someone involved in violence in "the local area". In future it will be anyone in the UK. Following the odious behaviour of yobs during the August 2011 riots there was strong support -  62% in favour with  24% opposed - for evicting those involved in rioting and looting.

There are many people on the waiting list for council housing - sometimes in pretty dreadful temporary housing, hostel accommodation, and even bed and breakfast hotels. Why should they be kept waiting while thugs are allowed to continue in council tenancies enjoying a subsidised rent?

Of course councils will have discretion over when to use these powers. For example, they could act against those for whom there is already evidence of wrong-doing, but which was previously  considered not to able to justify court action.

Evicting "neighbours from hell" delayed for a year in the courts

One phrase that often crops up in relation to anti-social behaviour is that there should be "zero tolerance". Another phrase that I hear frequently is that evictions in social housing for anti-social behaviour "should be a last resort."  You can believe one or the other of these, but not both.

Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council were firmly of the "eviction should be a last resort" school. After ten years of harassment during which her tormentors were not evicted Fiona Pilkington committed suicide.  The unwillingness of councils and housing associations to evict tenants in such flagrant and serious breach of their tenancy agreements is a scandal. The good news is that in a year's time there should be a new law in force with a "mandatory power of repossession for anti-social behaviour." This will apply where there is already a conviction which proves an offence has taken place - for instance assaulting a neighbour or criminal damage. At present there is a lot of delay and expense in having to go through two cases for the same offence - once for the breach of criminal law and once for eviction for the breach of the tenancy agreement.

The proposed change is:

Scare mongering over street lighting reduction not backed by evidence

3,000 miles of motorway do not have street lighting. Some, including the Sunday Telegraph and The Mirror, have presented this as news. The Mirror talked about them being "plunged into darkness." But 3,000 miles of motorway and trunk roads have never had street lighting. The news is that an extra 98 miles are to be unlit.

The Highways Agency are undertaking this modest reduction in street lighting after pilot studies suggested no increase in road accidents.

Tim Harbot, Midlands Regional Director for the Highways Agency, said:

"Since 2009 we've switched lighting off between the hours of midnight and 5am on 15 carefully selected stretches of motorways. This includes some stretches of lighting on the M5 and the M54 in the West Midlands. Evidence so far indicates that switching off the lights hasn't had an impact on safety. Analysis also suggests that switching off lights does not appear to have affected traffic volumes or speed."

The latest alarmist splurge has also stuck the story together with the lighting reductions from local councils. It is mentioned that their are "suggestions" or "concerns" that it might increase crime or accidents. But in places like Essex and Gloucestershire the policy of reducing street lighting is well established for a matter of years. It turns out that burglars don't like the dark as using torches attracts attention.

The forgotten partner – Safer Deals to complement City Deals

In a new paper, to be launched today at Party Conference Westminster City Council’s Cabinet Member for Community Protection, Cllr Nickie Aiken proposes a new model to deliver localised policing and criminal justice in partnership with Police and Crime Commissioners.

Heralded as the biggest shake up to the service for decades Police and Crime Commissioners offer the opportunity to radically transform local criminal justice. Already a topic of debate at this year’s party conferences there is now an opportunity for ambitious PPCs and their local authority partners to deliver radical solutions to reduce crime.

The cries of low voter turnout, “postcode lottery” in policing and the cost of elections are issues for debate – but they are parochial concerns missing the bigger picture. An injection of democracy and accountability in policing will lead to a more responsive, localised and, ultimately effective, police service.

Southampton Council forced taxi drivers they licensed to record all conversations by their passengers

Many conversations in the back of cabs are not only private but intimate. Often a decision to take a cab is prompted by being the worse for wear. Yet astonishingly in some places these conversations are recorded. The Information Commissioner Christoper Graham has ordered Labour-run Southamton City Council to end the requirement of the taxi drivers they licence to record all conversations taking place in their cab.

The ICO has ruled the council’s policy breaches the Data Protection Act - they have delivered the same verdict on Oxford City Council. This followed a campaign by Big Brother Watch.

While the councils said the measures improved safety, the ICO concluded that the breach of privacy was disproportionate.

Mr Graham, said:

Troubled Families progamme will be a test of localism

All the relevant 152 councils in England have signed up to the Government's Troubled Families programme.  What this really means is that they each now have an incentive to come up with their own programme. The more of the 120,000 families that are "turned round", the more funding the council responsible will get. There will be payment by results which will be measured by the reduction of the number of children excluded from schools, family members engaged in crime, and adults stuck on welfare.

The programme envisages that there should be "intensive interventions" that cover the whole family. Where a council succeeds it will be paid £4,000 per family. The Government believe that the existing Family Intervention programme - which helps teach parents basic tasks such as how to cook - has had some success. Staff on the programme turn up unannounced to help establish routines such as getting the children to bed or getting them up to go to school.

While the criteria for councils being paid has been set out, the content of their intervention will be up to them.

The framework document says:

This document is not a delivery strategy. It does not cover good practice on interventions for families, or provide advice on drawing up your local business case for investment or redesigning of public services. We will have a role in helping to build up and share that kind of information among the network of Troubled Families co-ordinators, but are not attempting to do that here.

£100 fine for home owners who see their gardens as rubbish dumps

The Daily Mail reports that under a Community Protection Notice there will be £100 on-the-spot fines introduced for those who use their gardens as rubbsh dumps for items such as old sofas or fridges.

The report says:

The powers will apply to privately owned homes as well as council houses. Officials will target only those guilty of ‘persistent, unreasonable behaviour’.

They will be given a warning and told to clear the rubbish away. If they ignore the notice, they will then be guilty of a crime.

Officials do not want to target law-abiding householders who are forced to have rubbish in their gardens at certain times of the week because of the complicated recycling policies introduced by many councils.

And the law will be worded to protect homeowners from over-zealous council officials patrolling the streets looking to make money by issuing on-the-spot fines. 

Tough on graffiti, tough on the causes of graffiti

As a councillor part of my role is to report graffiti and arrange for it to be cleaned off. But what are the underlying causes? Why is graffiti more likely to occur on modernist/brutalist rather than traditionalist buildings? How much is produced by gangs using tags to mark territory?

In his new book The Face of God, Roger Scruton writes:

Graffiti are acts of aggression against the public realm, ways of ‘defacing’ it. Often they involve caricatures of writing by people who are taking their revenge on the skill which, above all others, symbolizes the act of inter-personal communication. In most cases the graffiti vandal is offended by the sight of a settled place, a place that excludes him since he does not and cannot belong. He belongs not to a place but to the nomadic gang that is passing through, angered by the sight of others’ settlement.

Certainly clean off the graffiti and punish any culprits caught in the act. But it is also right to tackle the causes. The hideous tower blocks and the discredited "progressive" theories of the educational establishment.

Nothing being done to stop massive electoral fraud in Tower Hamlets

Cllr Peter Golds, leader of the Conservative opposition in Tower Hamlets, says the police and the Electoral Commission are ineffective in ensuring free and fair elections in his borough

In terms of the conduct of elections, the Borough of Tower Hamlets is in a league of its own. The lack of action taken on fraud and intimidation can be laid at the police and election officials. However, the system itself must share responsibility.

In 2010 we had the combined general and local elections and in this borough a referendum as to whether there should be a directly elected Mayor.

On 1 December 2007 the borough electorate was 152,466
On 1 December 2008 it was 156,712
On 1 June 2009 it was 158,251
On 1 September 2009 it was 158,549
On 1 December 2009 it was 160,278
On 1 April 2010 it was 164,847
On 4 May 2010 it was 171,870

In one month, in the lead up to the combined elections we had a 7,000 person increase in the electorate. Officials, on the advice of the electoral commission, have to take the evidence of applicants, in their words “at face value”. The electoral commission, as we know, appears dedicated to increasing the size of the electoral register in pursuit of unidentified missing voters. However, there are problems in this.