Consultation Outcomes , Community Protection S40(2) Legislation - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

, Community Protection

Proposed City Centre Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) Consultation Outcomes

S40(2)

Legislation

• Under the ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (2014 Act), a Local

Authority can make a PSPO if they are satisfied, on reasonable grounds, that a) Activities carried on in a public place have had a detrimental impact on the quality of life of those in the locality, or it is likely that such activities will be carried on and they will have that effect and b) The effect/likely effect of the activities is/or is likely to be persistent/continuing in nature, is likely to be such as to make the activities unreasonable and justifies the restrictions imposed

Requirement to consult

• Before making a PSPO the Council has to carry out consultation as

prescribed by the 2014 Act. This includes consulting with a) the Chief Officer of Police, and the local policing body, for the police area that includes the restricted area b) Whatever community representatives the Council thinks it appropriate to consult c) the owner and occupier of land within the restricted area, so far as is reasonably practicable

• At the point of consultation on the proposed PSPO the Council must

also publish the text of the proposed order

Consultation Process

• 6 week consultation period 23 August – 3 October
• Draft order, FAQs and associated information placed on Council

website

• Face to Face surveys undertaken by CPOs
• Survey link provided to BID and Creative Quarter
• Consultation brought to attention of other interested parties
• Media articles at outset of consultation – NEP, BBC Radio

Nottingham

Consultation Process

Consultation brought to attention of

• Police
• Police and Crime Commissioner
• Institute of Fundraising
• Big Issue
• BID
• Creative Quarter
• Keep Streets Live
• Equity
• NCVS
• Nottingham City Homes
• Universities
• Others whose land affected (Churches/Car Park providers)

Consultation Responses

• 547 survey responses via face to face surveys or via BID/Creative Quarter

members

• 33 other responses – 20 from members of the public, 13 from organisations

including

• Police
• BID
• Liberty
• Big Issue
• Keep Streets Live
• Musicians Union
• Manifesto Club
• Equity
• Institute of Fundraising
• Emmanuel House
• Churches x 2

Survey Responses

304 197 31 10 1

50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should have the power to take action against people who obstruct access to buildings, prevent or hinder cleansing operations or hinder vehicles or pedestrians

• n the highway?

Survey Responses

288 192 44 17 5

50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should control the numbers of people making unsolicited requests for money such as those undertaking on street charity collections?

Survey Responses

299 176 59 8 3

50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that Big Issue sellers should

• nly sell from approved pitches, and wear appropriate means of

identification?

Survey Responses

271 196 53 19 6

50 100 150 200 250 300

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should have the power to ask those busking to cease if they are causing an unreasonable disturbance to others in the locality?

Survey Responses

274 202 41 21 8

50 100 150 200 250 300

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should require those who distribute free material in the City Centre to obtain permission prior to doing so, to enable us to ensure that, for example, they clean up after any distribution?

Survey Responses

194 175 120 40 10

50 100 150 200 250

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should require those using mobile advertisements such as placards or human A Boards to obtain permission prior to doing so?

Survey Responses

432 83 12 10 4

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should issue fines to anyone who urinates or defecates in the street?

Survey Responses

404 88 26 10 8

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

How strongly do you agree or disagree that the Council should take more action against people who use psychoactive substances (Mamba/Spice) in the City Centre?

Police response

“I have read the attached PSPO and viewed the map. I fully support the proposed PSPO within the geographic area outlined within the map. I believe this will assist our Officers and staff to deal effectively with and reduce incidents of anti-social behaviour and drug use. This will have a positive effect on those living, working and visiting the City Centre to ensure they feel safe. CI will be your contact if the PSPO is introduced, to ensure that Nottinghamshire Police Officers and staff make full use of the order where appropriate”. Superintendent S40(2)

S40(2)

Concerns raised

A variety of concerns have been raised with regards the proposed PSPO which broadly relate to the following

• Nature of the consultation
• Impact of the proposals on the homeless/vulnerable
• Busking/Street Entertainment
• Big Issue

Concerns raised – Survey/Consultation

• Survey psychologically biased
• Survey nor distributed widely enough
• Not all citizens would want to interact with CPOs to complete

survey

• Consultation not flagged prominently enough on Council website

Concerns raised – Impact on vulnerable

• Concerns raised by a variety of responders including Liberty, Manifesto Club,

Emmanuel House, members of the public

• Targeting/criminalising homeless/rough sleepers/beggars contrary to

Government guidance on PSPOs

• Designed to sweep homeless from the street as impossible for them not to

breach the order (i.e. person rough sleeping in doorway will automatically be in breach)

• Definitions (i.e. free matter) are too wide and vague and would criminalise acts
• f kindness/charitable giving such as giving of a sandwich
• Financial penalty won’t help as vulnerable unable to pay/Infringement of human

rights

• Purely punitive and no attempt to solve homelessness issue

Concerns Raised - Busking

• Responses from Keep Streets Live, Musicians Union, Equity and local
• buskers. Local buskers submitted petition with 670 signatures
• National groups object to all of the provisions of the PSPO and prefer Code
• f Practice approach. Feel PSPO targets all busking irrespective of

disturbance

• Local buskers object to authorised pitches – suggest that sensitive areas

are identified as no busking areas or more pitches are identified

• Local buskers agree with Code of Practice approach but accept those

causing ASB should be addressed

• Local buskers concerned that PSPO (free matter) will prevent them offering

CDs to the public for a donation

Concerns Raised – Big Issue

• Keen to continue to work with the City Council
• Wish to negotiate over suggested Authorised Pitches to prevent

lowering of number and loss of training pitches

• Request change in wording of the PSPO to reflect the reality of

the day to day situation i.e. most but not all Big Issue sellers wear tabards, but all wear badges.

Possible amendments

• Consider with Legal whether requirement can be added to ensure

homeless receive offer of accommodation before enforcement action is taken under the PSPO

• Add ask and warn requirements to the Obstruction/Unauthorised Request

clauses to address the fear that people will be criminalised without warning

• Seek to clarify in PSPO or supporting guidance that will not seek to

criminalise acts such as the giving of a sandwich

• Further discussions with Big Issue to agree appropriate wording and

authorised pitches

• Further discussions with local buskers to agree issues regarding busking

locations and to identify means to permit them to offer CDs