Agenda item

The Chair welcomed John Coleman (Assistant Director, Children and Families) and Sally Nash (Service Manager, Youth Justice) to the meeting.

Sally Nash opened by explaining that whilst the presentation of the Youth Justice Plan to committee is a routine matter it is also of importance. Youth Justice is enshrined in statute and it is a condition of the Youth Justice Board that in order for Youth Justice Services to receive their funding they must produce an annual plan. The plan must be acceptable to the Board and demonstrate compatibility to the Council’s corporate aims and objectives. The plan is owned by the Youth Justice Partnership and by the Chief Officer Board. The overall objectives of the Youth Justice Service are to provide the safest environment as possible and to help young people to be as safe as possible. Youth offending is not a popular topic. Nevertheless, the service has the confidence of the courts and has been able to continue to maintain contact with the courts and young people throughout the Pandemic.

The committee was informed of a number of challenges.

1) Serious youth violence   Serious youth violence has grown. It now serves as a golden thread through the work of the Safer Warwickshire Partnership. The overall level of youth violence has not escalated although there have been a number of high-profile cases.

2) Engagement by young people in education, training and employment   The Pandemic has had a serious negative impact on vulnerable young people. School age children who do not have proactive parents have fallen behind on their education. It has been found necessary to realign resources to secure specialist support for these young people.

Whilst case-loads through courts have dropped owing to the Pandemic case loads generally have remained static.

Councillor Jill Simpson-Vince asked about out of court disposals. These were first time appearances but is it a case of “three strikes and you’re in court”? How many of the first offenders are likely to be seen again?

In response the committee was informed that out of court disposal is a multi-agency approach. Decisions regarding when a young person should be required to attend court rest with the police. With Youth Conditional Cautions if a young person does not comply then they will be required to attend court. It was stressed that out of court disposals are a serious sanction. It is not a case of young people “getting away with it” but the aim of the legislation is to keep children out of the court system. Sometimes children do come back into the system, but it remains preferable to manage them away from the courts if possible.

Councillor Marian Humphries welcomed that children are put first adding that it is important to identify and address the reasons behind a child’s behaviour. In response Sally Nash reminded members that these young people are children first and offenders second. There are no excuses for bad behaviour, but it should be recognised that they are children. School, she added, teach discipline but if children a re not in school they are not benefitting from this.

Councillor Jo Barker asked if entry level offenders are offending at a higher level. In response the committee was informed that there have been cases of children committing high level offences as their first offence. One child has recently been sentenced to five years imprisonment for their first offence. The Pandemic has seen a number of low level and high-level offences. There has been a gap in mid-range offences, but these are possibly down to policing decisions.

Sally Nash was asked about bespoke parenting initiatives. The committee was informed that recognising that the parents of young offenders have specific needs the youth justice Service has been running a pilot project around this. Bespoke remand accommodation is operated in Warwickshire. This is a fostering service for children awaiting remand.

Councillor Brett Beetham asked for information about re-offending rates. The committee was informed that information on these is two to three years old and is of limited use. Software companies are developing products that will provide real time information. The Youth Justice Service has yet to take this forward having been delayed by the Pandemic. For it to work effectively the police will have to agree to undertaking more real time reporting. Discussions will be needed with the Chief Constable as in other areas of the country this has been a challenge.

Councillor Beetham also enquired about engagement with education. He was informed that in the Youth Justice Service has recognised the value in employing a specialist whose principal focus will be education and the people involved in its delivery. A job description has yet to be drafted.

Councillor Brian Hammersley recognised that children who are not in school become bored and this can lead to them getting in to trouble. He asked what local authorities are doing to ensure that children are kept occupied. In reply Sally Nash stated that this is known as “diversion”. The County Council is investing heavily in more youth work and the Pandemic has seen virtual youth clubs being run. In addition, small grants have been made available to community groups to help keep young people occupied.

Councillor Jerry Roodhouse stressed the need to maintain the preventative agenda. John Coleman reported significant falls in the level of alcohol and drug abuse and the number of young people carrying bladed weapons as a result of early intervention initiatives. With the Priority Family initiative, it is possible to claim payment by results. Warwickshire has seen a 100% return.

Councillor Jill Simpson-Vince asked about “county-lines” and whether there are differences in approach depending on whether the offender is to the east or west of Warwickshire. The committee was informed that there are information sharing agreements with partners the aim being to prevent offending. Much cross-border work is police driven. Courts reflect local communities and whilst there are sentencing guidelines they are not always applied consistently. An agreement exists already to the west as it is recognised that offenders are using the train line from Birmingham down to Leamington. In time there may be agreements to the east with Leicestershire and Northamptonshire but presently the focus is on the West Midlands.

With county-lines it is important to appreciate that the children involved are not making their own choices.

John Coleman emphasised the need to ensure that information is shared freely between partner agencies. Police forces work in different ways and it is important to ensure that these differences in approach do not get in the way. Information comes from children who have been missing but who have returned home. If they have been interviews in Warwickshire it is important to ensure that the outcome of that interview is shared with the home authority.

Councillor Jeff Morgan welcomed the discussion regarding the role of the youth service. In response to a question regarding “early help” the committee was informed that an early help assessment includes a section on “potential to commit crime”. The Priority Families initiative also considers this. Although the age of criminal responsibility is 10 years young children will, if not supported, continue to move into crime. Early interventions have the potential to change behaviours and demeanour.

Resolved:

That the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee approve and Support the 2021/22 Youth Justice Plan. Associated actions will be tracked and monitored by the Youth Justice Chief Officer Board in line with the requirements of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.