Agenda item

(To receive a report by Martyn Parker, Assistant Director – Public Protection, Mark Baxter, Chief Fire Officer, Nicole Hilton, Assistant Director – Communities,  Steven Batchelor, Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership Senior Manager and Lee Sirdifield, Assistant Director – Corporate, and which summarises the Service Level Performance against the Success Framework 2022-2023 for Quarter 4)

The Committee gave consideration to a report from Martyn Parker, Assistant Director – Public Protection, Mark Baxter, Chief Fire Officer, Nicole Hilton, Assistant Director – Communities, Steven Batchelor, Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership Senior Manager and Lee Sirdified, Assistant Director Corporate, which summarised the Service Level Performance against the Success Framework 2022-2023 for Quarter 4 for Community Safety, Trading Standards, Fire Safety, Libraries and Heritage, Road Safety and Volunteers.

Ryan Stacy, Assistant Chief Officer, Will Mason, Head of Culture and Rob Hook, Enforcement Delivery Manager, Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership were also in attendance for this item.

During consideration of this item, some of the following comments were raised:

Community Safety

·       The Committee noted that the increase in the number of Ending Domestic Abuse Now (EDAN) phone calls had been due to the fact that the service was now recording contacts better;

·       There was recognition that there needed to be more narrative in the report concerning Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC), as to how individuals were being supported within the process, and how effective MARAC was working.  The Committee noted that reporting and metrics were being reviewed around domestic abuse to make sure it was more meaningful to the Committee and also to members of the public;

·       It was highlighted that in the domestic reporting section, this year domestic abuse to be reported had been removed, as the Committee would now be receiving a report at the end of the year; 

·       The Committee was advised that a rise in the number of people supported by EDAN in quarter 4, as shown in the graph on page 32 of the report was because it was thought that this was an accumulative figure for the year;

·       Some guidance was given as to how to deal with a challenging situation from a member of the public perspective; and

·       Confirmation was given that for a case to go forward, a person consent was not necessary where there was sufficient evidence to go the Crown Prosecution to show that an offence had been committed.  The Committee noted that there were other non-criminal processes that could be put in place to protect victims who were not engaging.

Trading Standards

·       The Committee noted that electrical goods and furniture seized from a business in Boston had been because the electrical goods had not complied with electrical safety regulations, the non-compliance generally identified was around labelling.  It was noted that the electrical goods had been submitted for testing, some of which were found to be safe and other were removed from the market and disposed.  Regarding the furniture referenced, the Committee noted that a lot of the products had been household goods such as rugs and flat pack furniture.  Again, there had been a problem with labelling, some because safety reasons; and that work had been undertaken to make sure the labelling was brought up to a standard for the items to be released for sale;

·       One member enquired when a high-risk premises was inspected by trading standards whether liaison was taking place between the county council and district councils as highlighted at an earlier Committee meeting, and likewise, where a district council found a food premises having a zero star or one star hygiene rating, were district councils contacting trading standards.  Confirmation was given that this had been actioned and was now in place; and

·       The Committee was advised that weigh bridge inspections had not been able to take place due to problems regarding the availability of equipment for hire.  Some members felt that this matter need to be considered further at a future meeting.

Fire Safety

·       Some clarity was sought as to what was a response time.  It was reported that a response time was from when a call was received; and then from there other performance measures were in place regarding how long it took call operators to speak to the person calling and then for them to dispatch their nearest asset.  Another area that was monitored was the time taken at on call stations, for officers to respond and to allow the fire appliance to be mobile. With the final part of the measure being the distance from leaving the station to actually arriving at the incident;

·       The Committee noted that the proposed changes to Sleaford Fire Station had been delayed to allow time for thorough consultation with staff and also some ongoing analysis.  The Committee was advised that the new pattern was due to start on 1 January 2024, following which performance and the impact of the changes would be monitored.  Reassurance was given that response times would not be affected;

·       It was noted that there had been a significant improvement in the number of home safety visits in the last 12 months.  Confirmation was given that the reasoning behind the stretched target was because the service recognised that there was a disproportionate ageing community within Lincolnshire. The Committee was advised that the target was stretched but there was a very good reason for it; and

·       That the SHERMAN campaign remained relevant with a meeting having taken place on 4 May 2023.

Libraries and Heritage

·       The Committee was advised that Lincoln Castle ground had made it into the top 20, free visited 320 attractions in the entire country.

Road Safety

·       The prominence of Lincolnshire in the killed or seriously injured graph on page 50 of the report pack.  The Committee noted that the council had no control over the statistical members shown;

·       What further measures could be included in a village with a very busy main road, who had a very active speed watch group, and reactive speed cameras already installed. The Committee noted that generally the Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership (LRSP) would monitor traffic volume and speed to obtain information as to the flow of traffic through the village and the levels of speed.  With regard to enforcement the LRSP could only use speed cameras, if certain criteria was met.  It was highlighted that the police could do additional enforcement; and once the assessment was done the Accident Investigation Partnership from the County Council could be asked to look to see if any additional work that could be done regarding signage etc. A further suggestion made was the positioning of village gates, which seem to focus drivers that they are entering a speed limit;

·       Whether the figures for killed and seriously injured were able to differentiate and highlight the number of motorcycles.  Officers advised that this figure was not to hand but could be obtained.  It was noted that the number of motorcycle collisions were down on the previous year’s figures; and

·       Officers agreed to look at speed limits on Bridge Street in Boston.  It was however noted that the LRSP were not responsible for setting speed limits, they would however look to see what traffic surveys were available.

Volunteers

·       The Committee was advised that the role of the County Council was to support the framework across Lincolnshire for volunteer provision, which ensures that appropriate training was in place, and that there was a hub for exploring volunteering opportunities.  It was noted that as an organization, the council had a number of volunteering placements for example within the library services, heritage services, all of whom were supported through internal policy and through some of the work the voluntary sectors provide.  It was highlighted that the community hub libraries were almost entirely run by volunteers, providing services to local communities, with volunteers then gaining experience, skills, and confidence in return.

The Chairman on behalf of the Committee extended his thank to all presenters.

RESOLVED

1.      That comments made be received.

2.      That the Service Level reporting against the Success Framework 2022/223 – Quarter 4 be received.

3.       That the Performance Indicators for Public Protection and Communities as shown in Appendix A to the report be received.