London Criminal Justice Board meeting minutes - 15 July 2022

Present         

Sophie Linden (SL), Deputy Mayor, MOPAC 

Debbie Weekes-Bernard (DBW), Deputy Mayor  

Diana Luchford (DL), Chief Executive, MOPAC 

Will Balakrishnan (WB), Director, C&P, MOPAC 

Kenny Bowie (KB), Director, S&MPS Oversight MOPAC 

Barbara Gray (BG), MPS 

Nick John (NJ), MPS 

Barry Hughes, Chief Crown Prosecutor London North, CPS 

Althea Loderick, London Councils 

Gary Poole (GP), London Prisons 

Martin Machray (MM), NHS England 

David Malone, Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor London South, CPS 

Andrew Nicholson (AM), HMCTS 

Andrea Simon, EVAW 

Claudia Strut (CS), CEO, YJB 

Karen Tipping (KT), NPS 

Tamara Barnett, Officer, MOPAC 

Tina Price (TP), Officer, MOPAC 

Naomi Sterling (NS), Senior Advisor, MOPAC 

Sean Cregten, Consultant, Leapwise 

The Deputy Mayor, Sophie Linden opened the meeting. Members were welcomed to the first meeting of the new London Criminal Justice Board (LCJB). There was an expression of thanks to AC Louisa Rolfe for her role as Chair on the former LCJB and for her contribution to the Board. 

LCJB partners were advised regarding the rationale for the new LCJB noting that the purpose was to set in place a new structure for the Board that included an outcome-focused, strategic approach whilst building on the previous good work of LCJB.

Partners were advised of the important need to work in partnership to deliver for London in coming months and years.

It was recommended that the Board invite partners from Defence to attend LCJB.

It was advised that whilst it was possible to cross consult ahead of and for the purpose of reporting to LCJB, it would be beneficial to have representation from all London prison directors on the board. 

The previously circulated LCJB priority outcomes was presented and taken as read. The importance of the outcomes to accelerate movement and ensure progress across LCJB, whilst influencing processes and outcomes within the CJS was noted. It was advised a consensus amongst partners regarding the key aspects which should be improved upon was being sought. It was noted LCJB outcomes should align with the Police and Crime Plan (PCP). Partners were taken through each outcome: 

1. Increasing public trust and confidence in the CJS as a whole
   It was argued a child focused CJS and the elimination of the unnecessary criminalisation of children was critical as was the issue of disproportionality across the whole CJS, the latter of which it was agreed would be taken on board across the new  governance framework. 
2. Deliver swift access to justice
   It was agreed overall that outcome 2 was fundamentally within the remit of LCJB. It was agreed the specific wording would be reviewed subsequent to the focus session 
3. Reduced reoffending rate 
   The various focus points within the outcome was considered and discussed such as the whether the outcome should be keeping as many children as possible out of the CJS also whether the success of this action should be one that is measured. The issue of terminology within this outcome specifically ‘disproportionality’ was highlighted noting that when seeking to analyse disproportionality and its impact, this should be clearly specified to ensure the matter was addressed correctly. It was put forward that it was important to consider this outcome from a youth justice perspective. 

It was advised that under the new structure, LCJB had adopted a set of outcomes for partnership working and as part of this, it is necessary to put forth a forward plan for its quarterly meetings with the focus of partner delivery.

The proposed approach to a workplan and forward agenda was set forth with advice that the agenda for each quarterly LCJB meeting would be structured around: a deep dive on a single LCJB outcome; a substantive update on key work from a sub board; enhanced data sharing and collaboration between partners and any emerging CJS concerns or issues escalated by the sub-boards.

It was noted MOPAC would seek to engage with partners ahead of each meeting to ensure connectivity and full engagement. 

Partners received a presentation of the strategy noting that it was an opportunity to give focus to the key actions in the delivery of the strategy and to discuss the support that would be needed from partners.

It was advised the VAWG board was due to convene in September. It was therefore noted that a specific issue would not be presented for discussion, rather partners were asked to give focus to the examples that had been shared regarding how the board might work together to deliver the strategy.

Partners were advised there continued to be unprecedented demand from victims of VAWG following the recent pandemic and that staff in support centres experienced burnout additionally, staff retention was an issue.

In summary, it was advised that the points raised would be taken to the VAWG board and that focus would also be given to lower volume crime such as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) as all VAWG formed part of the issues that women in London experienced. 

Partners referenced the LCJB’s inter-relationship with the National Criminal Justice Board (NCJB). The Chair advised the frequency of NCJB meetings would be looked into for the purpose of inter-connectivity and upward reporting to NCJB.