PUBLIC SPACES PROTECTION ORDER (PSPO)

Cabinet Member: Councillor Mrs J Adey

Wards Affected: All

Officer contact: Sarah McBrearty Ext:3876

Email: sarah.mcbrearty@wycombe.gov.uk

PROPOSED DECISION

To agree to proceed with a public consultation on the implementation of two Public Spaces Protection Orders for High Wycombe town centre and surrounding area. These new Orders will give Wycombe District Council an opportunity to restrict specific activities that have a detrimental effect on the businesses, residents and visitors to the area.

Reason for Decision

New powers have been introduced under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 to deal with anti-social behaviour, including the ability to create a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO). The Order will give the Council greater powers in relation to dealing with anti-social behaviour in public spaces.

Corporate and Legal Implications1. This report recommends legal action be taken by the Authority in accordance

with the new legislation, and also involves subsequent legal enforcement relevant to that action. The legal parameters laid out within the Act will be considered carefully against the proposal for an Order.

2. As with any new legislation of this type, this is untested ground and the legislation is likely to be further defined in years to come by a process of appeals and High Court rulings. The introduction of any Order presents a risk of legal challenge to the Council. Section 66 of the Anti-social Behaviour Crime and Policing Act 2014 states that “interested persons” may challenge the validity of any Order in the High Courts. This means that the Council could face a challenge against its ability to implement the Order. An application of this nature must be made within six weeks, beginning on the day the Order is made or varied. There are two grounds upon which a challenge could be made:

• That the local authority did not have the power to make the Order, or variation, or to include particular prohibitions or requirements imposed by the Order (or by the Order as varied)

• That a requirement under this element of the legislation was not complied with in relation to the order or variation

The High Court would have the power to quash, amend or uphold the Order.3. The penalties for breaches of an Order are fines following a prosecution or

Fixed Penalty Notices can be issued where appropriate by authorised officers.

4. Other legal implications and requirements are set out later in the report.

Finance5. Enforcement costs under this order will be mostly met by Police resources. Any

supplementary enforcement will be undertaken by officers within Environment Service and Community Services.

6. There would be some internal costs for consultation and the publication of the Order, along with stationery for FPNs and the official signage. The FPN books have already been printed, at a cost of £100. If we chose to produce posters and flyers to distribute in the town centre, this would cost approximately £250. The metal signs would cost approximately £500 and would be erected in place of the exiting DPPO signs.

7. It is expected that these costs will be met from existing budgets, although as increases in workload as a result of adopting this legislation are largely unknown, this may need to be reviewed.

8. Income from FPNs is expected to be small and will be used to cover the associated costs of implementing the proposal, and has not been included in this year’s budgeting.

Executive Summary

9. In October 2014 the Secretary of State enacted new powers under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, relevant to tackling anti-social behaviour. These new powers also make changes to some of the relevant existing legislation. The Council is required, within the period of three years, to assess its existing Designated Public Place Orders (DPPO) and, if still required, replace with a PSPO. After 3 years all DPPOs will become PSPOs.

10. The new Orders are more flexible and can be applied to a much broader range of issues, with local authorities having the ability to design and implement their own prohibitions or requirements where certain conditions are met. These conditions centre on the impact on the quality of life in the locality, persistence, and whether the impact makes the behaviour unreasonable.

11. Whilst a DPPO is focussed solely on alcohol related anti-social behaviour, the PSPO provides the opportunity to tackle other types of anti-social behaviour which also cause concern within the town centre and the immediate surrounding areas.

Sustainable Community Strategy/Council Priorities - Implications

12. The Implementation of a PSPO will contribute towards the Council’s priority ‘People’ in terms of working and engaging with local communities by reducing and dealing effectively with anti-social behaviour. It will also contribute to the ‘Place’ priority through making the district a place people want to live, work and visit by controlling and preventing low level crime and anti-social behaviour.

Background and Issues

13. Wycombe District Council implemented a Designated Public Places Order, in conjunction with Thames Valley Police, covering High Wycombe town centre in 2002 (which was then reviewed in 2010, and the covering area expanded). The DPPO allows a constable, where he believes that consumption of alcohol within the area will lead to anti-social behaviour being committed by an individual, to request the forfeiture of any alcohol in the individual’s possession. Failure to comply with the request is an offence. This has been considered as quite ambiguous in terms of its application and can lead to broad interpretation and, at times, limits the impact of the Order.

14. In October 2014 the power to make DPPOs was repealed by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. Section 59 of the Act provides local authorities with powers to make PSPOs. These Orders are intended to address activities carried out in public spaces which have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality.

Public Spaces Protection Orders

15. The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act came into force in October 2014. Chapter 2 of the Act contains provisions for Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO).

16. Local authorities have the power to implement a PSPO if satisfied on reasonable grounds that two conditions have been met. The first condition is that:

a) activities carried out in a public place within the authority’s area have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality, or

b) it is likely that activities will be carried out in a public place within that area and that they will have such an effect.

17. The second condition is that the effect, or likely effect, of the activities:

a) is, or is likely to be, of a persistent or continuing natureb) is, or is likely to be, such as to make the activities unreasonable, andc) justifies the restriction imposed by the notice.

18. A PSPO is an Order that identifies the space to which it applies (“the restricted area” within which the impact has or is likely to have occurred) and can make requirements, or prohibitions, or both within the area. This means that the local authority can, by virtue of the Order, require people to do specific things in a particular area or not to do specific things in a particular area. The local authority can enforce the prohibitions/requirements where it believes that they are reasonable in order to prevent or reduce the detrimental impact. The Order can be made so as to apply at all times, or within specified times and equally to

all circumstances, or special circumstances. The Order can apply for a maximum of three years, after which the process of reviews and consultation must be repeated to ensure the issues are still occurring and the Order is having the required effect. Thereafter, following appropriate review and consultation, the Order can be extended for further periods of three years.

19. Failure to comply with either a prohibition, or requirement, within an Order is an offence. Upon summary conviction (offences heard within the Magistrates Courts) defendants can face a fine not exceeding level three on the standard scale (currently £1000). The defendant cannot be found guilty of an offence under a prohibition/requirement where the local authority did not have the power to include it in the Order. Breaches of the Order can also be discharged by way of a fixed penalty notice (FPN).

20. The Act is not overly descriptive about the necessary process required for the application of these powers. It has therefore been necessary to design a process that is considered to be appropriate and suitably robust.

The Proposal

21. The recommendation is to seek two Public Space Protection Orders, in line with the discussion at November’s High Wycombe Town Committee.

The first order would replicate the current DPPO. It would provide that:

Person(s) within the area defined within the attached map (Appendix A) will not:

Consume alcohol or have an open container of alcohol in their possession, and be acting in an anti-social manner.

22. The focus of the current DPPO was solely alcohol related anti-social behaviour, and this continues to be an issue within the specified area. There is an ongoing problem with regular street drinkers who congregate in various locations within the town centre. The police also deal with problem drinkers on Friday and Saturday nights within the town centre. The justification for this area is based on that of the current Designated Public Place Order in terms of High Wycombe town centre, and adjacent surrounding area. It is clear that the prevalence of these issues remain within this area.

The second order would apply to Desborough Road, the exact area to be agreed in consultation with residents and traders in the area, and would include the same alcohol restriction as well as a restriction on prostitution. It would provide that:

Person(s) within the area outlined defined by the attached map (Appendix B) will not:Engage in prostitution related activities

23. Having obtained crime and incident statistical data from Thames Valley Police Headquarters, between January and December 2015 there was only one incident where ‘an ongoing issue with prostitution’ was mentioned. One other incident mentioned ‘hangs around with local prostitutes’. When asked whether

any of the sexual offences or public order crime related to prostitution, the analysts have confirmed that none were in relation to prostitution.

24. However, this area was proposed for a possible PSPO at the November High Wycombe Town Committee meeting where a number of Councillors provided anecdotal evidence that prostitution related activities were a problem in this area.

25. The proposed area has been identified through discussions with the Anti-Social Behaviour Team, and the Neighbourhood Police Officers. However, this may be revised following the consultation. In addition, the area defined for this PSPO is currently contained within the wider area for the first PSPO, therefore the prohibitions from both PSPOs apply here.

26. The prohibitions for both PSPOs will apply 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The proposed PSPOs will run for three years, but will be monitored during that time, with a review undertaken after 6 months and 1 year

Consultation

27. Following Cabinet approval, a formal consultation will be launched and run for 3 months. As above, the Act is not specific about what constitutes an appropriate consultation; however it is clear that it requires the local authority to consult with the following:

Chief Officer of Police for the local areaPolice and Crime Commissioner Land owners in the areaAny community representatives the local authority considers appropriate.

28. Consultation letters will be sent to all of the above, along with a significant array of partnership agencies (providing treatment, support, enforcement and representing business interests).

29. The Act requires that landowners within the area are consulted, the method of which can differ. In this case, due to the number of properties within the proposed area, making direct individual contact would not be viable. Therefore an online survey will be created to consult with the wider public, and a press release will be issued to the media to raise awareness of the survey.

30. A subsequent paper will be taken to LSB/Cabinet detailing the consultation findings, and whether any changes are required to the proposed PSPOs.

Implementation

31. To implement these Orders legally would require a public notice to be published.

32. This would be by a formal notice in the local newspaper, notification on our website and press releases through media outlets.

33. Although not necessarily a statutory requirement, signage would normally be required in the area explaining the order in plain English and what it means in practical terms. This is to provide support for the enforcement agencies and prevent risks of mitigation pleas from those found to be in breach. Such signage would be small and concise, and will be on all major entrance-ways to the town centre.

Enforcement34. In relation to enforcement of these orders there are two fundamental

differences to that of our abilities under the Designated Public Place Orders, these are that:

Police Community Support Officers can enforceCouncil Officers can enforce

35. It has been accepted by both Council Officers and Thames Valley Police that, whilst the Local Authority may have the legal ability to enforce, it does not have the skills or the resources to do on-street enforcement of this nature. Thames Valley Police have therefore agreed to undertake the majority of enforcement, should these Orders be made, with additional support from Environment Service and Community Safety Officers if required, including back office support.

36. However, it is important to note that even if the PSPOs are in place, if the prohibitions are breached and this is not witnessed by a delegated officer, legal action cannot be taken. Therefore if the Neighbourhood Officers are engaged in other duties, this will impact on the ability to enforce the prohibitions within the specified area.

Risk Implications37. Options Explored

Do nothing – The current Designated Public Place Order could be left unchanged for a further period of three years and then, as per the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, this would become a PSPO. This option will not provide the additional PSPO for the Desborough Road area.

Replace the DPPO with an alcohol related PSPO. Following the November High Wycombe Town Committee meeting, this option would not enable the problems to be addressed that have been identified in the Desborough Road area.

Key risks associated with the preferred approach38. If the required process to introduce a PSPO is not strictly followed, this could

lead to a challenge which would mean that the authority could face legal costs and reputational damage.

39. There is also a risk that expectations will be raised by this order which agencies cannot meet. The Order may also not resolve the issues, so there will be ongoing monitoring of the prohibited issues.

40. Implementation of this order could lead to displacement to the areas outside of the PSPO area, and this will also be monitored.

41. There is still negative national press coverage in relation to the implementation of PSPOs by local authorities, with a recent press article referring to PSPOs as the ‘busybody’s charter’. Whilst the prohibitions that have been included in the proposed PSPOs relate to crime and anti-social behaviour, there is still a chance that this could result in negative feedback about Wycombe District Council.

Next Steps42. If Members agree in principle to proceed with the implementation of two

PSPOs, including the proposed prohibitions and requirements, the above mentioned consultation process will be carried out and a further report submitted to Cabinet prior to implementation.

Background papersAnti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014Statutory GuidanceFixed Penalty Notice report to Cabinet 2015

Appendix A

Appendix B