Policing of Beaches and Parks - Ministerial Response - 21 September 2011

Findings

Comments

1

The Sub-Panel believes that the  Policing  of  Beaches (Jersey)  Regulations  1959 and  the  Policing  of  Parks (Jersey)  Regulations  2005 are  sufficient  and  do  not require amendment.

Agree (Home Affairs)

Agree (Economic Development)

2

The  Sub-Panel  found  that littering  (including  dog fouling),  did  not  currently qualify as a policing priority and it believes this should be given greater priority by the Police and Parishes.

It  is  not  a  policing  priority  and  the  States  of Jersey Police do not have the resources to allocate officers  to  deal  with  this  as  an  isolated  issue. Since 2004 the States of Jersey Police have only received  4 calls  from  the  public  in  relation  to littering. However, every day, officers from the States of Jersey Police challenge and deal with those people who drop litter by way of words of advice and ensuring that the litter is picked up and disposed of properly. This is good commonsense policing as it enables the officer to not only deal with the littering issue, but also to engage with those involved. The States of Jersey Police have a weekly meeting of the Tasking and Co-ordination Group who prioritise resources. If, for example, there were lots of calls dealing with a particular park, they may task officers to police the area. During the weekend evenings, the Jersey Street Pastors play a role in cleaning up broken glass and bottles (Home Affairs).

Agree  that  this  is  a  problem,  but  rather  than policing,  greater  communication  and  facilities might be envisaged (Economic Development).

3

The Review did not provide any compelling evidence to the  Sub-Panel  that  alcohol restrictions in public places would  be  constructive; however,  an  ability  to remove alcohol from adults

Agree (Economic Development)

It  is  agreed  that  alcohol-free  zones  are  not constructive, as they can have the adverse affect of  moving  underage  drinkers  and  dependent adults  from  supervised  areas  to  more  isolated unsupervised areas (beaches, harbours, etc.), thus

Findings

Comments

where necessary could be of great benefit.

increasing the risk to those groups.

The  principle  of  removing  alcohol  from  adults who are behaving inappropriately is supported by the States of Jersey Police, and was part of their submissions  to  the  Licensing  Law  review.  It would  act  as  an  early  deterrent  to  prevent  the escalation  of  potentially  greater  criminal offending  behaviour.  However,  careful consideration  would  need  to  be  taken  when dealing  with  dependent  street  drinkers,  as  it  is possible  that  they  may  suffer  withdrawal complications. Whilst the States of Jersey Police would welcome any new power to deal with anti- social behaviour, any law drafted to enable them to confiscate alcohol would need to be carefully worded in order for it to be of practical benefit, whilst  not  inappropriately  infringing  civil liberties. The States of Jersey Police already have the ability to remove alcohol from someone who is drunk and disorderly or drunk and incapable. (Home Affairs).

4

The  Sub-Panel  found  that the  use  of  fixed  penalties (on-the-spot  fines)  in  other jurisdictions had provided an effective  way  of  dealing with minor offences.

On-the-spot fines and fixed penalty notices are two  different  propositions.  On-the-spot  fines would be an impractical use of Police resources and would tie officers up for a longer period of time on the street at critical times than would be ideal.

The States of Jersey Police feel that there is some potential for minor offences to be dealt with by fixed  penalty  notices.  This  is  in  many  ways similar to the issue of a fixed penalty notice for a car parking infraction. It has the opportunity for the  reported  person  to  appeal  to  the  Honorary Police,  who  could  determine  whether  the  fine should be enforced, reduced or dispensed with.

The issue  of fixed  penalties  was  given  serious consideration  by  the  Home  Affairs  Department when  compiling  the  Criminal Justice  Policy.  It was noted that the UK have developed a system of  administrative  disposal  (by  fixed  penalties) because  of  pressure  on  the  Courts,  difficulties with the collection of fines and the geographical difficulties of appearing in court a long way from one's home. This has the benefit that the court process can be reserved for those offences that do not  lend  themselves  to  such  administrative disposal. However, Jersey is a small Island, and the benefits of introducing such a system need to be weighed against the benefits of the existing

Findings

Comments

system. The geographic difficulties in getting to court do not apply, and the court does not suffer from delays caused by an unmanageable number of minor offences. Jersey is very fortunate to have an honorary system which filters out most minor offending  and  enables  people  to  be  dealt  with outside the court system.

There could be merit in taking the fixed penalty notice  system  forward  in  tandem  with  the Honorary Police (Home Affairs).

5

Littering  is  given  lower social  priority  than  crimes such  as  vandalism  or  theft and is therefore given lower policing  priority.  However, evidence  also  highlighted that  there  are  still  a significant  number  of  the public  who  object  to  this anti-social  behaviour  and want something to be done about it.

Agree (Economic Development).

This is, in essence, correct. In the States of Jersey Police  Policing  Plan  for  2011,  vandalism,  for instance, would be dealt with under the priority area of protection and reassurance of our local community.  That  priority  targets  anti-social behaviour, which takes many forms. One of these is littering; however, as stated at 2, the States of Jersey Police very seldom receive complaints or reports of such activity. The closest is reports of fly-tipping,  where  a  significant  amount  of domestic rubbish has been left at a particular spot. Clearly those matters are investigated, and where an offender is traced they would be reported in the normal manner. However, dealing with litter in general is not something that the police are often  called  upon  to  do.  As  detailed  at  2, however,  where  they  are  confronted  with  that specific offence, then officers will deal with it by way  of  discretion.  Quite  often  the  offender  is made  to  pick  up  the  rubbish  that  they  have deposited, place it into a bin and/or backtrack on their route in order to pick up and/or clean up any mess made. It would be correct to say that the offence of littering is not one which is routinely targeted  by  police  officers,  given  the  lack  of public  reporting  of  this  particular  crime,  and therefore it continues to be an offence which is dealt with at the time, only if and when officers come  across  such  offending  behaviour  (Home Affairs).

6

The standard of cleanliness on  the  Island  is  generally good, but there are specific hotspots of littering and anti- social behaviour such as, in urban areas, often at night; specifically  Fridays  and Saturdays  and  during  the

Agree (Economic Development).

Without  doubt  there  is  an  increase  in  public presence on the streets in St. Helier on Friday and Saturday evenings as there is during a summer's day on the beaches. Police officers who are on duty on Friday and Saturday nights have other significant  priorities:  dealing  with  violent

Findings

Comments

summer  on  the  beaches. These are areas that the Sub- Panel believes should not be ignored  and  require  further attention  from  the responsible Authorities.

offenders and/or maintaining the public peace as part of their response to the night-time economy and the plethora of offending behaviour that is apparent.  Whilst  littering  undoubtedly  occurs during such hours, it is not a priority, given the potential nature for far more significantly serious crimes to occur. Much of the littering that takes place on a Friday and Saturday night is as a result of the ability of the public to access places of refreshment and takeaway food, and subsequently drop  the  litter  that  that  food  is  contained  in without any other thought. It might be possible that such littering could be mitigated through the appropriate use of signage on premises and by making  it  a  requirement  for  owners  of  such establishments to be responsible for cleaning up the area within a certain distance of their premises after closing time (Home Affairs).

7

The  Sub-Panel  is  pleased that  the  Authorities responsible are successfully targeting  their  cleaning resources  to  manage  the different demands during the week  and  the  year. However,  the  Sub-Panel questions  whether  greater focus  on  enforcement  and education could cut cleaning costs and consequently costs for the ratepayer/taxpayer.

Agree (Economic Development).

8

The  Sub-Panel  found  that dog  fouling  was  a  key concern for both members of the  public  and  States Departments  questioned during  this  Review.  It believes  that,  due  to  the health risks of coming into contact with dog faeces, this must  be  given  greater policing priority.

Agree (Economic Development).

The issue of dog fouling is not one that is brought to  the  attention  of  the  States  of  Jersey  Police often, or indeed at all. It is unclear how a health risk becomes a policing priority when policing is intended  to  deal  with  criminal  behaviour  and public disorder in general. The question of health issues  is  clearly  a  matter  for  other  States departments, and in terms of environmental health it may be that it is more appropriately targeted or directed at such agencies. This is not a policing priority  for  the  States  of  Jersey  Police.  With limited  resources,  the  Police  do  not  have  the capacity to deal with all of the issues that are apparent,  and  other  agencies  or  States departments  must  take  responsibility  for enforcement  action  where  it  falls  within  their remit. That said, officers of the States of Jersey

Findings

Comments

Police  would  not  ignore  someone  who  allows their dog to foul and does not clean up after it (Home Affairs).

9

The  Sub-Panel  was impressed  with  Eco-Active program being developed in schools  and  organisations. However, it believes there is further work to be done to engage with the wider public as  a  whole  in  order  to develop  a  community focussed approach.

Agree (Economic Development).

The  Minister  is  supportive  of  the  eco-active programme,  which  is  supported  by  his Department (Home Affairs).

10

The Sub-Panel places great importance  on  working towards a cleaner Island, but is  conscious  that  this  does not necessarily mean it is an environmentally-friendly Island.  Much  of  the  waste collected  from  public  bins goes straight to the Energy- from-Waste  Plant  to  be burned,  rather  than  being recycled.

11

While  education  about  the adverse effects of anti-social behaviour is important, it is not  enough  on  its  own. Specific  community initiatives  and  continued enforcement of legislation, a multi-pronged  approach,  is key.  If  people  were  more conscious  of  their environment and felt greater ownership  of  their community,  they  would  be less likely to litter.

Agree (Economic Development).

One  of  the  policing  priorities  of  the  States  of Jersey Police for 2011 is to Protect and Reassure local  communities'.  Within  this  priority  is  a commitment to address anti-social behaviour. The States of Jersey Police currently spend significant amounts  of time,  energy  and  resources  dealing with anti-social behaviour, and they also spend considerable time with their partners looking at, analysing  and  determining  ways  of  preventing and  dealing  with  anti-social  behaviour.  The Department  currently  adopts  a  multi-agency approach to anti-social behaviour through the co- ordinated  work  of  the  Anti-Social  Behaviour Working  Group  established  as  a  response  to Priority 7  of  the  States  Strategic  Plan  (Home Affairs).

12

The  Sub-Panel  recognises the  importance  of  Youth Service  initiatives  with regard  to  reducing, preventing  and  responding

Agree (Economic Development).

Agreed. The Minister is supportive of initiatives that involve the young people of the Island which may,  as  a  result,  reduce  or  prevent  anti-social behaviour.  The  Minister  is  also  supportive  of

Findings

Comments

to anti-social behaviour.

outside initiatives that have the same effect, such as the Prince's Trust (Home Affairs).

13

Unlike  Jersey,  both Singapore and Falkirk have monitoring  methods  in place, specific to anti-social behaviour  (including littering), to assess to what extent it is a problem. Both jurisdictions  recognise  the need  for  a  zero-tolerance approach  to  enforcement, and  how  this  needs  to  be part  of  a  multi-faceted approach to be successful.

In Falkirk it is their environmental enforcement officers  who  regularly  patrol  known  hotspot areas. It is they who deal with such matters by way of fixed penalty notice, rather than this being an enforcement action for the police. That appears to be a pragmatic approach; however, the size and scale of the resources available to Falkirk Council are unknown, and whilst it would be desirable to have such a capability, in terms of the current economic position, it may not be achievable at present (Home Affairs).

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

1

The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Home Affairs  works  with  the Police  and  Parishes  to enforce  the  existing Regulations addressing anti- social  behaviour  and littering  as  a  priority, ensuring consistency across the Parishes.

HA/ Comité des Conn.

Reject (Home Affairs)

The police do not consider littering to be  a  priority,  based  on  the  evidence contained  within  the  Jersey  Annual Social  surveys;  and  their  own experience from the level of calls made to them, and the level of littering that is seen  by  officers  when  out  on  patrol. Where confronted with an offence of littering, the police already take action appropriately in the circumstances, and do so in consideration of the need to have  a  proportionate  and  realistic response  to  such  matters  (Home Affairs).

2

The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Home Affairs  extends  the legislation  enabling  police officers  to  seize  alcohol from  underage  drinkers  to enable  the  seizure  of alcohol from adults as well.

HA

Accept

(Home Affairs)

The principle of removing alcohol from adults  who  are  behaving inappropriately  is  supported  by  the States of Jersey Police, and was part of their submissions to the Licensing Law review.  It  would  act  as  an  early deterrent  to  prevent  the  escalation  of potentially  greater  criminal  offending behaviour (Home Affairs).

2013

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

3

The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Home Affairs  considers  using fixed penalties for littering (including dog fouling).

HA

Accept (Home Affairs)

There could be merit in taking the fixed penalty  notice  system  forward  in tandem  with  the  Honorary  Police (Home Affairs).

2013

4

The  Sub-Panel  further recommends  that  a  fixed penalty scheme for littering should  only  be  introduced after  a  period  (suggested one  month)  of  media awareness  and  public warning  of  the  change  in enforcement.

HA

Accept (Home Affairs)

5

The  Sub-Panel  also recommends  that  Parish Hall s  must  adopt  a consistent  approach  to  the fixed  penalty  scheme,  and further that an allocation of the  proceeds  from  fixed penalties is re-invested into ongoing  education  and awareness campaigns.

HA/ Comité des Conn.

Accept (Home Affairs)

6

The Sub-Panel recommends that  the  Minister  for Economic  Development considers  assigning  a proportion of the impôt duty from  cigarettes  and chewing-gum  towards  the clean-up  of  those  items around the Island.

ED

Unable to accept (ED)

As all funds collected from impôt duty go to the Treasury, this is not within the gift  of  the  Minister  for  Economic Development (ED).

7

The Sub-Panel recommends that  the  Minister  for Economic  Development works  with  key stakeholders to consider the viability  of  a  reverse vending scheme.

ED

Accept (ED)

The  Minister  for  Economic Development  believes  that  a  Reverse Vending  Scheme  is  an  interesting option for Jersey, but believes that this should be a part of the successful Eco- Active scheme (ED).

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

8

The Sub-Panel recommends that  the  Minister  for Transport  and  Technical Services  reviews  the allocation of public bins and invites  input  from  dog- owners across the Island as to  the  most  convenient place  to  have  them  to prevent waste being left in public places.

TTS

Accept (TTS)

9

The Sub-Panel recommends that the Minister for Home Affairs  works  with  the Police  and  Parishes  to establish  a  Dog   Ward en role,  as  used  by  other authorities, to act as a point of  contact  for  members  of the public, should they want to report an incident.

HA/ Comité des Conn.

Reject (Home Affairs)

The establishment of a dog warden role in the current economic climate is not a realistic  proposition;  given  the  likely cost  and  the  limited  extent  to  which they would be able to provide coverage across  the  Island,  with  its  many beaches, parks, etc. There are already in  place  many  receptacles  for  the depositing of faeces from dogs and, as given in evidence to the Panel, the vast majority  of  the  public  abide  by  the requirement  to  remove  faeces  from beaches, parks and roads. It is a small minority that fail to do so, and although distressing  and/or  offensive  to  the public  in  general,  the  ability  of  the States  of  Jersey  Police  to  respond  to this  from  a  police  enforcement perspective is not pragmatic or indeed within  the  capability  of  the  police, given  the  extent  of  other  duties, commitments and matters of a higher priority  that  the  police  have  to undertake (Home Affairs).

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

10

The  Sub-Panel recommends  that  the Minister for Transport and Technical  Services, together with the Minister for  Planning  and Environment,  work  pro- actively  together  to promote  awareness  of environmental  issues, building on the Eco-Active programme and targeted at the  general  public  who may  not  currently  be engaged by the Eco-Active programs.

TTS/ P&E

Accept (P&E)

Accept (TTS)

We accept that there are various groups who as yet are not engaged with the ECO-ACTIVE campaign. In particular, this includes groups to whom English is not their first language. In 2012, the ECO-ACTIVE  campaign  will  be extending to additional specific sectors, including  the  agricultural  community. To  engender  behavioural  changes  in farm-workers  in  respect  of  litter,  a specifically  targeted  multi-lingual campaign  is  required  that  will  reach farm-workers  and  attempt  to  reduce littering in the countryside (P&E).

Scope and develop ECO- ACTIVE Farms' campaign Q1/2 2012

Launch campaign Q3 2012 (P&E)

11

The  Sub-Panel recommends  that  the Minister  for  Planning  and Environment, together with the Minister for Transport and  Technical  Services, look  to  installing  multi- compartment bins in public areas to target on the go' recycling.

TTS/ P&E

Accept (P&E)

Accept (TTS)

The  ECO-ACTIVE  Team  already works  closely  with TTS's  Waste and Recycling  Officer.  In  our  ongoing work,  we  will  assist  TTS  in  their scoping and costing of the potential for multi-compartment  recycling  public bins,  and  look  in  particular  to  assist with branding a launch campaign when they are able to facilitate a roll-out of these bins (P&E).

Ongoing (P&E)

Recommendations

To

Accept/ Reject

Comments

Target date of action/ completion

12

At a time where Ministers, with  their  Departments, need  to  identify  savings, the  Sub-Panel  recommend that  funding  for  Youth Service initiatives targeted at reducing, preventing and responding  to  anti-social behaviour is given priority and maintained.

ESC/ CoM.

Agreed (ESC)

The ESC Department, supported by the Youth Service and other organisations, actively  encourage  young  people  to take  part  in  positive  activities  to provide  personal  and  social development  opportunities  which makes a significant contribution to the minimization  of  anti-social  and  risk- taking  behaviour  with  these  young people.

Although  reducing,  preventing  and responding to anti-social behaviour is important, this must not be viewed in isolation,  as  there  are  other  equally deserving  initiatives  involving  young people that should be considered in the same light.

"Harder  to  reach"  young  people  are also  targeted  with  the  aim  of  re- engaging them with a range of services and  opportunities  provided  by  the Department and others.

This work will tend to focus on areas where  young  people  gather,  be  it  in parks, out on the streets, or within the range of building-based youth projects supported  by  the  parishes  and  the Youth Service (ESC).

Ongoing (ESC)