Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Leelu Ahmed and from Councillor Maium Talukdar, Cabinet Member for Education and Lifelong Learning.

Members are reminded to consider the categories of interest, identified in the Code of Conduct for Members to determine: whether they have an interest in any agenda item and any action they should take. For further details, see the attached note from the Monitoring Officer.

Members are also reminded to declare the nature of the interest at the earliest opportunity and the agenda item it relates to. Please note that ultimately it is the Members’ responsibility to identify any interests and also update their register of interest form as required by the Code.

If in doubt as to the nature of an interest, you are advised to seek advice prior the meeting by contacting the Monitoring Officer or Democratic Services.

Councillor Abdul Wahid declared that he worked for the Youth Service many years ago but was no longer involved in youth work. 

To confirm as a correct record of the proceedings the unrestricted minutes of the meeting of the held on 12^th July 2022.

The minutes of the previous meeting of 12th July 2022 were agreed and approved to be an accurate record of the meeting and were approved by the Sub-Committee.

To review the performance of the youth justice service, focusing specifically on drugs, grooming of young people, and county lines.

Mr James Thomas, Corporate Director for Children and Culture introduced the presentation stating that Children who become involved in anti-social behaviour and criminal activities are one of the Council’s most significant statutory responsibilities. He said the arrangement for the Youth Justice Service were set down in strict legislation and statutory guidance, with a multi-disciplinary service, involving the police and other stakeholders, contributing to its effectiveness.

Mr Thomas then handed over to Ms Susannah Beasley-Murray, Director of Supporting Families, who provided an overview of the Youth Justice Service. Ms Beasley-Murray was supported by Ms Kelly Duggan, Head of Youth Justice Service and Mr Luke Norbury, Deputy Head of Youth Justice Service.

The presentation provided a detailed analysis of the work of the Youth Justice Service, outlining the key performance indicators that the service is measured against as well as data on performance and impacts of interventions.  Ms Duggan stated they were part of the pilot project where youngsters in youth custody would be referred to residential units rather than prison. She said the accommodation was in Newham and Tower Hamlets was one of six borough’s working together on the accommodation project. She said they were working with 81 children as at September 2022 and the main types of offences related to violence against the person at 50%, with burglary and Fraud & forgery at 11%. Ms Duggan said drug related offences were statistically low at 6%, but the borough did have a problem with drug dealing and grooming of children. She said this was more within the borough and across London rather than cross county lines.

Ms Duggan said 277 children were at risk of harm, with 47 being identified as being at high risk and harm. Ms Duggan outlined what the Service was doing to tackle exploitation and how they work with other agencies, via multi-disciplinary teams to develop intelligence and provide intensive support to children on a one-to-one basis. Mr Norbury added they had used feedback from Youth Justice Children to understand what intervention worked best and were working in partnership to offer a holistic and targeted service to young people to prevent offending and at-risk behaviour.

In response to comments and questions from members the following was noted:

• The resettlement unit based in Newham was a six-bed facility with funding for three years. The Youth Justice Board were the main funders although each borough is also expected to make a small contribution towards it. Beds as part of the pilot cost approximately £140 per night compared with £350 per night for a bed at a custody facility.
• Safeguarding children from county lines was a vital part of the work the Youth Justice Service undertakes. Education is key for this. The child exploitation team works with those who are at low to high risk on a one-to-one basis. The data and intelligence collated via the multi-agency approach ensures that the team is aware of the emerging themes and is constantly questioning how it can disrupt the flow of drugs and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.1

Inspection of youth offending services in Tower Hamlets - To understand the findings from the inspection report and review the plans for improvement.

Mr James Thomas, Corporate Director for Children and Culture introduced this presentation stating the outcome of the inspection published in July 2022 was disappointing. He said it reflected services were not good enough at the point of inspection. Mr Thomas said a new leadership team had taken over with himself leading the Justice Service Management Board and new appointments of Ms Beasley-Murray as the Director of Supporting Families and Ms Kelly Duggan as Head of the Youth Justice Service.

Mr Thomas handed over to Ms Beasley-Murray who talked about the changes made in consideration of the seven recommendations made by the Inspectorate. She said the membership of the Board had been reviewed with an executive and operational board in place. She said this would help to ensure the actions on the improvement plan could being pushed forward and managers at the right level of seniority were actively seeking better outcomes for YJS children.

Ms Beasley-Murray continued stated they had made changes to policy and procedures to ensure all data and management information was accurate and reliable, which helped with informed decision-making. She said they had reviewed the out-of-court provision and had improved the quality of assessment of at-risk children.

Ms Kelly Duggan stated the statutory one-year Youth Justice Plan had been devised and submitted to the Youth Justice Board along with the comprehensive improvement plan outlining how the service was intending to improve its activity over the next two years. She said a YJS disproportionality action plan had also been included as part of the improvement plan.

Ms Duggan stated there were six priority areas for focus and they were working with staff, partners and YJS children to improve governance and leadership. Mr Luke Norbury showed how the service would track its delivery of the improvement plan and how they were learning from best practice, with better trained staff.

In response to comments and questions from members the following was noted:

• Referring to the out-of-court provision, Dr Rice asked what exactly was going on. Ms Duggan responded stating that there were many small things that led to the bigger issue; from the lack of focus and trust within the service to staff relying on Youth Condition Cautions – (the more stringent recourse than triage and Youth cautions – which are voluntary) for decision making.  She said they had re-trained staff and had built their confidence so that better decisions and outcomes can be achieved for children. She said they were changing the method of assessment.
• In respect to how the actions from the improvement plan had been communicated to staff, Mr Luke Norbury stated that they had involved staff from the onset to help devise, engage and own the improvement plan. He said the governance structure had been improved, with visibility of senior managers and daily communication within teams, plus dissemination of information through newsletters and emails. Ms Beasley-Murray added that there was an expectation for improvement, and this was also communicated and discussed through staff appraisals.
• Ms Duggan confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.2

There was no other business to be discussed.

The Chair, Councillor Choudhury referred members to the sub-committee’s work programme for 2022-23 and asked members if they had any comments or questions relating to the work scheduled for the sub-committee to scrutinise.

• No comment or questions were asked in relation to the work programme.

The Sub-Committee RESOLVED to:

1. NOTE and AGREE the work programme for 2022-23.