Archived decisions

COMBINED YOUTH JUSTICE COMMITTEE - SEMINAR

TUESDAY 1 JULY 2003 AT NETLEY POLICE HEADQUARTERS.

PRESENT:

Councillor R.W. Harris - Southampton City Council (Chairman)

Mrs A. Valentine - Hampshire Probation Board (Vice Chairman)

Phil Sutton - Head of the Youth Offending Services

P. Robertson - Chief Executive, Hampshire County Council and Chairman of YOT
Management Board

D. Scott - Chief Officer, National Probation Service (Hampshire) and Chairman
of the Chief Officers' Group

Councillor Mrs E.M.F. Randall - Hampshire County Council

Councillor Mrs P. Peskett - Hampshire County Council

Councillor Mrs V. Moore - Southampton City Council

D. Boyle - Hampshire Probation Board

Mrs M. Bowden JP - Youth Court Chairman

Mrs R. Behan JP - Youth Court Chairman

Mrs D.M. Evans JP - Youth Court Chairman

Chief Inspector Dulson - Hampshire Constabulary

Mrs P. Robinson - Social Services, Portsmouth City Council

J. Doyle - Social Services, Isle of Wight Council

G. Wright - Social Services, Hampshire County Council

Mrs C. Tozer - Social Services, Southampton City Council

I. Langley - Wessex YOT

I. Piper - Primary Care Trust

In advance of the meeting a discussion paper was circulated to members and officers setting out the future role and responsibilities of the Combined Youth Justice Committee. The paper outlined the background to the Committee, the need to consider change, the view of the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales and detailed possible options for the future.

David Scott, Chief Officer, National Probation Service (Hampshire) and Chairman of the Chief Officers' Group, addressed the meeting to explain the Committee's links with the Chief Officers' Group and the Management Board of the Youth Offending Team (YOT). In particular he highlighted a number of changes on the horizon including the Criminal Justice Bill, the Courts Bill and a Correctional Services review.

Peter Robertson, Chief Executive, Hampshire County Council and Chairman of the YOT Management Board also addressed the meeting to explain his role and the Committee's inter-relations with the YOT Management Board. He also explained about the Youth Justice Board's performance measures and the resulting refinements to service provision.

There was a high level agreement amongst those present about future arrangements. The Chairman, Councillor Richard Harris, summed up the view of the meeting as follows:

· There is a continuing need for an inter-agency, cross-authority body to focus specifically on your crime and youth justice. There is strength in the number, experience, knowledge an diversity of members and the Wessex-wide group and it has already been able to influence national and local policy. This needs to be maintained and developed.

· The youth justice forums, which currently operate in the three unitary authority areas, have the potential to provide an important link to the Wessex-wide body. They could each nominate a representative. The three existing forums might consider inviting an elected member to join them. Consideration should be given to the setting up of a Hampshire Youth Justice Forum.

· The involvement of elected members from the Districts Councils would help in spreading the message about the work of the YOT and should be investigated further with Hampshire and Isle of Wight Local Authorities (HIOWLA) with a view to obtaining 2 representatives.

· The Committee, extended as mentioned above, should be more like a "Standing Conference", than a formal committee. It should meet up to 3 times a year. One of the meetings would need to take place in March and would be asked to approve the annual Youth Justice Plan on behalf of the four local authorities.

· The new body should not have a formal quorum, nor any necessity to vote on issues except for the annual appointment of its Chairman and Vice Chairman. There would be equal status for all members and thus all would be entitled to vote in these elections.

· Membership should specifically include local authority members with responsibility for Social Services and Education or scrutiny of these two areas.

· The "Standing Conference" would make no decisions on funding, including the approval for contracting arrangements. These would be dealt with through the decision making processes of the respective local authorities and other statutory partner agencies.