Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

The Mayor referred Members to the process for dealing with petitions as laid down in Appendix 2 and then invited the petitioner, Mr Zach Bromfield to address Council.

Mr Bromfield firstly addressed the issues that were inherent in the petition taking shape. He explained that he had incorrectly assumed that an attack on a teenage girl in Brunswick Street, which had prompted him to start the petition, had taken place on 2^nd May this year but it had actually taken place last year. He then explained that he had chosen to start this petition on Change.org instead of the council’s website because he felt that he would reach more people, including families outside of Cheltenham concerned for relatives or friends living in the community and therefore believed this would improve the petition’s chances of success. He also stated that the information used for this petition was solely from the Gloucestershire Echo. However, he had subsequently received information from the Police that the incidents of crime in these areas differed to what was mentioned in the petition. He provided members with the details of these incidences. Crime had been reduced overall thanks to the actions of Streetwatch and other actions taken by the community to assist crime-prevention. Mr Bromfield said that having consulted with council officers and Streetwatch he recognised that in a time of austerity, prioritisation was inevitable and therefore he intended to focus on Brunswick Street as the main area to have CCTV placed. He felt that it was wrong that residents living in St Paul’s should feel anxious about crime in their area and that he had not intended to give places he had mentioned a bad representation as an unsafe place to be nor damage the University’s reputation.

He explained that he had started this petition because of recent concerns he had developed over the security measures placed in certain areas of Cheltenham. Brunswick Street in particular had, according to fellow students, gained a bad reputation as an unsafe street to walk down at night. He had learned via the Gloucestershire Echo that there were other areas vulnerable to violent crime and in some of their interviews, there were several concerns raised over the choice to implement CCTV in these areas as a way to deter or assist the police in tackling violent crime.

Mr Bromfield believed that CCTV placed in Cheltenham, or at least Brunswick Street, would be a good idea, for several reasons as supported by Streetwatch:

·         CCTV would help deter criminals and also ensure their detection. The Brunswick Street area next to Matalan is considered a desolate spot, lacking overlooking residential windows and therefore a lack of witnesses.

·         CCTV can also be used therefore to disprove alibis criminals will use, for example that they say they went down one alleyway when the footage can show that they went down a different way. 

·         CCTV would make people feel more secure when walking down certain areas of Cheltenham at night.

·         It would be an effective symbol to reduce the fear of crime.

Mr Bromfield referred to research from the Streetwatch Residents Coordinator that even though the St Paul’s Area and Brunswick Street were in fact safe areas, significant fear of crime existed in St Paul’s due to the media portrayal, particularly among the student population. This was reflected in their comments when signing the petition. He acknowledged that the media sensationalised crime in St Pauls. Streetwatch did however agree that CCTV was a good idea. He reported that Police Sgt. Julia Martin-Jones supported any CCTV initiative taken by the council as she believed cameras could be positive in detecting and deterring crime.

Finally Mr Bromfield challenged whether there needed to be a third sexual assault in Brunswick Street or further crimes before steps were taken to improve security in the St Paul’s Area. He hoped that the Council would take into account what had been said in the comments of this petition, why he had initiated it, and asked that it would continue to ensure and take steps to make Cheltenham a safer place to live in.

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety thanked Mr Bromfield for his petition on what was an important issue. He said the borough council took the issue of fighting crime seriously. The council worked closely with the police on CCTV and the level of financial commitment was illustrated in paragraph 3.2 of the report. This was not all focused on St Paul’s but £50k was dedicated to CCTV in the town centre. He reported that the police believed that CCTV was an effective deterrent to crime but did not believe St Paul’s was a special case with crime statistics actually falling in that area. He believed that the “fear of crime” was as much of an impediment as crime itself. The council was currently in negotiations with the police about how CCTV coverage could be taken forward.

The following points were made and then addressed by the Cabinet Member :

·         Local crime statistics provided by the Police did not differentiate between those crimes which had been solved due to CCTV and those solved by other means

·         It was noted that whilst there was CCTV on the Honeybourne Line, coverage could benefit from being extended northwards and potentially a bid could be made to the Local Sustainable Transport Fund as the aim would be to provide a safer walking and cycling route. The Line was often used as an approach and escape route for criminals.

·         Some members believed that the need to protect civil liberties must be balanced with the need to deter criminals and solve crime and this should be taken account of when considering extending CCTV.

·         Members recognised that while the evidence was "ambiguous" on exactly how many crimes have been solved primarily because of CCTV the petition had illustrated the significant public concern. Without doubt CCTV played an enormous part in the detection of crime.

·         Timescale for review-the Cabinet Member reminded Members that as the Police were relocating to Waterwells this was ongoing. He explained that CCTV was currently monitored from Lansdown Road whilst the Borough Council maintained the CCTV cameras

·         S106 monies from the sale of Midwinter allotments may be available to fund capital costs for CCTV

RESOLVED

1.    That the request for additional CCTV in the St Paul’s area be noted

2.    That this request be considered as part of the overall review of current CCTV provision within the Borough.