Partnerships
Keeping Section 17 on the Agenda [1/5]
Four years on from the implementation of the Crime and Disorder Act in which Section 17 was made a legal requirement, this briefing provides some recent examples of good mainstreaming practice by local authorities around the country. In particular, it highlights the promising approach taken by the London Borough of Havering.
The implications of Section 17
The 1998 Crime & Disorder Act provided local authorities, the police and a number of other key partners with a new legal framework to reduce crime and disorder. Within this, Section 17 of the Act requires local authorities, police authorities and other agencies to consider crime and disorder reduction and community safety in the exercise of all their duties and activities. Potentially this is a powerful tool, requiring authorities to look at the crime reduction potential of all their policies, budgetary and other decisions and service provision. The recent introduction of a more performance driven regime for Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships, supported by reporting structures introduced in the Police Reform Act 2002, is likely to further highlight the variation in responses to Section 17.
Section 17: Without prejudice to any other obligation imposed upon it, it shall be the duty of each authority... to exercise its various functions with due regard to the likely effect of the exercise of those functions on, and the need to do all that it reasonably can to prevent crime and disorder in its area. |
The positive opportunity of Section 17
Community safety touches the work of most departments and service areas. Through Section 17, officers and elected members have an opportunity to consider how each service area can contribute to reducing crime and disorder, addressing the social, community and physical 'drivers' of crime and so enhancing quality of life for local communities.
Taking this approach will also help achieve 'Best Value' in the delivery of local services. Recognising these links, many local authorities are using their best value review process to help drive continuous improvement in tackling community safety issues.
The legal challenge of Section 17
Local authorities should also be aware of the legal consequences of not considering Section 17 i.e. the risk that individuals or groups who feel that authorities are in breach of their duty may challenge their actions and decisions in the courts.
In the absence of case law, it remains unclear what the courts would consider to be a breach of Section 17. The courts will, however, seek evidence that an authority has done all it reasonably can to prevent crime.
Experience of similar duties suggests that, in making this assessment, they will look for evidence that the authority has a coherent plan for complying with Section 17, and that this is being implemented.
Local planning authorities in particular have started to use Section 17 as a material consideration when determining planning applications. This has occurred for example where there has been concern about the growth of licensed premises in town and city centres, and a corresponding increase in late night alcohol-related disorder. In a number of cases authorities have rejected applications for licensed premises on the grounds this could lead to a further increase in crime and disorder. These decisions have been upheld by Planning Inspectors at appeal.
Approaches to Section 17
The earlier Crime Concern briefing paper, Mainstreaming community safety identified three possible levels at which Section 17 could be implemented.
-
The minimalist approach involves having mechanisms in place to ensure that crime and disorder implications are considered whenever policy and service developments are approved. This might be achieved, for example, by inserting a section on community safety in all reports going to the executive or cabinet for decision.
-
The mid-level approach involves building a commitment to reducing crime and disorder into the routine activities of individual departments and service areas.
-
The corporate approach involves treating crime and disorder reduction as a 'whole organisation' activity and supporting this at corporate level, for example by building a commitment to creating safer communities into corporate plans, objectives, information gathering and review processes. The corporate approach has most potential for delivering safer communities, demonstrating best value, responding to community concerns and joining-up service delivery. The next section describes what this approach has meant in practice in the London Borough of Havering.
>> next section From theory to reality - an effective framework
Last update: 09/07/03