Crime Reduction - Helping to Reduce Crime in Your Area

Best practice Bury

 

Please note that information on this page refers to the 2001-2004 Small Retailers in Deprived Areas scheme. It is presented here for reference purposes only. It is not related to the 2009 Small Retailers' Capital Grant.

 

SRDA Good Practice Summary
Last orders on crime and disorder in Bury town centre - CCTV in licensed premises

The scheme in Bury town centre provided a number of independent pub/night-club licensees with CCTV. This was a pre-emptive response to an increasing Night-Time Economy and possible crime and disorder problems that this might bring as well as a direct follow-on from findings in the local CDRP 2002 audit.

Intelligence

Bury town centre is a typical modern town centre boasting numerous pubs, clubs and restaurants and high street shops. This scheme included ten licensees within the town centre. The centre itself is physically compact, incorporating a tram/bus station, indoor shopping centre and a thriving market. The Redvales ward (incorporating Bury Town centre) scores highly on a number of 'risk-factors' identified as predictors of becoming a victim of violent crime (e.g. a relatively young population, with a large number of one person households and high unemployment).

Bury CDRP's 2002 audit had identified fear of crime in the town centre at night as a concern. Furthermore the audit also highlighted that between April 2000 and March 2001, Bury town centre had the highest number of key crimes within the borough along with the highest number of woundings.

Bury town centre has seen an increase in the number of licensed premises over the past few years, which may increase further under the regulations of the 2003 Licensing Act. The project managers have cautiously welcomed this. They felt that the increase in activity in Bury's night-time economy had not yet led to a great increase in alcohol-related crime and disorder, but that it might possibly do so.

The rationale behind the scheme therefore was to pre-empt any possible crime and disorder increases and to try and reduce the fear of crime. It was also felt that young people would benefit from the scheme, as the main users of the town centre at night.

The scheme complemented a number of pre-existing schemes. For instance Bury had recently implemented an alcohol ban on drinking in the streets and by installing CCTV in premises, membership of a local 'Safe and Sound' scheme was increased.

Interventions

Typically three or four cameras were installed in each of the ten premises involved. Placement of cameras was dependent on the layout of each location, but it was non-negotiable that cameras would be placed at the entrance of each premises (so that all people entering and leaving premises would be captured on CCTV) and also covering the area where cash was stored. A survey of each of the premises involved took place where lighting and obstructions were considered to ensure that cameras were placed at the most effective points.

Premises were not identified through any detailed analysis of problem-spots and as such the targeting of the scheme was a little unfocussed. This slightly unstructured approach was highlighted by one licensee saying that they felt their pub would not attract trouble anyway. One project manager did note however that, as Bury is a relatively small town centre, the scheme provided the opportunity to get as many licensees involved as possible and thus raise the standard of licensed premises in the town (via the 'Safe and Sound' scheme (see later)). Additionally the project manager's own experience of the town centre gave him an insight into which premises may have the most potential for trouble.

The main anticipated outcomes of installing the CCTV were:

• Increased customer and staff safety as offenders would hopefully not commit crimes in CCTV covered premises if they think that there is a chance of them being caught committing an offence on camera and then prosecuted as a result. Detection of offences, and prosecution of offenders, can be made easier as CCTV can provide solid, visual evidence to replace verbal accounts of incidents.

• Problems could be resolved/diffused, with troublemakers backing down, or leaving premises, after an indication of the CCTV system making troublemakers aware that their actions are being filmed.

• Fear of crime is reduced as public perceptions of the town centre are changed to view it as a place to be enjoyed as opposed to somewhere to beware of, because of CCTV's reassurance ability.

• Local business viability is improved as town centre usage increases. Positive publicity of the effectiveness of CCTV in reducing the levels of disorder received by the public will support and promote an upbeat image of the town centre.

The project managers felt that proving to the public that local agencies were concerned for their well-being was paramount. The theory was that if this message is conveyed the public successfully, then local businesses profitability and viability will improve as the community is encouraged to make the most of their town centre.

In achieving these outcomes, the following factors were likely to be important to the effectiveness of the intervention:

1. CCTV cameras are placed in the right positions and free of obstructions etc.
2. Systems and tapes are updated, maintained, cleaned and stored effectively and data protection issues explained
3. The public, pub/nightclub staff and offenders are made aware of the rationale behind (and success of) the scheme
4. There is public and licensee support
5. The system complemented existing initiatives
6. Effective working protocols and practices are in place between partners.

A key issue around the project was that it complemented the pre-existing initiatives in the town centre. These are outlined in below.

Existing initiatives in Bury town centre General town centre CCTV coverage Extensive town centre coverage with a control room based in local shopping centre, staffed 24 hours a day. 'NightNet' radio link system Bars, clubs and pubs in the town centre have an open-channel radio link to each other. The police can also tune into this. Feedback from licensees was very positive about this. 'Safe and Sound' scheme Premises can apply for accredited 'Safe & Sound' status whereby they must have a number of practices in place, including knowledge of licensing laws, scene preservation training, registered and trained doorstaff and a 'victim room' amongst others. Street alcohol ban Implemented in the second half of 2003, offenders face a £500 fine. Notices are posted on lampposts and in windows.

Using the CCTV in conjunction with the 'NightNet' system seemed to be particularly useful. Interviews with licensees suggested that on more than one occasion, CCTV systems had been used to identify offenders and then descriptions had been passed on to other pubs via the 'NightNet' radio-link. In one pub, baseball caps were no longer allowed so that CCTV could identify people more accurately. In another the CCTV equipment had helped to catch a member of staff who had been stealing money from the till.

Both the 'NightNet' and 'Safe and Sound' schemes are in line with the Government's Alcohol Action Plan. The 'Safe and Sound' scheme is designed to raise the standard of licensed premises in Bury and the implementation of the CCTV scheme studied here allowed this community of licensed premises to be expanded. All of the initiatives that have been implemented in Bury have been advertised so that both the public and (potential) offenders have hopefully been made aware of the schemes. Radio and press advertising as well as stickers in the windows of premises advertising the radio-link system and signs in the street signalling the alcohol ban were all used.

Implementation and involvement

The project in Bury involved three partners; police, local authority and licensees. Although no formal working arrangement was put in place between these three there were arrangements already in place, which were suitable for this project to 'piggy-back' onto.

Two project managers ran the scheme in Bury. The financial side of the project remained in the hands of the local authority whilst the 'on the ground' work was done by the police representative. As long as areas of work are clearly defined, then having two managers might be a benefit as there is possibly less scope for confusion over roles.

Town centre licensees were advised that the money was available, as otherwise they would not have known about the scheme, and expressions of interest were invited in the first part of 2002. It may however have been more prudent to identify specific premises with a problem rather than this wide-ranging approach. Additionally some licensees could not afford the initial outlay that was required to install the CCTV and so work on the project was delayed for some licensees. There may be some value in creating a loan scheme for licensees in this situation.

Surveys were undertaken by police representatives in the licensed premises and advice given on where the cameras should be placed. Only after this was done did installation of the equipment begin. Installations were carried out by independent businesses. Licensees were allowed to choose their own companies to carry out the installations, but quotes had to be received from at least two separate companies so that the police representative could ensure the work was done to a suitable and agreed standard.

After the systems had been installed in premises, licensees were expected to manage and maintain the equipment themselves, although help was always at hand. The police representative was quite clear that if the licensees needed any help or advice that they should not hesitate to contact the project managers who would help as much as possible. In one case however a licensee was unsure of who to contact about a problem with the CCTV. Clearly lines of communication need to be maintained and transparent.

Outcomes and Sustainability

Actual outcomes are difficult to measure in Bury for a number of reasons, including the unfeasibility of conducting a customer survey to measure the main aim of the scheme, the fear of crime, and differences in the licensee questionnaire samples.

There were indicators of success though. According to those interviewed, there was no great sense of the staff, at the premises concerned, being worried or concerned about becoming a victim of crime in different circumstances. Police recorded crimes and incidents revealed decreases in 'Criminal damage', 'Robbery' and 'Theft', although increases were seen in 'Disturbances in licensed premises' and 'Minor woundings'. This might be due to the effect of CCTV capturing previously unrecorded incidents though. The reaction of interviewed licensees in Bury town centre to the scheme was generally positive and should be taken as an indicator of support and success.

Alternative, beneficial impacts of the Bury SRDA scheme were two-fold. Firstly premises got the benefits that the CCTV itself brings, and secondly, premises were also then eligible for the accredited status via the 'Safe & Sound' scheme, which should help to raise the standard of premises and may also help to improve public perceptions of the town centre.

Project staff felt that the sustainability of the project would not be a problem. One project manager though that setting the systems up was the difficult bit but keeping them running, storing tapes and maintaining the systems should be a relatively straight forward job, making sure that sustainability is ensured. The fact that there is regular contact between the licensees and the police anyway also lends itself to sustainability. In terms of replicability of the initiative, and of the general approach in Bury, project staff thought that some elements could certainly be replicated (e.g. first-aid trained staff), but that for some elements (e.g. radio-link) this depended on the local environment. It might not work for example if a town centre comprised of only a couple of pubs.

Key Issues and Good Practice Introducing CCTV in order to combat the fear of crime was a piece of evidence-led policy, stemming from a finding in the local CDRP Audit of 2002. The scheme was pro-active in that it was an attempt to pre-empt any sudden increases in disorder in the town centre as a result of an increased night-time economy even though evidence of sudden increases had not been apparent. The scheme was 'taken out' to the licensees in order to encourage participation. If this had not been done then licensees may not have known about the project, or found out about the scheme only when it was too late to get involved. By telling licensees what was on offer, the project managers were able to 'drum up business'. However as no analysis of the problem was carried out, targeting of the scheme was a little unfocussed. Those wanting to replicate the scheme may want to conduct a detailed problem analysis before informing those premises identified about the help on offer, although prior knowledge of the town centre and licensed premises can assist in this also. Additionally licensees sometimes had to save money before they could get involved in the scheme. This had the effect of prolonging implementation. It may be an idea to consider some kind of 'loan-system', whereby the local authority can foot the bill for licensees who can then pay the local authority back. This may be particularly apt in situations where quick installation is needed for some reason. 'Surveys' of each premises were undertaken in order to ensure cameras were placed in the optimum positions and not obstructed in any way. By insisting that some cameras were placed at certain points in the premises, the equipment was able to capture every person who came in and out of the premises, which would aid in detection of offences. Licensees were allowed to choose their own contractors to carry out the work, as long as quotes were received from two different companies, in order to ensure the work was of a suitable standard. The scheme involved three partners (local authority, police and licensees). Existing mechanisms for working were 'piggy-backed' onto in order to implement this particular project. This approach avoids the problems of establishing new forums is and is an efficient use of resources. The scheme in Bury was designed specifically to complement existing town centre initiatives. Research shows that CCTV is likely to be more effective when used in this way as it may convince offenders that a serious effort is being made to prevent them offending. The use of CCTV to provide descriptions of offenders that can be passed onto other licensees via a radio-link is evidence of this. The scheme in Bury was supported by two project managers, each with clearly defined roles. This had the benefit of ensuring efforts were focussed and energy not wasted in duplication of effort. Although a dual approach runs the risk of confusion and duplication, as long as lines of responsibility are clearly drawn then a dual approach can enable minds to stay focused on particular jobs. Licensees were left to manage the equipment themselves, indicating a level of trust between the partners. Help was available if required, although this may not have been communicated fully with licensees who joined the scheme after the initial 'batch'. Effective channels of communication should be established with new-comers onto the scheme to ensure that they are aware of procedures, contacts etc.

Contacts

For further information about this project please contact either:

• Chris Haslam (Christopher.Haslam@gmp.police.uk)

Author: Alex Culshaw, RDS Home Office Research Team, Government Office North West June 2004.

Last update: Wednesday, August 26, 2009