Examination of Witnesses (Questions 520-539)
12 JANUARY 2005
Mr Simon Boyle, Ms Sue Hall, and Mr Stephen Routledge
Q520 Julie Morgan: So it is not something
that is built into the system in any way, it should be more stable?
Ms Hall: Yes. The only thing which
is built into our constitution is that the chairmanship will rotate.
Q521 Chairman: Can I just come in there.
You did mention, Mr Boyle, that you are different from everyone
else. How did that come about?
Mr Boyle: Chairman, of course
I am not as different from everybody else as all that but when
the Boards were first formed the four main agency heads in Gwent
(the Police, the CPS, the Probation and the Courts) got together
for a shadow meeting and one of the items they discussed was who
should be the chairman. I believe all the other Boards decided
that one of them would, either on a rotating or a permanent basis,
but they took the view that they wanted an independent chairman.
Q522 Chairman: And you were it!
Mr Boyle: Three of the individuals
concerned have since moved from Gwent. Having decided that, they
then asked me if I would be willing to do so and I accepted on
a sort of temporary basis to see how it went. In the meantime,
as in South Wales, we have had a new Chief Constable last year,
we have had a new head of the Court Service and a new head of
the CPS. So I have ended up, to my surprise, being the continuity
man to some extent! That is how it happened anyway.
Chairman: Thank you.
Q523 Julie Morgan: I was going to ask
about increasing public confidence in the Criminal Justice System
and you have already answered a bit about that. How do you measure
public confidence and how reliable are the measures? You have
talked about the panel.
Mr Routledge: Just to go back,
we are measured nationally by the British Crime Survey. We get
results on a quarterly basis. There is only one particular aspect
on which the Boards are judged against, which is the effectiveness
of the Criminal Justice System or at least the perception of the
public of bringing offences to justice. So in terms of national
measurements there is only one particular target. We have not
been given a great steer over and above that of how we measure
public confidence by the centre, although I think recently they
have taken on board the fact that the Boards are saying what is
working in other areas and how can we share that, because it is
very difficult to say that something which is working in one area
would necessarily have an improvement in public confidence if
you introduced it in your area. So over and above that high level
measure, as I say, the panel is a way of tapping into public feelings
and public opinions. We also look to try and at least evaluate
every intervention that we do, so we will undertake evaluation
and questionnaires. For instance, when we introduced the video
which is mentioned in the briefing paper we evaluated that and
as part of a teaching package we will continue to evaluate what
people say about that and the questions which are in the evaluation
form are linked back to the questions within the British Crime
Survey itself. But I think there is scope possibly as well of
moving forward and actually conducting professional research,
perhaps from Cardiff University in our case or one of the other
universities in South Wales, which we have done in the past. With
domestic violence we had a sort of evaluation report done by a
doctor in the university. So I think there is scope as well for
actually getting professionals in and giving us some assistance,
but over and above that the Boards are very much left to sort
of find their way.
Q524 Julie Morgan: Are you sort of implying
there should be more guidance?
Mr Routledge: I think it would
be helpful because, as I say, again it is a very broad subject.
Because you bring more offences to justice does that necessarily
mean increased public confidence? As you know the discrepancy
that everybody is talking about is the fact that whilst recorded
crime has fallen for many years, I think for the last seven years,
and the chances of becoming a victim of crime are less than ever
according to the British Crime Survey people's fear of crime is
actually on the increase and I think really reducing that fear
is a key aim. But again, how do you measure it? So as a Board
we are quite new still and in terms of our measurement of this
particular target we are learning, I think.
Q525 Julie Morgan: From what you have
done so far do you have anything to suggest why there is this
disparity between the public's perception and the actual figures?
Mr Routledge: National research
which was carried out before the confidence target was introduced
showed that a lot of public confidence is determined by the media.
They do have a large role. That does not mean that they totally
determine it, but they do have a large role to play and linked
to that we have engaged a professional media company to help us
with press releases and radio interviews because that is seen
by research as an effective way of improving public confidence.
But also I think research has shown that your contact with the
Criminal Justice System regularly influences your confidence,
so we have got a real sort of focus about improving the way that
we service the public. I think also your contact with family and
friends as well is another key one, somebody who knows someone
who works in the Criminal Justice System. So if we are able to
improve internally the staff's belief in what they are doing,
their confidence and meaning in what they are doing, I think ultimately
that will pay off in terms of what they tell the public and family
and friends, et cetera.
Q526 Julie Morgan: Thank you. The Gwent
Criminal Justice Board has been involved in confidence research
you say on your website?
Mr Boyle: Yes.
Q527 Julie Morgan: Can you tell us any
more about that?
Mr Boyle: Yes. I will keep it
brief and give you the short version. We did a local survey through
a professional agency in March which produced a forty-three page
report and basically it said that most people in Gwent were confident
in the Criminal Justice System in Gwent but the large minority
who were reported not to be very happy about it were disproportionately
those who had brushed with the Criminal Justice System in one
way or another and the ones who were most happy about it were
those who had never had any contact with it. Within the forty-three
pages, as you can imagine, there were numerous points which we
are gradually trying to follow up. Victims and witnesses comes
out all the time. I do not think this point has been brought out
much yet.
Q528 Julie Morgan: That was the next
question actually.
Mr Boyle: It came out in our seminars
that tremendous priority is being given and will increasingly
be given to trying to make things easier for victims and witnesses
because without them no progress can really be made, and public
confidence is very much linked to that as well.
Q529 Julie Morgan: So how do you actually
measure this victim satisfaction?
Mr Boyle: We have not really got
a measure yet.
Mr Routledge: If I might add,
there is a survey called the WAVES survey. I think it stands for
Witness and Victim Experience Satisfaction, which is going to
be undertaken by MORI. I think they have been in contact with
lead people within each of the agencies, particularly the Police,
to identify victims and witnesses who have come into contact with
the system and who are willing to be contacted about their views.
So there is something nationally due to come in, but I do not
think we will see the real results of that for about six months
or so until it is up and running.
Q530 Julie Morgan: The Government is
proposing to have a victims' commissioner, is it not?
Mr Routledge: That is right, yes.
Q531 Julie Morgan: Do you think that
may help?
Mr Routledge: I think so. Certainly
having a victims' commissioner is important. I think the shift
particularly is much more victims focused than it has been in
the past. It is never going to be nice to be a witness in court
but I think the services that we provide need to be much more
coordinated. People need to be given more information about their
case because often in the past victims and witnesses have never
had a central contact point, whereas with witness care units you
will have a single person who manages their case from charge to
sentence. So there is a definite shift in focus towards victim
and witness satisfaction.
Julie Morgan: Thank you.
Q532 Mr Williams: Good afternoon. Perhaps
we could turn to performance management and data. In Gwent we
are told that the traffic light system is used for performance
measurement. Perhaps you could tell us something about that.
Mr Boyle: Certainly. I mentioned
earlier that we had seventy-eight actions on our list this year
and we use the traffic light system. Red means either the action
on it has not started or it is less than 50% achieved. yellow
means it is half achieved but less than 80% and green is 80% or
complete.
Q533 Mr Williams: Is that qualitative
or quantitative?
Mr Boyle: Some are qualitative
and some are quantitative.
Q534 Mr Williams: Also in paragraph 21
you say that the credibility of the data is an issue in Gwent.
Can you perhaps explore that a little bit for us?
Mr Boyle: This is a sore subject
because obviously the measure of offences brought to justice is
our crucial measure and we have been rather dumbfounded by the
fact that the national figures collected up in the centre show
that all the trends are going the wrong way, whereas we were fairly
convinced we were making progress. We have an ongoing investigation
into this. But apart from actually getting it right, there is
a very tangled route for the statistics. They have to go through
numerous different gates where coding errors can be made. That
is what I am referring to there.
Q535 Mr Williams: So is there work in
progress perhaps?
Mr Boyle: Yes, we are still working
on trying to get a robust measure which we can totally rely on.
I think some of the problem has been of our making in Gwent, frankly.
If I say that in Gwent they tend to say I am wrong.
Q536 Mr Williams: Ms Hall said that there
was a problem, perhaps, when you set up your Board in the beginning.
Is there any work which can be done between organisations, perhaps,
on these issues which would prevent the same system having to
be invented again?
Ms Hall: Yes. Certainly we have
been talking over the recent days and I think it might be helpful
for South Wales to talk with Gwent when the Gwent performance
officer is appointed because I think our position is that we are
relatively confident in our data and our data is more up to date
than Gwent's and perhaps our performance officer can explain why
that is so.
Mr Routledge: We did have a bit
of a lag with our offences brought to justice data. It is a complex
process. I think the main problem we had was that Cardiff Magistrates'
Court was submitting manual forms to the Home Office, or at least
the Police were sending manual forms to the Home Office. Obviously
that slowed the process down and meant the data lagged. We had
the assistance from the Home Office, which implemented an assisted
data interchange link, a grand phrase basically for electronic
exchange of the information. So it made it more accurate and speeded
up the process. So from a lag of about seven months, which makes
it extremely difficult to performance manage, as you can imagine,
we eventually brought the data up to date to within two months.
There is still scope for ensuring that local systems for collection
of data are water-tight and that the checks are done on a regular
basis but, as Sue says, we are quite confident that the data in
that area is now very good and I would say that with the other
data that we gather the systems that we have in place are very
strong and we are confident that the data we collect is accurate,
if not to 100%.
Q537 Mr Williams: So the data is strong
when it gives you the message that you would like to hear but
perhaps not so strong when it gives you the message that you do
not want to hear?
Ms Hall: I think it has been because
we recognised at the very beginning, as I mentioned earlier, that
our systems were not terribly robust. We have put a lot of effort
into sorting out our data collection system because if you cannot
actually accurately measure something you do not know how you
are doing and it is difficult then to focus your priorities and
your efforts. So that has been, I think, one of the successes
with the South Wales Board.
Mr Williams: Thank you.
Q538 Mr Edwards: Could I ask you about
anti-social behaviour. In evidence to this Committee the director
of the anti-social behaviour unit at the Home Office talked about
anti-social behaviour prosecutors. We questioned the chair of
the North Wales Criminal Justice Board on this, so could I ask
the same question of you. Do you have dedicated anti-social behaviour
prosecutors in Gwent or South Wales? Has this been a matter which
you have considered?
Mr Boyle: We have not got anybody
with that label in Gwent yet.
Q539 Mr Edwards: Has it been considered?
Mr Boyle: Not to my knowledge,
but we have had a gap in the leadership of the CPS and I think
we will be discussing it.
Ms Hall: Can I start off by saying
that Anti-Social Behaviour Orders are not actually a priority
for the Local Criminal Justice Board. That is not to say we do
not take an interest in it, but we are not tasked with overseeing
the operation of anti-social behaviour. That has been driven very
much through the Community Safety Partnerships and the local authorities.
However, having said that, we do take an interest in what is happening
and we do have a specialist anti-social behaviour prosecutor in
South Wales, and indeed an extremely active specialist prosecutor
who, as we have mentioned in our evidence, has recently convened
an anti-social behaviour legal group to try and ensure that consistent
standards of legal advice are offered across the seven CSPs and
to provide a sort of network for the prosecutors in each of the
seven CSPs to meet, together with the Police solicitor.
| 
