That the report the Strategic Director, Place (Document “I”) outlines the progress made in the last twelve months in the Bradford West Area in delivering the national Prevent strategy against the District Prevent Action Plan.

Recommended –

The Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee acknowledge the progress on work undertaken in implementing the Prevent agenda in Bradford and its approach to supporting vulnerable people.

(Ian Day – 01274 433507)

The Strategic Director, Place, presented a report (Document “I”) which outlined the progress made in the last twelve months in the Bradford West Area in delivering the national Prevent strategy against the District Prevent Action Plan.

The report was presented in response to an agreement made at the Bradford West Roundtable meeting on 2 August 2022 that the Prevent Team would provide feedback on the work of Prevent, and its impact, to Members.

Appended to the report were details of the roles and responsibilities of Prevent in the Bradford District and work undertaken in the Bradford West area in the past year.

Projects including the Bradford Hate Community Alliance (BHCA); Supplementary Schools Against Radicalisation and the Manningham Mills Sports Community Association were reported together with further training provided to ensure staff were aware of the extremism risks in their areas; signs of people needing support; the support available locally and how to be referred to that support.  The additional training had been provided to the following services:

·         Mears Housing

·         Ward Officers

·         Bradford City FC

·         Domestic Violence officers

·         NHS Safeguarding staff

·         Elected Members

·         Local Authority Safeguarding Adults personnel

·         Refugee and Asylum staff

·         Probation officers

·         Cadet training

·         Various children’s homes

The report also detailed that Prevent displays were depicted in libraries across the area and linked with the Council’s ‘Make Sure It Adds Up’ campaign to stress the importance of checking stores and thinking critically before information was shared.

Member were advised that whilst specific statistics were provided to the Home Office on a quarterly basis it was important to also consider the impact of the work conducted.  As progress was shown in things that didn’t happen rather than work conducted feedback was vital to understand how work had affected those involved.  It was reported that comments were gathered after each training session and project.  That information was shared with partners and utilised to inform future plans.

A Member referred to what he felt was ‘disgusting’ treatment of some communities and that despite feedback to the Government with regard to concerns about the Prevent strategy no response had been received.  It was reported that parents felt the strategy was heavy handed and that issues were blown out of proportion and they could not understand why referrals were made. 

In response it was explained that great importance was placed on unpicking issues which were reported.  Discussions were held with teachers, or others reporting issues, to understand the background to any concerns.  It was rare for referrals to be made to the Counter Terrorism Police or for issues to meet their strict criteria for concern.  There may be additional issues contributing to people’s behaviour such as mental health problems.  Assurances were provided that parents were always consulted and involved.

Concern was also expressed by Members about disparaging comments expressed about Muslim communities by the Government’s Independent Reviewer of Prevent.

It was felt that the comments made at the Roundtable discussions in August 2022 had not been addressed in the report and requests that there should be a local independent approach taken to Prevent in Bradford had been ignored.

In response it was explained that consultation had taken place at a local level to discover people’s concerns and their fears about the Prevent Strategy.  It was explained that it had been difficult to engage with residents and the rationale for the roundtable meetings had been to work on issues locally and unpick the concern of residents. 

A Member referred to a visit he had undertaken to a local football tournament where he had spoken to young people.  They were concerned that they were visited at schools and when told about terrorism it was only about Islamic terrorism which was discussed.  There had been no mention of the far right or other extremists which it was felt was more dangerous to local communities.  It was felt that young people were more at risk of racial attacks from far right extremists and that young people should be educated to protect them from real dangers.  

It was further stressed that information presented appeared to suggest that the programme was working well, however, that was not the response which was being heard from local communities.

A Member believed that the perception of the Prevent agenda was anti Muslim and that nothing had been done to negate that image.  He believed communities felt threatened and that people were working against them. In response it was explained that work was undertaken to address all forms of extremism and it was agreed that examples would be provided. 

Those sentiments were echoed by Members who questioned where in the report were details of the groups of people targeted and the proportion of time spent with diverse groups at risk of radicalisation. 

It was agreed that Members needed to be provided with a much more detailed report to include, but not be limited to, the following issues:

·         Which venues and how many venues had been utilised.

·         The gender and ethnicity of the people the Prevent team were targeting and working with.

·         The membership of the Prevent Advisory Group.

·         Statistics which were reported quarterly to the Home Office. 

·         Specific information on what the Prevent Team had undertaken and achieved.

·         Details of the groups most likely to be at risk of radicalisation.

·         Measures undertaken to counter threats from far right extremists.

·         Engagement with far right extremists.

·         Funding and the funding criteria.

·         The work which had been conducted with groups other than ethnic minorities.

·         The precise schools engaged in the Prevent programme.

·         What was not working in the strategy and measures to address those failings.

It was acknowledged that all Members were passionate and knowledgeable about the issues being discussed but they were not reassured that people who needed to be addressed were being reached.   It was cited, as an example, that information shared at school assembly times would not reach those young people who were not in school. It was also highlighted that the report did not include an equality impact statement.  

It agreed that a more detailed report be requested and that when that update report was provided the Prevent Co-ordinator; Education Officer and Engagement officers be invited to attend the meeting.

Resolved –

That the concerns of Members about the lack of detail contained in Document “I” be noted and the Strategic Director, Place, be requested to provide a further report in November 2022 containing more detailed information on the work of the Prevent Team.

Action: Strategic Director, Place