The borough-wide PSPO would make behaviour including public urination, pavement riding and lighting fireworks in restricted spaces illegal, reports Grace Howarth, Local Democracy Reporter

Haringey Council and (inset) the Met Police

The decision to implement a borough-wide PSPO in Haringey will be looked at again after councillors said they wanted it reconsidered.

Haringey Council approved a public spaces protection order (PSPO) in December, making certain behaviours including public urination, riding bikes or scooters on pavements, and lighting fireworks in restricted spaces illegal.

Fines for breaching a PSPO can be a fixed penalty notice of £100, however, if the charge goes to court, can reach up to £1,000.

However, after a lengthy three hour meeting, the council’s overview and scrutiny committee voted on Tuesday (14th) to refer the decision back to cabinet. It follows significant local opposition to the move.

Jon Glackin, the founder of Streets Kitchen, a grassroots organisation that supports those experiencing homelessness, made a deputation and called the orders “a bad thing”. He said he had witnessed the impact of PSPOs in other boroughs including “Hackney and Camden” and described it as “very negative”.

Jon said if the “same ambition” to introduce and implement the PSPO was put into “combatting rough sleeping” the borough would see improvements.

Committee member Lester Buxton asked how frequently Jon came across unverified homeless people and to provide examples of why they were unverified.

Jon said: “In order to be verified you have to be spotted by an outreach worker and my problem is that there aren’t enough outreach workers.”

He said government cuts to funding were responsible but added a “mistrust” of outreach workers and the implementations of PSPOs made it “even harder” to be verified.

While acknowledging the “devastating” impact of anti-social behaviour (ASB) councillor Tammy Hymas, the lead signatory, said: “My contention with the PSPO is not sufficient evidence has been offered to demonstrate that they will reduce the number or severity of ASB incidents in the borough.

“Therefore I think the significant risk of harm that PSPOs are likely to cause to marginalised members of our community cannot be justified.”

She said since being introduced homelessness groups had said they were “regularly” used by local authorities to “explicitly target people experiencing homelessness”.

Committee member Pippa Connor asked what was Cllr Hymas’ response to residents who support the PSPO and who didn’t feel “safe in their own areas and where they live”.

Cllr Hymas said: “I don’t think a £100 fine will be a significant deterrent. Clearly people behaving in that way are operating in an environment with less and less support and I don’t think this is the solution, we need to look harder.”

She advocated exploring policies that offered “more support” and “not persecution” concluding “we’re not safe until we’re all safe.”

The cabinet member for communities Ajda Ovat urged the committee to “take no further action”.

She said in response to the consultation the PSPO had been adjusted “significantly” to reflect the public’s concern.

Some of the changes included “strengthened safeguards” so there would be “no on-the-spot fines” and FPNs would be issued “only after a council review to ensure fairness”.

Another change was spitting in public places and prohibitions on individuals with psychoactive substances and drug paraphernalia were removed.

However, Jon, when giving his opinion on the added changes, said the order itself could not be “watered down”.

Summarising the committee’s reasons to refer the decision back to cabinet, chair Matt White said it wanted the “exemption” provided for verified rough sleepers to be “widened to cover all homeless people”.

In terms of the prohibition on public urination and defecation, the committee had concerns over the shortage of public toilets in the borough and lack of toilet strategy and recommended the strategy be brought forward “as soon as possible” and public provision be expanded as “fast as it can be”.

Lastly the committee said it wanted the ASB team to evidence how they were going to work closely with the public health team and the homelessness outreach team to ensure a “joined up approach”.

No news is bad news

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, or one-off donation.