Post 15 | Royal Holloway & Runnymede Consultative Group Meeting
The minutes of Nov 15th’s meeting were released this week. I also have Andrea’s account, so I thought it was the right time to share some of my thoughts.
It would appear that there was much covered in the meeting and I have only commented on parts of it. I have marked the start of each comment with an emoji. (I am not really an emoji kind of person but thought they would act as an aid to identify the comment when writing in this format. I hope I have used the right emojis.)
As mentioned previously, it is a bit disheartening, especially if you have been impacted by student ASB directly.
1/ Cllr Berardi made a request for Royal Holloway to fund a joint Runnymede / RH enforcement team. However, it was made clear at the meeting by Cllr Prescot that only the council can fund enforcement teams. There is an established process for what each authority is responsible for and Royal Holloway has the authority to deal with incidences on campus only.
😡 So this refers to the 24/7 patrols. The initial brushstrokes of the Joint Enforcement Team (JET) proposal would require RHUL to contribute funding for Runnymede Environmental Health officers to undertake 24/7 patrols of problem areas in the community, and be on call when any issues emerge, with back-up from the Police. Nick Prescott has made it clear that he is not in favour of exploring this idea. Disappointing. I would also like to add that though they have an established process, it is completely ineffective, as it does not provide a local resident who has a complaint a meaningful solution.
2/ Cllr Berardi states there is support for Article 4 direction to stop the spread of
HMOs in the community. Cllr Prescot outlines that these are difficult to enforce.
Cllr Prescot references a working party as part of the local plan review and states
that planning is driven by planning officers with experience of planning law.
🤬 I am not sure Nick Prescott is looking for any pragmatic solutions to the problem of student ASB. Is an Article 4 Direction really difficult to enforce? I will be writing to him to ask him to provide evidence to substantiate his claim.
3/ Cllr Heath raised the possibility of appointing Security staff at university exit
points and for the public to contact them when there are issues off campus. Mike
Berry clarified that sending out the university’s Security staff is unworkable as
they have no legal authority off campus.
😤 The minutes of the meeting don’t disclose the details here but it would appear that RHUL are not wanting to explore this idea or seek a method to make it work.
4/ Aileen Baker advised that issues can be reported to Safer Runnymede, who
operate 24/7. They can be reached by reached 24rs via dialling 01932 838383,
and a recorded message is given for instructions in emergencies and out of
hours.
😕 Not really a solution to dealing with realtime student ASB. (Try giving them a call out of hours to the number above and you’ll see what I mean.)
5/ Cllr Berardi passed on a request from Saturday’s councillor surgery to have a
forum of residents and Royal Holloway representatives. Tracy Bhamra proposed
that the way forward is to potentially improve the format of this forum meeting; it’s
about working together to find solutions.
😭 Tracy Bhamra, Deputy Principal and Senior Vice-Principal (And Chair), doesn’t seem too keen on having a more public forum. She is sending out a short survey to discuss the format of the current meeting to members though. It would appear that she recognises that the meeting may not be all that constructive in its current format.
6/ Surrey Police. This shows a substantial drop in anti-social behaviour in comparison to the last three years. Royal Holloway student-related work has helped to reduce ASB
being caused by a minority of students and Insp Wyatt believes the partnership
working has had an impact.
😕 On face value this is great news. But then you read on and RHUL reports an increase in ASB. I believe that this decrease could possibly be attributed to us promoting that complaints should be aimed at RHUL and not the Police. (There have been some new initiatives though including some videos that may have resonated with some of the students leading to less ASB.)
7/ Insp Wyatt advises that partnership members compare reports and de-duplicate to
provide a full picture.
😊 This is quite interesting. As above, it would appear Insp Wyatt recognises that the partnership members have not a true handle on the numbers. The partnership’s official procedure for reporting student ASB as we already know is convoluted and difficult for local residents to follow. It does not come as a surprise to me that subsequently the data collected is difficult to manage.
8/ The university’s nuisance data has gone up, as anticipated due to the return to in-
person lecture, but it is still down on pre-pandemic years. Noise nuisance
continues to be an issue, transient noise especially. 81% of issues are reported
only once and there have been two conduct processes for households this
academic year to date.
😕 As comment 6, possibly attributed to the reporting procedure promoted in the 100 Gnat campaign. (RHUL complaints were up 33% like-for-like over the period. If I penned this minute I would have said that nuisance data had gone up significantly. Thank you everyone for taking the time to report your complaints.)
–
The full minutes can be found using the link below:
If you read them it does feel like a bit of a whitewash. Sarah Ixer-Pitfield, head of PR and Media wrote the minutes so it does go some way to explain the voice/ angle/ spin. RHUL does control the narrative today.
We now think it is time for 100 Gnats to get a public platform so that we too can have a voice. Will share more on this in the next post.
Best wishes,
A Gnat