Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court: Economic and Social Impact Assessment

FINAL DRAFT

A report for

Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council

Submitted August 2010

John Holden Head of Strategic Research

1 Introduction 1.1 Her Majesty’s Court Service (HMCS) is consulting on the provision of court services in . Currently HMCS operates magistrates’ courts in Bolton, Bury, Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale, Salford, Stockport, , , and Wigan. HMCS argue that these courts no longer reflect changes in population, workload or transport and communication leading to a utilisation rate in 2009/10 of just 63.2%. 1.2 It is proposed that Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court be closed and its work be moved to Bury Magistrates’ Court. The proposal would also include the merger of the Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Local Justice Area with the Bury Local Justice Area to create the Bury and Rochdale Local Justice Area. 1.3 HMCS’s proposals are based on the following principles:

••• Improve utilisation to at least 80%

••• Provide greater flexibility through co-location of criminal courts and civil courts with tribunal hearing centres

••• Plan on a long terms basis

••• Integrate developing policy and operational changes into estates planning

••• Ensure access to courts – enabling the majority of the public to be within a 60 minute commute of their nearest court by public transport

••• Ensure the estate supports the challenges of rural access

••• Wherever possible centralise back office functions

••• Have specialist facilities in large strategic locations only

••• Move towards larger courts

••• Maintain properties at an appropriate level; and

••• Share facilities with the Tribunal Service. 1.4 This study looks at the impact of the proposed closure on the Borough of Rochdale’s economy and population. It is structured as follows:

••• Section 1: Introduction

••• Section 2: Economic Impacts

••• Section 3: Social Impacts

••• Section 4: Borough of Rochdale Crime Profile

••• Section 5: Conclusions

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 02 2 Economic impact of the Magistrates’ Court 2.1 The magistrates’ court provides a range of economic effects on the Borough of Rochdale’s economy, which are examined in turn below:

••• Direct effects are the economic impacts that are a direct consequence of the magistrates’ court being located in the Borough of Rochdale.

••• Indirect effects (supply chain) arise from the purchase of goods and services from suppliers by the magistrates’ court in the local economy, who in turn make purchases from their suppliers and so on, generating additional economic impact. They also include the supply chain that is formed around the magistrates’ court to utilise its services.

••• Induced effect comprise the expenditure of the employment incomes of those people who are employed directly by the magistrates’ court or whose employment is supported indirectly through supply chain effects, as well as the expenditure of those who visit the town centre to use the magistrates’ court. Direct Effects 2.2 Direct effects are those which are a direct consequence of the magistrates’ court being located in Rochdale town centre. For example, the employment of managers and administrators of the Court. 2.3 To estimate the financial impact from these direct employment effects the gross number of jobs in each occupation has been multiplied by the average (mid-point) wage in that occupation. 2.4 The magistrates’ court currently employs 38 people in Rochdale town centre across six occupations and generates £886,000 of direct wage benefits for the Borough of Rochdale. The breakdown below shows how employment within the magistrates’ court contributes to the local economy: Figure 1 Employment in magistrates’ court by group EMPLOYMENT PAY BAND WAGE CONTRIBUTION 8 x Legal Advisers £29,000 - £60,000 £356,000 1 x Court Manager £29,000 - £38,000 £33,500 2 x Team Leaders £21,000 - £29,000 £50,000 6 x Senior or Deputy £17,000 - £23,000 £120,000 Team Leaders 13 x Administration £15,000 - £18,000 £214,500 Officers 8 x Court Ushers £13,000 - £15,000 £112,000 TOTAL £886,000

2.5 The court is currently three legal advisors short of its normal staffing levels. If these legal advisers were employed it would mean that the magistrates’ court

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 03 would contribute 41 jobs to Rochdale town centre and £1,019,500 of direct wage benefits to the local economy. 2.6 The direct contribution to the Borough of Rochdale is relatively small - around 0.13% of the total output of the town centre at present and 0.14% if it was at full staffing levels.

Indirect Effects 2.7 Indirect effects arise from the purchase of goods and services from suppliers by the magistrates’ court in the local economy, who in turn make purchases from their suppliers and so on, generating additional economic impact. As the overwhelming majority of magistrates’ court procurement is dealt with centrally (at a national level) it is not possible to quantify the impact of this on the Borough of Rochdale’s economy using primary data. However, using a standard local multiplier 1 it can be estimated that direct employment at the magistrates’ court supports additional activity through its supply chain in the town centre worth £285,460 per annum. 2.8 Furthermore, and more importantly, the magistrates’ court supports a local supply chain, which is a major part of the town centre’s economy. The key parts of this supply chain are:

••• Solicitors. There are currently 476 people employed in the legal services sector, two thirds of which (318) are based in Rochdale town centre 2. If the magistrates’ court were to close it is anticipated that the some legal firms would remain in the Borough of Rochdale to retain close access to their client base, however it is likely that a good proportion would migrate to be closer to the court in Bury. In particular, legal aid rules mean that solicitors are not paid for waiting or travel time, which would encourage firms to migrate out of Rochdale town centre. Those firms that remained in Rochdale town centre are likely to see demand for their services decline, particularly from the loss of ready access to overnight arrests.

••• Crown Prosecutors and the Crown Prosecutor Service. The Crown Prosecution Service is based in Wigan, so there is currently no direct employment located in the Borough of Rochdale. However, between 4 and 5 Crown Prosecutors use the court daily bringing in spending power to the town centre.

••• Probation Services and witness support. Currently there are specialist Youth Offending and Witness Support teams at the magistrates’ court, which would need to relocate with the magistrates’

1 BIS (2009). ‘BIS Occasional Paper No. 1: Research to improve the assessment of additionality’. Available at http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore/economics-and- statistics/docs/09-1302-bis-occasional-paper-01.pdf 2 A proxy of two super output areas (E02001141 and E02001146) has been used for Rochdale town centre

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 04 court. There are approximately 4 full time equivalent posts in both team, plus a large number of local volunteers. The loss of local volunteering opportunities, and the pathway to employment this often presents, would also negatively affect those involved in this activity.

••• Police. While the police service is unlikely move significant numbers out of the borough following the relocation of the magistrates’ court, the viability of the £10m redevelopment of the Police Station (which is physically connected to the magistrates’ court via the cell block) would be put in question.

Induced Effects 2.9 Perhaps the most important impact of the magistrates’ court on the Borough of Rochdale’s economy is the induced effects, particularly on the economy of the town centre. The magistrates’ court is a source of significant activity in the town attracting over 150 people daily using conservative estimates, and up to 350. These figures include:

••• Magistrates – 12 – 18 magistrates attend court every day, with an average of around 15 magistrates daily;

••• Court users – around 100 cases are scheduled per day, with between 40 and 80 cases seen every day. Each of these has its solicitors (covered below), witnesses, defendants, family and friends and police officers. These alone can push the numbers in excess of 100;

••• Witness Support Services – 3 – 5 witness support officers every day;

••• Probation services – 3 – 4 probation officers at the magistrates’ court daily;

••• Cells management – 6 – 8 security personnel attend to cells;

••• Solicitors – 10 – 20 per day depending on the number of cases seen;

••• Court services – 3 – 4 individuals provide security in the courts;

••• Youth offending team – the Youth Offending Team visits the court on Wednesdays, and consists of 3 – 4 officers; and

••• Other social workers – this includes community support workers who may also be classed as witnesses and drugs workers who may provide evidence. 2.10 Users of the Court support local shops and traders. It is estimated that there are between 150 and 350 people who attend the court daily. Assuming that each spends on average £2.50 (based on a limited time in the court, or waiting for a court appearance), results in a total impact on the town centre’s economy of £93,750 - £218,750 per annum.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 05 Wider Economic Impacts 2.11 The above assessment does not include the knock-on or potential negative impacts of the closure of the magistrates’ court in the Borough of Rochdale. These include:

••• Loss of a successful legal and judicial cluster. Currently the legal, justice and judicial services sector employs 908 people in the Borough of Rochdale. While this is a small percentage of total employment (1.2%), it has seen extremely strong growth over the past decade, increasing by 7.0% per annum, much higher than growth in employment overall in the Borough of Rochdale which grew by just 0.3% per annum. In Greater Manchester, only Bolton had stronger growth in legal, justice and judicial services (7.4%). As can be seen from the map below, employment is heavily concentration in and around Rochdale town centre. As mentioned previously, moving the magistrates’ court from Rochdale town centre would require many of these firms to relocate, stalling any future growth potential.

Figure 2 Employment in Legal activities and Justice and judicial activities

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 06

••• Further damage to the medium/long-term viability of Rochdale town centre. Between 2003 and 2008, employment in the town centre grew slightly by 5.4% (although, as noted above, growth in employment in legal and judicial activities was strong showing an increase of 79.1% over the same period). However, the town centre is a struggling retail and commercial centre. The Greater Manchester Town Centres study 3 reported that in 2008 there were 23 empty shops in Rochdale town centre – the fourth highest number in Greater Manchester and significantly above the 13 vacant shops in Bury town centre. This equates to approximately 10,002m 2 of empty retail space (12.2% of the total space in the town centre), only Wigan and Altrincham have higher vacancy rates. Since these figures, the on onset of the recession will have raised the number of vacant units in Rochdale town centre (although it should be noted that the recession combined with the opening of the Rock retail complex will also have increased the amount of empty space in Bury too). Demand for space is relatively muted in Rochdale town centre, with the borough accounting for just 8% of Drivers Jonas’ estimates of genuine operator requirements – only Bury and Altrincham (at 7%) have lower levels of demand. The GM Town Centres study concludes that Rochdale town centre ‘is one of the weakest performing retail centres in Greater Manchester, characterised by high levels of vacancy and relatively low levels of occupier demand.’ With regards to the office market the study concludes that Rochdale town centre is ‘performing at or below average reflecting key weaknesses in [its] core town centre office [market]…The town centre has no credible current offer and any office development will be driven by public sector occupation.’ This analysis indicates that the vacated magistrates’ court building is unlikely to be taken up by the private sector for commercial purposes. Given current public sector spending constraints the public sector is also extremely unlikely to require space in the medium term. That the court is a purpose built facility that is physically connected to the police station via the cellblock only makes the disposal of the asset by HMCS more problematic. Bury’s town centre, in comparison, is reported by the GM Town Centres study to have a ‘certain resilience…which may enable it to move forward at a greater pace than other town centres’.

••• Reduced potential benefits from the town centre regeneration scheme and negative reputational impacts. The future of the town centre is particularly important as Rochdale MBC and its partners across Greater Manchester have invested significant sums to ensure the

3 Drivers Jonas Deloitte (2010). Greater Manchester Town Centres Study: Stage 5. A Forward Strategy for Greater Manchester Town Centres.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 07 continued viability of the town centre, including the £38.2m investment to bring Metrolink into the town centre, as well as the £10m redevelopment of the Police Station. The removal of the magistrates’ court would significant damage the image of Rochdale town centre as a major civic centre in North Manchester, and reduce the potential benefits from the town centre regeneration scheme.

••• Negative impact on public finances in the Borough of Rochdale. Rochdale MBC are one of the Courts biggest users. Currently efficiencies (in terms of staff time and travel costs) are possible as staff can return to work during waiting times, breaks etc. If the court is moved to Bury, this would no longer be possible meaning significant losses in terms of man and woman hours for the Council and other public sector agencies. There may also be further costs in travel time for the local council’s legal team, which is based in Rochdale town centre. This would increase costs at a time when the public sector is striving to reduce expenditure.

••• Shift in costs from central to local government. Many cost savings coming as a result of the relocation of Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court may simply be transferred rather than reduced. Increased travel times and costs imposed on local council operations would count against the benefits gained through the court closure. As the finances come from the same public purse, the overall impact on both central and local government finances needs to be taken into account. For instance, whilst obtaining search warrants for entry takes only minutes within the magistrates’ court, the additional travel time associated with travelling to and from a relocated court could increase the time taken to over 2 hours.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 08 3 Social impact of the magistrates’ court 3.1 In addition to economic benefits, there are some important negative social impacts that arise from the proposed closure, including:

••• Impact on views of justice and the image of local accountability. There is a strong view within the local community – especially amongst victim support groups – that justice should be driven locally, and that illegal activities conducted locally should be dealt with locally, to show that justice is being served. Removing the magistrates’ court to another local authority could impact on how local residents view the delivery of justice.

••• Reduced ability of the police and local communities to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour. The current Home Office Draft Structural Reform plans state that the Government wishes to enable the police and local communities to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour. Relocating Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court to Bury would increase the amount of police time taken escorting defendants and witnesses to court, as well as police time taken to provide material evidence in cases. This would reduce the amount of time officers spend ‘on the beat’ tackling crime.

••• Reduced accessibility to magistrates’ court for residents of the Borough of Rochdale. As can be seen from the map and the table below, the relocation of the magistrates’ court from the Rochdale town centre to Bury would mean more limited access to the court for Borough of Rochdale residents. With the magistrates’ court currently in Rochdale town centre, around 90,180 residencies are within an hour’s travel time to the court – 99.3% of residencies. Relocating the court to Bury would reduce the proportion of residencies within an hour’s travel time to 74,860 – around 82.5% of residencies. In essence, over 15,200 households would have to travel for more than an hour to the magistrates’ court in Bury town centre, compared to less than 20 to the magistrates’ court in Rochdale town centre.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 09 Figure 3 Travel times for Borough of Rochdale households to magistrates’ court in Bury Magistrates’ Court and Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court ROCHDALE, MIDDLETON AND TRAVEL TIME TO HEYWOOD MAGISTRATES' BURY MAGISTRATES' COURT MAGISTRATES' COURT COURT NUMBER OF NUMBER OF (MINS) PERCENT PERCENT HOUSEHOLDS HOUSEHOLDS 0 - 10 5,700 6.3% 0 0.0% 10 - 20 34,080 37.5% 107 0.1% 20 - 30 19,750 21.8% 6,418 7.1% 30 - 40 19,908 21.9% 13,111 14.4% 40 - 50 9,543 10.5% 23,531 25.9% 50 - 60 1,202 1.3% 31,695 34.9% 60 - 70 11 0.0% 13,506 14.9% 70 - 80 5 0.0% 1,612 1.8% 80 - 90 1 0.0% 106 0.1% 90 - 100 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 100 - 110 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 110 - 120 0 0.0% 1 0.0%

••• Residents in some of the most deprived and highest crime neighbourhoods having to travel longer. The map overleaf highlights the difference in travel time across the Borough of Rochdale after the potential relocation of Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court to Bury. As can be seen, some of the most deprived areas in the Borough of Rochdale experience an increase in travel time to the magistrates’ court of up to 60 extra minutes, whilst those areas closer to Bury experience a reduced travel time of between 15 and 30 minutes. Effectively, those living in the most deprived areas east of Rochdale town centre are penalised by the relocation. Unemployed and workless residents will also be subjected to further journey times, which they may not be able to afford – over half (56.5%) of jobseeker’s allowance claimants in the Borough of Rochdale would have to travel for an additional half an hour at a minimum to reach the magistrates’ court in Bury. Overall, the Borough of Rochdale has 57 neighbourhoods that fall within the 20% most deprived in . Of these areas, just 6 would experience a reduction in travel times after the relocation of the magistrates’ court to Bury; 23 would experience an increase in travel times of over 40 minutes; whilst a further 11 would experience an increase in travel times of between 30 and 40 minutes. As identified in the crime profile below, the areas experiencing the most deprivation are also those that experience the highest levels of crime.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 010 Figure 4 Accessibility to magistrates’ courts in Rochdale town centre and Bury town centre for Borough of Rochdale residents

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 011 Figure 5 Accessibility to magistrates’ courts for the most deprived areas of the Borough of Rochdale

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 012

••• Disproportionate impact on unemployed and disadvantaged residents. The Borough of Rochdale currently experiences the joint highest unemployment rate in Greater Manchester. In the 2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation, the Borough of Rochdale is also the third most deprived area of Greater Manchester, and significantly more deprived than the England average. Comparatively, Bury is much less deprived with fewer benefit claimants. Hence, the transfer essentially shifts a key community asset – which is disproportionately used by residents of deprived areas – from one of the most deprived areas in Greater Manchester to one of the least. Moreover, the Borough of Rochdale has a larger absolute population than Bury (206,300 residents compared to 183,100) and population forecasts show that the total population of the Borough of Rochdale is expected to remain above that of Bury for the foreseeable future.

••• Increased propensity to not attend court. This applies to defendants as well as witnesses, reducing the service of justice. Increased travel times and costs is likely is likely to lead to increased non-attendance (and the knock on increased workload for court officials to issue an increased number of summons). It is important to note that for both witnesses and defendants it is rarely the case that just one visit to court is required per case.

••• Reduced community feedback. The relocation of the magistrates’ court could also impact on the feedback of information about sentences to the Borough of Rochdale communities. Smaller local press organisations from the Borough of Rochdale would find it much harder to attend court and provide summaries of cases for the general public. This could again lead to a loss of confidence in the application of justice in the Borough of Rochdale.

••• Impact upon number of offences brought to justice. The borough performs better than the Greater Manchester average in terms of proportion of offences brought to justice. Over 20% of serious violent offences and over 40% of serious sexual offences were brought to justice last year. Relocating the magistrates’ court to Bury could impact on witnesses’ abilities to attend court, and as such can impact on conviction rates for these serious offences.

••• Increased costs to police in terms of travel times and following up on crime investigations. With the increased likelihood of defendants not being able to attend a relocated court in Bury – due to increased travel times, costs etc – the police would be burdened with following up more court non-attendees. This places a cost directly on the police, as well as the added opportunity cost associated with attending to court non-attendees rather than focusing on tackling and reducing crime.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 013 4 Crime Profile for the Borough of Rochdale 4.1 In discussing the impact of relocating the Rochdale, Middleton and Heywood Magistrates’ Court to Bury, an analysis needs to be made of the crime profile of Rochdale and its neighbouring boroughs. This will clearly impact on the relocation of the magistrates’ court, as the difference in crime rates and levels determines what cases are heard at the court, and the need to travel for witnesses and defendants.

Crime levels and rates 4.2 The table below shows both the total numbers of crimes and rates of crime per 1,000 population (using 2007 population mid-year estimates). As can be seen, the Borough of Rochdale has both a greater number of crimes recorded and a greater crime rate than surrounding areas.

Figure 6 All crime levels and rates, 2008/09 – 2009/10 ALL CRIMES IN 2008/09 ALL CRIMES IN 2009/10 AREA PER 1,000 PER 1,000 TOTAL TOTAL RESIDENTS RESIDENTS Rochdale 24,373 118.26 21,623 106.0 Oldham 22,566 102.78 18,712 86.0 Bury 16,385 89.34 13,724 76.0 Bolton 26,611 101.40 21,260 81.0

4.3 In addition, while Borough of Rochdale has experienced a reduction in crime of over 11% during 2009/10, the rate of crime per 1,000 residents is still considerably higher than its neighbouring boroughs. 4.4 Across a range of crimes, the crime rate is higher than neighbouring boroughs. The largest difference is within criminal damage – where a total of around 23 offences were committed in Borough of Rochdale per 1,000 residents, against around 19 in neighbouring Oldham.

Figure 7 Serious violent crime levels and rates, 2008/09 – 2009/10 SERIOUS VIOLENT CRIMES SERIOUS VIOLENT CRIME S IN 2008/09 IN 2009/10 AREA PER 1,000 PER 1,000 TOTAL TOTAL RESIDENTS RESIDENTS Rochdale 237 1.16 269 1.31 Oldham 321 1.47 251 1.15 Bury 179 0.98 182 1.00 Bolton 279 1.06 221 0.84

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 014 Figure 8 Serious acquisitive crime levels and rates, 2008/09 – 2009/10 SERIOUS ACQUISITIVE SERIOUS ACQUISITIVE CRIMES IN 2008/09 CRIMES IN 2009/10 AREA PER 1,000 PER 1,000 TOTAL TOTAL RESIDENTS RESIDENTS Rochdale 5353 26.2 4561 22.56 Oldham 5916 27.2 4518 20.79 Bury 3630 20.0 3177 17.5 Bolton 6984 26.6 4457 16.9

Figure 9 Criminal damage levels and rates, 2008/09 – 2009/10 CRIMINAL DAMAGE IN CRIMINAL DAMAGE 2009/10 2008/09 AREA PER 1,000 PER 1,000 TOTAL TOTAL RESIDENTS RESIDENTS Rochdale 6275 30.71 4769 23.34 Oldham 5321 24.48 3854 18.86 Bury 3515 19.39 2798 15.44 Bolton 5922 22.52 4602 17.50

Figure 10 Assaults with less serious injuries levels and rates, 2008/09 – 2009/10 ASSAULTS WITH LESS ASSAULTS WITH LESS SERIOUS INJURY IN 2008/09 SERIOUS INJURY IN 2009/10 AREA PER 1,000 PER 1,000 TOTAL TOTAL RESIDENTS RESIDENTS Rochdale 1729 8.46 1709 8.36 Oldham 1581 5.82 1343 6.18 Bury 1293 7.68 1004 5.54 Bolton 1671 6.35 1639 6.23

Comparison with most similar Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership areas 4.5 The graph below highlights the comparison of crime rates (per 1,000 residents) amongst similar Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership areas 4. The Borough of Rochdale’s group consists of 15 areas, including the neighbouring boroughs of Bolton and Oldham, as well as Tameside, which neighbours Oldham.

4 These areas are chosen by the Home Office, and considered to be similar in a range of demographic, social and economic criteria.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 015 Figure 11 Crime rates per 1,000 residents, January – March 2010

30.0

25.0 GROUP AVERAGE: 19.6 CRIMES PER 1,000 RESIDENTS 20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0 CRIMES PER 1,000RESIDENTS PER CRIMES

0.0

s y e le e eld m on d by irral es fi aen field r n rf hda W Bolton Halt ns Co c ur arnsl To a B Ash Oldha colnshire St Helens n-F Tamesi M Hartlepool Ro -i n ow rr a B

North East Li 4.6 From the table above, it can be seen that the Borough of Rochdale was the worst performing in the group in terms of the total crime rate.

Crime at the neighbourhood level 4.7 As can be seen from the tables below:

••• South Middleton experienced the highest volume of burglaries, though the Kingsway, Balderstone and Kirkholt and North Heywood wards were also hard hit;

••• The Town Centre ward was highest in volume or robberies, which is typical of the situation most years. Other wards seeing higher volumes of robbery were Rochdale Central, North Heywood and North Middleton;

••• South Middleton saw a disproportionate number of business robberies, though intelligence indicates that this ward is geographically vulnerable to travelling offenders from neighbouring Boroughs and their easy access / exit due to the close proximity of the M60;

••• Kingsway ward was particularly vulnerable to vehicle crime, topping the list for theft of and theft from vehicles;

••• Smallbridge & Firgrove and Milkstone & Deeplish wards saw higher levels of criminal damage than most others, with Balderstone & Kirkholt close behind;

••• On serious violent crime, Rochdale Central was top of the list, with Kingsway, North Heywood and Smallbridge & Firgrove also seeing higher than average volumes; and

••• Smallbridge & Firgrove experienced the greatest number of assaults with less serious injury, with Rochdale Central, Kingsway and North Heywood not far behind.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 016 4.8 From the above analysis we can see some common threads in terms of wards in the Borough of Rochdale that consistently experience high levels of one or more crime type:

••• Smallbridge and Firgrove topped the list for both forms of violent crime and for criminal damage

••• Kingsway saw highest levels of both forms of vehicle crime and was high on the list for both forms of violent crime

••• Balderstone & Kirkholt was amongst the hardest hit by burglary and criminal damage. 4.9 Considering this analysis in relation to the figures for offences brought to justice, the issue of court closure could be argued to be of greatest concern to those in the Smallbridge & Firgrove and Kingsway wards, which saw higher levels of violent crime than most. These forms of crime tend to be detected and go to court more than acquisitive crimes, as the figures below bear out. These wards are to the east of the Town Centre and travel from them by public transport to Bury is not straightforward. 4.10 With the exception of South Middleton, the wards that experienced the highest levels of crime during 2009/10 are amongst the most deprived in the Borough. Smallbridge & Firgrove, Kingsway, Balderstone & Kirkholt, and Rochdale Central all contain significant concentrations of the most deprived neighbourhoods in the borough and in some cases nationally. 4.11 In short, the worst affected areas for crime tend to be the central and southern areas, particularly Central Rochdale, Kingsway, Balderstone and Kirkholt, and Smallbridge and Firgrove. These areas have shown the highest levels of personal robberies, serious violent crime and assaults with less serious injury - all crimes against the person for which witnesses will be sought. Simultaneously, these areas will also be expected to see the largest changes in travel times if the magistrates' court were moved to Bury - an average increase in travel times of over 40 minutes. The relocation of the magistrates' court could therefore reduce the proportion of individuals attending court from these high crime areas, and as such impact on conviction rates.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 017 Figure 12 Crime levels, 2009/10 Assaults Theft from Theft of Serious Burglary Personal Business Criminal with less Anti-social AREA motor motor Violent dwelling robbery robbery damage serious behaviour vehicle vehicle Crime injury Rochdale Central 85 23 2 100 29 291 27 132 1,518 Bamford 81 14 7 102 29 133 6 42 691 Norden 54 4 2 78 15 61 4 13 398 Spotland & Falinge 71 16 2 65 32 331 19 87 1,090 Healey 57 10 0 41 21 160 12 44 663 Rochdale Town Centre 5 43 1 51 8 125 18 141 884 Kingsway 119 21 2 149 70 396 22 109 1,501 Milkstone & Deeplish 84 19 1 109 48 245 16 96 1,324 Balderstone & Kirkholt 139 18 2 82 32 387 18 75 1,206 Castleton 71 15 4 72 45 227 16 55 979 North Middleton 65 23 10 93 46 233 15 78 1,026 East Middleton 110 7 8 68 31 214 10 52 1,060 South Middleton 170 21 12 97 33 153 11 57 944 West Middleton 1 74 21 5 79 44 312 11 74 1,240 North Heywood 129 26 5 85 56 314 20 122 1,541 West Heywood 80 8 2 36 60 233 11 84 1,009 Hopwood Hall 37 3 2 52 23 129 6 42 474 West Middleton 2 23 8 0 10 14 136 4 45 572 Wardle & West 42 4 0 75 26 81 1 31 404 Littleborough Littleborough Lakeside 33 3 2 73 28 119 6 57 566 Milnrow & Newhey 54 4 6 79 36 150 5 44 568 Smallbridge & Firgrove 74 21 1 61 34 409 23 164 1,525 TOTAL 1,728 321 76 1,681 753 4,880 281 1,627 22,078

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 018 Offences brought to justice 4.12 Figures from the Local Criminal Justice Board show how the Borough of Rochdale performed in comparison with others across Greater Manchester in relation to effectiveness of the criminal justice system.

Figure 13 Conviction rates across several authorities in Greater Manchester Serious Serious Serious Other AREA Violent Sexual Acquisitive recorded Offences Offences Offences crime Rochdale 21.0% 41.1% 10.7% 30.1% Oldham 15.4% 44.2% 9.5% 31.1% Bury 18.0% 44.0% 13.8% 34.1% Bolton 21.9% 30.9% 9.8% 29.6% Greater Manchester 20.2% 37.5% 9.1% 28.9%

4.13 As the table shows, performance in bringing offences to justice in the borough is above the GM average for all categories of offence and compares well with that of Borough of Rochdale’s nearest neighbours in Oldham and Bury. 4.14 Figures for violent and sexual crimes are markedly higher than for acquisitive crimes, reflecting the greater likelihood of detection and cases going to court. Assault with less serious injury and criminal damage fall under the ‘other recorded crime’ category. Perceptions of Anti-social behaviour 4.15 To measure perceptions of anti-social behaviour a composite indicator made up of seven aspects is used – noisy neighbours or loud parties; teenagers hanging around on the streets; rubbish or litter lying around; vandalism, graffiti and other deliberate damage to property or vehicles; people using or dealing drugs; people being drunk or rowdy in public places; and abandoned / burnt out cars –. As can be seen from Figure 14, despite reductions in Q4 2009/10, perceptions of anti-social behaviour in the Borough of Rochdale are significantly (2.6 percentage points) above the Greater Manchester Force average. Figure 14 Perception of anti-social behaviour in Rochdale and Greater Manchester 2009/10 and 2010/11

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 019

4.16 Perceptions of anti-social behaviour vary significantly by neighbourhood. As Figure 15 shows it is the area around the town centre in particular (which are those areas that will experience the greatest increase in travel time following the court relocation, see figure 5) that have the highest perceptions of anti- social behaviour.

Figure 15 Perceptions of anti social behaviour by community neighbourhood

4.17 Despite the high perception of anti-social behaviour, the percentage of people who agree that the police and local council are dealing with anti-social behaviour and crime issues that matter in their local area in the Borough of Rochdale is broadly in line with the Greater Manchester Force average.

Figure 16 Confidence in dealing with concerns (agencies) in the Borough of Rochdale and Greater Manchester 2009/10 and 2010/11

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 020 4.18 Again, there is significant variation by community. Several community neighbourhoods with low perception levels that the police and the council are dealing with crime and anti-social behaviour are those that would experience the greatest increase in travel times to access court – particularly Spotland & Falinge, Healey, Kingsway, Bamford, and Milnrow & Newhey Figure 17 Confidence in dealing with concerns (agencies) by community neighbourhood

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 021 5 Conclusions 5.1 The magistrates’ court provides a range of economic benefits for local people and for the local economy. Whilst its direct impact is relatively limited – up to 41 employees and £1 million of wage benefits, 0.14% of the town centre’s economy – it has a large catalytic effect. 5.2 The court supports a large supply chain – including the Borough of Rochdale’s strong legal sector which has grown by an 7% per annum over the past decade. Furthermore, it attracts between 150 and 350 users daily, which has been estimated to be worth between £93,750 and £218,750 to local traders per annum. 5.3 Relocation of the magistrates’ court will result in a variety of social and financial costs disproportionately imposed on individuals from the most deprived areas of the Borough of Rochdale. Travel times are shown to increase by the greatest amount amongst the most deprived areas in the Borough of Rochdale – exactly the areas where instances of crime are recorded the most. Of the Borough of Rochdale’s 57 most deprived neighbourhoods only 6 experience a reduction in travel time, while 34 experience an increase in travel time of over an hour. It is likely that non- attendance will increase as a direct result of the increased travel time. 5.4 Added to this, there would also be increased financial and opportunity costs to the police and other public sector users of the court. Potentially the financial benefits for one part of the public sector of closing the magistrates’ court will be negated by increased costs for another – more in depth research is required to fully understand the impact of this. 5.5 One clear opportunity cost is that increased travel time and following up increased non-attendance will directly impact on the police’s ability to tackle crime and prevent anti-social behaviour in the local community. The potential negative effects of this, combined with the loss of local business and the thriving legal sector, could severely impact on Rochdale’s town centre regeneration plans. 5.6 Lastly, the combined effects contribute to increase negative perceptions of crime and reduce the perception that local justice is being done, with negative impacts on local community cohesion.

Manchester’s Commission for the New Economy 022