8 RELATIONS WITH CRIMINAL JUSTICE PARTNERS
Local Bar Associations
Aberdeen:
A response was received from the President of the Aberdeen Bar Association who responded in a personal capacity. His comments also included comments on Stonehaven where many Aberdeen practitioners also operate.
There was criticism of the closure of Stonehaven Fiscal's Office. In particular it was claimed that this caused problems with "Stonehaven" custodies going to Aberdeen. It depended on which day of the week whether "Stonehaven" custodies stayed in Stonehaven or went to Aberdeen which could cause inconsistency as there was a permanent Sheriff based in Stonehaven.
There were also complaints about the duty scheme (Legal Aid) in Stonehaven and the fact that the absence of a dedicated Stonehaven Depute made it difficult for Solicitors to speak to a Depute about Stonehaven cases. Equally Disclosure issues arose from Stonehaven Solicitors having to travel to Aberdeen to discuss Stonehaven cases.
On the question of Advocacy there was comment on the lack of experience of many of the legal staff with the bulk of the staff being recently appointed and being asked to do work especially Solemn Court work beyond their experience. The issue of staff leaving was also highlighted as a problem.
Disclosure was identified as a problem albeit one that had suddenly been foisted on the Crown. There were complaints that the time limits for Disclosure (28 days in non-custody cases and 7 days in custody cases) were not being complied with.
There was also comment on the continuing reliance on Ad Hoc Fiscals to conduct Summary Trial Courts and not to do other work for which they might be eminently suitable. The lack of Deputes generally led to a difficulty for Defence Solicitors in discussing cases and agreeing pleas. There was also criticism of the Crown policy on domestic abuse cases and race cases (although of course this was not specific to Grampian).
There were complaints about a new (nationwide) phone system being expensive.
Finally there was a plea to encourage Depute Fiscals to join the Aberdeen Bar Association to help foster good relations between both sides of the bar and an encouragement to the Crown to pay if necessary the annual subscription costs.
Stonehaven:
A response was received from a leading Stonehaven firm to the effect that the failure to disclose statements timeously caused problems and adjournments. In addition echoing the views from Aberdeen the arrangements regarding the handling of "Stonehaven" custodies in Aberdeen was criticised as being costly and causing inconvenience.
Peterhead:
A response was received from a member of the Peterhead Bar. Relations with the Procurator Fiscal in both Peterhead and Banff were described as exceptionally good with the Crown being well represented in both offices.
No problems were highlighted regarding Disclosure and preparation by the Crown was described as high as was the availability of a Procurator Fiscal to discuss cases.
Feedback from Sheriff Clerks
Aberdeen:
A meeting took place with the Sheriff Clerk in Aberdeen and her senior members of staff.
Lack of staff was identified by the Sheriff Clerk as a problem for the Procurator Fiscal as was the lack of experience of the legal staff (echoing some defence comments).
The Sheriff Clerk also had to deal with the same problem in her office and both offices were having to compete with the bigger draw of the Aberdeen Oil and Gas industry.
This lack of experience showed in the running of the courts on a day-to-day basis especially the Sheriff and Jury Courts where court time was not being best utilised leading to annoyance in the part of the bench. This in turn could cause problems for jurors.
Communication could be better it was stated with the Clerks on occasions having difficulty in contacting a member of the Procurator Fiscal staff who could make decisions.
Staff exchanges had been used as a device to break down barriers. The staff in court on both sides were described as working well together; it was the lack of experience coupled with shortages and lack of preparation which was seen as a problem.
Liaison between the two offices existed on different levels. The Sheriffdom Business Manager met the Area Fiscal and there were local "protocol" meetings held monthly with the District Procurator Fiscal.
A perceived lack of staff was also blamed for the abandonment of the Aberdeen "Cleanstream Project" which was seen as a success from the Sheriff Clerk's point of view. Cleanstream had been particularly beneficial in providing savings for the police. (The Area Fiscal indicated that "Cleanstream" was only an experiment and it was not possible to continue with it indefinitely)
In addition to the above there was a Court Liaison Committee and a Court Programming meeting and the Procurator Fiscal attended both of these.
At the monthly "protocol" meeting the business and work trends were examined and the Procurator Fiscal and Scottish Court figures compared.
Disclosure (echoing other commentators) was identified as a major issue with Disclosure taking place too close to intermediate diets causing Sheriffs to discharge diets or even on occasion to desert cases.
The use of Ad Hoc Fiscals was also commented on with an apparent lack of discretion to discontinue cases.
The Sheriff Clerk indicated that the Fiscal's lack of resources made it difficult for her to achieve the joint Scottish Courts Service/Crown Office 6 month target for the disposal of summary business. It was not due to any lack of commitment on the part of the Procurator Fiscal.
The Procurator Fiscal computer system was also described as not being entirely compatible with that of the Sheriff Clerk causing problems for the processing and registration of business.
On the question of outreach an "open doors day" was described as a success with the Procurator Fiscal making an input into a mock trial and some joint training between the two offices had taken place.
Interpreting could on occasion be a problem in Aberdeen with a fairly high level of immigrant workers. Two cases were identified in which interpreting difficulties had impacted on the court (note: the Sheriff Clerk is responsible for obtaining the interpreter for an accused and the Procurator Fiscal is responsible for obtaining an interpreter for a witness).
Stonehaven:
The Sheriff Clerk indicated that since the Fiscal's Office was closed there had been difficulties with frequent changes of Procurator Fiscal personnel and late receipt of complaints and witness lists.
On occasions witnesses had turned up for the court for business which had previously been put off. Mail had also proved to be a problem.
The issues surrounding the taking of custodies to Aberdeen (mentioned elsewhere) were also raised.
The lack of a "dedicated" Stonehaven resource led to a lack of ownership of cases including dealings with bereaved next of kin. Most of the problems would be solved if there were clearly identified staff for Stonehaven even if these were based in Aberdeen.
Peterhead:
Liaison between the two offices in Peterhead was described as good with the usual monthly "protocol" meeting used to discuss issues of mutual interest including court programming and the achievement of joint targets. The court programme had recently been adjusted to take account of these targets.
Echoing concerns in Stonehaven the Sheriff Clerk indicated there was some concern regarding "Banff" custodies which came to Peterhead when the Banff court wasn't sitting. There were no easy transport links from Peterhead to Banff.
Summary Justice Reform was not seen as presenting any great difficulty even if this led to greater use of undertakers and less cited cases.
There was fairly frequent use of interpreters given the high immigrant population locally and occasional difficulties were encountered if there was a need for a rare language or a need for more than one interpreter for a case.
The Sheriff Court building was described as complying with the Disability Act.
Finally Disclosure was not seen as a problem in Peterhead and the Procurator Fiscal was coping well with the additional requirements.
Elgin:
There is a full time Sheriff at Elgin.
The Sheriff Clerk indicated that the monthly "protocol" meetings were useful and also recourse was had to informal meetings which again were very useful.
There was also a Court Advisory meeting which included the Procurator Fiscal, Police, Social Work, Witness Service, Reliance etc.
Also in anticipation of unification with the District Court there were quarterly meetings of a unification group to discuss the problems of implementation.
The business of the court itself was discussed at the "protocol" meetings and had led to changes to accommodate a need for increased jury trials. This was being monitored to ensure it did not impact adversely on the achievement of summary targets.
Relations with the Procurator Fiscal on the achievement of joint criminal justice targets were described as excellent.
The Summary Justice Reforms had been anticipated and appropriate arrangements were in place to cope with an expected increase in the use of undertakers.
The Vulnerable Witness legislation hadn't adversely impacted on the court programme although it had generated more paperwork. VIA was described as particularly active in the area.
The Fiscal's Office was going to be outhoused from the Sheriff Court building and suitable accommodation was being sought. This would create more court space in the building.
Disclosure was not seen as a major problem in Elgin and hadn't greatly impacted on the court business although on occasions the Procurator Fiscal had difficulty in complying with the rules on Disclosure.
Again echoing other reports from other parts of the north east there was a fairly frequent need for court interpreters because of the high immigrant population locally. It was unusual not to get an interpreter when required but there could be occasional delay in physically getting the interpreter to court.
Feedback from Sheriffs
Meetings took place with Sheriffs from Aberdeen, Banff, Peterhead and Stonehaven. Some of the comments include the following:-
Aberdeen:
The retention and recruitment of staff to the Procurator Fiscal's Office especially Depute Fiscals was a major concern. Various members of legal staff had left the office in recent times.
Target achievement and statistics were seen as a goal in themselves to the detriment of the work in court.
There was also criticism of Crown Office policy on race cases and domestic abuse cases because of its perceived inflexibility.
The focus on victims was seen as creating the danger of undermining the independence of the Procurator Fiscal. There was also a perceived lack of discretion in the handling of cases in court with a tendency to run "no hopers" leaving it to the court to throw them out. Over-reliance on police statements (rather than precognoscing witnesses) was seen as a problem. There was a contrast between increased powers for Sheriffs and perceived poorer preparation of the same cases by the Crown. More resources were needed for the Procurator Fiscal who was encouraged to fight for these.
The inexperience of Court Deputes was also seen as an issue compared to experienced Defence Agents.
There was a clearly perceived marked shift away from prosecution in court to alternatives to prosecution.
Disclosure was identified as a major problem with either no Disclosure being made or late Disclosure impacting on the court business by way of continued or adjourned business. There was a feeling the police were late in reporting cases to the Procurator Fiscal.
Delays in starting the custody court were also commented on as an ongoing problem.
Similarly there was a perception that Fatal Accident Inquiries were quite old before they got to court with an impact on bereaved next of kin.
The closure of the Stonehaven Court was also adversely commented on.
Generally there was a perceived drop in the quality of preparation of court and other work by the Procurator Fiscal and a greater emphasis on "management".
There was also recognition of the huge task that Disclosure had imposed on the Crown with a considerable increase in the number of accused pleading not guilty in recent times. There was recognition that the Procurator Fiscal was aware that the systems were not good enough and was trying to improve performance. There was adverse comment on the standard of evidence given by police officers in court.
Stonehaven and Banff:
The Sheriff (who covers both Stonehaven and Banff) expressed concern about the level of service being provided by the Crown at Stonehaven. Indeed he made a point of seeking out the Chief Inspector to express his concerns.
The first issue was the lack of a dedicated Fiscal for Stonehaven. This led to a distinct lack of continuity, the staff attending did their best but they were inevitably not as committed as they would be if based in Stonehaven.
The other very big item identified by the Sheriff was Disclosure and a failure by the Crown to disclose timeously to the Defence. Trials were frequently adjourned (or even deserted) because of a failure by the Crown to disclose in time.
The Sheriff was greatly concerned that Banff might suffer the same fate as Stonehaven with similar results.
Feedback from District Clerks
Aberdeen:
Aberdeen city has one District Court which sits every day.
There were complaints about the new Procurator Fiscal phone system and difficulty as a result in contacting Procurator Fiscal staff. Defence Solicitors were known to have similar problems.
Relations with the Procurator Fiscal's Office were described as very good; any problems that existed were felt to be attributable to lack of staff especially with no one individual identified as manning the "District Court desk" which led to difficulty in getting information and cases having to be continued in court.
It was felt that Court Deputes didn't get sufficient time to prepare their cases.
Problems with Disclosure were not attributed to the Procurator Fiscal but to the Defence and their failure to pick up the information which was being provided by the Procurator Fiscal.
Service of court documents by the Recorded Delivery system was seen as a problem and outmoded, about one third of documents being returned as undelivered.
Court staff were described as very good with a good relationship with the Justices of the Peace on the bench.
Echoing others the high cost of living in Aberdeen, particularly housing, was seen as a major obstacle to the recruitment of staff.
Some problems were identified with the electronic transfer of data especially breaches of supervised attendance orders with these expected to increase.
Stonehaven, Inverurie, Peterhead and Banff:
There is currently a District Court in Stonehaven once every three weeks (there used to be three per month). The introduction of fixed penalties had dramatically reduced the workload although this was gradually building up again.
Court programming was discussed with the Procurator Fiscal and it was felt the courts were getting too big. All the business was put down for 10am resulting in trials rarely starting before 2pm.
Contact with the Procurator Fiscal regarding Stonehaven business was described as "not what it used to be".
The Clerk at Stonehaven also clerks the court at Inverurie which sits twice a month and was beginning to struggle with the volume of business.
The courts at Banff and Peterhead are also covered by the same Clerk. As Peterhead has its own Procurator Fiscal and Banff a Depute Fiscal contact there was described as easier than Stonehaven. Banff has a very small court and Peterhead was the busiest of them all.
The Clerk is keen to revisit the court programme especially for Stonehaven with the difficulty now being experienced in achieving criminal justice targets.
Echoing others he had trouble contacting a member of the Procurator Fiscal staff about Stonehaven business as there was no-one "dedicated" to the Stonehaven business. This was also true in Inverurie.
Disclosure at Stonehaven was described as a problem with frequent adjournments because of a failure of the Procurator Fiscal to disclose or disclose in time. Adverse comment had been made on this by one of the JPs.
Papers didn't always arrive in time and the Procurator Fiscal in court didn't always know the position on Disclosure so the Defence version was accepted.
Overall performance in court was described as good with frequent use of Ad Hoc Fiscals who were experienced; younger permanent staff seemed less willing to make decisions.
Elgin:
Elgin District Court sits seven times over an eight week period. Generally the court manages to finish its business by 3pm with three Justices sitting on the bench.
The Justices come from a wide geographical area and recruitment is not a problem. Training is provided with input from the Procurator Fiscal.
No court loading problems were reported, volume having dropped slightly as alternatives to prosecution have mounted.
Disclosure was described as not being a problem locally and cases were not subject to "churn". Interpreters were rarely required.
Relations with the Procurator Fiscal were described as close and good and the Sheriff Clerk, Procurator Fiscal and District Clerk worked together on rotas (the Sheriff Court uses the District Court facility in Elgin). Dialogue is informal any issues being quickly resolved. Relations with the local Defence were also described as good.
Summary Justice Reform was being looked forward to with the hope of increased volume and quality of work for the court.
Feedback from Justices of the Peace
Aberdeen:
Views were obtained from Justices of the Peace in Aberdeen.
Generally the conduct of Procurators Fiscal was described as good with some excellent and all helpful.
Some areas for improvement were mentioned.
1. Preparation - it was felt that Fiscals had little or no time for pre-court preparation and information on items such as the cost of damage or the time of events was missing. On occasion trials didn't seem very well prepared.
2. Overall conduct in court was described as good but again inexperienced staff were commented on as opposed to experienced Defence Lawyers.
3. Training input from the Procurator Fiscal was described as not particularly helpful.
4. Courts were on occasion seen to be overloaded especially cited courts and there could be delays in processing custodies.
Elgin:
Views were obtained from the Chair of the Moray District Court Justices Committee.
Procurator Fiscal preparation of the court in Elgin was described as being to a high standard and consistent. Similarly Advocacy in court was to a very high standard and staff courteous.
Training input from the Procurator Fiscal was described as to great benefit including the holding of mock trials and sentencing scenarios.
The relationship between the bench and the Procurator Fiscal generally was described as very professional and helpful.
Feedback from Police
Aberdeen:
Views were obtained from several senior Police Officers in Aberdeen.
Grampian Police have four Divisions with a fifth to deal with Summary Justice Reform. Much of the current work was geared toward Summary Justice Reform eg increased use of undertakers, Disclosure, formal warnings etc.
One Senior Officer dealt with criminal justice on a strategic level and discussed issues with the Area Procurator Fiscal. Contact was both informal and formal with meetings with the Area Fiscal every two to three months with other police and Procurator Fiscal personnel present. Relations with the Area Fiscal were extremely good.
Many issues were discussed including warrants, alcohol test purchasing schemes etc. The meetings were described from the police point of view as very useful.
Mention was made of the Summary Justice pilot called Cleanstream and this was described as going very well from a police point of view. It was regretted that the Procurator Fiscal could not continue with the project mainly due to resource issues. In the meantime following discussion a Case Progression Officer was going to be put in place who would work part of the time in the Procurator Fiscal's Office to expedite cases. (The Area Fiscal indicated that the Case Progression Officer was created to capture beneficial aspects of "Cleanstream" and was in line with similar developments elsewhere.)
Possible future co-location of the police and the Procurator Fiscal was discussed although deemed to be a long way off. Sharing admin staff was however, being actively investigated.
The Area Fiscal reported there was good liaison with the police especially in relation to a number of high profile cases and a significant amount of joint training took place including on Summary Justice Reform and media relations. Informal as well as formal meetings took place.
Elgin:
Liaison between the police and the Procurator Fiscal's Office in Elgin was described as good both formal and informal contact being regularly made. Changes had been anticipated in advance of Summary Justice Reform and joint negotiations had taken place eg regarding increased use of undertakers.
So far as police witnesses were concerned a "standby" arrangement was in operation in Elgin. The force was looking actively at improving ways of dealing with court citations.
Disclosure was not seen as a problem in Elgin from the police point of view. It had, however, highlighted the need for the police to be accurate in the statements they submitted to the Procurator Fiscal.
Overall there was a good working relationship with the local Procurator Fiscal's Office.
Peterhead:
Quarterly meetings took place in Peterhead involving various criminal justice partners including the Procurator Fiscal, Sheriff Clerk and others.
Relations were described as formal but based on mutual respect. More informal contacts existed between the Procurator Fiscal and police especially with the CID in serious cases. The CID found relations very good.
There were local arrangements for obtaining out of hours warrants and dealing with sudden deaths.
There was also a local court users group.
Summary justice reform was being planned for with no significant problems anticipated especially in potential increases in the number of undertakers.
For police witnesses at court a "stand by" arrangement was in operation which worked well from for the police. There was a small issue with countermands not always arriving in time.
Disclosure was reported as having a big impact on the police.
Locally there was a high immigrant population and significant number of warrants existed for people who had returned home. The police were trying to keep on top of the situation.
Feedback from Police Doctor
Aberdeen:
One very experienced Police Doctor was kind enough to provide feedback to us on his perspective of various issues in the Aberdeen area.
He described all his Procurator Fiscal contacts over the years as being pleasant, professional and helpful.
Recent changes in citing procedures had greatly improved (although not excluded) previous frustrations.
He did however make some individual comments.
The requirement by the Procurator Fiscal for original notes made at the time of the examination to be delivered could cause problems especially as proper writing facilities were not always available to facilitate this in some police stations.
As a working General Practitioner this doctor's practice was subject to interruption by the number of court citations he received frequently for distant courts in Edinburgh and Dundee with many last minute cancellations causing problems for locum cover.
A standby (one hour's notice) system was in operation but this still caused difficulties in anticipating when cover would be required. It was noted, however, that this had reduced recently both in the number of citations and the actual need to attend court.
One problem with the citation as it stood was that it didn't always give the doctor enough detail as to which patient he had examined as it was based on the name of the accused and this caused some unnecessary follow-up work. More detail on the citation itself could exclude that.
Another difficulty was with trials which lasted over several days when it could not be clearly indicated when the doctor was actually required, again causing problems for locum cover.
Finally some issues were raised regarding the payment of professional fees which could result in the fees paid to a locum exceeding the fees paid to the doctor by the Procurator Fiscal.
Children's Reporter
Elgin:
Relationships between the Reporter's Office and the Procurator Fiscal were described as good, contact being easy and informal.
In jointly reported cases the discussion usually took place immediately either by telephone or at a meeting. In custody cases there could be a delay problem if a hearing had to be convened at short notice especially if this was in the afternoon.
Elgin was described as a busy area for juvenile offending although a lot of it was fairly low level anti-social type behaviour. Lack of time had resulted in fewer face to face meetings but would be resumed as circumstances permitted. Joint training (thought desirable) would be pursued.
Child protection work was seen as particularly challenging but every effort was made to progress these cases.
Referrals in terms of Section 48 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 from the court had declined in recent years but done where appropriate.
There was some criticism of the police in reporting cases both to the Reporter and the Procurator Fiscal when the guidelines would have required reporting only to the Reporter which in turn could cause some delay and wasted effort on both sides.
The Reporter paid particular tribute to the professionalism of the Procurator Fiscal and spoke of mutual respect and understanding.
Aberdeen, Peterhead and Banff:
Liaison and relationships between the Aberdeen Reporter's Office and the Procurator Fiscal were described as good. Previously there had been regular meetings but these were now felt to be unnecessary. Similarly in Peterhead and Banff relations were good.
A liaison Fiscal (in Aberdeen) was supplied on a rota basis which was seen to work well, the named contact being beneficial.
There was a youth justice reporter in existence with good working relations with the Fiscal dealing with such cases. Contact by phone was regular and the Procurator Fiscal attended a multi-agency group which looked at particular offenders.
Relations with the District Fiscal and Deputes in Aberdeen were described as positive with advice being freely given on legal issues.
Wherever possible if there had been a prosecution the Reporter tried to take action after the criminal proceedings.
Shadowing of staff by both parties had been seen to be successful and useful in the past but had fallen away. Joint training had been done on a national level but this had declined and would be welcomed.
Police Input on Child Protection Issues:
A view was obtained from Grampian Police on child protection issues. Relations between the police and the Procurator Fiscal's Office were described as good. Family Protection Units were in existence and frequent contact was made with the appropriate Procurator Fiscal and a partnership approach was taken to progressing these cases.
New Fiscal Deputes attended joint police training on a range of topics. This was seen as providing an excellent networking opportunity and strengthened working relations between the police and Depute Fiscals.
The Area Fiscal sat on the North East of Scotland Child Protection Committee and attended associated groups and meetings.
Overall from the police perspective regarding child protection issues the Procurator Fiscal was seen to be especially supportive of police efforts to report cases and a number of these had been progressed to a satisfactory conclusion. There was regular contact with both the Area Fiscal and District Fiscals.
Social Work
Aberdeen:
Relations in Aberdeen between child care staff and the Procurator Fiscal Service were described as good and direct contact on individual cases was useful and successful.
As previously stated the Procurator Fiscal was represented on the Child Protection Committee and the District Fiscal also attended.
More joint training was seen as desirable with a multi-agency focus.
One area for improvement suggested was for the Procurator Fiscal's Office to be more proactive in liaison and direct contact with child care services.
Elgin:
Relationships and liaison between the Social Work Department and Procurator Fiscal's Office were described as very positive with good rapport having been established over the years. One social worker was in court every day and informal telephone contact was the norm.
A diversion scheme was in existence and it was hoped to review it shortly. It was felt, however, that it worked well in practice.
A number of child protection cases were on diversion (we examined most of these as part of our case review). One comment was a desire for more feedback from the Procurator Fiscal especially on completion of the diversion and this would be discussed. Many of these cases from the social work point of view were difficult and complex and not low level or trivial.
No problems were reported in supplying court reports such as Social Enquiry Reports or Probation Reports.
Peterhead, Banff and Stonehaven:
Generally social workers in these areas reported helpful liaison with Procurator Fiscal staff especially in Banff. Echoing other comments the closure of the Fiscal's Office in Stonehaven had caused some problems, making contact more difficult.
Again joint training would be welcomed as would regular meetings.
Diversion schemes were operating in these areas and although overall numbers were low in Peterhead and Banff especially were deemed to work satisfactorily although again problems were highlighted with Stonehaven cases.
SACRO (Safeguarding Communities - Reducing Offending)
SACRO runs a Restorative Justice Service ( RJS) in Aberdeen (formerly called Mediation and Reparation Service).
It was reported that strong links had been developed over the years with the Procurator Fiscal's Office based on open and effective communication.
A representative from RJS met weekly with a contact Depute. This allowed the Fiscal to make referrals and receive feedback on all current cases.
There had been recent joint efforts to streamline the process and improve timescales. In addition to the weekly meetings there were quarterly review meetings to address any issues relating to cases and volume of referrals.
The Fiscal's marking team (who decide on how to action cases) had been given a presentation on the working of RJS and they in turn had shown how the marking team operated. A Depute Fiscal had made a contribution to the training of SACRO volunteers.
One slight disappointment reported by SACRO was a decline in the number of referrals recently, staff difficulties in the Fiscal's Office were seen as the problem rather than unwillingness.
It was pointed out that SACRO could only deal with cases arising in Aberdeen city although occasionally the Fiscal would have liked to refer cases outwith the city. This was now the subject of an action point in Northern's Community Justice Plan for 2008-2011.
Grampian Racial Equality Council ( GREC)
GREC operated a special project called ADAPT (Anti-Discriminatory Awareness Programme Training).
Relations between GREC and Grampian Area Fiscals were described as very good with significant support being given to the ADAPT project and other initiatives.
GREC provided input into Aberdeen Fiscal training events.
Aberdeen City Council
A view was expressed from the Aberdeen City Solicitor's Office about cases reported to the Fiscal by the Council.
The response was dependent on the type of case, if of a kind familiar to the Fiscal the response was good but more of an issue in the less common type of cases especially violations of the planning legislation. The Fiscal's Office was known to be under pressure. If staff were known to each other communication was found to be better.
The Fiscal's Office was described as helpful to the Council's work but felt there was room for improvement in communication on new offences such as anti-social behaviour.