Section Three The second year – activities and key issues by type of detention adult. HMIC and HMIP found this to be out of line with international standards and other domestic legislation, which treats all those under the age of 18 as a child or young person in need of additional protection and support. Arrangements for primary health care and support for substance users were extremely mixed, as were the outcomes achieved for detainees. In some areas, there was ineffective use of schemes to divert those with mental health problems from police custody, and police cells were used inappropriately to detain those subject to section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983.22 HMIC and HMIP have been pleased by the positive way in which most police forces have responded to their inspection findings and by the improvements which frequently result. This clearly demonstrates the positive impact of the UK’s ratification of OPCAT and the role of NPMs in raising standards in places of detention. In addition to inspections by HMIC and HMIP, all police custody suites in England and Wales are monitored by independent custody visiting schemes. Custody visitors are members of the local community who make very frequent – often weekly – unannounced visits to police custody. This year, custody visitors have expressed concern at the use of police cells as a place of safety under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and at the length of time that police cells are used to hold immigration detainees. Visitors have also begun to monitor the action plans put in place by police authorities in response to recommendations arising from the joint HMIC/HMIP inspections. Most custody visiting schemes are members of the Independent Custody Visiting Association (ICVA), a voluntary organisation which seeks to promote and support effective custody visiting. ICVA led on redrafting a code of practice for custody visiting, which was published in April 2010, and has also been involved in an extensive consultation on national standards for custody visiting.23 ICVA has also sought to promote human rights awareness among custody visitors via training programmes and checklists for visitors. It will continue to play a crucial role in the coming year as policing structures in England and Wales face significant reform, resulting in uncertainty for those managing custody visiting schemes, as well as custody visitors themselves. Scotland In 2010–11, HMICS continued to monitor the implementation of recommendations made in previous thematic reports on police detention. These reports had focused on the design of detention facilities, the care of detained children and the provision of medical services for people in police custody. During its regular inspections of policing in Scotland, HMICS monitors the extent to which individual police forces and their corresponding police boards facilitate independent custody visiting.24 Unlike other jurisdictions in the UK, 22 Section 136 authorises any police officer to remove a person to a place of safety if they find that person in a public place, apparently suffering from a mental disorder and in immediate need of care or control. Once at the place of safety, the person can be detained for up to 72 hours to determine whether hospital admission or another form of help is required. There has been a shift towards hospital-based places of safety rather than using police cells. 23 Home Office, Code of practice on independent custody visiting (April 2010). 24 Police boards (also known as police authorities) in Scotland are independent of the police force and are not responsible for the day-to-day delivery of policing. Instead, each police board is responsible for setting, monitoring and scrutinising the budget of its local police force and for holding the chief constable to account for the force’s performance. 27