{"id":124,"date":"2016-07-18T11:17:46","date_gmt":"2016-07-18T11:17:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/?page_id=123"},"modified":"2016-07-18T11:17:46","modified_gmt":"2016-07-18T11:17:46","slug":"anti-social-behaviour","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/speeches\/anti-social-behaviour\/","title":{"rendered":"Anti-Social Behaviour – part of the Government’s crime reduction strategy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Regent’s Park College
\n<\/em>“Promoting acceptable behaviour –\u00a0positive approaches to anti-social behaviour”
\n<\/strong><\/em>9\u00a0October\u00a02001<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n

\n

One of my memories of childhood is the radio.\u00a0 Televisions were not around but the radio was on much of the time. There was a diet of Mrs\u00a0 Dale’s Diary, even before the days of the Archers, Music while you Work (I would love to put that on in the office now) and Gardeners’ Question Time.\u00a0 All this wafted over a somewhat unruly little boy.<\/p>\n

Almost each time Gardeners’ Question time came on, someone would ask a question about delphiniums falling over or whatever and the great man, Percy Thrower, would be asked for an answer.\u00a0 There was often the single word “well”, a pregnant pause, and that famous line “the answer lies in the soil”.<\/p>\n

I mention this because I suspect the answer to many of the questions which will arise today, whether some things flourish whilst others fall flat on their face, will be, in some form or other, “the answer lies in the partnership”.<\/p>\n

Crime and Disorder Act 1998<\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the great innovations of the Crime and Disorder Act was its creation of partnerships, known as Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships, or CDRPs.\u00a0 Pushing local authorities and the police together was radical enough, but the partnerships went much wider to include social services, education, probation, health and the voluntary sector, particularly Victim Support and Neighbourhood Watch.<\/p>\n

We have travelled a great distance in the three years since all this was established and I know of nobody who would want to turn back the clock.\u00a0 The impact on the way the police, for instance, see their work has been dramatic.\u00a0 Before the Act, the police, quite properly, tended to see the world in the light of their powers: did they have a power in such-and-such an instance, or didn’t they?\u00a0 If they did, they would act: if they didn’t they would steer clear.\u00a0 You could say exactly the same about local authorities.<\/p>\n

Now, as the result of partnership working, things are very different. Partners can do things not only through powers but also by influence.\u00a0 So the police, for instance, see the scope of crime and disorder more widely and, if they do not have a power, they will discuss how to tackle the problem using a range of powers across all the partners.\u00a0 In the good partnerships, that works a treat.\u00a0 In others it’s harder work.\u00a0 The answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

One of the other radical aspects of the Crime and Disorder Act was the prominence it gave to anti-social behaviour.\u00a0 The concept was not new.\u00a0 The definition of anti-social behaviour as that which gives rise to harassment, alarm and distress<\/em> comes directly from the Public Order Act 1986, when Douglas Hurd was Home Secretary.\u00a0 What is new is the prominence given to this – and tackling anti-social behaviour through a partnership.<\/p>\n

Area child protection committees (ACPCs)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Well, nearly new.\u00a0 Area child protection committees had been set up a few years earlier.\u00a0 ACPCs considered offenders who put children at risk, the children who were at risk from offenders and families where children were at risk.\u00a0 ACPCs consist of the police, local authorities, social services, education, probation and so on.\u00a0 They exchange confidential information according to a protocol – long before the days of section 115.<\/p>\n

ACPCs take decisions about offending behaviour and offenders.\u00a0 They have been an enormous success and massively improve protection for children.\u00a0 In many ways, they can be seen as a precursor of Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships which have a much wider scope.\u00a0 And the reason why ACPCs have done so well is that the answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

Importance of anti-social behaviour to CDRPs<\/strong><\/p>\n

The experience with anti-social behaviour since the Crime and Disorder Act bears that out. Tackling anti-social behaviour is on the agenda of every CDRP that I know and a priority for over two-thirds. A major reason for that is that every partnership knows that it has potentially powerful enforcement powers available to it through ASBOs.\u00a0 You can only start to think of tackling long-standing and difficult issues if you know that there are powers up your sleeve if you need them.<\/p>\n

One of the more curious debates over ASBOs is whether they are a measure of last resort or not.\u00a0 That’s not a question which makes a lot of sense to me.\u00a0 We don’t ask whether charging someone for burglary is a measure of last resort or not. The mere possibility of ASBOs legitimises the work of partnerships in tackling anti-social behaviour, whether or not they formally use ASBOs very often.\u00a0 Certainly, without those powers most partnerships would not start trying to tackle otherwise intractable anti-social behaviour – for instance through the interesting work being done with anti-social behaviour contracts in Islington, which we are to hear about next – simply because they know that the offenders will quickly call their bluff.<\/p>\n

Research on ASBOs<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Home Office has been carrying out research on ASBOs and I understand that the results are due to be known later this year.\u00a0 I would be surprised if the research did not show that some areas will have had an excellent experience with ASBOs which have made a real difference to the lives of some communities; while others will have been disappointed, even frustrated. That is generally the way with new legislation and new powers, as I know only too well from my days with tagging.<\/p>\n

But, in research, it is necessary to demonstrate only that some people can get it right. The fact that others haven’t is likely to be because they have not had the right conditions, or have set about it wrongly, or have simply been unlucky, which can happen when you hit the courts.\u00a0 I suspect that the research will show that a single agency cannot do it all by itself: that the answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

I am sure one crucial issue is how the partnership tackles anti-social behaviour: whether it has a strategy; whether there is a named person (as the PAT 8 report suggests); whether there is trust and active co-operation between the partners; whether there is a real problem-solving attitude; whether each partner is willing to do its bit to pull off the task; and whether the partnership gives enough publicity to what it is doing.<\/p>\n

Examples of partnership working on anti-social behaviour<\/strong><\/p>\n

I have, for instance, been to such a partnership on problem families.\u00a0 It was in a district of 130,000 inhabitants and the partners met to discuss their handling of 6 or 8 problem families.<\/p>\n

Tackling problem families in this way is a very effective use of everyone’s time.\u00a0 Every practitioner knows that a small proportion of their clientele accounts for most of their time.\u00a0 Typically, 8% of patients account for 80% of a doctor’s time.\u00a0 When I was a forensic psychologist in prisons, the proportion was even smaller.\u00a0 In Los Angeles – to take a non-UK example – 16% of families account for two-thirds of arrests and a similar proportion of Los Angeles social services, health, probation, police and education expenditure.<\/p>\n

The reason for this is simply that known offenders account for the vast majority of reported crime.\u00a0 We don’t spell it out anything like often enough but, in this country, we catch and punish the vast majority of persistent offenders.\u00a0 People who go on committing offences get caught and are punished for it.<\/p>\n

It would be unrealistic to think that we could ever detect or prosecute every offence, so the experience of most of us will be that “our” offender is not caught.\u00a0 But call in at any court and see how offenders are brought to justice so regularly that they have strings of convictions. Our prisons are full.\u00a0 There aren’t many who are getting away with it.\u00a0 We all know who our offenders are.<\/p>\n

We can use this to our advantage.\u00a0 It means that we can target our efforts on the families and individuals known to us. We don’t have to go searching in order to reduce crime, we know the people already.\u00a0 What’s more, all the partners know. The answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

Problem families<\/strong><\/p>\n

So in the partnership I was talking about they considered their problem families.\u00a0 The usual issues came up: poor school attendance, drugs, thieving and anti-social behaviour, prostitution, drink, unemployment, father in prison (actually, the problem was that he was just about to come out).\u00a0 The partners together worked out how best to tackle each family together, in the round.\u00a0 In one case the police said that they would hold back from charging one youngster if the attendance officer was able to get him to school.<\/p>\n

This all seemed to me to make eminently good sense. I would have to say that, in none of the cases I heard that morning did anyone consider that they needed an ASBO, or at least not just now, but the awareness that an ASBO was available greatly strengthened partners’ resolve and confidence in addressing the problems thrown up by these families.<\/p>\n

Police and probation co-operation<\/strong><\/p>\n

Another example I know of is where the police and the probation service co-operate actively over persistent offenders, exchanging confidential and intelligence information in a way which would have been unthinkable a few years ago and using each others’ powers.<\/p>\n

So when they had to consider what to do about one individual who always commits serious motor offences in the company of another named individual, the police and probation service together decided to put a condition on a release licence which forbids that.\u00a0 That simple co-operation between two services made enforcement enormously easier.\u00a0 It could not have been done without trust.\u00a0 It is not merely joined-up thinking, but joined up working.\u00a0 The answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

Supporting CDRPs<\/strong><\/p>\n

The next question is what are we doing to support, sustain and encourage these partnerships?\u00a0 Firstly, we have put lots of guidance on the crime reduction website and, in June this year, we issued further guidance, in the light of the PAT 8 report, to add to the toolkits on partnerships, anti-social behaviour and intelligence and information-sharing.<\/p>\n

Secondly, nationally, the Home Office has funded a partnership support programme of \u00a320m for this year and the next two.\u00a0 The way this plays out in different regions will vary.\u00a0 But in the South East every partnership has received between \u00a320k and \u00a350k, depending on its size and the level of crime, for each of the three years.\u00a0 One of the major impacts of that will be the appointment of a number of community safety staff.\u00a0 I expect it has been much the same in other regions.<\/p>\n

Funding streams are important.\u00a0 You will know that we are coming to the end of the crime reduction programme (CRP) which will be replaced next year by the Safer Communities Initiative.\u00a0 The SCI is likely to be more generic that the CRP, so there won’t be separate CCTV, burglary, schools &c pots of money.\u00a0 It is also likely to be more regional, with greater discretion for Government Offices.\u00a0 But we don’t yet know how much money will be in the pot.<\/p>\n

Development of C&D strategies<\/strong><\/p>\n

Perhaps more important is the fact that, as we speak, local crime and disorder partnerships will be putting together their strategies for the next three years from April 2001. Those strategies should contain the essence of how the partnerships will be wanting to tackle their anti-social behaviour problems and be based on consultation with local communities.\u00a0 Without a strategy and, as the PAT 8 report recommended, without a named person to take forward initiatives, anti-social behaviour will surely slip between the cracks.<\/p>\n

Besides the obvious elements of such a strategy – like identifying the key areas or estates where anti-social behaviour is a problem – partnerships need to consider elements like race; how they handle witnesses, some of whom may be vulnerable; how to avoid delaying and putting-off action; and how to enforce any action as it is a serious matter to breach an ASBO and the courts must be left in no doubt about that.<\/p>\n

For the future, the debate will continue about whether we need also a new type of ASBO which might be added on to a sentence on conviction (and that is a matter for the consultation around the Halliday report); and whether we need to make it possible for registered social landlords and the British Transport Police to apply for ASBOs.<\/p>\n

Importance of getting the partnership right<\/strong><\/p>\n

But the context for all this, as I have said before, is the nature of the partnership: making sure that all partners engage and co-operate; where there is a real problem-solving approach to anti-social behaviour; where there are proper procedures for collecting evidence; where the partnership has the confidence of the courts; where there is a proper follow-up within the partnership and, if an ASBO is breached, proper enforcement of the breach.\u00a0 Don’t give up if the going gets rough!\u00a0 That’s what too many people have been doing for years.<\/p>\n

Today will develop our skills in tackling anti-social behaviour and I look forward to that.\u00a0 It will also be about developing partnerships.\u00a0 I have referred to how ACPCs in some ways paved the way for Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships.\u00a0 That process may well be repeated in some areas where Local Strategic Partnerships will be formed and are likely to build on the experience of their Crime and Disorder Partnerships.\u00a0 The important thing is not the name – for the partners so often stay the same – but the quality of the relationships in the partnership and the cohesion with which they work for the good of their locality.\u00a0 Whether it be robbery, burglary, car crime, or anti-social behaviour, the answer lies in the partnership.<\/p>\n

\n

Address given by Hugh Marriage OBE
\nCrime Reduction Director, Government Office for the South East<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Regent’s Park College “Promoting acceptable behaviour –\u00a0positive approaches to anti-social behaviour” 9\u00a0October\u00a02001 One of my memories of childhood is the radio.\u00a0 Televisions were not around but the radio was on much of the time. There was a diet of Mrs\u00a0 Dale’s Diary, even before the days of the Archers, Music while you Work (I would love to put that on in the office now) and Gardeners’ Question Time.\u00a0 All this wafted over a somewhat unruly little boy. Almost each time…<\/p>\n

read moreAnti-Social Behaviour – part of the Government’s crime reduction strategy<\/span><\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":15,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-124","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry","entry"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/124","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=124"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/124\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/15"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.marriages.me.uk\/hugh\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=124"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}