---

Antisocial Behaviour

Yes. I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker, for reading out The Times report of the phrase that was used. Perhaps I should paraphrase, and say that the T-shirt bore the slogan ““Testicles to the Prime Minister””. The prohibited phrase epitomises a sentiment that is probably shared by 80 per cent. of the general public. It is almost certainly shared by the occupant of No. 11 Downing street, but it apparently constitutes an offence meriting a fine of £80. That is plainly nonsense. If there had been any attempt to take the case to court, it is inconceivable that a sensible magistrate would have convicted the man for wearing the shirt. That shows another danger arising from the increasing use of penalty notices for disorder—that they can lead to injustice, with improper decisions being taken by the police and people effectively being coerced into accepting a ticket rather than run the risk of a prosecution. The prohibited phrase would be an apt description of the Government’s Respect action plan. I have it here. The House will remember the plan, as it followed the Together plan, which has been dropped. The Together website is closed, and the hotline does not ring. The Together plan has fallen apart, but a new catchphrase has been adopted—““respect””. The new action plan is full of profound advice, of which I am sure that the Minister is justly proud. On page 20, it states:"““Everyone is part of everyone else””." On page 24, it states:"““The whole is greater than the sum of its parts””." On page 36, it states:"““Respect—broader, deeper, further””." That is the sort of vacuous nonsense that the so-called Respect action plan contains, but let us take a careful look at some of its proposals. The 101 national non-emergency number is called a ““key part”” of the Respect drive. That was promised in Labour’s 2005 manifesto, but what has happened? The pilot schemes were a huge success. The head of the Home Office’s work force strategy directorate admitted last year that"““many benefits…have already been realised, including increased partnership working between police and local authorities, improved call handling, more coordinated community safety service delivery and high levels of customer satisfaction.””" A recent caller satisfaction survey in Hampshire found that 91 per cent. of respondents were either satisfied or very satisfied with the 101 service. I am not surprised at that. I visited Chicago with an all-party group at the end of last year and saw for myself how important and effective a non-emergency number service can be. Such a service makes people feel that the police and other public services are accessible, and that help and information are within reach. So why has the next phase effectively been shelved? Perhaps the Minister will tell us. I am holding a 101 pen, which promises"““a new number to call””." However, that number is not available to people in London—or Birmingham, Manchester or most of the country. In October 2006, the Mayor of London wrote to the Home Secretary. He said:"““I am extremely concerned that the Home Office has decided to delay Waves 2 and 3 of the implementation of the National Single Non-Emergency Number—101—including London.""To be a truly world class city that hosts the Olympics in 2012, should the Capital not have the facilities that New York and Paris boast?””" So what has happened to the 101 number?