Proceeding contribution from Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 18 January 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Antisocial Behaviour.
Antisocial Behaviour
I apologise to the hon. Gentleman. I talked about the police, but I did not mention wardens. I am happy to echo his support for them. In my constituency, successful warden schemes operate in some villages, and they are popular with the local community; but in other villages in my rural constituency, there is unhappiness that too much of the burden is now being put on the local community, which has to make its own provision for wardens. The police precept has increased—it has doubled proportionately in terms of the funding for police—yet people feel that they have not been given police officers in return. The Government’s recent reneging on their promise of PCSOs for those villages has deeply upset people. They feel that they are being asked to pay twice; they are paying increased council tax and not receiving police officers in return and now they are being asked to pay for wardens, too. The NAO said that the majority of people in its six focus groups were completely unaware of the strategy in their local area. The Government have already reviewed the crime and disorder reduction partnerships. The permanent secretary told the Public Accounts Committee that the Home Office is evaluating the partnerships, and that in spring it will publish evidence of how they are performing. How does that evaluation relate to the review that is already under way? I should be grateful if the Minister told us. The review is certainly needed. Crime and disorder reduction partnerships are invisible to the public, exactly as police authorities are invisible to the public. Much stronger local accountability is needed, as well as diversity in the delivery of community safety and an enhanced sense of community among the organisations involved. We favour a right to policing; communities should be given ownership of community safety and a real say in how it is delivered. That say will certainly not be given by the community call for action, which has just been introduced under the Police and Justice Act 2006, and which we regard as more of a gimmick than a serious attempt to enable communities to participate in policing.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 455 c963-4
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- CCTV Crime prevention Alcoholic drinks Anti-social behaviour Housing Drugs Parents Police Motorcycles Police community support officers Young people Young offenders Anti-social behaviour orders Crime and disorder reduction partnerships Acceptable behaviour contracts
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:27:41 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370841
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370841
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_370841