---

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

The way in which the ASBO works is that the individual who is subject to the order is placed under a number of restrictions. Those restrictions may be very irksome to him. Similarly, he is placed under the guidance of those who are monitoring the order. He may find that to be irksome, too. Over two years, the frustration that he feels is likely to mount up and a breach is therefore more likely to occur. A shorter period of an ASBO, if the court in its wisdom thought that appropriate, would enable him to have the short sharp shock that the Conservative Party was once very much in support of, to realise what it means to have anti-social behaviour orders placed on him and to mend his ways accordingly. Surely it is for the good sense of the magistrate to determine that. The second point—I am sorry that I did not get the support of the noble Lord, Lord Elton, on this—is on imprisonment. If a person under the age of 18 has acted in such a way in breaching his anti-social behaviour order as to merit imprisonment, I respectfully suggest that he must have committed some criminal offence that would make it necessary for him to go to prison, if that is the last resort and the best way of dealing with the problem. I cannot envisage that a breach of the conditions of an ASBO—for example, that he should not go out at night, visit a particular public house or walk down a street, or whatever else the restrictions are that have been placed on him—could ever amount to the necessity to imprison. I am not suggesting abolition of imprisonment or detention—or whatever you want to call it—for people under 18. I am suggesting that the Government should abolish youth detention for persons under 18 simply for the breach of an ASBO. I do not go any further than that with this amendment. I will reflect on what the Minister has said, in his well considered and lengthy reply, and consider what to do. For the moment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.