It seems bizarre to find the Labour Party defending one of its most right-wing policies against a Conservative-led government that wants to scrap it.
Home secretary Theresa May yesterday announced she wants to get rid of anti-social behaviour orders, prompting her predecessor Alan Johnson to leap to their defence.
Anti-ASBO campaigners, who would have been unlikely to expect much support from a Conservative home secretary, must be rubbing their eyes in disbelief. Ms May even picked up some of their arguments, saying ASBOs had put ‘young people on a conveyor belt to prison’.
As ASBOs are a civil order, but breach of one is a criminal offence, this argument carries some weight. Especially when you consider the latest statistics, published yesterday, which show of the 16,999 ASBOs issued between 1999 and 2008, 55 per cent were breached.
Ms May used this figure as evidence the orders are failing, but also cited decreasing use of the orders. Some might argue decreasing use of ASBOs is a sign of decreasing anti-social behaviour, and therefore shows they are working.
The truth is probably that for some communities ASBOs have worked. Some troublemakers have been prompted to mend their ways, or received support they need to help them deal with their own problems. In other cases ASBOs have been little more than a ‘badge of honour’.
And then there are always the ones the media finds incredibly amusing, banning people from answering doors in their dressing gowns, having noisy sex, or letting their pigs escape. What will we do without them?
What we will actually do without them, according to Ms May, is deal with the problems ourselves. Solutions will come ‘from the homes or our citizens, from the heads of our police officers, council employees and housing associations’, she said.
Just in case that sounded a bit like she was washing her hands of responsibility for tackling anti-social behaviour, she quickly added: ‘I’m not saying that there is no role for government. We’re not going to just walk away and leave you to it.’
The government is going to review the range of powers for tackling anti-social behaviour that are available to the police, it is also promising to tackle worklessness, and welfare, and improve education.
‘It’s about dealing with some of the root causes,’ she explained, which isn’t very snappy. Perhaps they need a slogan, how about ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’. Or have we heard that one somewhere before?
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (4)
Chris | 29/07/2010 6:26 pm
Why is it odd for the Mandleson inflicted Labour Party to be defending its right-wing policies?
What is really odd is that it is Tories that are removing them. If only Labour had been brave enough to undo the ultra-right restrictions and laws in 1997.
Perhaps we can begin to enter a non-tribal zone and support ideas on the merit rather than their source. It could have an interesting effect on some of our fellow posters should it ever happen in a widespread way. The old I'm right Your wrong non-argument will no longer do. Perhaps I dream too much!
ASBO were wrong in their inception and are wrong now. I have always said so, which is why I hope we are seeing the end of a divisive, expensive, failed idea.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Steven McCann | 30/07/2010 9:39 am
Labour couldn't undo the right wing laws in 1997, Christopher, because they didn't exist then. It was Labour that introduced them post-1997.
I hope they go because they feed our worst instincts and criminalise young people, vulnerable people and anyone perceived as different. There were and still are laws for landlords to deal with bad tenants and for the Police to deal with criminal behaviour.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 30/07/2010 10:02 am
Apologies for ambiguity Steven, I did not mean to infer Labour were not 100% responsible for ASB (in more ways than one). My reference to the ultra-right was more to do with employment and social welfare changes introduced between 1981 and 1991 particularly. I skipped the traditional descent into rant for not wanting to spark of the ranters for the other side, thus was probably not as clear as was required.
I 100% agree with your hopes, and the sooner the better. I feel that you too have held this view since the asbo was invented. It's been a long wait for justice.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Tom Lloyd | 30/07/2010 12:21 pm
One of the many things that always struck me as a bit odd about ASBOs was the way they would have conditions attached to them stopping people doing things that were already criminal offences - like possessing drugs. Surely if possession of drugs is a crime, you don't need an ASBO banning you from carrying drugs.
The Conservatives are talking about giving the police more discretion in how they deal with minor offences, but it does sound a little like we are going round in circles.
Christoper, I take your point about tribalism in politics, but it would be nice to feel that you know what a party stands for, and if you vote it into government then it will behave accordingly. It sometimes feels like all we get is rebranding.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment