| Previous Section | Home Page |
Column 1186
Netherlands for brucellosis. All those measures have played, and continue to play, a vital part in preventing the importation of disease.My hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare and the hon. Member for Glanford and Scunthorpe (Mr. Morley) mentioned the
Bendixen-Dexter report. We agree that it should be made available in full to all member states by the Commission. We shall continue to press for that, together with an indication of the action taken where inadequacies have been found. We consider that to be most important. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Thanet, North (Mr. Gale) for his kind comments. We agree on most things, but we may not agree on everything tonight. My hon. Friend mentioned the new rules for protection against equine viral arteritis. Anyone interested in equine health will welcome that measure. When I have met interested parties in the past, I have had to say, "That measure is coming shortly." I am pleased that it is now in place. In addition, stallions imported from third countries to the Community must have originated from a country that has been free of EVA for at least six months, or the stallion's blood or semen must have been tested, with negative results for EVA, before export. That, I think, will be welcomed.
The hon. Member for North Cornwall (Mr. Tyler) mentioned several issues, one or two of which were picked up by others. He talked about BSE. When we receive scientific information, we put it in the public domain as quickly as is practically possible. The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the attitude of the Germans, who at times have been less than fair in the way in which they have assessed the stringent measures on BSE that we have taken.
We have made changes recently because, as new evidence has come to light, we have felt it important to act. We have changed the rules in feed mills, where we thought that there could have been cross-contamination for quite some time after the ban. Feed was being processed for the pig and poultry industries on the same lines, and that may have created some cross- contamination. We have tried to put that right, and the industry has responded well.
As for the case of the post-92 birth, the Germans and our partners in the Commission have renegotiated the two-and-a-half-year rule. I do not think that that will press the industry hard or cause it problems. It was important to act as the evidence emerged. The hon. Member for North Cornwall also discussed maternal transmission. All the evidence shows that, if BSE had been caused by maternal transmission, it would not have resulted in the numbers affected. Those numbers are now falling, but we have never ruled out the vertical--
Mrs. Browning: That is precisely the sort of irresponsible remark that brings the red meat trade of this country into disrepute. We have never ruled out categorically either vertical or horizontal transmission. That is why we have some pretty strong regulations. I know that the farming community finds them inconvenient, but we felt it necessary to ensure people's continued confidence in our red meat industry.
The hon. Members for North Cornwall and for Glanford and Scunthorpe also mentioned bovine TB. They know that I am concerned about that, and the hon.
Column 1187
Member for North Cornwall asked the Select Committee to look into it. I can assure him that the Government would welcome giving evidence to the Committee if it proceeds to do so.As the hon. Gentleman will know, we are also examining OP dips, a subject that I take seriously. We are giving sheep scab and the problems of OP dips our fullest attention. I shall continue to work with the hon. Gentleman and with his committee to share any information that is available. I hope that he appreciates that. Rabies took up the major part of tonight's debate. The hon. Member for Bristol, East (Ms Corston) said that the last death from rabies in Europe occurred in France in 1928. In fact, the last recorded death was in 1990, in Leipzig, which at the time was in East Germany but which is now in the Community. In Europe, there have been 198 cases of human rabies since 1977.
My hon. Friend the Member for Weston-super-Mare talked of the advantages for tourism and said that in France the subject is rarely spoken of. Furthermore, the hon. Member for Bristol, East said that this country is a laughing stock in Europe. I must tell them both that 10,000 people a year in France get rabies treatment as a precaution after bites and scratches. So this is not a trivial matter, and it is discussed in France. Those 10,000 people are concerned about their personal health. That helps to put the issue in perspective-- [Interruption.] The hon. Lady should listen to the facts, instead of calling this country a laughing stock. We are not a laughing stock. We have taken careful and proper action to protect the health of our animals and the health of the human beings in this country.
Quarantine for rabies is, as tonight's debate has shown, a sensitive issue. It is also technical and scientific. I know that there are arguments from both sides of the House, and we heard many of them tonight, but we believe that one must recognise that rabies remains a serious health risk in many parts of the world, including mainland Europe, where, for example, there have been four deaths--in Hungary--in recent years. It is not just a matter for the Indian subcontinent, as it affects all of us on mainland Europe. Although both wild and pet animals can be vaccinated against the disease, and humans can be treated if the disease is caught in the early stages, it is an extremely unpleasant disease and once the symptoms emerge in man, the disease is invariably fatal.
When rabies was eradicated from the United Kingdom in the early part of the century, we believed that the consequences of the disease re-entering the United Kingdom would be severe and that there would be considerable public concern about it. An outbreak would lead to the destruction of wildlife over a wide area, and onerous controls would be put on pet owners until the disease was wiped out. We would have the same situation as that in France: anyone who was scratched or bitten would immediately feel the necessity to go and seek medical help. Whether or not a diseased animal was involved, the fear would be there in the population.
The Government therefore endorse the view expressed by the Select Committee in its report that it would never support a change in our rules that increased the likelihood of rabies entering the United Kingdom. We consider that that central principle must be borne in mind when considering any change. We believe that the quarantine rules have been effective since 1922.
Column 1188
It has been suggested that quarantine encourages smuggling and that an alternative system would reduce the risk of smuggling. Animals under three months cannot be vaccinated. They would then have a six-month period before they were free to travel, so we are looking at all animals under the age of nine months not being able to travel. It is often those sweet little kittens under nine months that people smuggle back into this country in their pockets. I am not convinced that the argument made tonight would in any way contribute to solving the problem of animals, particularly kittens, being smuggled into this country.Sir Roger Moate: Can my hon. Friend therefore put at rest my fears about a story that was reported in the Sunday Express a few weeks ago, in which it was said that she was going to have a trial period for relaxing quarantine regulations between here and Cyprus and Malta?
Mrs. Browning: Indeed. I can confirm that to my hon. Friend. I wrote to the editor of the Sunday Express . He has not yet published my letter, in which I explain that that was not true. I hope that he will find the space to do so and put it on the record this Sunday. This has been a detailed and, sometimes, quite emotional debate. It does bring out emotions, because people feel very strongly about their pets. Although hon. Members who take the opposite view from that of the Government may find it hard to believe, I am a cat owner and I would find separation very difficult. When it is safe to make changes, the Government will do so, guided by the principle that I mentioned at the outset. We will not support changes that increase the likelihood of rabies entering the United Kingdom.
Mr. Tyler: I very much appreciate the positive response from the Minister to the points that I raised this evening.
I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Sir Jerry Wiggin: I thank my hon. Friend for her reply. I am satisfied that we have won the argument this evening. I hope that the Government will allow common sense to overcome emotion, and that they will keep the matter constantly under review, observe our European partners, who have made these substantial changes, and after a short time, look at the whole matter again to relieve suffering, cost and danger to our community.
Question deferred, pursuant to paragraph (4) of Standing Order No. 52 (Consideration of estimates).
It being Ten o'clock , Mr. Deputy Speaker-- proceeded to put forthwith the deferred Questions which he was directed by paragraph (5) of Standing Order No. 52 (Consideration of estimates), to put at that hour.
ESTIMATES, 1995-96
Class XIII, Vote 1
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £18,829,738,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for expenditure by the Department of Social Security on non-contributory retirement pensions, Christmas bonus payments to pensioners, pensions etc., for disablement or death arising out of war or service in the armed forces after 2nd September 1939 and on
Column 1189
sundry other services, on attendance allowances, invalid care allowance, severe disablement allowance, disability living allowance; disability working allowance; on pensions, gratuities and sundry allowances for disablement and specified deaths arising from industrial causes; on income support, payments of spousal and child maintenance, child benefit, one parent benefit, family credit, and on the vaccine damage payment scheme.put and agreed to.
Class XIII, Vote 2
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £6,104,207,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for expenditure by the Department of Social Security on rent rebate, rent allowance, council tax benefit, community charge benefit, community charge rebate and rate rebate subsidies and on sums payable in respect of anti- fraud measures to housing, charging, levying and local authorities; on transitional payments to help certain housing benefit claimants significantly affected by the changes to the housing benefit scheme and certain supplementary benefit claimants not entitled to benefit under the income support scheme; on sums payable into the National Insurance Fund to increase its income and as compensation payments in respect of statutory sick pay and statutory maternity pay and on sums payable into the Social Fund for expenditure on maternity expenses, funeral expenses and heating expenses in exceptionally cold weather.
put and agreed to.
Class XIII, Vote 3
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £211,869,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for expenditure by the Department of Social Security on sums payable as grants to Independent Living; on subsidies to housing and local authorities towards the cost of administering the housing benefit scheme and to charging and levying authorities towards the cost of administering the council tax benefit scheme, as grants to Motability towards their administrative costs and to enable them to assist invalid vehicle users and others to have adapted and/or to purchase or lease cars from them, as grants to the British Limbless Ex-Servicemen's Association to enable them to assist certain other disabled vehicle users to have cars adapted, and on sums payable to the Social Fund to finance budgeting loans, crisis loans and community care grants.
put and agreed to.
Class XIII, Vote 4
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £1,450,436,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for expenditure by the Department of Social Security on administration, for agency payments, the promotion of Government policy on disability issues, and for certain other services including grants to local authorities and voluntary organisations.
put and agreed to.
Class III, Vote 3
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £263,921,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for cash limited and demand led operational expenditure by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to: promote food safety, take action against diseases with implications for human health, safeguard essential supplies in an emergency, and
Column 1190
promote action to alleviate flooding and coastal erosion; to encourage action to reduce water and other pollution and by other measures to safeguard the aquatic environment including its fauna and flora, to improve the attractiveness and bio-diversity of the rural environment and protect the rural economy; implement MAFF's CAP obligations efficiently and seek a more economically rational CAP while avoiding discrimination against UK businesses (including expenditure on existing CAP measures and schemes), to create the conditions in which efficient and sustainable agriculture, fishing and food industries can flourish, take action against animal and plant diseases and pests, encourage high animal welfare standards; provide specialist support services and allocate resources where they are most needed; provide for some inter-agency payments and undertake research and development.put and agreed to.
Class III, Vote 4
Question,
That a further sum, not exceeding £181,719,000, be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to defray the charges that will come in course of payment during the year ending on 31st March 1996 for expenditure by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on departmental research, advisory services and administration, executive agencies and certain other services.
put and agreed to.
It being after Ten o'clock, Mr. Deputy Speaker-- proceeded to put forthwith the Question which he was directed by paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 53 (Questions on voting of estimates, &c.), to put at that hour.
ESTIMATES AND SUPPLEMENTARY
ESTIMATES, 1995-96
Resolved,
That a further sum, not exceeding £85,741,525,000 be granted to Her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund to complete or defray the charges for Defence and Civil Services for the year ending on 31st March 1996, as set out in House of Commons Papers Nos. 271, 272, 273 and 465.
Ordered,
That a Bill be brought in on the foregoing resolutions: And that the Chairman of the Ways and Means, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. William Waldegrave, Mr. David Heathcoat-Amory, Mrs. Angela Knight and Mr. Michael Jack do prepare and bring it in.
CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL
Mr. Michael Jack accordingly presented a Bill to apply a sum out of the Consolidated Fund to the service of the year ending on 31st March 1996; to appropriate the supplies granted in this Session of Parliament; and to repeal certain Consolidated Fund and Appropriation Acts: And the same was read the First time; and ordered to be read a Second time tomorrow and to be printed [Bill 137.]
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.),
Contracting Out
That the draft Contracting Out (Highway Functions) Order 1995, which was laid before this House on 27th June, be approved.-- [Mr. Bates.]
Question agreed to.
Column 1191
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY DOCUMENTS
Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees),
Preliminary Draft Budget for 1996
That this House takes note of European Community Document No. COM (95) 300, the Preliminary Draft Budget of the European Communities for 1996; and supports the Government's efforts to maintain budget discipline in the European Community.-- [Mr. Bates.]
Question agreed to.
Public Health
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Morris): With permission, I shall put together the two motions on public health.
Resolved ,
That the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning) (No. 5) Order 1995 (S.I., 1995, No. 1714), dated 4th July 1995, a copy of which was laid before this House on 6th July, be approved.
That the Food Protection (Emergency Prohibitions) (Paralytic Shellfish Poisoning) (No. 6) Order 1995 (S.I., 1995, No. 1737), dated 6th July 1995, a copy of which was laid before this House on 10th July, be approved.-- [Mr. Raymond S. Robertson.]
Column 1192
Probation Service
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Bates.]
10.1 pm
Mr. Anthony Coombs (Wyre Forest): In initiating this debate on the probation service, I refer first to what the Home Secretary said in March this year when he introduced the current consultative paper, "Strengthening Punishment in the Community". He said:
"The probation service can be rightly proud of its work and I appreciate the dedication and commitment shown by probation staff and members of committees in their work."
I was quoted in the 1993-94 Hereford and Worcester probation service annual report when I spoke approvingly of much of the work that it does and, in particular, of the community projects and their effect on reducing reconviction.
There is no doubt that the work of the probation service has increased dramatically. Last year, there were 233,000 pre-sentence reports, 2,000 of which were in Hereford and Worcester, which is itself a 12 per cent. increase on the previous year; 151,000 people were under probation service supervision, and there were 32,800 community sentences.
The probation service was involved in a huge area of work, some of it to do with the criminal justice system--liaison with the courts, prisoners and hostels and pre-sentence reports--and some outside the criminal justice system such as child welfare, family work and crime prevention in a more general context.
That increase in work occurred despite the fact that it in the current year its total budget has fallen from £395 million to about £392 million, which has been translated into a 6 per cent. reduction in Hereford and Worcester.
In 1993, the Minister of State, Home Office said:
"If the probation service did not exist we would have to invent it".
The service does valuable work, and what I am about to say is in no way a criticism of the dedication that many probation officers bring to their task. "Strengthening Punishment in the Community" reminded us:
"The present arrangements suffer from the drawback that probation and supervision orders do not appear to the public to offer sufficient punishment."
Commenting on the consultation document, The Times said that the Home Secretary had
"taken measures to rid the public of the idea that community sentences are a soft option."
Unfortunately, many members of the public feel that probation and community service orders, and other community sentences, are not as rigorous as they should be, and that the probation service looks too much to its rehabilitative role and too little to its role in preventing further crime and protecting the public from crime by ensuring that sentences are not only rehabilitative but a deterrent to further offending.
There may be some justification for that view. Only 26 per cent. of indictable offences that come before the courts result in community sentences, and only 11 per cent. result in imprisonment. That means that some two thirds of offenders are either fined or given a non-custodial sentence of some other kind. The public do not consider that a sufficient deterrent. There has also been a huge increase in cautioning. Some of that may involve first
Column 1193
offences, but much does not. One can understand the feelings of many members of the public, including my constituents, who want elements of punishment to be returned to non- custodial sentences and community service orders.Recently, there have been several cases of young people aged 14 or 15-- sometimes they are as young as 11 or 12--acting in a grossly irresponsible and, indeed, criminal way in the leisure centre in my constituency. That has caused outrage in the community, but local magistrates seem powerless to effect a remedy.
Part of the problem appears to be the ethos of the probation service. It is very social-work oriented, as most of its members have a social-work qualification. The Hereford and Worcester 1994-97 plan for the probation service identified crime as a community problem, saying that one of the service's roles was to ensure that the community could respond to and reduce its offending. Although a third of the male population aged 30 may have some form of criminal record, the fact is that the vast majority of the community does not, and does not need to reduce its offending. My local police force tells me that, if just 20 offenders could be dealt with locally, crime could be reduced by some 50 per cent.
Too often, the probation service sees the offender, rather than the victim, as the actual victim. Although there is a correlation between dropping out of school, unemployment and family instability and crime, I do not think that the problem is as "reactive" as the probation service wishes to make out. According to the service,
"Personal and social problems might put them"--
young people--
"at risk of further offending",
as though offending were something that happened to people rather than their taking a specific decision.
In Hereford and Worcester's "Link" magazine, the assistant chief probation officer recently quoted approvingly some Liverpool university studies showing a correlation between unemployment and crime. We are all aware of that, of course. He said that this was bad news for the
"let's get tough and punish lobby".
In other words, the probation service believes that the idea of punishment is something for the far right of the political spectrum rather than, as is the case, a reflection of the views of the vast majority of the population.
That is especially so as the Association of Chief Officers of Probation has quoted recent Home Office studies that show that, despite what the probation service might like to argue, the two-year reconviction rate of the probation community service is not much different from that of prison. I think that the relevant reconviction statistics are 53 per cent. for prisons, 49 per cent. for community service and 45 per cent. for probation, so the idea that probation is a major panacea against further convictions is erroneous. In certain cases, the probation service seems totally unwilling to recommend custodial sentences as appropriate, despite the wishes of the population. The Hereford and Worcester annual report of 1993- 94 showed that pre-sentence reports recommended a custodial sentence in only 11 cases in the whole year, despite the fact that 484 sentences were passed.
Column 1194
If we are to improve public confidence in the probation service, we need to change the culture. That is why I am especially pleased at the first of the Government's three major reforms, which will do away with the probation service's exclusive entry qualification: the certificate in social work. It is vital that we increase the number of people who come into the probation service by bringing in people from other sectors than social work.As the Home Secretary has reminded us, the work of social workers and of probation officers is significantly different. People who have never been involved in social work have an important contribution to make to social work. If we can ease their passage into the probation service through additional qualifications, which must be nationally validated--they cannot be left entirely to local validation--we will be effecting a major and important reform.
Equally, I agree that there should be a more flexible continuum between community service orders and probation orders. Community service orders are oriented more towards punishment; probation orders are oriented more towards the prevention of further offending. Any effective order should contain significant proportions of both. Community service orders and probation orders should be available to the courts for all offences and not for ones that are merely imprisonable.
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Mid-Staffordshire): I appreciate that my hon. Friend has only just begun to expand his argument, but it seems that he is arguing very well for the total abolition of the probation service. Is he not saying that the service is no more effective--in fact, probably less so --than prison and other sanctions in stopping people committing other crimes, and that it is not a deterrent?
Mr. Coombs: There are other reasons for doing non-custodial work apart from those involving deterrence. The probation service has an important role to play, but the element of punishment and deterrence in its work has been undervalued and, as a result, the Government's reforms, in particular those in relation to the greater control by magistrates of the details of community sentences, are extremely important.
I shall give an example of what can go wrong. I recently took up the case of some constituents who were worried about a hostel and the activities of its residents. It is not directly supervised by the probation service, but there is a liaison officer. I was told by the probation service's chief officer that she understood that, in the past two years, hostel residents had committed no offences. I checked with the police and found that its residents had committed 343 offences in 1993 and 390 offences in 1994--26 per cent. and 27 per cent. of the crime in the town in which the hostel is situated. Is that an example of protecting the community via community service in hostels?
I should like to emphasise one or two other areas in which the work of the probation service could be significantly improved. I have already mentioned the very young criminal. I should like to see the minimum age for community service orders reduced from 16. At present, for a 15-year-old offender in my area, magistrates can impose a fine, which may not be paid because parental fines are difficult to enforce under the present legislation, or he could be locked up in a youth offenders' institution but, understandably, magistrates are reluctant to do that.
Column 1195
We no longer have an attendance centre in Hereford and Worcester, so that is not an option and supervision is too often not effective to the extent that the Home Office has recently had to lay down standards saying that the impression should not be given of providing reward for offending. It is my view that community service orders, which can be made rigorous, should be extended to 14 and 15-year- olds under any new legislation.I believe that, short of youth custody, attendance centres and boot camps should be established on the lines of those set up by the airborne initiative in Scotland and down on the south coast--and, hopefully, soon in the midlands. About two thirds of those who successfully get through those camps do not reoffend. I believe that probation supervision grants, which are currently not available to fund the capital costs of such schemes, should be made available so that more of them can be set up. I believe that better co-ordination is necessary between the probation service and local employers and training and enterprise councils. Someone who is offered a job after having been on a community service order is less likely to reoffend. That is beyond peradventure. Very good work is going on in the Hereford and Worcester area through the Doors project.
The criminal justice system for juveniles is too slow. It can take anything from six to nine months between an offence being detected and arrest being made and a punishment being imposed by the courts. A pre-trial meeting is necessary with social services, which means a delay of two or three months, then the trial itself, pre-trial sentence reports cause further delays and then sentencing. Because there is no immediacy, it is difficult to identify the offence with the punishment in the minds of the young offenders. That is a view held by the clerks to the magistrates in my local area, and I am sure that the Government will wish to investigate it.
Currently in Hereford and Worcester, nine of the 15 members of the probation committee are magistrates. Magistrates do have an important role to play, but it is not an exclusive role. I believe that the scope of probation committees should be extended to include laymen who are looking for a more deterrent and retribution-oriented community service provision.
It is crucial that we change the way in which sentences, whether custodial or non-custodial, are organised for young offenders in particular. Too often, the sentence increases in severity with the criminal record of the individual involved. I understand that it is important that individuals are not unduly involved in the criminal justice system at too early an age. However, in certain circumstances, it is important to frighten young people away from a life of crime, especially if it looks as if they are just about to begin one. I am not convinced--and certainly many people involved in the magistracy in the Hereford and Worcester area are not convinced--that there are sufficiently severe and deterrent penalties available for young people at the beginning of their criminal careers to deter them and their friends from further criminal activity. A magistrate's clerk recently explained to me that, sadly, under the present structure there is no question of frightening the life out of a 17-year-old, thereby preventing further criminal behaviour, if he has gone a long way down the tracks towards a criminal career.
| Next Section
| Home Page |