Scottish Grand Committee
Tuesday 16 June 1998
[Mr. John Maxton in the Chair]
Community Safety
10.30 am
The Chairman: Our debate on community safety is scheduled to finish at one o'clock, so I would
appeal to Committee members, including the Minister, for brief contributions. That will enable me to
call as many speakers as possible.
The Minister for Home Affairs and Devolution, Scottish Office (Mr. Henry McLeish): I beg to
move, That the Committee do now adjourn.
I am delighted that community safety has remained one of the Government's top priorities over the
past 13 months. Reducing crime and anti-social behaviour and improving community safety are matters
that I have long pursued-as a local authority councillor, as a constituency Member of Parliament, and
more recently as the Scottish Officer Minister for home affairs.
My experience makes it crystal clear that people throughout Scotland are fed up with crime and
anti-social behaviour in their communities. We all want safer communities. Much has already been
done in the 13 months we have been in office. However, our debate will show that we are taking
important new steps in tackling outstanding matters.
Our manifesto promised a new approach to law and order. That was summed up in the phrase,
"Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime". We want to protect people's right to live in confidence
and without fear for their own safety or that of others. That is the working definition of community
safety. I will briefly explain what it means in practice.
Above all, we want to prevent crime. Crime has fallen by 23 per cent. since 1991. However, the
tough approach to crime requires that we catch offenders. The clear-up rate has risen steadily from 29
per cent. in 1991 to 37 per cent. in the year 1996 to 1997.
The tough approach requires that criminals be dealt with quickly and efficiently by the police, by
prosecutors and by the courts. It requires that the courts sentence those who are found guilty in a way
that protects the public and reduces the likelihood of re-offending. We want to take tough action to
stamp out the culture of violence and we must convince the judiciary, the public and the press that non-
custodial sentences are effective penalties and certainly not soft options.
That is the core philosophy underpinning the work that we are doing on tackling crime and
improving community safety. Community crime does not affect the whole of Scotland uniformly. It
does not even affect a particular community all the time. Much has been done-and much more is in
hand-to tackle that problem. We do not face an impossible task and we should not be pessimistic
about what we can achieve. Today, we are debating what we can achieve in partnership to tackle
community issues.
I turn to road and fire safety. So far I have concentrated my remarks on the crime prevention
angle. However, community safety is a much broader term. Road safety, for example, matters to local
communities. I am glad to say that there has been a big decrease in road accidents and casualties. In
1997 there were 41 per cent. fewer deaths and 51 per cent. fewer serious injuries in Scotland than in the
early 1980s. That decrease is thanks to the energetic work of many people and organisations.
Speeding offences have decreased from a peak of 100,000 in 1991 to approximately 92,000 in
1997. That too is welcome. However, every day one person dies in a road accident and 11 are seriously
injured. Those figures are unacceptable if we are serious about community safety. They suggest that
there is no scope for complacency.
Excessive speed is thought to be a contributory cause in an estimated one third of fatal accidents.
Again, that figure is far too high. Such accidents are mostly in built-up areas with a 30 miles an hour
speed limit-those are precisely the kind of communities that we are discussing today. I am glad that
the police's "Speedwatch" campaign concentrated on those areas. We are piloting 20 miles an hour
schemes in 75 places to make it easier for local authorities to introduce such schemes where they are
needed, often in the heart of communities.
The term "community safety" also covers fire safety improvements, which are much needed
because tragic fatalities are all too common. Last year, 74 people died in house fires in Scotland; that is
about 12 per cent. of the UK total. Although that death toll is much smaller than the 109 deaths in 1993,
it is not a good record; the Scottish population is about 8.6 per cent. of that of the UK, but we still have
12 per cent. of the total number of fatalities.
The immediate causes of house fires are avoidable: carelessness with cigarette ends and matches,
leaving pans on the cooker and heaters that are misused or faulty. Alcohol and drugs are thought to
have played a part in well over half of fatal house fires last year. Although about 90 per cent. of houses
have a smoke alarm, such alarms were fitted in less than half of the houses in which there was a fatal
fire. In those cases, only one third of the alarms worked; in the remaining cases, normally the battery
had been removed or was flat.
Communities can do a lot better than that. In January, I launched a £250,000 television and
newspaper advertising campaign to remind people of the actions needed to avoid becoming a casualty
in a fire. Looking to the future, the Government have broadly accepted the recommendations of the
community fire safety task force and have emphatically confirmed that community fire safety should be
a core activity of the fire service and be given high priority by the brigades and the Scottish Office. I
have seen what a powerful message the fire brigades can give to children and elderly people, two of the
more vulnerable groups.
I am confident that we shall see a further reduction in deaths. That depends on partnership,
however, especially between fire brigades, local authorities and other housing providers, and
householders.
We must do more about having fire alarms in every house. However, there is no point in having a
fire alarm if it is faulty, if it has no battery or if the batteries are flat. This is a serious issue, to which we
must give urgent attention.
It is not only community fire safety that benefits from partnerships. They are vital to community
safety more broadly, and the Government are taking an important step in that direction today. It gives
me some satisfaction to announce the publication of a strategy for action on community safety, copies
of which have been distributed to hon. Members. The document flows from two community safety
conferences which I arranged. The first was in October, with local authorities and voluntary bodies; the
second was in March, with the business community. The conferences showed that the time was right for
much closer collaboration locally, and the strategy for action is the blueprint for that. It is designed to
improve community safety in Scotland through partnerships between public, private and voluntary
bodies. I am especially pleased that the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Association of
Chief Police Officers in Scotland have been able to endorse the publication in partnership with the
Scottish Office.
The strategy encourages local authorities to take the lead in forming local partnerships, involving
the police and other bodies who can influence community safety. That might include public bodies such
as the health board or Scottish Homes, business interests such as the local enterprise companies or
chambers of commerce, and voluntary bodies such as community councils, youth clubs or
neighbourhood watch associations. The partnership might cover an entire council area, or a town or
village, or part of a city-any part of Scotland that is able to take effective action to improve
community safety.
The strategy does not say exactly what should be done. That must be decided locally, in the light
of local needs and opportunities, and as part of other local policies.
Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife): I am looking at the document to which the Minister
referred, in particular the part about road safety. The Minister has spent some time dealing with that
issue this morning. Perhaps I should declare an interest as I have a house in the village of Gateside
where there is considerable annoyance at the fact that there appears to be a compelling case for a 30
mile an hour speed limit rather than the existing 40 miles an hour limit. The Minister will also be aware
that I have written to him about a primary school at Montrave in my constituency.
The Minister has spoken of local initiative. However, that is sometimes circumscribed by the fact
that there are national standards which determine whether speed limits may be lowered. Are the
Government willing to consider that matter?
Mr. McLeish: Yes, the matter concerns me. The Government want a balanced partnership between
central and local government and other organisations. In the past, many local authorities have felt
frustrated; they felt that they had a good case for change which was thwarted by national guidelines and
policies and, often, indifference. We are setting up pilot projects to look at 20 mph speed limits.
Eventually we will give local authorities more discretion regarding speed limits in their areas. That is
being worked out at present, but I hope that we will take on board the serious issues that have been
raised by the hon. and learned Member.
Mr. Campbell: I am most grateful to the Minister for giving way again and for what he has just
said. Does he agree that there ought to be a presumption that in the area of a primary school there
should be a 20 mph speed limit?
Mr. McLeish: In most cases that could be a general and good presumption to make. Clearly we
need to look at every school and its surroundings. Some are in very dangerous locations, others are not.
I take the general thrust of the hon. and learned Gentleman's comments: we must be more sensitive to
local and parental requirements and the needs of children. I have no doubt that that matter will be taken
care of in the policy we are currently working out. It is essential that local people, as well as the bodies
that can contribute to the partnership, have a voice in that decision.
I expect to see results from these partnerships we want real action, not planning documents. So the
strategy recommends that targets should be set and monitored through crime figures, or fire or road
accident casualty rates, or through surveys of local people. The Government will be keeping closely in
touch with these outcomes.
I am delighted that we have not needed to resort to legislation in Scotland to drive home the need
for local councils and the police to work together to combat crime and improve community safety.
There is already ample evidence that councils and the police are voluntarily, indeed enthusiastically,
entering into such partnerships. Only two weeks ago, I was involved in the launch of Fife's community
safety strategy, a formal agreement between Fife council and Fife constabulary, which will include a
wider partnership of relevant national and locally based agencies along with the local community. I
know that similar arrangements have been started elsewhere in Scotland. That is precisely what our
strategy for action proposes.
I should like to look briefly at some of the Government's achievements in the past 12 months.
Obviously the strategy for action looks to the future but we have already been involved in introducing
initiatives to help community safety.
We have been working closely with the police to focus their action on the problem. I would like to
pay tribute to what every force has achieved. One of the threats to community safety, which concerns
the police and the Scottish Office alike, is repeat victimisation-the pernicious fact that crime tends to
be concentrated on relatively few people and places, with a small number of people becoming chronic
victims. The Scottish Office is publishing today the report of a conference held in January to brief the
Scottish police service on the problem and to encourage the adoption of a strategy which uses prior
victimisation as a measure of need for local policing. By giving priority to the most victimised members
of society, it is possible to reduce crime and increase the clear-up rate.
A demonstration of our commitment and a cornerstone for our positive approach has been to
establish a post of community safety development officer within COSLA. The post, which the Scottish
Office is funding for two years, will help individual local authorities to develop their own community
safety strategies. The success of that appointment recently persuaded us to set up a similar arrangement
for a local authority drug co-ordinator, also operating within COSLA. The post will provide a local
authority contact on drugs issues at national level, promote good practice, and support a proposed
Scottish local government drugs forum. That is important, because the drugs problem is one which local
communities often mention as a menace to normal life.
One of the Government's most significant contributions to the safety of people and property in our
high streets and towns is our substantial and continuing investment in close circuit television. I recently
announced a further 23 successful applications to add to the 60 already approved in the two previous
rounds; and I am pleased to say that, because of continuing demand, we have extended the scheme for a
further year. CCTV needs to be carefully managed to avoid the "big brother is watching you" angle. But
our experience, and Scottish Office research, indicates that people welcome the security which cameras
provide.
|