| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
6.46 pm
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Charles Clarke): We have debated a serious subject, and I genuinely thank the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) for tabling it. I welcome the debate. We have heard some outstanding speeches, and I hope that no one will be offended if I pay special tribute to the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey (Mr. Hughes), who made an excellent speech, and to my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham (Mr. Banks), who made a first-class speech. I shall not follow him in his speculations as to the motives of UEFA
and so on, but I am sure the whole House wishes him well in his efforts with the 2006 world cup. I pay credit to the intelligence with which he so powerfully addresses the issues.It was a shame that the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald and the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) descended to crude party politics.
Mr. Heald: Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Clarke: No, I shall not give way--[Hon. Members: "Give way, give way."] When the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald) spoke about small numbers, I thought that he might have been referring to the fact that, at times during the debate, only one, two or a maximum of three Opposition Back Benchers were in the Chamber. I wondered whether that reflected a general unhappiness with the stance taken by the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald.
As the violence two nights ago demonstrates, the key point is that international football hooliganism is not the exclusive property of English troublemakers. However, the record of English hooligans outstrips that of all their competitors. We have all noted, in various ways, that we are heartily sick of their boorish, offensive, threatening and sometimes violent behaviour.
Several hon. Members rightly asked what individuals could do in such circumstances. To avoid individual responsibility is absolutely wrong. Individuals must take responsibility for their acts; they must behave in a sportsmanlike way; they must focus on good conduct and respect others. That is critically important, as several hon. Members pointed out.
The question being debated today is what the Government can do about those matters. That is a legitimate subject for debate, and I shall respond with three points. First, I shall describe what the Government can and should do operationally. Secondly, I shall set out what can be done legislatively--referring especially to the issues raised in a good speech by the hon. Member for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns), who has a fine record of fighting for such matters. Thirdly, I shall discuss the general social and cultural issues that were raised by several hon. Members.
On operational matters, policing is extremely important. The achievement of effective policing of football in this country and our expertise--manifested during Euro 96 and in our domestic games--are powerful. My hon. Friend the Member for Halton (Mr. Twigg) used those points to make a good argument for holding the 2006 world cup in this country. We want to lend that expertise to other countries. We discussed with Denmark, Holland and Belgium how policing could be strengthened throughout the continent. That is important. I had two meetings with Turkey's Minister of the Interior to discuss those matters in relation to his country's policing issues.
The hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow)--who is not in his place--asked about intelligence. The police devote extensive resources to keeping close tabs on the most active football hooligans--often at great risk to the officers involved. The House will understand that I cannot reveal details, but outstanding work is done by spotters and intelligence liaison officers, and the whole House will share in paying tribute to the National Criminal Intelligence Service.
It is worth highlighting the work done in the European Union--by my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State, in Tampere, and the Prime Minister in Feira--to ensure closer liaison between criminal justice systems: not something the previous Government would have done. We are committed to effective joint working, which is critical in this, as in so many other respects. An important element is the international agreements with Holland and Belgium in particular and the operational discussions. Our police have a strong and positive relationship with forces in the rest of the European Union; the UK ports operations, which we continue to intensify, is an example of how joint working operates. I am sure that Opposition Members wish to encourage that work, which is critical to everything that we do and to which we are greatly committed.
We have done a lot, but much more needs to be done at every turn--including the international environment, both judicially and operationally. The right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald and the hon. Members for North-East Hertfordshire and for West Chelmsford focused on legislation. The hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey said that our legislation is already among the toughest in Europe. There is an argument as to whether Germany's laws are tougher in some respects, given that country's different political and judicial traditions, but Britain is at the cutting edge of tough legislation. The Football (Offences and Disorder) Act 1999 built on the work of the previous Government and reflects a consistent tradition across all parties of seeking to strengthen effective legislation against hooliganism.
I acknowledge that more can be done. The passports legislation associated with the hon. Member for West Chelmsford was the subject of a party knockabout in today's debate, but we are looking at doing more in an appropriate way. My right hon. Friend referred to merging domestic and international banning orders. We have made announcements about stopping people from returning to the Low Countries and partnerships with clubs. My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham also made a number of specific proposals for strengthening existing legislation.
I assure the hon. Member for West Chelmsford, who put his points extremely effectively, that we are prepared to legislate--including on naming and shaming. However, my hon. Friend the Member for Reading, West (Mr. Salter) made important points in that respect. Key to that is that any legislative change that we might have made would have had little or no impact on events in the Low Countries at this time.
Mr. Heald: Does the Minister accept that it is necessary to have the sort of football behaviour order that my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) proposed two years ago? If so, when will one be introduced? Is it correct--as was said by Eddie Curtis, head of the spotting team--that most of the undesirables are in Holland and Belgium as we speak?
Mr. Clarke: That is not the information we have from NCIS. Mr. Curtis made it clear that he is deeply frustrated with the failure of the courts to use their existing powers to impose banning orders--a point also made by the hon. Member for West Chelmsford. We are considering tightening or extending legislation--including football behaviour orders. There is plenty of scope for partisan knockabout, but any serious review of recent events in the
Low Countries and what must be done shows that legislative change of the kind that preoccupies the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire would not have resolved the current situation.My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and the hon. Member for Southwark, North and Bermondsey made effective points about yob culture. Twenty six per cent. of men born in 1968 had convictions by the age of 24, and nearly 10 per cent. had convictions for violence against the person, sexual offences or robbery--an appalling picture of the society that has developed and that reflects convictions that did not necessarily have anything to do with football violence. We have to turn that around.
The right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield mentioned law and order in the community. Other issues that need to be addressed include the way in which young people are brought up, xenophobia in the media, law and order, education and alcohol. One Opposition Member sneered about seminars that bring together people dealing with alcohol-related issues, but over 18 Tory years nothing was done. Alcohol is a big factor in crime. The alcohol industry, retail and licensing trades want to work on that connection--and the White Paper on licensing addresses some of the issues. Alcohol is important is looking for the motive force behind crime--almost as important as drugs, in some respects.
My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and others mentioned peer pressure and families. Individualism is to be found in some people but--I am not making a party political point--the phrase, "There is no such thing as society" was extremely damaging. It might be argued that it is okay to say, "There's no such thing as society," but I fundamentally disagree. Government policies on crime reduction partnerships put in place by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, and the initiatives in education--by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment--in health and in other areas are aimed at building communities and getting people to work together in an acknowledgement that society is important.
There are no quick fixes, but we must work in that direction rather than in the opposite direction that we inherited. That will be difficult, but we are introducing a series of measures focused on all the issues that I have mentioned. I urge right hon. and hon. Members to vote against the Opposition motion--which is all about short-term, blame-culture fixes--and to vote for the Government amendment, which identifies the real problems and supports measures to change society in a way that will eliminate football hooliganism in future, which is what we all want.
Question put, That the original words stand part of the Question:--
The House divided: Ayes 132, Noes 363.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |