Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
13. Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South) (Lab): What steps she is taking to ensure that offenders receive adequate treatment for drug misuse. [183096]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Caroline Flint): Drug misusing offenders damage communities, their families and themselves. We are committed to breaking the cycle of offending and drug misuse. We are investing £447 million through the criminal justice interventions programme to get offenders out of crime and into treatment. That includes drug testing on charge for some offences, placing drugs workers in police custody suites, increasing treatment places in prisons and putting in place comprehensive through-care and after-care packages.
Mr. Chapman: Although I agree that weaning offenders off drugs, including methadone, is important in tackling drug-related crime, does my hon. Friend agree that tackling alcohol abuse is equally important? Alcohol causes half of all violent crimes in this country and probably most incidences of antisocial behaviour in Wirral, South. The issue must be tackled, and I hope that the Home Office will take all possible steps to address alcoholism as well as drug addiction among offenders.
Caroline Flint: My hon. Friend makes an important point. This summer, we are targeting enforcement and tackling the underlying drinking problems associated with binge drinking in 70 basic command unit areas. We agree with the alcohol harm reduction strategy that drug action teams should become drug and alcohol action teams, and we are considering how we can support pilots to examine alcohol arrest referral, and are examining two pilot areas. In a recent speech at the Turning Point conference, the Home Secretary announced that we will examine the interventions for those for whom misusing alcohol becomes a criminal problem.
Mr. James Paice (South-East Cambridgeshire) (Con): The restriction on bail project is already under way in some of our cities, and the Government are ever so reluctantly inching towards the policy that we announced two years ago. What are the Government doing to increase the number of places for drug treatment outside prison? Does the Minister agree with the chief executive of DrugScope, Mr. Martin Barnes, who said that unless the initiative is matched by investment in places and in skilled drugs workers, there is
"a risk that already stretched services will be inundated and unable cope."
Caroline Flint: I have crossed swords with the hon. Gentleman before, and it is a bit of a cheek to ask that question. The Government have put more money than ever before into both enforcement and drug treatment. The proof is that 140,900 people were in treatment in 200203, which is a 41 per cent. increase from the 100,000 baseline in 199899. The number of people starting treatment has increased by 47 per cent. in areas covered by criminal justice interventions programmes, and waiting times are falling across the piece. More needs to be done, but the Government are tackling the problem because we recognise that drug addiction fuels a huge amount of crime in this country. The issue involves growing capacity, which we intend to carry on doing.
Mr. Paice: So the Minister does not agree with the chief executive of DrugScope and believes that the resources are sufficient. [Interruption.] Will she explain to the House why only 28 per cent. of drug treatment and testing orders were completed last year, and why recidivism occurred within two years in 80 per cent. of cases in the three pilot areas? That demonstrates that the system is still not right. The Minister may laud the extra resources, but they are inadequate. How many residential placesproper placesare needed to ensure that all young, hard drug abusers receive the same treatment as that provided in the best countries in the world, such as Sweden?
Caroline Flint: I am pleased to inform the hon. Gentleman that drug services have increased to approximately 750up a third since 1997and treatment for young people has increased by 69 per cent. In addition, we have pooled the young people's budget to ensure that money can be spent better and more wisely locally.
I have never said that we are doing enough. More needs to be done. However, we have prioritised and ring-fenced the resources and I am pleased to say that, as of last week, residential rehabilitation is being used.
Caroline Flint: As of last week, approximately 90 per cent. of beds in residential rehabilitation were being used. However, that is only one part of treating drug users and, as I have told the hon. Gentleman several times, one has to deal with people before they go into residential treatment and when they leave. The only way to achieve that is through a sustained policy, which means putting your money where your mouth is. The Government are doing that.
Mr. John Denham (Southampton, Itchen)
(Lab): I welcome the Government's substantial investment in drug treatment. Will my hon. Friend confirm my impression that, in the past year or so, we have probably made more impact on speeding up access to treatment for those who are newly arrested than on improving services for those who come out of prison? Given the importance of ensuring that those who clean up in prison do not go back on drugs, will my hon. Friend make sure that the investment is applied evenly across every part of the criminal justice system?
12 Jul 2004 : Column 1121
Caroline Flint: My right hon. Friend makes a good point. As Chair of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, he knows the importance not only of identifying people through drug testing on chargewe are expanding the number of offences to which that will applybut of getting people into treatment even before they go to court, whatever subsequently happens. Whether they go to prison or have a community-based sentence, they should be supported. That is why I am pleased to be working with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary responsible for correctional services to ensure through-care and after-care. That is an important aspect of making the policy work and making it sustainable.
14. Mr. Andrew Dismore (Hendon) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the use of fixed penalty notices for antisocial behaviour in Barnet. [183097]
The Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing and Community Safety (Ms Hazel Blears): Penalty notices provide the police with a quick and effective tool for dealing with low level, disorderly behaviour and divert those minor cases from the courts. In the past three weeks, police in Barnet have been conducting a successful operation, targeting antisocial behaviour that occurs on Friday nights. Around 40 penalty notices were issued in Barnet between April and June; 20,000 have been issued nationally.
Mr. Dismore: The Barnet police borough commander recently told me that he was highly sceptical about the effectiveness of the notices. However, he subsequently changed his view. He originally used rather unparliamentary language, describing them as something akin to a dog's reproductive anatomy. However, he has authorised me to say to the House that he now considers them to be an effective, precision-guided impact weapon in the fight against antisocial behaviour. He has issued 75 since May and believes that relentless follow-up of the fines is required. Will my hon. Friend consider whether some of the money could come back to Barnet to enable us to continue the campaign against antisocial behaviour?
Ms Blears: I am delighted that the borough commander has changed his view on fixed penalty notices. Perhaps I would prefer him to refer to them as the cat's whiskers rather than his original description. I am pleased that fixed penalty notices have been welcomed throughout the country. It takes approximately half an hour to deal with a case with a fixed penalty, as opposed to two and a half hours to complete the paperwork for a charge. Each fixed penalty notice saves the criminal justice system approximately £100. Police universally welcome the notices as a quick, effective way in which to get the message across. We will use many more as part of our alcohol enforcement campaign.
15. Angela Watkinson (Upminster)
(Con): For what reasons the home detention curfew scheme is being extended to a maximum of 135 days. [183098]
12 Jul 2004 : Column 1122
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Paul Goggins): The maximum curfew period available under the home detention curfew scheme was increased from 90 days to 135 days 12 months ago. That change provides earlier resettlement opportunities for lower risk offenders and helps to manage the prison population. At the same time, we also introduced a presumption against release for prisoners convicted of certain serious offences.
Angela Watkinson: To exactly what category of offences is the scheme to be extended? Will the Under-Secretary give the House an assurance that serious offenders, who serve seven-year sentences for street robbery, and drug offenders will not be included in the scheme? If they are to be included, has a proper risk assessment of public safety been conducted?
Paul Goggins: I am sure that I can reassure the hon. Lady. There is a presumption against people who have committed certain offencesviolent offences, sexual offences, cruelty to children and so onwho cannot even be considered under this scheme. It is only available for prisoners serving sentences between three months and four years. Therefore anybody serving seven years would not be eligible. I confirmed earlier that we are not seeking to extend the scheme. Finally, of those who are eligible, only 39 per cent. are granted home detention curfew. Risk assessment is therefore taken very seriously.
Next Section | Index | Home Page |