35. Memorandum submitted by the Northern
Housing Consortium
1. BACKGROUND
1.1 The Northern Housing Consortium (previously
the Northern Consortium of Housing Authorities 1974-2002) was
established in April 2002, and its 179 members include Local Authorities,
Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) and other organisations involved
in housing.
1.2 The Northern Housing Consortium is controlled
by its members, who between them manage over 75% of social housing
in the North. These organisations are drawn from the three Northern
Government Office regions of the North East, North West and Yorkshire
& Humberside, as well as the Housing Corporation (Northern).
1.3 Members meet regularly to consider the
impact of Government policy and to agree a joint approach to new
initiatives, and the Consortium's Anti Social Behaviour (ASB)
Practitioner Study Group has contributed to this response.
1.4 The following details the views of the
Northern Housing Consortium on the Home Affairs Committee inquiry
into the Government's strategy for combating all types of ASB
opened in August 2004.
2. THE CAUSES
OF ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR
2.1 The causes of ASB identified by our
members are many and complex, and any solutions require a range
of responses by different agencies working together. The societal
and individual causes identified by our members include:
— The effect of alcohol, drugs and
other substance misuse.
— Lack of parental guidance.
— Social and financial exclusion.
— People adopting a selfish approach.
— Lack of leisure facilities where
children can safely play, causing complaints of inappropriate
street play.
— Failure to prepare young people for
later life by a failure in education to apply the standards necessary
to become properly literate.
3. THE EFFECTIVENESS
AND PROPORTIONALITY
OF CURRENT
POWERS
3.1 Our membership feel that social housing
providers and their partners have sufficient powers at their disposal
to tackle ASB, but key issues surrounding these powers still remain.
3.2 It is felt that there is a genuine need
for all those involved to better co-ordinate their responses,
so they are as effective as possible. It is also felt that resources
remain a key problem, with demand for tenancy enforcement services
continuing to outweigh the capacity of ASB teams.
3.3 Progress also needs to be made by the
Court Service in raising the awareness of their own staff and
District Judges of the new powers, as the legal system appears
slow to respond to what is expected of them. Our members are receiving
more (but not enough) support from the courts when cases are put
before them, the main barrier being cost. Not all social landlords
can afford to employ in-house solicitors and it can be extremely
expensive to meet the justified demands and expectations of the
public. The Government must do more to reduce the cost; the expertise,
legislation and the will is present just not the funding.
3.4 Further resources also need to be concentrated
on early intervention, to increase the prospects of reducing more
serious ASB at a later stage. Local authority landlords and RSL's
can make a contribution to reducing causes of ASB by creating
safe and sustainable communities, and by allocating sufficient
resources to their estate management functions so that early ASB
prevention work can be undertaken, linked with powers available
to Police and other statutory bodies.
3.5 Much more work can, and should, be done
in assertive outreach work with parents failing to control their
anti-social children, through such powers as Parenting Orders.
Improved links between Education and Children's services are needed
so they are more co-ordinated.
3.6 There are also concerns over some of
the newer measures that have been introduced. Human Rights Group
"Liberty" have indicated that they are going to take
the case against Dispersal Orders to the European Courts. The
power to stop two or more individuals congregating in a specified
area seems draconian and difficult to effectively enforce. This
power coupled with alcohol bans may be useful but must be used
in a balanced way. Fixed Penalty Notices may be effectively used
but those who do use them need to ensure that they are not used
merely as a revenue raising device.
4. ISSUES OF
ENFORCEMENT AND
CO -ORDINATION,
LOOKING AT
THE RESPECTIVE
ROLES OF
LOCAL AUTHORITIES,
DIFFERENT GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENTS, CDRPS,
THE POLICE,
THE CROWN PROSECUTION
SERVICE (CPS), HOUSING
AUTHORITIES AND
LANDLORDS, AND
HOW THEY INTER-RELATE
4.1 Since the Crime and Disorder Act 1998
all agencies tackling ASB have been working more effectively together.
Most Councils have now appointed an anti-social behaviour co-ordinator.
For this role to be effective it will need to be "mainstreamed"
in terms of funding and be integrated with the Crime and Disorder
Reduction Partnerships (CDRP's).
4.2 Members generally have a good working
relationship with the police, which is proving to be very effective.
However this is not the case with the CDRP, which for many have
so far proved to be quite ineffective and achieves little.
4.3 The CPS have been rather slow in "coming
on board" with using new ASB powers, with some attributing
this to not having been issued with guidance and/or training on
how to administer their new powers. The CDRP have, to their credit,
tried to encourage both the CPS and staff from magistrates' courts
to raise awareness by meeting with them and facilitating training
sessions (eg on ASBOs ).
4.4 Although the Home Office has taken steps
recently to improve the role of the courts this remains a difficult
area and the courts are often too slow to react to the very real
problems of ASB.
4.5 Many of the roles that help to pull
ASB work together (eg Wardens, Community Support Officers, outreach
workers) are short term funded and all partners need to ensure
that the work is an integral part of day-to-day work.
5. THE IMPACT
OF GOVERNMENT
INITIATIVES
5.1 Whilst Government initiatives often
provide drivers, they are sometimes unco-ordinated and might overlap
(eg Police Community Support Officers and Neighbourhood Wardens).
Some have proved to be good but they are very frequent and raise
expectations amongst the public that cannot always be met.
5.2 The Government have generally shown
a high commitment to raising the profile of ASB and initiatives
such as the "Together" campaign have had some impact
in giving focus to the national debate. This has included encouraging
local CDRP's to develop an awareness and participation from local
communities.
5.3 TV and press coverage of initiatives
have been high profile, and the Home Office have clearly put a
lot of resources into the development of best practice for local
authorities and RSL's to assist them in making effective use of
new powers.
5.4 Overall, however, as with many new initiatives
put forward from central government, the key problem is one of
resources. Whilst it is incumbent upon CDRPs to develop localised
solutions to tackling local problems, all too often practitioners
find it difficult to keep up to speed as there is "no breathing
space".
6. THE ROLE
OF PARENTING
SUPPORT, YOUTH
AND COMMUNITY
SERVICES AND
THE YOUTH
JUSTICE SYSTEM
IN DIVERTING
YOUNG PEOPLE
FROM ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR
6.1 It is important that there should be
a coordinated and coherent approach to the prevention of youth
crime, ASB and disorder. Both voluntary and mandatory sanctions
related to ASB should always be offered in ways that encourage
and reinforce a desire to effect a positive change in behaviour.
Thus ASBOs and CRASBOs need to be applied with this aim in mind.
It is not the number of orders imposed in any locality that will
determine an effective multi agency response to the problem, but
the quality of content. All sanctions should consider, and where
appropriate, offer support to parents via Parenting Contracts
and Orders.
6.2 Whilst a minority of parents are neglectful
of their children or have a disregard for their children's behaviour
outside the home, the greater number will welcome support and
opportunities to examine different ways of setting boundaries
and encouraging appropriate behaviours with their children.
6.3 Locally, agencies need to plan together
and well ahead, for those times when young people are least likely
to be constructively occupied/supervised eg during school holidays.
Youth and community services, Connexions and Youth Offending Teams/Services
need to work closely together to ensure that they offer age-appropriate
and accessible activity provision for all children and young people.
Such provision must also take into account the needs of "high
risk" and "highly at risk" individual young people
so as to ensure that their needs are closely identified and met
and their progress charted.
6.4 Tenancy Enforcement Officers and estate
managers are frequently faced with barriers when seeking to refer
issues for action by Children's Services. There appears to be
a "cultural" divide in which CS will only act if the
subject of the referral (or their parents) has been advised of
the referral, and a Social Worker will only seek to get involved
if the nature of the risk to the child meets the strict criteria
laid down in the Childrens Act 1998 (Child Protection) legislation.
As for youth and community services, there appears to be extreme
limitations upon youth and community workers actively engaging
with children and young people in "hotspot" areas, and
the sparse resources are spread across a wide area.
7. DISPARITIES
IN LEVELS
OF ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR AND
IN THE
USE OF
POWERS TO
COMBAT IT
ACROSS THE
COUNTRY
7.1 The levels of ASB are clearly different
throughout the country depending on the size and location of the
area. Most powers are universal, however, some police forces are
yet to adopt dispersal areas as policy and this has created some
difficulties as residents expect authorities to use this power.
It would be more beneficial if all powers given by Government
were compulsory to the organisations they are aimed at, thus ensuring
consistency across the country.
7.2 Some areas will always suffer more than
others but funding should not be given just on crude statistics,
but should also reflect commitment to solving the problem and
success achieved.
7.3 One of the unaddressed issues around
ASB is that of tolerance. Communities can be very intolerant of
the activities of young people and may complain of any kind of
behaviour or activities by young people, there is a cross generational
education issue.
8. RESPONSIBILITIES
OF THE
PRIVATE SECTOR
FOR TACKLING
ANTI-SOCIAL
BEHAVIOUR
8.1 This is an area that requires a great
deal of attention as significant number of problems arise in the
private sector that are ignored due to absentee landlords or landlords
that do not have the skills or capacity to tackle the problems.
Some form of compulsory licensing or financial penalty could be
enforced on private landlords to ensure they deal with problems
in their properties effectively.
8.2 Greater powers other than ABC, Injunctions
or ASBO's that are cost effective would also be appreciated in
the use of owner-occupiers. In addition to this it is vital that
courts make serious cost awards against those who are punished
in court rather than making the public purse or housing organisations
pick up the cost.
8.3 Although the Housing Bill is making
good strides to tackle private sector ASB, there is still a significant
disparity. There is also a perception that less is expected of
owners of private sector property in terms of ASB than is the
case for public sector landlords.
8.4 RSLs need to be more effectively brought
into CDRPs in tackling ASB. It has been suggested that Section
17 of the Crime and Disorder Act could be brought to RSLs in some
way.
9. SUMMARY
9.1 Whilst Government initiatives and guidelines
on tackling ASB are welcomed, there remain ongoing problems in
securing appropriate resources. In other words, whilst there may
be great enthusiasm to use new powers available, this is tempered
by frustration at not being able to use these powers due to the
sheer volume of case work which needs to be done and can be dealt
with by utilising existing powers.
9.2 Links between ASB practitioners and
the police have become well established and are proving mutually
beneficial, however the relationship between practitioners and
the CPS, as well the dynamics of the CDRPs still have great room
for improvement.
9.3 The need for further emphasis on prevention
and rehabilitation has also been highlighted by our membership,
to avoid the age old issue of simply moving the problem on to
another area. This should include greater funds to occupy children
of all ages in their spare time, and support for parents.
9.4 Our members have also emphasised the
important need for tougher action to be taken to stop the private
sector being a safe haven for those who are guilty of ASB. This
impacts on the wider community and destroys the confidence of
the general public in the abilities of those who attempt to tackle
ASB.
14 September 2004
| 
