You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Hansard > Commons Debates > Commons Debates by date > Commons Debates - previous sessions > Bound Volume Hansard - Written Answers
Previous Section Index Home Page

9 Oct 2006 : Column 480W—continued


Period
1 January 2001 to 31 December 2001 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2002 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2003
Local authority area Total issued Total refused Total issued Total refused Total issued Total refused

Adur DC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Bradford, City of, MDC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Brighton and Hove CC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Burnley BC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Enfield LB

—

—

—

—

—

—

Epsom and Ewell BC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Havering LB

—

—

—

—

—

—

Kennet DC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Manchester CC

—

—

—

—

3

—

Masfield DC

—

—

—

—

—

—

North East Lincolnshire Council

—

—

—

—

—

—

North Hertfordshire DC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Redcar and Cleveland Council

—

—

—

—

—

—

Salisbury DC

—

—

—

—

1

—

Southwark LB

—

—

—

—

—

—

St. Helens MBC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Trafford MBC

—

—

—

—

3

—

Walsall MBC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Woking BC

—

—

—

—

—

—

Total

—

—

—

—

7

—



9 Oct 2006 : Column 481W

9 Oct 2006 : Column 482W
Period
1 January 2004 to 31 December 2004 1 January 2005 to 30 September 2005
Local authority area Total issued Total refused Total issued Total refused

Adur DC

—

—

1

—

Bradford, City of, MDC

—

—

2

—

Brighton and Hove CC

1

—

—

—

Burnley BC

—

—

3

—

Enfield LB

—

—

1

—

Epsom and Ewell BC

1

—

—

—

Havering LB

—

—

1

—

Kennet DC

—

—

1

—

Manchester CC

—

—

—

—

Masfield DC

—

—

1

—

North East Lincolnshire Council

—

—

2

—

North Hertfordshire DC

—

—

1

—

Redcar and Cleveland Council

1

—

—

—

Salisbury DC

—

—

—

—

Southwark LB

—

—

1

—

St. Helens MBC

2

—

1

—

Trafford MBC

1

—

—

—

Walsall MBC

—

—

1

—

Woking BC

—

—

2

—

Total

6

—

18

—

(1) Between 1 April 1999 and 31 May 2000 data were collected on aggregate numbers only by police force area.
Notes:
1. Some of the local authority areas defined in the table may not be classified as formally listed borough, city, district or unitary authorities.
2. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.

Mr. Love: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders have been issued in Greater London; and if he will make a statement. [90161]

Mr. McNulty: A table giving the number of antisocial behaviour orders issued at all courts by criminal justice system area, as reported to the Home Office by the Court Service, up to 30 September 2005 (latest available), can be found on the Crime Reduction website at www.crimereduction.gov.uk

Mr. Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) antisocial behaviour orders and (b) acceptable behaviour contracts were issued in (i) Hammersmith and Fulham and (ii) Ealing, Acton and Shepherds Bush constituency in 2005. [90213]

Mr. McNulty: A table giving the number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued annually, as reported to the Home Office by the Court Service, by the local government authority area in which prohibitions have been imposed, up to 30 September 2005 (latest available), can be found on the Crime Reduction website at www.crimereduction.gov.uk. ASBO data are not available at parliamentary constituency level.

There are no national statistics on acceptable behaviour contracts (ABCs) as these are voluntary agreements.

Mr. Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of further reforms required to decrease incidents of antisocial behaviour. [92610]

Mr. Coaker: The Government are committed to tackling antisocial behaviour, and has a proven track record of success. We keep under continuous review the range of tools and powers available to practitioners and provide practical day to day support to front line services, for example through the Respect ActionLine and website. However, we know that more needs to be done to combat antisocial behaviour which is why, in January this year, the Respect Action Plan set out our intention to consider strengthening summary powers to bring about immediate protection for those suffering antisocial behaviour. This aligns with my further commitment in 'Rebalancing the Criminal Justice System' to consult on proposals to tackle low-level offending and antisocial behaviour.

Next Section Index Home Page