Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100-119)
HOME OFFICE
7 MAY 2008
Q100 Geraldine Smith: What I would
say, however, is that it really is essential to channel young
people's energy into positive things. It is perhaps beyond your
control in the Home Office, but I think that other government
departments, particularly Education, have to take that on board
and have to provide the facilities—not that middle-aged
people think young people want but that young people actually
do want.
Sir David Normington: We do work
closely with DCSF now. Their Aimhigher—or it may be their
Positive Futures Programme—is all under this heading of
things to do and places to go: really fruitful activities, sport
and other activities for young people. The constant complaint
from young people is "I've got nothing to do and nowhere
to go". A lot of resource from the DCSF, several hundred
million pounds, is going into providing those kinds of facilities.
That is a really important bit of prevention, in my view.
Q101 Dr Pugh: I have a few questions
on the subject of violent crime in general. Can I start with chart
7 on page 12? It says there that 85% of violent offenders are
between the ages of 16 and 29. It is a breakdown by age and a
breakdown by gender. Do you have a breakdown by social category
or class?
Sir David Normington: I do not,
no.
Q102 Dr Pugh: Would it be possible
to get such a breakdown?[3]
Sir David Normington: I do not
know. We do have quite a lot of things that are about the characteristics
of young offenders; so I can do that, but not by social class.
We can provide you with that data. There is quite a lot of good
data about that.
Q103 Dr Pugh: In terms of the victims
of crime, I see that young men are also the most likely to be
victims of violent crime in this case. What percentage of victims
do they make up? I see that the risk factor is 13.8 and 6.2.
Sir David Normington: I will have
to check this. From memory, about 27% are victims, but I have
to check that. If we are breaking again, I would like to check
it while I can.
Chairman: I am afraid that we are interrupted
by some "gang" divisions in the Chamber downstairs!
The Committee suspended from 4.43 pm to
4.50 pm for a division in the House.
Q104 Dr Pugh: I think we had left things
with your saying that you are not quite sure what the social complexion
is of the average offender and you think that, of the victims,
on average about 29% or 30% are young men as well.
Sir David Normington: The figure
I quoted is 27%, and that is 27% of young people say that they
have been a victim of crime at some point.
Q105 Dr Pugh: Surely we have a breakdown
of reported crime, do we not?
Sir David Normington: We do, but
I do not think I have it broken down here. I will try to give
you that. I think that I can give you the data in due course about
income related to crime.
Q106 Dr Pugh: Perhaps you could send
us a note on that then. On chart 7 on page 12, it also says that
"... 17% of violent offenders were thought by their victim
to be under the influence of drugs". Have we any data on
precisely what drugs they are under the influence of? Clearly
if it was Mogadon you would be very surprised by that, but other
drugs rather less so—crack cocaine, for example. Have we
any data that enables us to know which drugs are so closely related
to violent crime?
Sir David Normington: We do not
have that. We cannot relate those things, though I think, anecdotally,
more serious drugs like crack cocaine are more likely to lead
to violent crime. I think that is a fact, but I do not think that
we have the actual, hard evidence.
Q107 Dr Pugh: My next question will
therefore probably get that answer as well. Given the profile
we have of violent crime in the UK, how does it compare with the
profile of violent crime in similar European countries? Do we
actually have a higher percentage of young men involved in violent
crime or is it possibly just the going rate?
Sir David Normington: It is certainly
the case that in most developed countries it is broadly the same
issue of male young people. I do not know precisely what the international
comparisons are, but it is broadly the same trend in most developed
countries.
Q108 Dr Pugh: Your suspicion is that
it would not be a very informative comparison if we made it?
Sir David Normington: I do not
think it would illuminate anything in particular, no.
Q109 Dr Pugh: When I studied a little
bit of criminology many years ago, they used to distinguish between
two sorts of gangs: gangs that went looking for trouble, which
they called "conflict gangs" and criminal gangs that
basically were not looking to be noticed at all, but were involved
in lucrative and mercenary pursuits. Is that distinction any longer
valid, or are all the gangs or all the gang activity you are familiar
with and record connected with further crime apart from violence,
such as drugs?
Sir David Normington: Gangs do
come in lots of different shapes and sizes. Clearly, organised
crime is a completely different issue from the one we are talking
about here. Most of the gangs that we are talking about here actually
like people to know that they exist. That is the purpose of it.
Some of them have websites; they have names and they publicise
their existence. That is what they are for really; it is their
territory.
Q110 Dr Pugh: Apart from defending
a territory, attacking other people and generally putting themselves
about in an unnecessary way, are they engaged in further criminal
activity? In other words, is the line that used to be drawn between
conflict gangs and criminal gangs a somewhat blurred one now?
Mr King: Yes, I think it is. I
think that has blurred increasingly. A lot of these gangs, as
well as the territorial aspects of their functioning, are also
involved in working for other people who may be involved in organised
crime at a lower level; for example, involving themselves in drug-dealing
in particular communities. I therefore do not think that we would
seek to draw quite the same distinction now as has been drawn
in the past.
Q111 Dr Pugh: In terms of the partnerships
that address crime and seek to reduce violent crime in particular,
some are regarded as effective, some are regarded as ineffective.
I do not know whether my question is to you or to the NAO, but
in assessing effectiveness you obviously look at how crime rates
fall in that area. However, whether they fall or not could be
a function of the vigilance of the local police force rather than
directly the result of the partnership. The partnership may make
little or no difference whatsoever. Can you separate the two?
Can you say that quite clearly it is the partnership "wot
done it"?
Sir David Normington: Partnerships
are only as strong, first of all, as the partners. If the police
are no good, then you are in trouble and the partnership will
not be able to counteract that. I think that is the starting point.
However, if you take what has been some remarkable progress recently
on crime overall, that was partly driven by us working with the
44 partnerships where performance compared with others was not
good enough in terms of bringing down crime. Making those partnerships
work was the key to crime going down faster in those areas than
in comparator areas; and that was because the local authority,
other emergency services, the police, all—
Q112 Dr Pugh: The local authority
is the lead in the partnership in all cases?
Sir David Normington: No, they
decide who is in the lead. I think that it is about a third the
police, a third the local authorities, and a third others.
Q113 Dr Pugh: Is there any correlation
between who leads it and their success? Would the NAO possibly
comment there?
Ms Murphie: No, there is not.
I think the issue of causality that you have picked on there,
between particular activities and particular falls of crime, is
a very difficult one to draw. I think that, if you have a partnership
that is working well, that has good analysis, good data-sharing,
and it is associated with a fall, you can make the assumption
that the one is related to the other.
Dr Pugh: My last question is to
the NAO. At the end of the report, it says that they toured Liverpool
throughout the night-time, had spoken to door staff and others,
and had looked at the closed circuit TV control room. I did exactly
the same thing many years ago and the worst thing that happened
to me was that I got my bottom pinched in a nightclub!
Mr Mitchell: It is tough in the
Liberal Party!
Q114 Dr Pugh: Having done all that—having
done the tour, which everybody does—can you assess the efficiency
of what they are doing?
Ms Murphie: The efficiency of
it?
Q115 Dr Pugh: Yes.
Ms Murphie: I think that the in-depth
visits are not so much about efficiency: they are about looking
for best practice and what works, especially in the bigger—
Q116 Dr Pugh: But you do not know
the best practice unless you know that it is efficient, do you?
Ms Murphie: I see what you mean.
I think that you make a reasonable assumption that it is.
Q117 Dr Pugh: That it is efficient?
Ms Murphie: Yes. Personally, I
did not visit Liverpool; I went to Birmingham and looked at the
way that they were implementing the Licensing Act. The way that
was set up, they had costed it all; they had particular interventions
they were doing. I went out with the police and so on. Yes, I
think that you can make an assumption it was a good use of public
funds.
Q118 Mr Mitchell: I have to say that
I just do not get it. You are telling us that violent crime is
down and, since the crime survey records the experience of the
victims—and they are likely to feel more upset about violent
crime perpetrated on them—it must be true; but fear of crime
is up. We all make jokes about "Come to Liverpool, you may
not get mugged"! There is a constant series of complaints;
it becomes a major political issue. Why is this? Is it the Daily
Mail terrorising its readers?
Sir David Normington: Fear of
crime is down. Actually, in the same surveys fear of crime is
down. Fear of specific forms of crime is also down. I am as frustrated
as you about this mismatch.
Q119 Mr Mitchell: Has any research
been done as to whether coverage today in the newspapers and on
television of violent crime is more extensive and more bloodcurdling
than it used to be, say 10 or 20 years ago?
Sir David Normington: I do not
know.
3 Ev 22 Back
| 
