Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140-159)
HOME OFFICE
7 MAY 2008
Q140 Mr Mitchell: We have talked
about School Partnerships but, from the report, there are only
450. The number of actual schools is enormously greater than that.
Why are there so few?
Sir David Normington: You do not
need them everywhere. Some of the conversation we have just had
is about trying to target your efforts in particular places. Obviously,
there are some places and some schools where the likelihood of
crime or the likelihood of violent crime is greater. Some of it
is therefore making sure that it is targeted on the places where
it is needed most.
Q141 Mr Williams: We are told in
the report that senior police officers highly value the Safer
School Partnerships. Why do they highly value them?
Sir David Normington: Because
it gives them a chance to get to young people before they commit
the crime. In other words, to begin to build a relationship with
them in a safe environment before they are having to deal with
them on the streets. There is quite a lot of evidence that that
works, in terms of what the young people then do. It is also very
good at reinforcing school discipline. There is nothing like a
policeman turning up at the school for people to behave.
Q142 Mr Williams: Does the Home Office
share the view of the senior police officers?
Sir David Normington: Yes.
Q143 Mr Williams: Then why is it
that we are told that the Home Office has not been able to promote
Safer School Partnerships effectively because they have not collected
basic data on the number of safer schools in existence or their
location? Why is that?
Sir David Normington: I think
I said earlier that we are going to do that now, prompted by the
report. However, we did take an earlier decision that we would
let local schools and the local police get on with it, which we
are often being encouraged to do. We are often being told not
to tell people what to do. Earlier, in 2002, we put this arrangement
in place and encouraged schools to use it, but then did not actively
monitor what happened. I think that there is sometimes a good
case for letting local people get on with it and make things work.
Safer School Partnerships come in different shapes and sizes.
Sometimes the police work out of the school for quite a lot of
the day; sometimes they just come in the morning; sometimes they
are at the school gate. It is quite variable.
Q144 Mr Williams: One of the problems
with letting people get on with it is that we are told that not
all head teachers would admit to having problems with violence
with violence in their schools.
Sir David Normington: That is
true.
Q145 Mr Williams: What evidence is
there of that, NAO? What hard data did you find to substantiate
the claim that head teachers do not admit to having problems with
violence?
Ms Murphie: The police officers
that we interviewed when we went out to visit who were part of
the partnerships—it was their view that some head teachers
were more reluctant than others to say that there was a problem
in their schools, because of the reputational damage that it would
do to the schools themselves. I think that it is more about trying
to solve the problems themselves.
Sir David Normington: In some
places it is not a selling point for you to say that you have
that sort of problem.
Q146 Mr Williams: I can understand
that. Does that mean they deliberately mis-categorise it, or what?
Ms Murphie: I think that it is
more about not wanting that visible police presence in the school,
because that is the sort of thing—we were talking about
media representation—that can be blown up in the local media,
is it not?
Q147 Mr Williams: We are also told
that the Home Office has increased its funding, but we are told
that the effectiveness of Home Office funding distributed to partnerships
to reduce violent crime is substantially undermined by its lateness
and its poor administration. First of all, why is it late and,
secondly, what can you tell us about the poor administration?
Sir David Normington: What most
partnerships are complaining about is that the funding is for
one-off projects; it is not sustained funding over a period. That
is deliberate, in that what we are trying to do is to get the
mainstream funding, which is hugely more than the small amounts
we put in from the Home Office, focused on these problems and
trying to demonstrate through one-off project funding how that
can be done. Partnerships do not like that, though we think that
can be successful. I think that the administration point is about
lateness of notification, i.e. not being told in good time
that they are getting the money and then being expected to spend
it very quickly. There has been some of that in the past, but
we are putting that right. I hope that in the future that will
not happen.
Q148 Mr Williams: You seem to rate
amnesties quite highly, yet the partnerships regard them as ineffective.
Why the difference of viewpoint?
Sir David Normington: Personally,
I have mixed views about amnesties. The latest knife amnesty took
90,000 knives off the street, but I think that several partnerships
would say that that was just a one-off; it did not have a long-term
effect, and that it would be better to put your efforts into trying
to have a long-term impact than a one-off impact. In fact, in
the Home Office we are not promoting amnesties at the moment;
we are going to leave it to local people to decide whether they
are useful or not. I do not think that you will see us having
a sort of national amnesty. I also have to say that sometimes
national amnesties raise anxieties, because you see police officers
standing in front of piles of weapons and that feeds a view, which
we have been talking about, that the country is lawless, which
it is not.
Q149 Mr Williams: I understand the
motivation and the message they are trying to get over but, at
the end of the day, what is collected in an amnesty is a minuscule
proportion of the weapons in circulation.
Sir David Normington: It can be.
It is the guns that we have not got at that are the problem, of
course.
Q150 Mr Williams: Replica guns—you
made a point, which I agree with entirely, that at least if they
are a danger they are a danger to the person who has it. He or
she may end up getting knocked about or even shot for possessing
it. Is there any evidence that, in criminalising these pseudo-weapons,
young people turn to the real thing?
Sir David Normington: I do not
think so. What we have criminalised, of course, is the supply
and the sale of those weapons. It is very early days, because
that has only just been done; but I do not think there is. Basically,
it is very hard for young people to get hold of guns and mostly
they do not. It has not been so hard to get hold of a replica
gun, and that is why we are trying to cut off that supply. It
is not very easy for most young people, fortunately, to get hold
of a gun.
Q151 Mr Williams: You said in answer
to Dr Pugh that gangs come in different shapes and sizes. What
difference is there in the groups that go heavily for knives?
Is there any characteristic that differentiates them from other
gangs?
Mr King: No, I do not think we
have the detail broken down in that sense; but we do know that
there are many different ways in which gangs work, and different
gangs will use different weapons, for example. We do know that
there is great variation in practice.
Q152 Mr Williams: You have area gangs.
Mr King: Yes.
Q153 Mr Williams: You also have,
I suppose, racial gangs, ethnic gangs, as well.
Mr King: Yes.
Q154 Mr Williams: Are some of those
more predisposed to weaponry than others?
Sir David Normington: Some of
the black gangs in London, slightly older gangs, are more serious
and are more likely to have guns; but I would not like to make
an ethnic point beyond that. That is just a fact. I do not know
that generally there is a difference in how gangs behave otherwise.
Q155 Mr Davidson: I apologise for
being late and for having missed some of this; so I am not sure
if some of these points have been covered. I wanted to pick up
chart 14 on page 29, about using the details from the ambulance
service and accident and emergency data and that really quite
substantial proportions do not seem to use that. To what extent
does that not give you a complete distortion of the actual crime
rates, as distinct from the reported crime rates?
Sir David Normington: I was explaining
earlier the importance of persuading every PCT to bring its data
to the table. Otherwise, you have only a partial story in an area.
Hospitals are seeing the real effects of some of these crimes,
in terms of woundings and the real cost it is to the Health Service.
Unless they do that, therefore, we have only a partial picture
in an area, and a lot of work is going on to try to ensure that
they do that. Where they do it, of course, you can see the benefits.
There are real benefits in cutting crime, and therefore savings
to the hospital.
Q156 Mr Davidson: Is this not something
that there ought to be a clear line about? I get the impression
that when, for example, 55% do not use ambulance data figures,
it is almost as if it is voluntary then, is it not?
Sir David Normington: We have
now made it, as a last resort, a statutory requirement to share
data and we are now training partnerships in how to do that, to
show them it can be done. Also, improving the analytical capability
locally to look at all the data and say, "This is what is
happening in my area".
Q157 Mr Davidson: It is a question
of what is happening in my area, and the charts we have give crimes
by age and by gender but they do not give us anything by social
class. I am wondering whether or not you have clear figures about
that. It is my impression that working-class youngsters tend to
be the worst victims of crime and that there are clear class distinctions
in terms of who suffers most from it. Is that supported by the
figures you have?
Sir David Normington: We can certainly
do that. It is certainly true that young people from low-income
families are more likely to be both the victims of crime and to
commit crime. I do not know whether I would read that right across
the social class, but it is a reasonable proxy in some cases for
social class. It is not the only thing that makes people likely
to commit crimes.
Q158 Mr Davidson: No, but in terms
of correlation.
Sir David Normington: There is
some.
Q159 Mr Davidson: Can I also ask
about the geographical location of crime? Am I right in thinking
that crimes are committed disproportionately in poorer areas,
particularly crimes like assault? There will be some that take
place in city centres, but you are much more likely to find crimes
taking place in the poorer areas. Is that also the case?
Sir David Normington: For most
crimes that would be so, yes.
| 
