HC Deb 06 July 1976 vol 914 cc1328-38

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. James Hamilton.]

11.7 p.m.

Mr. Teddy Taylor (Glasgow, Cathcart)

I was very sorely tempted to speak in the debate on the Compensation for Limitation of Prices (British Gas Corporation) Order 1976 when I heard my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) and other hon. Members talking of the possibility of a gas tax. They will be aware that we have had a gas tax in Scotland for many years. We have always paid more for our gas in Scotland than people in the rest of Britain have paid. The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland will agree that the efforts of both Conservative and Labour Scottish Members of Parliament to get Governments to do anything about this have been singularly unsuccessful.

I apologise to the Under-Secretary for bringing him here yet again for an Adjournment debate. Although I have not been involved in one myself for many years, the Under-Secretary, since his appointment, seems to have had far more than his share of them. However, he will probably not object to my doing this on the important question of List D schools. As the House is aware, List D schools were established as one of the pillars of the children's panel system. It was one of the pillars on which this system was to function. In practice, the only action that a panel can take to deal with a young offender, apart from giving advice to the parents and the youngsters, is to put the young offender in a List D school or under the supervision of a social worker while at home.

Unfortunately, because the List D schools are overfull, with lengthy waiting lists, and because the social departments in some areas already provide little more than an emergency service, the children's panel system of dealing with young offenders is in danger of collapsing. Everywhere, figures can be produced to show that schools are not full at any time and that in some cases only 60 per cent. of the beds are full. That arises because of the changeover. One youngster leaves and the bed remains empty until another youngster arrives. I am sure the Minister would not question that, although there is not 100 per cent. occupancy, there is a severe shortage of beds in these schools. There are long waiting lists, and panels have been told that children cannot be taken.

The panel members are becoming frustrated, and some are close to resigning. Mrs. Maurine Murchison, who chairs the Inverness-shire panels, said recently: It is fair to say that unless adequate provision for young offenders is made by the Highland Region, there are panel members who will have to consider whether the time spent on children's hearings is worth while. The police are fed up to the teeth with the whole system. In May, for example, Chief Constable Alex Morrison, of the Grampian Force, said: Police morale is low because they know that, no matter how earnestly they pursue inquiries, little is going to happen to the offenders. List D schools are chock-a-block. I am sure that the hon. Member for West Stirlingshire (Mr. Canavan) will agree that the public are disturbed—rightly so—about the rising tide of juvenile crime and vandalism. Vandalism has become Scotland's greatest social disease. There is clearly no effective deterrent to curb vandalism and juvenile crime when all that can happen if the offenders are caught is that they appear before a children's panel that is hamstrung by the limitation of resources.

I know that many youngsters are concerned and alarmed that the State is apparently powerless to maintain standards of conduct amongst the young. Wild tearaways, wreckers and vandals, who, happily, are still in the minority, are undermining school discipline and community standards and causing an immense loss to public funds by their activities.

Even liberally-minded people like the hon. Member for Glasgow, Kelvingrove (Mr. Carmichael), who supported the panel system, are disturbed at the effect of the present List D school crisis. Some youngsters who have to be detained because of their conduct are put in prison simply because there are no secure places available in List D schools. I shall mention only one example. In Paisley, two youngsters aged 14 and 15 were sentenced in March to two years' and one year's detention, respectively, for housebreaking. They were taken to Barlinnie Prison, because they had been waiting since the previous summer for a place in a List D school. The sheriff declared that it was ridiculous that the youngsters, who were supposed to be getting training at a List D school, had been free to commit other offences.

Perhaps I should mention yet another case. Everyone in Scotland was shocked to read the report of the Inverness case last week. A youngster who had appeared before a panel on 21st January on charges of indecent assault had been assessed before a panel as suitable to be placed in a secure home. No place could be found for him, although the social worker concerned telephoned every such establishment in Scotland. The boy was therefore allowed to go home. He proceeded to assault a little girl of 4 and to attempt to rape her. Since the incident the boy has been in Porterfield Prison. The distress caused to the little girl, and the fact that no training had been given to her attacker, should make Parliament and the Government wonder whether the guilt does not fall on them for failing to provide a system that deals adequately with young offenders.

What are the full facts? I should like the Minister to tell the House about the number of youngsters who have been sent to prison because no secure places are available. I should like the Minister to tell us about the capacity of List D schools and about the waiting lists. I should like the Minister to tell us what plans he has to deal with what is clearly a crisis situation, and to comment on some suggestions that I have for dealing with the present emergency.

I think that the Minister will agree that, even if cash were available now to build more List D schools, it would probably be at least two years before the buildings would be ready for occupation. Would the Minister be willing to set up a committee of panel members, police forces and Members of Parliament to review the urgent need that exists and put forward, within a period of eight weeks, specific proposals on alternative accommodation?

I would think that we could use the many hutted camp sites in Scotland to provide training facilities similar to those of List D schools, and to man them I believe that we could use the surplus of teachers who will, unfortunately, shortly be joining the dole queues. Some cash would be required to make the sites more secure, but I am convinced that our open-air camp site schools would give scope for outdoor activities and that the spending required could probably fall within the job creation scheme. The camps would not be holiday centres; they would be tough and disciplined camps, which could provide the kind of training that might influence the youngsters to change their ways.

Secondly, I recommend and hope that the Minister gets some statistical calculations done as a matter of urgency to establish the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of List D school training. In particular, we should learn what percentage of the youngsters return to crime or vandalism and the percentage who get into no more trouble.

The Minister has complained in the past that Scotland has a larger percentage of youngsters in List D schools than have other nations, and particularly more than England. Could it not be that the reason for this is simply that the List D schools are not effective either as a deterrent or as a form of rehabilitation?

Thirdly, I ask the Minister to have urgent talks with the police to get their views on how deterrents might be made more effective. If they are not, we are simply condemning hundreds of thousands of our Scottish citizens, particularly in housing schemes, to a continued life of hell as they suffer from the activities of vandals and young hooligans.

I have always believed in the reintroduction of the birch as a penalty for acts of violence and vandalism by young offenders. I am sure that this would relieve the pressures on List D schools very speedily, and would also give encouragement and protection to the law-abiding public.

Mr. Dennis Canavan (West Stirling-shire)

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that corporal punishment is at present used in schools, including List D schools? How on earth would the reintroduction of the birch help to minimise this problem or solve it? I suggest that we already have an excessive use of corporal punishment in certain schools, and it obviously does not act as a deterrent to vandalism.

Mr. Taylor

I know that the hon. Gentleman takes a great interest in this matter. He has said that as a teacher he used corporal punishment, although he has spent most of his parliamentary career trying to get it abolished. His ideas have been popular and have been in charge, to some degree, of the policy of the Government. But that soft policy has produced the situation in which we have a crisis in the List D schools because we cannot find places for youngsters found guilty of serious crimes, and in which the penal system is in danger of breaking down. We have tried the hon. Gentleman's ways for years, and the situation has reached crisis proportions.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree with me that vandalism and violence among young offenders generally have been increasing at a disturbing rate. I am convinced that if we had an effective deterrent of this sort it would make a major change. The Minister has his views, which he holds strongly. I have mine. In view of the collapse of the policy that has been followed, would he be willing to try my suggestion for an experimental period of three or four years and see whether it would make a difference?

Mr. Canavan

It would do harm.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bryant Codman Irvine)

Order. Sedentary interruptions are not in order.

Mr. Taylor

The present policies and their effects are doing immense damage to law-abiding people in many of our communities who want to live healthy lives but whose lives are being made a hell by the activities of young hooligans and vandals.

I ask those who disagree with me—and I believe that the Minister is one of them—for their solutions to what they must admit is the very urgent and serious problem that exists on our doorstep in Scotland. If we cannot propose an effective solution the electors and the citizens of Scotland will continue to lose faith in our democratic institutions. Some may be tempted to take the law into their own hands.

A Written Answer was given today to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind), relating to the powers of the Government under the Childrens Act 1975 to make grants to councils that want to build secure accommodation for children. I understand that my hon. Friend asked how many applications the Government had received under that Act and that the reply was that there had been three applications but none had been granted so far. If that is the case, it shows that the Government are not treating the matter with the urgency that it merits.

I hope that the Minister will acccept that there is an emergency situation and that emergency measures are required. I have every confidence in the Minister. I am sure that he will feel a sense of urgency, and will not give us flannel.

11.22 p.m.

The Under-Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Frank McElhone)

I thank the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Taylor) for initiating this debate. The matter is causing a great deal of concern to the public in Scotland. I do not deny that. I readily recognise that this concern has not been stimulated solely by the particular case of the Inverness incident to which the hon. Gentleman referred. It is of a more general kind. We have a serious problem on our hands. I fully understand that and appreciate the concern and, indeed, the anger of individual people whose property or whose children are attacked. I share the hon. Gentleman's view that we should reject the vandalism that occurs in many places. In communities that have tried to look after themselves vandalism does not occur to any great extent. In my own area of Hutchesontown little damage is done, thanks to the efforts of the tenants' association.

The Government and the local authorities are giving expression to their concern. Things have been done and are being done to tackle the problems with which this debate is concerned. Expenditure on List D schools has risen from just over £2 million in 1969–70 to an expected figure of approximately £7.3 million in 1976–77, and the building programme is running at about £750,000 annually. Since 1968–69 the number of staff has risen from 614 to 999. A total of 69 additional places have recently been added to the system, including 28 secure places. In the List D schools there are at present 53 secure places for boys and a special unit of 10 places for particularly difficult girls.

There are 12 assessment centres in Scotland, providing 350 places. Current local authority building programmes should provide a further 137 assessment centre places, 61 of which are expected to become available this year and the remainder in 1977. Planning is proceeding to provide another 45 places. If certain difficulties can be resolved in relation to the project in the Highland Region, to which the hon. Gentleman referred, we should see all regional authorities having assessment centres for their youngsters.

In the Highland Region there is no assessment centre and no List D school. One might ask whether former local authorities took that into account when they thought about the social problems that might occur there. The Department has allocated £100,000 to the provision of a centre in the region and it is urgently considering what can be done within the constraints on local authorities in the Government's present financial programme.

My Department has taken the lead in trying to work out with List D schools and local authorities a quota system for the allocation of places in the schools, whereby each local authority will have a certain number of places and will arrange the admission of children from its own area.

I do not doubt what the hon. Gentleman said about the social worker telephoning every List D school. I was not aware of that. We have made many checks on this case, but I shall check that point also for the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. Andrew Welsh (South Angus)

Can the Minister give an indication of the size of the waiting list for List D schools? What sort of demand for places is there?

Mr. McElhone

I think that the hon. Gentleman will find that I shall cover those points.

We have now had comments from the schools and the local authorities on our quota proposals, and we are considering the best procedure.

There was a mention in the Press recently of the problems of Strathclyde Regional Council with the Larchgrove Assessment Centre. My officials are aware of the problem and have made considerable efforts to assist Strathclyde to secure the placement of boys sentenced to detention by the courts for serious offences. Only two of the boys in that category about whom the council approached the Department in March have not yet been placed, and they require special assessment. We give as much help as possible to local authorities.

So far, I have spoken only about our efforts in relation to residential accommodation. We believe that this is not the only possible approach to the problem of children in trouble. We have been active in promoting, through policy guidance and otherwise, the provision of schemes of intermediate treatment, and there are now many such schemes, ranging from extra activities arranged by social workers for children on supervision to more formal schemes. Many of the more formal schemes provided by local authorities have been supported by urban aid funds. Schemes have also been organised by voluntary bodies that receive specific grant for the purpose from the Department.

There may yet be more scope for a movement away from residential care. That is a view that I hold. Pro rata, we send more youngsters into care in Scotland than in England and Wales or any other EEC country. Are the youngsters in Manchester, Birmingham or Brussels any better or worse than in Glasgow? I am convinced that we must seek other ways.

I have been having meetings with various people from local authorities—in particular the Lothian and Strathclyde Regions, I have met the directors, conveners, reporters and panel chairmen from Strathclyde and Lothian. They are actively engaged with me in considering alternative ways of assisting young people—in other words, putting some responsibility on to the community for the social ills of the community.

Although there is a need for List D places, I suspect that a number of young people in them should not be there. I am trying to tell the community "You must accept some responsibility, and do it voluntarily". We are heading in that direction.

The hon. Gentleman asked whether we had consulted the police about deterrents. We put out a circular some time ago asking various authorities, including the police, for their views on the powers of children's hearings, and on the future powers that they might like to see, and any changes that they might want in the allocation of those powers. Included in the circular there was a point about finding caution and also the possibility of fines being imposed by children's panels. They are only points for discussion, and the views of the police and of all the other bodies will be seriously considered.

The hon. Gentleman asked for the number of places in List D schools. There are 1,646 places. He also referred to the occupancy rate. That is a difficult question. Certain schools have age ranges. Some take only girls. Others take only Roman Catholic children, or Protestant children. We had the disadvantage of a fire at Thornly Park, Paisley, and we had difficulties at Wellington School, Penicuik, which have now been resolved by the appointment of a headmaster, and we hope to get that school working at full capacity again.

The hon. Gentleman pointed out that there is a great deal of disillusionment amongst members of children's panels. I have taken the opportunity to look into that. Although we have 1,751 members of children's panels, and although 171 members resigned in 1975, in their letters of resignation only 10 said that they were resigning because they were disillusioned or frustrated. Most of the other resignations were because people had to move away, or because of the pressure of their work. I have tried to check the figures for this year. I understand that only five have sent letters saying that they were disillusioned with the children's panel system.

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will join me in paying tribute to the many people who give dedicated service in their free time to running the system. Although the system has been going for five years, it is still under trial and needs time to prove itself.

As for the boy whom the hon. Gentleman mentioned, I must say that I offer my sympathy to the family whose child was attacked. But there is no doubt that the boy was receiving regular supervision, both formal and informal, from his social worker, who lived on the same housing estate, and co-operation from the mother was good.

I am aware that we can always improve our allocation of youngsters to List D schools, and I am instructing my officials to undertake as soon as possible discussions with directors of social work and reporters to children's panels on how to achieve improvements in the means of identifying children who have committed serious offences and who present special difficulties so that we can arrange placement as quickly as possible. We shall also discuss ways of speeding up the filling of the empty bed spaces in the List D schools. We have 26 List D schools.

The hon. Gentleman referred to a Question asked by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, Pentlands (Mr. Rifkind) about grants for secure accommodation. Perhaps I may give him some information about them. In May 1976, the DHSS issued a circular about the grant scheme that will operate south of the border, a circular giving details of a comparable scheme in Scotland is in preparation. It should be issued shortly. My Department is also having discussions with two or three regions which are interested in planning the provision of secure accommodation.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

Is it not preposterous that an Act should have been passed in 1975 providing for grants to be paid in respect of secure accommodation and that the Government are only now thinking of sending out a circular letter on the subject?

Mr. McElhone

At the end of the day we had to have some regard to the fact that the new authorities were only getting under way in 1975, and that they have gone through a transition period from the old local authorities. In the case of the regional authorities there was a mas- sive changeover, when they brought so many smaller district authorities into one unit. We had to have some regard to that. But I think that they are now starting to speed up the process of working with central Government.

I want to say a quick word about waiting lists. There was a waiting list of 536 in June 1975, and the figure on 20th June this year was 366. I do not deny that there is a problem—the hon. Member for Cathcart highlighted it—but within the constraints that local authorities and my own Department have to work we are doing as much as we can to provide places for youngsters who need care and treatment in the List D schools, at the same time looking to oher possibilities.

I am very glad that in the two major authorities that I consulted on this matter—Lothian and Strathclyde—the officials, the reporters, the chairmen of the children's panels, the social work committee and the conveners are at one with me on the need to attempt something different, in bringing some responsibility to bear on the community.

I totally reject the hon. Member's suggestion about the birch. I have always opposed its use—as a magistrate, a police judge and a member of a local authority. History proves that that type of punishment given to young people does not reduce the number of offences at the juvenile or the senior level. I have learned this not only through discussing the subject but from people who have had the birch and people who have had to administer it. We must look to other methods. The trouble stems from the environment from which many of these youngsters come. Perhaps we all share responsibility for them. Finally, we shall get back to a balanced, sane society, in which our young people respond as all young people should—

The Question having being proposed after Ten o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at twenty-three minutes to Twelve o'clock.