§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Garel-Jones.]
10.51 pm§ Mr. Tom Cox (Tooting)The Adjournment debate this evening is on a subject that I have often debated in the House. I have lost count, over the years that I have been an hon. Member, of the number of debates and questions in which I have been involved that have brought to the attention of Ministers this problem in my constituency. Indeed, as long ago as when Mr. Alexander Lyon was the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, he met a number of residents from my constituency to discuss with them the problems that they faced from street prostitution.
Prostitution in part of my constituency has been a problem for many years. The experience that women of all ages, including school girls, face day in and day out from the individuals who come to the area seeking to pick up prostitutes are invariably degrading and disgusting. The remarks and the threats are faced all the time. Equally, the experiences of local residents when they express their views to both the women and the kerb crawlers who are seeking them are disgusting. There are threats to local people from the pimps and minders who can be clearly seen in the area. Windows have been broken. In one case of which I am aware, a car was driven at a person. We are in no doubt who does such things. Parents find contraceptives outside their homes or in the car parking spaces where young children often play, and that is just another example of the problem. The list of the incidents that I could give is endless.
Locally, I have had many meetings with the police and residents over the years. We accept that the police know of the problem and have sought to help, but we also know that they have had, and still have, manpower problems. I give them credit for drafting more officers into the area. Moreover, the women then move out and and it seems as though the problem is partly solved. However, we are then told by the local police that there is not evidence of prostitution on the streets in the area and they cannot therefore keep as many officers in the area doing such work. So the problem continues. The problem is not only in my area, but in many other areas such as London, Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, Southampton, Norwich and Leicester.
I have here a press cutting of 24 June last year, which highlights the problem in Luton. So, sadly, the problem exists in many parts of the country.
Last October, the problem was tackled in a different way. Nottingham police, who had suffered from the problem for many years, acted under a law that goes back hundreds of years. They took action against the kerb-crawlers under the Justice of the Peace Act 1361. Following that action and the success in the courts, other police forces took similar action. I welcome that, because at long last something is being done to try to rid areas of the problem.
In London, the police operated under a different Act—the Metropolitan Police Act 1839, giving the right to take action regarding insulting behaviour that is likely to lead to a breach of the peace. I welcome that action, but I am far from happy with it.
673 We are trying to deal with a modern problem—the kerb-crawler — with laws that go back hundreds of years. I understand that most of the people who have appeared in courts have pleaded guilty, but a time will come when someone will plead not guilty. The case could well go to appeal, possibly even to the High Court. What the outcome will be, only time can tell. I am in no doubt—and when I speak to senior police officers I find that they, too, are in no doubt—that this will ultimately happen. No one — neither the Home Secretary nor anyone in the Home Office—can be happy with the present position.
I put it firmly to the Minister that it is an abnegation of responsibility on the part of a senior Government Department, in dealing with a major problem in many parts of the country, not to seek to introduce a more modern law to tackle this problem.
I do not have the figures in the cities that I mentioned of the number of offences that have been taken to the courts under soliciting for prostitution. However, I have the figures for my area. They highlight how drastic the problem now is in my constituency. In 1981, there were 145 convictions for soliciting. In 1982, the number had risen to 313. In 1983, the number had risen to 802. I suggest that similar figures could be given for all the other areas where prostitution is a problem. There is a problem, and no one denies it. Nor, I am sure, will the Minister dispute it. Unfortunately, the problem is getting worse. When I am told by senior police officers in my area that women who operate in the area can earn up to £600 a week, I realise that it can be a very profitable way of life.
In December 1982, we had the report of the Criminal Law Revision Committee on offences relating to prostitution. The report clearly stated that the public wanted action to try to stop the problem, which, as I have said, exists throughout the country. In paragraph 344, it says about the kerb-crawler:
this offence should be punishable with one month's imprisonment or a fine of £1,000 or both".In the past, I have been told by successive Ministers—in the last Adjournment debate that I had on this subject it was the present Home Secretary who replied—that we would have to wait for the report. I have also been told that there could be problems in taking cases to court for conviction. Like many of my constituents, I refuse to accept that. If the Home Office is prepared to allow police forces up and down the country to take such people to court under laws that go back hundreds of years and that were not introduced for such an offence, it is inconceivable that it should say that, despite what the Criminal Law Revision Committee has suggested, there will be problems, so it cannot consider that point very seriously. I beg the Minister not to give me that sort of reply tonight.
From the figures that I have given, it is clear that the situation has become worse. After all, how would the Minister feel if, when he got home, his wife told him that she had been accosted by a kerb-crawler who had asked how much she wanted for him to have sex with her? I am sure that he would be revolted by the fact that his wife had been through that experience. However, it happens day after day and night after night to women in my constituency, irrespective of their age.
Kerb-crawlers come into my constituency—and into all the areas that face this problem—from the early afternoon until the early hours of the morning. The local 674 residents who attempt to voice their concern and to get such people out of the area are abused and threatened, as I have said, by the very people who live off prostitution. Some time ago I wrote to the Home Secretary about this issue, and he told me that he was not in a position to interfere with the actions of the courts. That may be so. However, the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor have made their views known to judges—and I have welcomed it—who have tried rape cases. Local people have complained that such people have been dealt with appallingly leniently given the offences that they have committed.
Fairly recently, someone was charged at the local South-Western magistrates' court with living off immoral earnings. That person pleaded guilty and was fined £100. I bet that frightened that guy! I bet he shuddered when he heard his sentence. Therefore, I ask the Minister to consider that point. The time has come to introduce legislation under which the police can act. The cost in police manpower in those areas where the police are now acting must be enormous.
I have outlined the problem in my area. I see the hon. Member for Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Chope) in the Chamber, and I am sure that he, along with many other hon. Members, could echo my remarks. We do not want any more expressions of concern. We do not want anyone to tell us to be patient because the problem will go away in time. We know that it will not go away in time. Therefore, we look to the Home Office to introduce a meaningful law to rid those areas of a problem that they have to live with day in and day out.
The Minister and I know the Wandsworth Borough News very well, because it circulates in the borough that we represent. A statement by a senior local police officer appears in that newspaper this week. Talking of a meeting with local residents about the problems of prostitution in the area, he said:
Until a law is passed in Parliament which specifically allows us to arrest kerb crawlers the problem will never be solved.There speaks a senior police officer with responsibility for dealing with the problem. He sums up what I believe to be true, as do the vast majority of my constituents who have to live with the problem day in and day out.We accept that there must be discussion of the proposals by the Criminal Law Revision Committee. We beg the Minister to give us hope that in the foreseeable future meaningful legislation will be introduced to allow the police to take the action that they wish to take and which will once and for all rid such areas of the problem with which we have had to live for so long.
§ 11.5 pm
§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. David Mellor)I am grateful to the hon. Member for Tooting (Mr. Cox) for giving us the opportunity once again to consider this important matter. It is a particular pleasure to me to reply to the debate since the hon. Gentleman is the senior Member of Parliament for the London borough of Wandsworth and I am one of the two junior Members. For me this is a local issue as well as being of national importance. Genuinely, and not in arty sense piously, I say that representing a neighbouring constituency I have noted the brave and determined stand that the hon. Gentleman has taken on the issue. I hope that in my response I shall show how important I regard his comments.
675 In the fight that the hon. Gentleman has sustained for so long, he has been well supported by local councillors. I am glad to see in the Chamber two former members of that council who are now hon. Members of the House—my hon. Friends the Members for Glanford and Scunthorpe (Mr. Hickmet) and Southampton, Itchen (Mr. Chope) —not in the latter case merely because of an interest in Wandsworth but because he has similar problems in his constituency.
The hon. Member for Tooting has the support of his constituents and I understand the distress that they feel about the issue. We are under no illusions about the nuisance caused by prostitutes soliciting in the streets, or the genuine distress experienced by respectable and law-abiding residents who live in the vicinity of red light areas. This is particularly so in Bedford Hill where large numbers of prostitutes congregate and, through their presence, encourage large numbers of equally undesirable people who kerb-crawl and become involved in other offensive behaviour in their quest for prostitutes.
It is clear that for some time the Bedford Hill area of SW12 has been an established haunt for street prostitutes. There is ample evidence, I am sad to say, that in recent years the number of women engaged in this activity has greatly increased.
The hon. Gentleman rightly quoted the prosecution figures which show the extent of soliciting in the area. In 1980, 116 women were charged with the offence and 369 were cautioned. By 1982 the figures had risen to 318 charges and 676 cautions. Last year the figures were 802 charges and 415 cautions. That is evidence of the increased prostitute activity in the area and of the welcome increase in police attention to the problem.
The hon. Gentleman was right to say how we would feel if it were members of our families who were insulted by the offensive behaviour that this activity involves. I can well understand how the residents of Bedford Hill feel about it, and I know that the consequences for them are very unpleasant indeed. It is clear beyond peradventure that many innocent women have been subjected in error to offensive overtures by the influx of largely car-borne men seeking the services of prostitutes and that the streets are made unsightly by great quantities of litter left by the men and women, a number of them items that one would not want members of one's family to come across.
I also understand that, over a period of time, this obviously leads in the minds of residents to a general lowering of the tone of the area and that that works to the detriment of the whole area and, indeed, can gravely damage property values and so on. Plainly, people are right to be particularly concerned about their children.
It is with pleasure that I can report to the House the activities that the police and the community have taken over a protracted period and the success that has been achieved in dealing with this issue in recent months. Until early in 1982, the police in the Tooting area had attempted to contain the problem by cautioning and, if need be, arresting prostitutes whenever offences came to light in the course of normal patrol. Additionally, from time to time as information about offences came to light, they proceeded against those persons who acted in control of prostitutes or managed brothels.
But in the latter part of 1982 and in early 1983, in response to the rising number of prostitutes and growing 676 public concern, police action was stepped up. Considerably more police resources were deployed in the area against vice generally and street prostitutes in particular. Foot patrols were increased and the number of arrests rose, as I have demonstrated.
Unfortunately, however, neither the overall number of prostitutes nor the level of their activities changed, and this was obviously deeply disappointing to the police and the local community; indeed, frustrating for those who had made such great efforts to bring about an improvement. Residents formed ad hoc associations and spokesmen arranged public meetings to discuss the subject so that the local community could be mobilised against it. Street meetings were held and local residents patrolled the streets in small groups, airing their feelings and trying peacefully to dissuade prostitutes and their followers from frequenting the area.
In the final months of 1983, the police introduced a new line of action aimed at deterring prospective clients and, in particular, kerb-crawlers. It is not without significance that it is a relatively recent phenomenon that attention has focused on those who come to seek the services of prostitutes, not merely on the prostitutes themselves and those who are involved in the business of operating and controlling prostitutes.
Police patrols were intensified and a proportion of officers were deployed in plain clothes. The police sought to involve the community to an even greater extent in these activities; meetings were held with officials and so on, and it was accepted on all sides that there was need for a really concerted effort. A marked police patrol van was deployed daily in the area as a centre of operations, so that there was a contact point for the public and visible deterrent to offenders.
The major weapon that the police are using to deter the kerb-crawler—one which they believe has been most effective—is publicity. Since the inception of this latest campaign, every possible use has been made of national and local press, radio and television publicity. Happily, the work of the police and the community has been given wide coverage. Names and addresses of convicted offenders have been published in newspapers local to the areas in which they reside, and similar information has been published in The Standard and national daily newspapers.
It is, therefore, pleasant to be able to report to the House that the Commissioner of the Metropolitan police informs me now that the overall picture in Bedford Hill is, for the first time and after all this effort, beginning to give some cause for satisfaction to both police and public. This happy situation has prevailed for the past three or four weeks. The number of kerb-crawlers has been reduced from literally hundreds daily at the beginning of the campaign to only a handful on most occasions recently. Officers employed on the prevention of vice have reported that the level of activity has greatly reduced. Arrests of prostitutes continue to be made in significant numbers. Eighty were arrested in the first six weeks of the year, but that is a reflection of the heightened police activity. The ratio of arrests to the number of prostitutes frequenting the area is much higher than before. The number of prostitutes on the streets is now down to a low level. The Commissioner intends that police action should continue at the present level and in the manner that I have described for the foreseeable future. The effort that has been made, now that it has had such results, must be maintained and, indeed, 677 will be sustained. I am sure that the House will agree that credit must be given to the Metropolitan police, in association with the community and the hon. Gentleman, for the efforts that they have made.
Rightly, the hon. Gentleman was not merely concerned with the problem in his own constituency. He cast his net wider to the national scene, and I, too, shall direct myself to the more general question of prostitution. Loitering and soliciting for the purposes of prostitution carry a fine for first offenders of £50 and for subsequent offenders of £200. By the action of the Home Secretary announced today, taking effect in May, the fines will be doubled. I hope that the courts will not hesitate to impose heavy fines where it is clear that a business is being operated and only a heavy financial penalty will do.
It was the clear wish of the House of Commons, expressed in Committee when the 1982 Bill was passing through the House, that imprisonment should be removed as a penalty for soliciting for prostitution, and that was done. I am bound to say that the penalties for those who control prostitutes, or live off immoral earnings, are rightly very high. Seven years' imprisonment is the maximum for each of these offences. I hope that the courts will not hesitate to use the powers that Parliament has given them to deal severely with those who are running a business out of these girls and causing distress thereby.
We must address ourselves to the prostitute and those who control her and the kerb-crawler, and it is to the kerb-crawler that I wish to devote the remainder of my remarks. We do not underestimate the nuisance and annoyance, and the fear, that are placed in the minds of those in areas such as Bedford Hill when droves of men descend in cars and start openly touting for the services of prostitutes, propositioning respectable women as well as those who are involved in the trade.
We must balance the factors that would militate both for and against the creation of a new offence. There is a real difficulty in catching kerb-crawlers who are the clients of prostitutes and differentiating them from others who may be innocently pulling up their car to ask for directions or something of that sort. If they are hauled before the courts, let alone convicted, a terrible threat could be posed to their future careers. If there is to be a specific criminal offence, we shall need to ensure that it is carefully formulated. I am sure that I take the hon. Gentleman with me when I say that.
I recognise that this issue must be examined with care and with a sense of impetus. It is true that there are many 678 other areas apart from Tooting which suffer from the problem. We have the 1361 Act and, to some extent, the Public Order Act 1936. These measures have been employed with great effect in Tooting, where there were 34 convictions against kerb-crawlers in the last three months of 1983, and in other parts of the country. However, the hon. Gentleman is right to question, as did the Criminal Law Revision Committee in its working paper, whether in the longer run this is the appropriate way of dealing with the problem.
I do not need to remind the House that the law in this area is being considered by the Criminal Law Revision Committee. It produced a working paper at the end of 1982 which proposed no fewer than three offences on kerb-crawling. It was not its final report. It was a working paper designed to stimulate a public response. It proposed that it should be unlawful for a man to accost a woman from a motor car for sexual purposes so as to put her in fear, to accost her for sexual purposes so as to cause her annoyance, or to accost her for the purposes of prostitution.
The committee will shortly be re-examining these proposals in the light of the comments that it has received. In deference to the hon. Gentleman, I wish to say clearly that I recognise the importance that is attached to receiving its concluded recommendations. I have therefore asked the committee, bearing in mind the widespread concern, to give us its views on this issue as soon as it possibly can. I thought it right to ask Lord Justice Lawton whether the committee would find it possible, because of the particular concern that attaches to kerb-crawling, to bring forward its report on kerb-crawling in advance of its more general report on prostitution. I am glad to say that he has responded to this request extremely positively, as one would expect, and as a result we may expect to see the committee's final recommendations on kerb-crawling by the autumn. When we have the recommendations we shall all be in a position to know how best we should proceed. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we shall want to consider the recommendations with great care. The concern that he has expressed has not fallen on deaf ears.
§ The Question having been 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-one minutes past Eleven o'clock.