Neighbourhood Watch Schemes (Hansard, 14 March 1986)

§ Mr. Tony Favell (Stockport)

I beg to move,

That this House regards neighbourhood watch schemes as an excellent and cost-effective way for the community to help in the fight against crime; applauds the efforts of those police officers who already have helped to establish a network of such schemes; expresses gratitude to those public-spirited members of the public who are taking an active part in promoting neighbourhood watch for the benefit of their neighbours; takes note of the evidence that crime is being combated in those areas with schemes already established; and resolves to encourage those areas without schemes to establish them as quickly as possible. This is the first time that neighbourhood watch schemes have been debated in the House, and it is unfortunate that they will be debated for only a short time. However, I shall get on as quickly as I can. It is particularly appropriate that, on the day following the publication of the annual crime figures, we should debate ways in which the public can help to combat crime. The incidence of crime, especially violent crime, has continued to rise and the public are alarmed.

The Opposition—we heard the Leader of the Opposition yesterday—demand that more money should be spent in an attempt to reduce the incidence of crime. That is fair enough, for our police must not be left short of resources. The Government have recognised that, and, since their coming to power, there has been a substantial increase in police pay and there are now 7,400 extra police officers. But, no matter how many extra policemen we have, there will never be enough to enable us to have a police officer standing on every street corner, and it will never be possible to solve all crime.

Crime prevention cannot be left to the police alone. If we are to win the battle against crime, we must all play our part. In the home, parents must be made far more aware of the influence that they have over their children. Fiddling the tax man or the DHSS is not the example to set. In the courts, magistrates and judges have a duty to show young people that crime does not pay, especially now that almost one third of serious crime is committed by those under the age of 17. I suggest to the Home Office that it is time to think about publishing the names of offenders over the age of 14 years. The publication of every offender's name over that age would lead to the derision of one's friends and neighbours and help to deter them from further crime.

For too long many members of the public have thought that the fight against crime is not for them. They have passed by on the other side of the road and failed to follow the good Samaritan's example. Good neighbourliness does have a great deal to offer. As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said yesterday, crime statistics show that neighourhood watch schemes do beat crime, especially the burglar. In London, burglaries from dwellings dropped by 11 per cent last year, and in England and Wales there was a 4 per cent. decrease. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has no doubt that neighbourhood watch schemes are making a dramatic contribution to that fall.

Stockport forms part of the Greater Manchester police authority. It is one of only three divisions out of the 14 in the Greater Manchester area that operate neighbourhood watch schemes. In 11 divisions neighourhood watch schemes are not operating. Last year, crime rose in Greater Manchester as a whole, but Stockport's crime rate fell. 1382 Chief Superintendent Tony Whittle, Stockport's divisional commander, has said that one of the greatest factors in producing that result is neighbourhood watch schemes.

Under the leadership of Inspector Peter Butters 73 schemes have been set up in a little over a year, and 1,760 families in Stockport are now safer than before. Overall, in Stockport, the number of burglaries dropped by 13 per cent. during 1985, and in those areas with established neighbourhood watch schemes the drop was far greater. It is estimated to be as high as 50 per cent.

How do we account for the success of the scheme? The answer lies in its simplicity. Anyone interested in setting up a scheme gets in touch with the local crime prevention officer who will assist the caller in arranging a meeting of interested neighbours. A police officer will attend that meeting. Indeed, there was a meeting in Stockport only last week, which more than 200 people attended in response to a call to set up a neighbourhood watch scheme.

A police officer explains how the system works. He will demonstrate how to mark property with invisible ink. That not only facilitates the recovery of stolen property, but deters criminals from taking it in the first place, as signs are displayed to show that there is a neighbourhood watch scheme in operation.

The officers also arrange visits to examine house protection. The co-ordinators of the scheme arrange for the reporting of unusual types of caller at unoccupied homes and, in particular, keeping an eye on the elderly. I am told by the Stockport police that assistance for the elderly not only helps to retain their confidence in the security of their homes, but engenders a spirit of good neighbourliness during the recent cold spell.

One thing that I was pleased to note in the speech yesterday of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary was that neighbourhood watch schemes are not confined to the leafier suburbs. Research shows that there is a greater incidence of crime in the poorer inner city areas, and that is where there is the greatest feeling of desperation. I am told by many people in one particular area of Stockport that they fear to go to work or on holiday in case their homes are burgled. That is a disgraceful situation. Neighbourhood watch schemes will help to deter such burglaries.

I have one word of warning. Once set up, it is important for the area constable to maintain contact, and, if anything unusual is reported to him, he must report back to the resident who provided the information. In Stockport, the police have arranged for newsletters to be sent to members of schemes. It is critical, when a community goes to the trouble of setting up a scheme, that its efforts are shown to be appreciated and that its interest is maintained.

There is one body of interested parties that could do much more—the insurance companies. They say that they are in favour of neighbourhood watch schemes, but they do little else. I urge them to tell anyone who is renewing his premium about the advantage of a neighbourhood watch scheme and to consider premium rebates as a matter of urgency. The insurance companies do a great job in sponsoring the arts and sport, but it is even more important that they should sponsor the fight against crime.