HC Deb 13 April 1989 vol 150 cc1046-7
6. Mr. Gill

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received on the subject of making it obligatory for parents to attend court alongside alleged juvenile offenders.

Mr. John Patten

In addition to the recent questions from my hon. Friend, in the past 12 months the Home Office has received about 40 letters stressing the need to involve parents in the consequences of their children's misbehaviour. Some referred to parents' attendance at court with their children.

Mr. Gill

On the very day when it is reported that three children, aged six, seven and nine, carried out a depraved sex attack on an elderly, disabled and defenceless woman, does my hon. Friend not agree that it is high time that society made it clear that it will hold parents entirely responsible for the actions of their children?

Mr. Patten

On the second point, I agree entirely with my hon. Friend that we need to make considerable and rapid strides forward by making parents more responsible for their children's criminal acts. On the first point, I cannot and should not comment on press reports, but I agree entirely with Superintendent Martin Burton—reported in The Daily Telegraph, so it must be true—who says: Parents should be responsible for bringing up their children, teaching them to tell the truth, to respect other people's property and to look after those less fortunate. They should be told it is wrong to lie, cheat, steal and bully.

Mr. Bermingham

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will tell that to other Ministers. In view of his comments today, and more particularly his recent utterances on children and parents in court, does he agree that instead of seeking to punish parents for the acts of their children, whom the parents are sometimes not in a position to control, it might be better to investigate the root cause of juvenile crime and make efforts to provide help for those families which, at an early stage, have problems with their children?

Mr. Patten

I recognise the hon. Gentleman's serious interest in the issue. He is right that parents who, for a variety of reasons, cannot control their children, or who have sought help because of their children's unruly behaviour, should not be punished by the law. However, it is right that we should follow the signposts provided by the Labour Government's Children and Young Persons Act 1969, which provides that parents can be bound over on a recognisance of £500 to ensure the proper conduct of their children. I look forward to new and imaginative thoughts on the issue in the forthcoming Labour party policy review, though heaven knows what they will be.

Mr. Nicholas Bennett

As parents are already required to go to court in truancy cases, and as most children who are at risk indulge in criminal activities at the age of 14 or 15, will my hon. Friend reconsider the time limit? It can take up to two years to get the parent and the child to court. Will he also reconsider the penalties which can be imposed? Will he ensure that such cases are dealt with as quickly as possible as there is no point in taking children to court once they have left school?

Mr. Patten

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The best form of justice is the swiftest form of justice, particularly when dealing with children. Such delays are undesirable and I shall bring them to the attention of my right hon. Friend who is responsible for these matters. In addition, I agree that the attendance of parents in court when their children are being tried is very desirable indeed, and I am sure that all of my hon. Friends would wish to see that happen on every such occasion.

Mr. Randall

How would the Minister's much publicised new proposal dealing with the failure to prevent child crime, to which he indirectly referred just now, distinguish between parents who turn a blind eye and those who genuinely cannot cope with the behaviour of their children? Does the Minister realise that his proposal is unworkable and, at best, would increase family breakdown and create even more homelessness? Is he aware that there are already enough powers to make parents accountable for the behaviour of their children? Why, therefore, does he not throw his proposals in the dustbin, where they belong?

Mr. Patten

I answer no to the hon. Gentleman's second and third questions. As to his first question, if he had bothered to read my words he would have seen that in the four or five-page document in which these ideas are presented the methods are very carefully set out. Should we proceed with such an offence, those parents who are not able to deal with their offending children can be separated from the deliberately delinquent parents and the deliberately delinquent children, about whom the Labour party has no ideas at all. If the hon. Gentleman's question is good evidence of the new thinking emerging from the Labour party's policy review, heaven help the Labour party.