§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Streeter.]
10.17 pm§ Ms Estelle Morris (Birmingham, Yardley)I welcome this opportunity to debate policing and law and order in the city of Birmingham.
As well as bringing to the Minister's attention issues concerning our city, I want to refer to important issues in Yardley. In such a debate I risk giving the impression that our city is crime ridden and that half of those who live there commit crimes against the other half. That is not so. Birmingham is a thriving and successful city, which has fought its way through successive recessions and marked out a real future for itself. In discussing my constituency I also risk giving the wrong impression of what it is like to live there. It is on the outer ring of Birmingham and is a sought-after place in which to live. Like citizens throughout the city, the majority of my constituents are decent and honest people who want to live in the knowledge that they are safe in their community and secure in their homes.
As I refer to young people throughout my speech and comment on the problems that we have with some of those committing crime, I am only too well aware that most young people in our country are good people who contribute to their communities and want nothing more than to work hard, contribute their skills and be part of our society. I hope that the Minister will accept my comments against that important background.
The Government tell us that things are getting better and that they are winning the battle over crime. But whatever the Government's statistics show, the perception of my constituents is that things are getting worse. We know what the Government's figures say about crime in the west midlands. The figures show that crime has almost doubled under this Government and that violent crime has more than doubled. We know that there is a one in nine chance of being burgled and a one in four chance of a vehicle being broken into.
People in Birmingham feel vulnerable on all fronts. The headline news in the region today was of three incidents of stabbing—major crime in Birmingham that has been committed over the past weekend and recent months. That is the serious crime, which makes the headlines and shocks us all. Over the Christmas period, two Birmingham police constables, PC Jon Jackson and WPC Vanessa Greening, were viciously attacked and badly injured while patrolling in the Kings Heath area. Ten shoppers were attacked by a man with a knife in the Bordesley Green area and in recent weeks gangs of youths in the Aston area of the city have taken to the streets to battle out their differences. I am sorry to say that Mr. Tommy McGregor, a victim in the Netto supermarket stabbings, died in hospital yesterday as a result of the wounds that he received.
As well as big, horrifying crime that we all know about, there is what I term the lesser crime—anti-social behaviour and criminal behaviour that occur day in, day out, and the fear of crime to which that behaviour leads. I am fed up of having to listen to stories from constituents who tell me that they have been burgled three and four times in a year. There are families whose neighbours have 120 made their lives so miserable that they want to move. Youths hang about street corners causing disturbances; pensioners no longer open the door after dark; our public buildings and open spaces are vandalised and covered with graffiti. Such crime does not make the headlines and it does not lead the regional news; most of it does not even reach the official statistics, but it blights the lives of too many people.
I wanted to be sure about the views of my constituents in Yardley and over the summer I distributed a survey to every household in the constituency. I am not claiming that it is scientific, but it represents the real voice of thousands of people who live on the east side of Birmingham. The results were shocking: 40 per cent. of my constituents felt that they had been victims of crime in the past two years; 17 per cent. had not even bothered to report it to the police; more than one third felt that they had been treated badly as victims. Is it any wonder that 60 per cent. of my old-age pensioners feel vulnerable in their homes?
Yardley is not a high-crime area. I am not pretending for a minute that those with responsibility for securing law and order are sitting idly by and doing nothing. The West Midlands police acted promptly and bravely at the supermarket stabbings, as they did this weekend at New Street station. They have recently uncovered a lorry full of drugs in my constituency, in Tyseley; they support neighbourhood watch groups and work with schools. I acknowledge those achievements and thank them for their work and for the co-operation that I receive.
One of the consequences of effective police action on big crime is that officers are pulled out of areas like mine and drafted into the problem spots in the city, which is why the low-level crime goes unreported and undetected. Whatever those in power and authority have done, it is not enough. People in Birmingham feel that the situation is becoming worse, not better. Crime and anti-social behaviour are still major problems.
There is probably agreement between the Minister and everyone in the House on the need to work together if we are to get anywhere. But there must also be leadership, which is what the Government should be showing. There is no recognition by Ministers that the decimation of our youth service can encourage anti-social behaviour. There is no acknowledgement that more than 55,000 unemployed 18 to 24-year-olds can lead to problems. There seems to be no understanding that too many of our young people do not feel that they have a stake in the future of our city.
Why did the Home Office stop the funding of the safer cities project, which everyone agreed was successful? What sort of leadership cuts local government funding so drastically that crime prevention measures get squeezed out? Where is the initiative for dealing with anti-social behaviour before it turns to crime? Why do police tell people that they know who is committing crime, but that it is pointless to try to do anything about it? The Minister will not be surprised to learn that in my survey people called for longer sentences for those who commit crimes. It is also interesting to note that people felt that crime could be reduced by giving young people more to do and more opportunities.
Governments are judged by their actions not by their words, and the verdict of the people of Birmingham is that the Government have failed them on the issue that is 121 most important to them: ensuring a safe and secure city. We must change the underlying values of society if we are to tackle the problem, but that must wait until we have a new Government. Meanwhile, something must and can be done.
I shall tell the Minister what initiatives I and others are taking in my constituency and elsewhere in the city following the survey that I carried out in the summer. It is not for me to detect and deal with those who break the law; that is the responsibility of the state. However, we can take initiatives locally.
First, our local newspaper, the Birmingham Evening Mail, is stepping up its attack on crime. The newspaper already has a good reputation for working closely with the national organisation, Crimestoppers and it runs a weekly slot on Thursday appealing to the public for information about crime. I am pleased to announce that from next week the Crimestoppers contact number will be displayed very prominently across the pages of the city's biggest newspaper every day. I am grateful to the editor, I am Dowell, and to the deputy editor, Ray Dunn, for their support for the initiative and for the way in which they have always worked, and shall continue to work, with people throughout the city to fight crime and anti-social behaviour.
Secondly, Crimestoppers will do all that it can to ensure that its telephone line is answered personally 12 hours a day and that an answer phone is available at other times. Thirdly, in my constituency there will be door-to-door leafleting of Crimestoppers information. Fourthly, we shall be piloting a project in Yardley to help the elderly to protect themselves against crime.
I shall be working with the Comet group and with the voluntary organisation Age Concern, which is making available to every pensioner in my constituency a fact sheet about safety in the home. In conjunction with that, the Comet electrical superstore will provide money-off vouchers so that pensioners can buy timed plug sockets in order to give signs of occupancy when they are home alone or when the house is empty.
That is what we are doing locally to combat crime. However, the Government must take action and show more leadership if we are to solve the problem. In my survey, people said that having more bobbies on the beat would reduce crime. Beat bobbies make a difference and crime decreases with regular police patrols. We also need stable policing. There must be sufficient police available so that when crises arise—as occurred in Birmingham recently—police are not diverted from my area and similar outer ring areas to problem areas.
We welcome the money that the Government have allocated to provide extra police and we look forward to seeing extra constables in the West Midlands force. However, the measure is very little and very late.
We need money for simple crime prevention. Every street should be lit and every back entry should be cleared. Subways that people are too frightened to use should be closed. The safer cities project should be reinstated so that communities can work together. We need a proper youth programme so that young people have somewhere to go and something to do. We need all those things, yet the local council has been told to make cuts of £48 million next year.
Young people who break the law need supervision. I do not want them locked away unnecessarily, but I want action taken against those who commit crimes and then 122 brag about it on the street. The probation service has a good record in working with young people. Why cannot that service be expanded? It is easy to be alarmist about crime, but it is also too easy to refuse to stare the problem in the face. Any Minister who tells the House that crime has been conquered and any Government who pretend that crime is decreasing are burying their heads in the sand. We cannot remove the fear of crime while we have a Government who give people a message that does not match those people's experience.
As a country and as a city, we are good at tackling the big crime. That is a real success, and the people involved should be congratulated. What gnaws away at people's lives, however, is the incessant, everyday crime and what they consider to be crime. Every person in the city of Birmingham knows a relative, friend or neighbour who has been a victim of crime. That is not how the people of Yardley, of Birmingham or of the United Kingdom want to live. They deserve better, and the Government have an obligation to show some leadership so that they may have better.
I have outlined to the Minister the action that we shall take locally, but the responsibility for law and order lies with him. We need to know what action he will take to lessen people's fears. I look forward to hearing his comments.
§ Mr. Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield)I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Ms Morris) on securing the debate and I thank her and the Minister for giving me a couple of minutes to say a few words in the debate, which is so important to the people of Birmingham and to all the people of the west midlands.
In the west midlands, the risk of a household being burgled is one in nine, the risk of a vehicle being broken into is one in four and the risk of a person being assaulted is one in 78. All those statistics are worse than in 1979. My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the problem of the fear of crime and the justified worry that so many people have that if they report crime nothing will happen as a result.
I want to tell the House of an instructive incident from my constituency, Northfield. In the summer, a man appeared outside a nursery with an air gun and fired pellets through the windows; indeed, pellets were found on the ground afterwards. The entire incident was witnessed by members of staff at the nursery, but to this day no conviction has resulted because police officers were apparently unable to reach the scene in time, even though the incident was reported while it was going on.
That matter has been taken up with the local police. I endorse what my hon. Friend said about the great efforts that the West Midlands police are making, but at that time the response rate for urgent crimes—crimes requiring police response in 10 minutes at the outside—was only 76 per cent. I am pleased that the figure has increased since then, but there remains a 15 per cent. chance that if a crime of that nature is committed the police will be unable to reach the scene within their response time.
That means that we need changes. I endorse what my hon. Friend said about the need for more bobbies on the beat and for better response times as a result of improved police staffing levels. We also need the organisation 123 behind that, and the back-up through the vital partnership between the police, local authorities and many other agencies. Here I pay tribute to the Birmingham Evening Mail for its initiatives in conjunction with the Crimestoppers organisation.
The Government must realise that it makes no sense to say that one wants to reduce crime, especially youth crime, and at the same time to impose on local authorities cuts which mean cuts in the youth service and youth provision. The two just do not go together.
I appeal to the Minister to address the considerable problems that my hon. Friend has outlined, and to build the partnership against crime that people in Birmingham, and people throughout the country, deserve.
§ The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. David Maclean)I thank the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley (Ms Morris) for the opportunity to debate issues of law and order in Birmingham. The hon. Lady drew attention to several of the anxieties of her constituents and those important issues are of interest to people throughout the country.
For too long there has been a depressing view that we are powerless in the face of increasing crime. That is not a view to which I and my ministerial colleagues in the Home Office have ever subscribed. We have listened to the anxieties of those people at the sharp end of the fight against crime and to their opinions about how we, as a Government, should respond to those anxieties.
We do not underestimate the problems, but we believe that we can win—although it is a tough battle. I share the hon. Lady's distress at recent attacks on officers in the West Midlands police. I am pleased to be able to report today that WPC Vanessa Greening, who suffered a broken skull after being set upon by vicious louts, is making a good recovery. I am sure that the whole House will wish to join me in sending our good wishes to her, and to every other officer, not only in Birmingham but throughout the country, who is injured in the course of their duties.
Attacks on the police, such as that suffered by police officers in Birmingham recently, demonstrate the need for the best available protection. West Midlands' chief constable is keen that his officers should be able to use CS spray for self-defence, and CS is an effective incapacitant. The Association of Chief Police Officers decided last Thursday to start operational trials in 16 forces in England and Wales, starting on 1 March. West Midlands police will be one of the trialling forces. The trials will be the subject of expert evaluation, and we shall watch progress with interest.
Our strategy for dealing with crime has four main strands. We must do all that we can to prevent crime. We must do all that we can to catch criminals. We must ensure that when they have been caught they are tried fairly and speedily. And we must make sure that if they are convicted, the courts have all the powers that they need to deal with criminals appropriately and effectively.
Our objectives in dealing with law and order are widely shared, and we are making progress towards relieving the fears that many of our constituents face.
Last September, with my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary, I was able to announce the biggest fall in recorded crime in our history. Those are not just 124 Home Office figures. They come from all the police forces throughout the country, who give us the figures. On top of earlier falls, recorded crime fell a further 5 per cent. for the 12 months to June 1995. The West Midlands police area was no exception, with recorded crime falling 5 per cent. in the 12 months to June 1995. Although offences of robbery rose, there were significant falls in offences of burglary—which decreased by 9 per cent—and in offences of violence against the person, which fell by 19 per cent.
The latest recorded crime figures highlight the fact that, although the level of crime is still far too high, the dedicated efforts of the police and the community at large can result and have resulted in significant falls in the number of recorded crimes.
§ Ms Estelle MorrisIs the Minister not concerned about the problem of unrecorded crime? Has his Department done anything to establish the extent of crime? In my experience, the public feel that the system will not deliver and so there is no point in reporting crime. That is why the figures that the Minister has given bear no relationship to the public perception of crime levels in the community.
§ Mr. MacleanOf course we have undertaken research. The British crime survey figures, which are published every few years, are consistent. Of course there is a lot of unreported crime, which remains fairly consistent. Recently, we have seen a declining trend in the British crime survey which measures unrecorded crime. In fact, it is self-reporting. The public, depending on their memory, tell researchers the level of crime that they have, in their belief, witnessed. That trend has been going the same way as reported crime figures.
Some crimes, such as murder and violence, are subject to high reporting levels. Car theft produces almost 100 per cent. reporting. At the other end of the scale, vandalism is certainly subject to low reporting levels. Nevertheless, the levels of recorded crime have been falling. There has been no change in recording practice in the last two years. The police know that levels have been falling. The insurance companies will say that claims have been falling. That all follows the same trend, which is good news.
Of course I would like the news to be even better and the fall in crime to be not just 5 per cent. each year but 10 per cent., 15 per cent. or 20 per cent. We would all like that. The fall has shown that we are not helpless in the face of rising crime. A myth has grown up since the war: just because crime has risen under every Tory and Labour Government—it certainly rose under the last Labour Government, just as it has risen under this Government—we tend to believe that nothing can be done. People say that the rise in crime is inevitable; it is, they say, a statistical trend in every west European country, and we are all doomed to rising crime for ever more. That is bunkum. It is possible to cut into the problem—with effective police action, backed up by proper legal changes and, crucially, partnerships in the community.
Let me turn now to the resources available to West Midlands police. This year the force's spending power is about £329.3 million. That is an increase of 4.3 per cent.—an extra £13.5 million—over the base budget for 1994–95. That is a substantial increase, above the 125 national average, and clearly demonstrates the high priority that the Government place on fighting crime. The police authority has sensibly taken full advantage of the additional funds available in setting this year's budget.
In addition, West Midlands police did not have to find a further sum this year to pay for common police services such as the police national computer. The year before, that cost them £2.6 million, which they did not have to cough up this year. Those extra resources should provide scope to increase local policing levels. I understand that the chief constable is expecting force strength to increase by 181 during 1995–96.
The Government's commitment to the police will be maintained in the next financial year too. Under our current proposals, the basic funding available to West Midlands police for the financial year 1996–97 increases by £14.5 million, or 4.4 per cent. over the equivalent figure for last year. Again, that is above the national average. Next year, West Midlands will not have to find a further sum to pay for common police services.
The £343.7 million to be allocated to West Midlands police in 1996–97 includes their share of the funding being made available for the 5,000 additional officers over the next three years announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. Under our proposals, West Midlands' share of the additional funding in the first year will be f£1 million. That alone would be sufficient to recruit an extra 52 extra constables. Based on a similar distribution mechanism, and assuming that the chief decides to spend the money on extra bobbies, this initiative alone could provide the force with an extra 258 constables after three years and will help the force to achieve high visibility policing.
The hon. Lady said that she was pleased with the money we are putting into the West Midlands force this year. I hope that that did not give the impression that this year was a unique occasion. The West Midlands force, like every other in the country, has received substantial extra funding from the Government. The net result is that the money available to the British police service now is about double what it was in 1979 in real terms. That is only to be expected: the extra 16,000 officers and 16,000 civilians whom we have recruited do not come cheaply. The police are an expensive resource, but they are also valuable and worth while.
The fight against crime cannot be left to the police alone. The Police and Magistrates Courts Act 1994 sets out a new framework for policing which will help the police service to fight crime in partnership with the public and local police authorities.
The Act gives police authorities and chief officers the freedom to make the best use of their resources in return for greater openness and accountability. It is not for my right hon. and learned Friend the Home Secretary to set targets in relation to the national objectives that he specifies. It is a matter for local decision by the police authority as to what local targets should sensibly be. In future, police activities will be more clearly focused on the public's priorities. In turn, the public will be kept informed about the service that they can expect and how well their force has performed.
I know that the police share my concern about the misery caused by crimes such as burglary and car theft and are determined to do all that they can to fight it. To increase the number of detections for burglaries, and to 126 target and prevent crimes which are a particular local problem—drug dealing, for instance—are key objectives that have been set for the police. Throughout the country, police forces have undertaken initiatives specifically to tackle those types of crime, often using intelligence-based methods such as crime pattern analysis and the targeting of offenders.
I am sure that hon. Members will be aware of Operation Christmas Cracker, which was undertaken on 5 December. It was the largest operation against burglary that this country has seen, involving 12,000 officers from 40 forces in England and Wales. The police targeted people suspected of being involved in burglary and completed 3,772 dawn raids. In all, 3,327 people were arrested and £1.8 million worth of stolen property was recovered.
I was pleased to learn that the West Midlands force has had some even more recent successes. On Saturday 6 January the drug squad seized a metric tonne of cannabis, equivalent to a million deals and with a street value of £10 million. Three men were arrested. The following week the regional crime squad recovered Ecstasy tablets worth more than £1.5 million. Some of those were a very nasty mixture indeed of anaesthetics and stimulants. The West Midlands force deserves our congratulations for those operations and, indeed, all its other operations against crime.
Preventing crime is as important as tackling its consequences and the concept of partnership is central to our crime prevention strategy. That vital work cannot be left to the police alone; communities have a central role to play. Successful partnerships are essentially those which have developed local solutions to local problems, and they are successful. I have seen many in operation. I came hotfoot from Durham this morning, where I witnessed yet another partnership being created by the county police force and the Royal Mail.
All over the country, business, community groups, local authorities and the public are working with the police to reduce and prevent crime in their areas. Local knowledge and expertise is being used to solve local crime problems. In Birmingham South, for example, the police, the probation service and the city council are working together to provide a swimming training scheme for local youngsters during the Easter holidays. An anti-burglary scheme in west Birmingham, involving local residents and businesses, has contributed to a 30 per cent. reduction in crime levels. Those are good, cast-iron examples of local partnerships and we happily encourage more and more of those.
Businesses have helped in many different ways, from offering discounts on home security products to members of neighbourhood watch schemes, to direct—and often substantial—contributions towards the cost of town centre closed circuit television schemes. In Birmingham, initiatives such as the many business watch schemes, bus watch and radio link schemes for city centre retailers show what can be achieved through local co-operation, with benefits both to businesses and to the wider community.
§ The motion having been made after Ten o'clock and the debate having continued for half an hour, MADAM SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.
§ Adjourned at thirteen minutes to Eleven o'clock.