§ 3.28 p.m.
§ Lord DubsMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the last Question of the present Parliament standing in my name on the Order Paper.
The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government:
What has been the increase in the level of violent crime in London between 1979 and the present time.
§ Baroness BlatchMy Lords, there has been a steady and consistent increase in violent crime in England and Wales since 1946. I understand from the Commissioner 1051 of Police for the Metropolis that violent crime in the Metropolitan Police District has risen from 24,995 incidents in 1979 to 89,861 in 1996.
§ Lord DubsMy Lords, does the Minister agree that while the Metropolitan Police have been doing a good job in difficult circumstances, the Government have failed abysmally in dealing with violent crime? Is it not a disaster for the people of London that the violent crime rate increased by 20 per cent. in the past year alone to 90,000? Is not the truth that this Government are weak on violent crime and weak on the causes of violent crime?
§ Baroness BlatchMy Lords, since 1946, crime has risen by 2,305 per cent.; between 1946 and 1979, violent crime rose by 803 per cent. and between 1979 and 1996, it rose by 166 per cent. Noble Lords opposite may wring their hands about crime, and about violent crime in particular, but where were they when I looked for support to crack down on violent crime? We are extremely concerned about the rise in violent crime and we are committed to introducing tough measures to cut down on crime, and particularly on violent and persistent crime as well as crimes such as domestic burglary, drug dealing and repeat violent offences. Noble Lords opposite, however, were found wanting when it came to putting their fine words into action.
§ Lord MolloyMy Lords, is the Minister prepared to consider what I regard as a vital issue; namely, the reduction of manpower in the police force in many of our London boroughs? We are all proud of our police officers, who do splendid work. However, in the London Borough of Ealing there has been such a massive reduction in the number of police officers that the Greenford and Northolt areas now have no patrolling policemen whatsoever. Such things are noted by the criminal classes who take full advantage of them.
§ Baroness BlatchMy Lords, since 1979 the Government have increased the funding for the police by 90 per cent. in real terms. I and my ministerial colleagues on these Benches take daily criticism from noble Lords opposite about the level of expenditure on our programmes, but tell that to Mr. Gordon Brown in another place who has pledged to continue that level of expenditure on programmes!
The noble Lord, Lord Molloy, makes an important point because there are now 16,000 more policemen than in 1979. My right honourable friend the Prime Minister pledged to fund another 5,000. The money for that was made available last year and money has been made available this year. The whole 5,000 will be funded by the end of the next financial year. We shall meet our pledge. However, two points arise from that, one with particular regard to London. Sadly, because of the reappearance of the IRA on the streets of London, the Commissioner chose to use the money to pay for extra overtime using experienced policemen. That was what happened to London's money for new policemen. However, the Metropolitan Commissioner has welcomed the extra money for the financial year 1052 that we are about to enter and he will be increasing police numbers to 27,400. The other point is that we now have information and intelligence, including new technology, CCTV and many other innovations, which extend the arm of the police.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords—
§ Baroness Farrington of RibbletonMy Lords—
§ Lord Harris of GreenwichMy Lords—
The Lord Privy Seal (Viscount Cranborne)My Lords, I am in the hands of the House, but I wonder whether the Liberal Chief Whip could come in first.
§ Lord Harris of GreenwichMy Lords, is the Minister aware that some of us have found her answers to these questions puzzling because they appear to relate to the Crime (Sentences) Bill? Is she also aware that if Parliament had been prorogued next week or after Easter many of the Government's legislative problems would not have arisen? Is she further aware that some of us find it very strange that the Government decided to prorogue Parliament in the way that they did?
§ Baroness BlatchMy Lords, is the noble Lord suggesting that if we had met for one more week he would have supported the Government's tough policies on crime?
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, is my noble friend the Minister—
Viscount CranborneMy Lords, I apologise to my noble friend. I would have loved to hear him one last time, but the 30 minutes for Questions are up.