ASBOs have limited effect on anti-social behaviour, Paul Cavadino of crime reduction charity Nacro claimed after a National Audit Office report on ASBOs.
Mr Cavadino told the Radio 4 Today programme on December 8, that ASBOs had only a limited use as an intervention – for problems in their early stages, a letter from the police – far cheaper to the authorities than an ASBO evidence-gathering and court case process – was as effective. And, he added, for serious offenders, more intensive intervention than a restrictive ASBO was needed.
The NAO study looked at the impact of three of the most commonly used interventions: warning letters, Acceptable Behaviour Contracts and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. The success rate for those receiving warning letters or Acceptable Behaviour Contracts were similar, with around two thirds receiving just one form of intervention from the authorities. However, over half of those who received the strongest form of intervention – an Anti-Social Behaviour Order (ASBO) – breached the Order, and one third did so on five or more occasions. Forty per cent of people who received an Anti-Social Behaviour Order had received an earlier anti-social behaviour intervention and 80 per cent had previous criminal convictions.
The Home Office’s Anti-Social Behaviour Unit has supported local areas to tackle anti-social behaviour through funding 373 Anti-Social Behaviour Co-ordinators, promoting the use of new tools and powers and providing training to practitioners. Whilst 21 per cent of the population perceived high levels of anti-social behaviour in 2002-03, by 2005-06 this had fallen to 17 per cent. There is however, a significant regional disparity in levels of perception, from 29 per cent of people in London perceiving high levels of anti-social behaviour to 7 per cent in Essex and Lincolnshire. In general the young and least well off are disproportionately adversely affected.
In four of the 12 the areas visited by the NAO, local co-ordinators working to tackle anti-social behaviour were concerned that a lack of capacity and experience of using anti-social behaviour legislation within their local authorities’ legal services departments meant that breaches were not always dealt with in a timely manner, creating frustration in the community. This frustration appears to be compounded by fear of reprisal for individuals who report incidents, and concerns that witness intimidation is a factor in the breakdown of legal processes when dealing with breaches of intervention.
Local agencies would be better placed to target their interventions more effectively if the Home Office undertook formal evaluation of the success of different interventions and the impact of providing support services in conjunction with enforcement. International research suggests that preventive programmes, such as education, counselling and training can be a cost effective way of addressing anti-social behaviour. The Home Office, with other departments, is taking this forward through the Respect Action Plan and the Government is also considering further legislation to address anti-social behaviour.
What they say
Sir John Bourn said: “Whilst 65 per cent of people in our case review did not go on to commit any further anti-social behaviour after receiving one anti-social behaviour intervention, there is a hard core of individuals who repeatedly behave in an anti-social way and for whom more action is needed. The Home Office should formally evaluate the success of different interventions and the impact of combining enforcement interventions with support services to better advise Anti-Social Behaviour Co-ordinators at a local level. They should also consider developing and implementing further more preventive measures to tackle the causes of anti-social behaviour.”
You can read the full report by downloading from the NAO website:
