The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

A Report on the Consultation Responses to Putting Our Communities First: A Strategy for tackling Anti- Social Behaviour

Chapter Four Anti-social Behaviour in Scotland: Experiences and Views

This chapter reports on the various consultation events and mechanisms that formed, alongside written responses to the consultation document, a key element of the consultation process. The aim of these consultation mechanisms was for ministers and officials to learn about local communities' and stakeholders' experiences of anti-social behaviour and to provide opportunities for groups and individuals who may not always be included in more formal consultation processes to contribute their perspectives on the issue and the proposals outlined to tackle anti-social behaviour.

4.1 Public Consultation and Stakeholder Meetings

4.1.1. The consultation meetings

4.1.1.1 Ministers and Scottish Executive officials held a series of consultation meetings in various public forums across Scotland during the consultation period in order to hear first hand about experiences and issues relating to anti-social behaviour. More than 30 such meetings were conducted with a wide range of community representative groups, local authorities and local residents from several MSP's constituencies in order to get a deeper understanding of responses and reactions to the Scottish Executive's proposals. At some of the meetings multiple stakeholders were represented. Attendance varied but was sometimes as many as 80 attendees. Notes were taken at these meetings and these notes have been used in preparing this section of the report.

4.1.1.2 Overall the meetings highlighted strong support for the general thrust of the proposals to tackle anti-social behaviour and provided an opportunity to discuss a wide range of issues which were seen as having distinctively negative impacts on quality of life. Many of the sessions were attended by representatives of organisations and communities as well as residents themselves. On several occasions it was noted that people welcomed the opportunity to have a discussion about the various issues that were raised. In making an overall assessment of the proposals many groups, representatives and residents had reservations about particular aspects of these proposals but generally welcomed the overall direction in dealing with anti-social behaviour. What follows is a summary of all of the substantive points raised in these meetings and, where possible, some indication of the relative volume of support. While in many cases interesting points were raised in only once, these have been recorded to allow the Scottish Executive to consider the voices of all of those involved in the consultation process.

4.1.1.3 The findings are presented in two parts. The first section details the major concerns of residents and representatives relating to experiences of anti-social behaviour in Scotland. The second section details proposals and suggestions made in response to the issues and questions raised by the Scottish Executive's consultation document.

4.1.2 The current situation relating to anti-social behaviour

4.1.2.1 A wide range of issues was raised in the discussions which overlapped strongly between the different meetings that were convened. The issues covered were diverse but focused on:

• Young people
• The use of alcohol and drugs
• Police responsiveness to anti-social behaviour problems
• The housing and legal system
• The role of the local authority in managing disorder and anti-social behaviour
• Environmental degradation through neglect and malice (i.e. graffiti, vandalism and lack of environmental service provision)

4.1.2.2 A key issue for many consultees was the range of connected issues that threaten the quality of life in localities. Many welcomed the discussions during the consultation, one resident adding that "This is the first time we've been able to have this discussion", another adding that "ordinary decent people need to be supported, not overlooked". A range of issues were brought up, in particular problems were identified ranging from graffiti to vandalism as well as under-age drinking and loitering gangs. However, responses as to how these issues should be dealt with varied widely.

4.1.2.3 In general there was a strong impression that residents felt that problems were getting worse, more specifically that a problematic fraction of young people were untouchable or didn't care or respect authority enough to worry about the repercussions of their behaviour. Amongst organisations and individuals who thought that the proposals were too punitive or counter-productive there was also a recognition that a problem existed but that, often, existing remedies needed to be improved rather than new methods being introduced.

4.1.2.4 Several consultees felt that much anti-social behaviour was not reported because of people's strong fears of retaliation and victimisation. These themes ran through the series of meetings with many arguing that a culture of fear existed in many localities where people were afraid to report anti-social behaviour or to intervene, even in low level infractions. This was argued to be due to two particular problems. First, what was seen to be an inadequate response by officials, police and the legal process. Here many people registered strong discontent with available sanctions, the relative response of the police and a slow legal system that made witnesses and victims vulnerable to intimidation and abuse. The time lag involved in the court process was also singled out as leaving perpetrators to continue problematic behaviour. In addition, Children's Panels were seen as being ineffective with regard to many youths who, it was reported, felt that such sanctions, along with electronic tagging, were weak or a 'badge of honour' among peers.

4.1.2.5 Secondly, a perceived decline in respect for authority and community sanctions was seen to be a key social change through which young people, and those with problematic behaviour and attitudes, were seen as more difficult to deal with. Because of this many respondents felt that police and residents alike did not challenge behaviour either because of the dangers of doing so or because it would not result in better behaviour.

4.1.2.6 Other issues raised as problematic and linked to anti-social behaviour were also mentioned. In particular private and social landlords were thought to be irresponsible and contributing to the problem of anti-social behaviour. Social landlords were seen as dumping problematic tenants in disadvantaged areas while private landlords were often thought not to care about the impact of their tenant's behaviour or to be unwilling to get involved. Finally, there appeared to be a difference in the definition of anti-social behaviour between different social groups. Younger and older people were divided on what constituted anti-social behaviour with, for example, young people feeling that swearing was not anti-social while many older groups felt that it was. It transpired through the consultation responses that some minority ethnic groups felt that religious and cultural differences were sometimes singled out as being anti-social by intolerant neighbours. Others mentioned that the sum effect of these inter-linked problems was that community health was declining, linked to the social and environmental damage caused by anti-social behaviour.

4.1.3 Reactions and suggestions relating to the Scottish Executive's proposals

Young people, the courts and Children's Panels

4.1.3.1 Young people were singled out generally as perhaps the key group associated with anti-social behaviour. This took a variety of forms and included being responsible for graffiti, gangs hanging around as well as noise, drinking and drug taking. Many people were keen to point out that this was linked only to a minority of young people but that the effect was often disproportionately dramatic. In two local authority areas the use of 'teen shelters' were seen to be a useful diversion and which helped police and other agencies to know where young people were. The general lack of community facilities, particularly in more deprived areas, was identified as a key issue in that it meant that there were no distractions for young people. The territoriality of some young people was also seen as a difficult issue to overcome. Where effective diversionary activities had been established these were not attractive to some young people because they did not want to travel outside of their own area.

4.1.3.2 There was concern that an existing youth justice strategy had been implemented that was turning towards a more knee-jerk and punitive anti-social behaviour strategy. While children's organisations were generally critical of the approach outlined in the consultation document they recognised that there was a problem which required tackling. However, these organisations felt that there was a need for a more interventionist and restorative approach to prevention and dealing with the perpetrators of anti-social behaviour. This view was held more widely than just by children's organisations and charities with a significant number of groups and individuals concerned about the possible criminalisation of young people that the proposals might create and wanting to make existing laws more effective rather than introducing new ones. Here there were some concerns about the European Court of Human Rights legislation and whether the new proposals breached individual's rights.

4.1.3.3 While Community Reparation Orders and Acceptable Behaviour Contracts were met with some positive feedback, there was a concern that there would be problems where non-compliance occurred (These proposals are discussed further in Chapters Eight and Nine of the report respectively). The lack of effective sanctions provided a more general theme for respondents in the consultation meeting. In particular, there was a general perceived weakness in Children's Panels, which were seen as not being strong enough to apply the necessary sanctions. More punitive measures like tagging were widely met with strong scepticism and criticism with some noting that tags are seen as 'badges of honour', that are difficult to police and followed routes which had been discredited by research evidence from similar schemes in England. Police respondents felt that tagging was a quick fix and that there might not be enough secure accommodation resources to cope (These proposals are discussed further in Chapter Nine).

4.1.3.5 Proposals not included in the consultation document but suggested by consultees included the use of youth mentors to provide guidance to 'at risk' individuals and allowing Children's Panel Hearings to set the conditions of Anti-social Behaviour Orders for young people. Several consultees supported Anti-social Behaviour Orders which were perceived to be beneficial because they diverted young people away from custody which was itself seen to cause re-offending (These measures are discussed in Chapter Nine).

4.1.3.6 The legal process more generally was frequently singled out as being a major hindrance to dealing with youth crime and anti-social behaviour. A lack of support for victims and the perception that criminals unduly benefited from the process were regularly mentioned. In the majority of meetings many attendees said that a slow justice system, lack of witness protection and the demands of giving evidence left residents open to victimisation, intimidation and further anti-social behaviour. Suggestions were made to streamline the court process and provide greater support for victims.

Policing and wardens

4.1.3.7 Overall the responses from the consultation meetings suggest that links between the police, other agencies and residents are often strained. A widespread complaint voiced in the consultation meetings was that the police responded late to complaints of anti-social behaviour and took such issues less seriously than other crimes. A further complaint was that, where the police did try to intervene, they were not effective and appeared to have inadequate powers or propensity to deal with problems. However, there were also suggestions that the morale of the police themselves were low. As one community policeman observed "I'm just fed up and I'm giving up. I'm asking myself, 'Why bother? What can we do?" For both the police and residents there was a strong impression that young people were 'untouchables' who were not dealt with by the justice system, residents, the police or Children's Panels.

4.1.3.8 Consultees voiced concern that Community Police Officers seemed to be taken away to other duties too quickly and were replaced just as they were considered to be getting to know the patch. More generally many residents felt that the police were not visible enough as a deterrent to anti-social behaviour, with one respondent adding that a curfew would be a good response to youth disorder. There was also the suggestion that criminals acted as paid informants and that therefore some anti-social behaviour was ignored by the police for wider operational purposes.

4.1.3.9 Several residents felt that the proposed powers of dispersal in the consultation document would be ineffective and that there was no reason why young people should not be allowed to hang around. This was broadly supported by the police representatives, who argued that the dispersal proposals would be very difficult to implement. Dispersal might also damage their relationship with the community and could be seen as too heavy-handed (This proposal is discussed further in Chapter Ten). The police consulted also felt that it was difficult to control anti-social behaviour since it was sometimes organised by websites that makes dispersal more difficult to implement as groups could more easily reform. Instead it was proposed that a national intelligence model and problem-based policing should be pursued. Wider problems were also related to Ministers in the consultation meetings, including the need for greater multi-agency information sharing. This was considered to be something that was not generally happening and that needed to be improved. During the consultation the police representatives themselves were supportive of having the power to issue fixed penalty notices for low level anti-social behaviour offences, but not for under-16s. Suggestions were made for a ring-fenced (additional) set of funding to be made available to pay for community police who could deal with anti-social behaviour more effectively.

4.1.3.10 There was widespread support for the use of community wardens but some concerns about two of their proposed roles. First, in relation to the proposed capacity and duty to issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) and second, in their possible use as professional witnesses. In relation to the former point it was noted that general concern about using wardens to issue FPNs had resulted in very few wardens scheme in England going down this route. Others believed that the use of FPNs by neighbourhood wardens would change their role and they would be less safe as a result. Some consultees suggested that professional witness status might compromise community warden's trust with their local community (though others disagreed with this point). Some fears were expressed that community wardens might act as a replacement for community policing as a kind of cheaper option. Both the police representatives and residents were keen for this to be avoided, but both appeared to see a role for an intermediary body of wardens. One authority suggested that wardens should not be directed by the police. (These issues are discussed further in Chapters Seven, Nine and Ten).

Alcohol and licensing

4.1.3.11 A key problem identified by many respondents was the selling, use and distribution of alcohol. Several respondents argued that drinking had always gone on but that there seemed to be more aggression associated with it now. Some commented that shops sold competitively priced strong drinks and that these could easily be accessed by proxies for young people or bought under intimidation. Minority ethnic shopkeepers were viewed as being particular targets, both for buying alcohol and more generally. Alcohol was seen as a key issue that drove a range of social problems and suggestions in the consultation document to deal with this were met with general approval subject to the resolution of some key difficulties. For example, it was suggested that closure of off-licenses was useful for extreme anti-social behaviour but that the power to do this might be passed to local authorities and licensing boards. On licensing some respondents felt that certain city areas experiencing high levels of anti-social behaviour should be seen as special cases to address the concerns of local residents. A contradiction was noted between the recent Nicholson report findings on licensing and what was perceived to be a general need to restrict rather than open up existing restrictions. Some groups and residents argued that local people should have an increased say in licensing board decisions (These proposals are discussed in Chapter Ten).

Anti-social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) and Acceptable Behaviour Contracts (ABCs)

4.1.3.12 Some respondents claimed that ASBOs were beneficial since individuals could be targeted and tracked rather than being lost through one-off punitive actions like eviction. There was some concern at the implementation of ASBOs for under-16s although residents were more supportive of stronger controlling measures than organisations. However, there was concern at a possible contradiction between new homelessness duties in legislation and the proposals relating to housing, discussed below.

4.1.3.13 Reponses to the consultation events highlighted examples of good practice to be found in the consultation. For example, SACRO referred to a youth justice mediation project which they run and which was seen to have reduced re-offending significantly (others pointed out the value of mediation in resolving a range of anti-social behaviour-related problems). The SACRO project used surrogate victims to enable community reparation where victims are too frightened or traumatised to engage with perpetrators. Non-harassment orders were also reported by some respondents to have been successful in tackling anti-social behaviour. The majority of local residents consulted on the other hand, felt that restorative justice was too weak and were often keen to see ASBOs used with powers of arrest for breach even, in some cases for children as young as eight years old. Overall, the majority of responses supported an extension of ASBOs to younger people, but limited to a minimum age of twelve, however some respondents believed that the measures should go further, for example that ASBOs should be extended to under-12s. There were also individual suggestions that those with ASBOs should be 'named and shamed'. In the case of both ABCs and ASBOs there were suggestions that stronger sanctions would be needed to deal with non-compliance.

Housing and housing management

4.1.3.14 The problem of anti-social behaviour was seen as being located in both public and private sector housing. In some cases the difficulties associated with disciplining and controlling households in the private sector were seen as being more difficult and the extension of ASBOs was welcomed in this respect, with one housing officer remarking that "a lot of people take notice of ASBOs, most of them work." However, a range of issues stood out to which respondents suggested there be more co-ordinated and effective responses. The housing of drug dealers, for example, was often blamed for better households moving out thereby contributing to area decline.

4.1.3.15 Tensions were identified between homelessness legislation and the anti-social behaviour proposals, given a statutory duty on social landlords to house and the perceived need to evict anti-social households. Certainly it was universally felt that taking away housing benefit from anti-social tenants would not help and would, rather, displace existing problems. There was a strong sense that some of the proposals, would, if implemented, lead to what one resident described as a 'merry go round' with problems displaced but remaining in the locality. There were additional suggestions that a duty be placed on tenants of private landlords to tell neighbours who their landlord was but a feeling that the wider power to register private landlords would not help in itself. More generally there was seen to be a problem with private sublets.

4.1.3.16 One landlord commented that it was not appropriate to evict all those with drug offences as this would make problems worse. Dispersal and eviction were also seen as simply moving problems around - it took time to evict, social work departments often opposed the process and it displaced the problem which might benefit from in situ resolution through intensive housing and social work management in co-operation with the police where this was necessary. There was also the suggestion that there should be more rewards available for good tenants to incentivise good behaviour. Some respondents believed that there was a strong role to be played by various tiers of neighbourhood management through a variety of agencies such as social work, registered social landlords, local authorities and the police. In one case it was argued that strong housing officers played a key role in tackling anti-social behaviour.

4.1.3.17 A series of suggestions were raised by respondents in relation to the need for greater information sharing and multi-agency working. Generally many consultees felt that the role of local authorities needed to be made more explicit and that the bill needed to attach particular responsibilities and duties to organisations so that fault could be established if and where the bill failed to work. In some cases institutional co-working was seen as an important issue, for example one housing Association suggested that its local authority should have a duty to take on board their views. Often there were calls for community involvement in future measures to address anti-social behaviour, though there was much less detail on exactly how this might take place (Housing and anti-social behaviour is discussed further in Chapter Nine).

General comments

4.1.3.18 A general sentiment from the consultation was the need for greater partnership working and community action. One resident noted that "it's the community that has to take control of their area with the support of the local authority and the police." Another added that "its not legislation that will make the real difference, but action by communities". However, fears of retaliation ("you remonstrate and you've a brick through your window" in the words of one local resident) were widespread, as was the sense that many people felt powerless and unsupported by the law and official agencies.

4.1.3.19 Other suggestions included greater use of existing powers on litter which were not currently being used effectively and the introduction of powers to enable local authorities to pick up litter on the land of other owners (with reference, for example, to problem areas such as railway embankments). A key comment made by several respondents was that the strategy for tackling anti-social behaviour outlined in the consultation document did not, in itself, provide a resource for action. There was a general feeling that more resources were needed, both to fund the proposals and to support valued existing mainstream services like policing.

4.1.3.20 At a meeting of voluntary organisations it was suggested that it was as important to reward good behaviour as to condemn bad. There were also feelings expressed that more work needed to be done on the possible links between dyslexia and anti-social behaviour by young people. One suggestion was that recovered funds from drug dealers could be invested in the communities in which the dealer had operated to fund improved quality of life initiatives. Others argued that fines generated from FPNs could also be put back into areas affected by vandalism.

4.1.3.21 Representative bodies for black and ethnic minority groups felt that the proposals discussed in the consultation paper might represent discriminatory devices, particularly against young black people towards whom police attitudes were already seen as not being very positive. There were also fears amongst local residents that certain proposals could enable malicious complaining. At the same time it was felt that other proposals could be introduced including a duty to remove 'hate' graffiti by the local authority and the need for audio-visual CCTV to capture abusive behaviour. On a more positive note it was felt that the involvement of registered social landlords in tackling anti-social behaviour was a good thing but that Parenting Orders would likely need tailoring to support black and ethnic minority families. The contribution of certain media outlets to the consultation process was seen as a negative by several respondents, given what they regarded as sensationalist and one-sided reporting of issues relating to anti-social behaviour.

4.2 Other Forms of Consultation

4.2.1 Web-based Questionnaire

4.2.1.1 The Scottish Executive established a questionnaire on its website chiefly aimed at young people, requesting views on anti-social behaviour. In addition to asking for general comments, the questionnaire sought views on four specific issues: Parenting Orders, electronic tagging, reparation and young people 'hanging around.' 44 responses were received from individuals, although, where ages were identified, the majority of these were from adults. A further two responses provided findings from consultations with young people. These two responses, and other responses identified as being from young people are included in the analysis in Chapter Five.

4.2.1.2 The adults who responded to the web-based questionnaire reported that anti-social behaviour, particularly in relation to young people, is a real concern in many communities. The respondents agreed with the Scottish Executive taking action to address anti-social behaviour and generally supported the three specific proposals outlined on Parenting Orders, electronic tagging and reparation. However, mention was also made of tackling wider structural factors, improving community facilities and activities for young people and increasing the police presence in local communities. Respondents were much more divided over the issue of young people 'hanging around.' Some people reported having experienced intimidation, including racial harassment, from groups of young people and supported additional measures to disperse groups. However, other respondents were concerned that such measures labelled all young people as problematic and led to the collective condemnation of young people, rather than targeting the anti-social behaviour of a minority of individuals. It was argued by this group that, in addition to improved diversionary activities, there was a need to improve relationships between young people and other sections of local communities, particularly the elderly, and that greater interaction between these sections of the community should be facilitated.

4.2.2 MSP Questionnaires

4.2.2.1 Four MSPs submitted consultation responses from their constituencies in the form of returned questionnaires from their constituents. These quantitative questionnaires asked respondents to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the Scottish Executive's proposals. It is important to note that the questions in these questionnaires differed from those set out in the consultation document, and were more general in their nature. The exact wording of each of the four questionnaires was also different and the context in which they had been distributed and completed also varied. The number of responses received were:

Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley: 29
Glasgow Maryhill: 218
Glasgow Springburn: 479
Glasgow Bailleston: 131

The questionnaires revealed very high levels of support for the proposed measures, with over 90 percent of respondents either agreeing strongly or agreeing with each specific proposal and very small numbers of respondents disagreeing. These proportions were consistent across the four constituencies.

4.2.2.2 These questionnaires indicate strong support for the Scottish Executive's proposals. However, it is important that the following considerations are taken into account in interpreting these findings. Firstly, the responses are from only four constituencies, and the numbers involved are overall relatively small given the number of people living in these areas. Secondly, although no information is provided, it is assumed that these surveys have no been subject to any established sampling techniques, and that the respondents are not therefore necessarily representative of local populations. Thus, whilst these surveys may provide useful indicative evidence of opinion in a small section of four local constituencies, they do not enable a generalisation to be made about the level of public support for the proposed measures across Scotland.

4.2.2.3 A further report was submitted from Greenock and Inverclyde constituency. This also included data from a quantitative survey of constituents. Again, over ninety percent of respondents indicated support for both the broad approach and specific proposals of the Scottish Executive. No information was provided about the number of responses used in this survey. A report was also submitted from Cumbernauld and Kilsyth constituency, which provided responses to each of the specific proposals in the consultation document. It is not clear how this response was compiled.

4.2.3 Non-Scottish Executive Consultation Events

4.2.3.1 The Scottish Civic Forum submitted a response to the main consultation exercise based on six events they held throughout the country. The information from this response is incorporated into the later chapters of this report. Youthlink Scotland also held a major consultation event with young people from across Scotland and their resulting report is incorporated into Chapter Five.

4.2.4 Newspaper Campaigns

Two newspapers ran campaigns during the consultation period, requesting their readers to write in with their experiences of anti-social behaviour and their proposals for addressing the issue. 150 responses were received by the Daily Record and 64 by the Greenock Telegraph. It should be noted that the context and language for these campaigns were determined by the two newspapers and the responses they received reflect this. The responses received catalogued many incidences of anti-social behaviour, especially harassment, intimidation, vandalism and disorder related to drink and drugs misuse and drug dealing. The responses also suggested that elderly and infirm residents were particularly likely to be the victims of anti-social behaviour.

4.2.4.2 Several letters from young people reported that they themselves had been the victims of anti-social behaviour. Although the majority of letters referred to the conduct of young people, many also reported anti-social behaviour by adults. Although some respondents mentioned the provision of better facilities for young people, the majority argued that firmer action was required, including a more effective police response and encouraging parental responsibility.

4.2.4.3 These letters highlighted the impact that anti-social behaviour has on victims, and also the obvious fear, anger and feelings of impotence within sections of local communities. However, the fact that this was a self-selecting sample, mainly comprising individuals who had suffered from anti-social behaviour, and also the newspaper rhetoric used in soliciting responses, makes it impossible to determine to what extent these responses reflect the wider views of the public in Scotland. It should also be noted that these responses did not make any reference to the specific proposals set out in the consultation document.

4.3 Other Forms of 'Anti-social' Behaviour

4.3.1 Drawing on all the elements of the consultation process, a number of other forms of 'problematic' behaviour not explicitly discussed in the consultation document were identified. These included:

• Vandalism and misuse of fire hydrants
• Vehicles being parked on pavements or other prohibited places
• Fly-posting
• Joy riding and excessive noise from cars
• Littering related to the inadequate provision of bins
• Chewing gum deposited on pavements etc.
• Vandalism of cemeteries
• Vandalism of retail premises
• Vandalism and theft of cars (need for greater car park security)
• Anti-social behaviour on public transport

In addition, life-style disputes were raised in relation to:

• Skateboarding
• Street football
• Sectarian marches

Consultees felt that it was important that the Scottish Executive take steps to deal with these issues in addition to the ones addressed in the consultation document.

4.4 SUMMARY

• It was very apparent from all these elements of the consultation process that many individuals and communities experience substantial and very serious anti-social behaviour and that such behaviour has severe consequences for the wellbeing of individuals and communities. Much, but not all of this anti-social behaviour involved young people, who were also likely to be the victims of anti-social behaviour
• The need to address anti-social behaviour as a matter of urgency was identified by nearly all the responses. There was a general feeling that current procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour were not adequate, and the Scottish Executive's focus on this issue was widely welcomed.
• The responses from local residents and members of the public were strongly supportive of a stronger and more punitive stand being taken against anti-social behaviour and broadly supported most of the proposals outlined to address this issue. These responses were characterised by the belief that policies and procedures should be directed more firmly towards the needs of victims and witnesses.
• Organisations and agencies also recognised the scale of the problem, but had more reservations about the actual implications and effectiveness of specific proposals.
• Amongst both supporters and opponents of specific proposals, there was recognition that these should form part of a broader, adequately resourced, strategy dealing with the wider causes of anti-social behaviour.
• A range of other forms of anti-social behaviour were also identified and it was requested that the Scottish Executive consider measures for dealing with these problems.

« Previous | Contents | Next »