The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

2 INCIDENCE OF ASBO APPLICATIONS AND ORDERS GRANTED

2.1 This section sets out data on the deployment of ASBOs between April 1999 and March 2004. Drawing on evidence from the email survey, as well as secondary data, ASBO activity in Scotland is compared with England and Wales.

ASBO applications

2.2 Between April 1999 and March 2004 ASBO applications in Scotland totalled 603 (see Table 2.1). The 235 ASBOs applications made in 2003/04 constituted an increase of 87% on the previous year. This growth has primarily been driven by a rise in ASBO applications by local authorities, with RSLs (who were empowered to make ASBO applications only as from June 2003 ⁷) also contributing to the increase.

2.3 Fifteen of the 25 ASBO applications made by RSLs in 2003/04 were attributable to just three associations - Glasgow, Melville and Scottish Borders ⁸.

Table 2.1: ASBO applications in Scotland 1999-2004

Notes to table
Note: Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 DTZ email survey and Communities Scotland APSR data

ASBO applications by area

2.4 Figure 2.1 presents the numbers of LA and RSLASBO applications made during 2003/04 broken down by the geographical area in which the application was made. Of the 235 applications, 40 (17%) were made in the North Lanarkshire area. Dundee (26 or 11%) and South Lanarkshire (20 or 8%) had the next largest numbers of applications. Within six local authority areas no ASBO applications were made, while in a further 10, applications numbered three or less.

Figure 2.1: ASBO applications by local authority area, 2002-04

Notes to chart
Note: Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 DTZ email survey and APSR data

2.5 The six applications by Glasgow Housing Association were the only ones made by any Glasgow agency.

2.6 Trends in ASBO applications by local authority area are set out in Table 2.2. The numbers of authorities where no ASBOs were sought reduced from 12 in 2002/03 to six in 2003/04. The overall growth in ASBO applications is most significant in the City of Edinburgh, where applications increased from one to 15. Just four authorities - Dundee, North Lanarkshire and South Lanarkshire and Stirling - accounted for 100 of the 211 ASBOs sought by local authorities in 2003/04. In three of these authorities applications were substantially higher than in the previous 12 months.

2.7 Table 2.2 shows the rate of ASBO applications per every 100,000 households. Whilst the number of applications was highest in North Lanarkshire, the rate of applications was higher in both Stirling and Dundee. Because of their comparatively small populations the relatively small numbers of ASBO applications by Orkney and Shetland place these authorities amongst those areas with the highest ASBO application rates (see Table 2.2).

Table 2.2: ASBO applications in Scotland 2002-2004 by local authority areas (2002/03 figures converted to financial years)

Note: Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 = DTZ email survey and APSR data, Scottish Executive 2002 Based Household Projections

ASBOs granted

2.8 Since April 1999, a total of 374 ASBOs have been granted in Scotland. This represents 62% of applications made over the same period. However, it is not accurate to state that 38% of ASBO applications have been rejected during this period. This is because ASBO applications enumerated as having taken place in a particular year, say 2003/04, will not necessarily have resulted in a judicial outcome before the end of that year. Evidence from practitioners suggests that the proportion of rejected ASBO is considerably lower than 38%.

2.9 As with the profile of applications, ASBOs granted have steadily increased, rising from 26 in 1999/00 to 148 in 2003/04. The rate of growth slowed between 2001 and 2003, peaking again in the most recent year.

Table 2.3: ASBO Orders Granted in Scotland 1999-2004

Notes to table
Note: Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 = DTZ email survey and APSR data, Scottish Executive 2002 Based Household Projections

2.10 Using Home Office data ⁹, we have compared the rate of ASBOs granted in England and Wales and Scotland. Table 2.4 and Figure 2.2 show that ASBOs granted per 100,000 households have been consistently higher in Scotland than in England and Wales (though, as explained in paras 1.2-1.3, the two regimes differ in certain respects).

2.11 During the period covered by this report, Scottish organisations were unable to seek ASBOs for persons under 16 years of age. As such, the ASBO applications and Orders granted figures for Scotland do not include younger people for whom an ASBO might have been an option, had the power been available. On this basis it is reasonable to argue that the incidence of ASBO applications in Scotland is significantly higher than in England and Wales in relation to the 'actionable' proportion of the population.

Table 2.4: ASBOs granted in England and Wales, and Scotland, 1999-2004

Notes to table
Pre-2003/04 figures for Scotland converted to financial years;
England and Wales data for 1999/00 not available.
Sources: ASBOs granted - Home Office (England and Wales), CIHS, DTZ Pieda, Communities Scotland (Scotland); Households figures - ONS 2001 mid-year estimates (1996-based projections); (England and Wales), Scottish Executive 2002 Based Household Projections (Scotland)

Figure 2.2: Incidence of ASBOs Granted in England & Wales and Scotland, 1999-2004

Notes to chart
1. Households figures for Scotland 2002-based, England & Wales 1996-based;
2. Scotland figures for 1999/00-2002/03 interpolated from CIHS data; 3. England and Wales data for 1999/00 not available.
Sources: As Table 2.4

ASBOs granted by area

2.12 Figure 2.3 presents the ASBOs granted in 2002/03 and 2003/04 by LA area. Of the 148 ASBOs granted, 31 (21%) were initiated within the North Lanarkshire area. Dundee (20 or 13%) and Fife (14 or 9%) had the next largest numbers of ASBOs granted. Within ten local authority areas no ASBOs were granted, while in a further 10 the numbers granted totalled three or less.

2.13 Trends in ASBOs granted are plotted for two years and are set out in Table 2.5. ASBOs granted increased from 75 in 2002/03 to 148 the following year. The greatest numerical growth in ASBOs was in Dundee, were ASBOs granted rose from nil to 20. The number of ASBOs granted in North Lanarkshire, Scottish Borders, Dumfries and Galloway and Edinburgh also increased significantly - together the number of ASBOs granted in these areas increased from 26 to 56.

2.14 Table 2.5 also shows the rate of ASBOs granted per every 100,000 households. Overall, 2003/04 saw 6.8 ASBOs granted per 100,000 households, twice the figure for 2002/03. As with the applications, Orkney and Shetland show up as 'high rate' authorities thanks to their relatively small populations. Perhaps more notable is that largely rural areas such as Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway were also among the authorities where ' ASBOs granted' rates were highest in 2003/04. In the former, most of this activity was initiated by RSLs rather than by the local authority. Dumfries and Galloway Council process all ASBO applications on behalf of Dumfries and Galloway Housing Partnership.

Figure 2.3: ASBO Granted by local authority area, 2002-04

Notes to chart
Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: DTZ email survey and APSR data

Table 2.5: ASBOs Granted in Scotland 2002-2004 by local authority area (2002/03 figures converted to financial years)

2.15 Notes to table
Pre-2003/04 figures converted to financial years
Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 = DTZ email survey and APSR data, Scottish Executive 2002 Based Household Projections
The incidence of ASBOs in Scotland can also be compared with that in England and Wales at a local authority level. As shown in Figure 2.4, several Scottish authorities feature among the highest ASBO users on this measure, though even in Dundee the 2003/04 numbers were modest by comparison with certain English authorities.

Figure 2.4 - Incidence of ASBOs Granted, 2003/04: Highest 20 LAs in Scotland and England & Wales

Notes to chart
Households figures for Scotland 2002-based, England & Wales 1996-based. Scotland figures for 1999/00-2002/03 interpolated from CIHS data
Sources: Scotland 1999/00-2002/03 - CIHS; 2003/04 - DTZ Pieda and APSR; England & Wales

Interim ASBOs

2.16 In Scotland the option of applying for an ASBO on an 'interim' basis was introduced under the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2003. The aim was to provide more immediate protection to victims of antisocial behaviour and/or to protect witnesses from intimidation prior to a full ASBO court hearing. Interim Orders can be applied for pending the full application for an ASBO.

2.17 Table 2.6 shows the total number of ASBO applications alongside the number of ASBOs granted on an interim basis. This suggests marked variations in practice between local authority areas. For example:

• In Angus, West Lothian, West Dunbartonshire and East Lothian the number of interim ASBOs granted was equal to the total number of ASBO applications
• In South Lanarkshire, East Ayrshire and Aberdeen the number of interim ASBOs was less than 20% of the applications made

2.18 Around 59% of interim ASBOs were later granted as full ASBOs during 2003/04 - (and more may have been granted as full ASBOs subsequently). It needs to be borne in mind here that the power to grant Interim ASBOs came into force only in June 2003 - part way through 2003/04. Particularly given the likely time lag before new legislation is reflected by organisational practice, it is possible that the 2004/05 pattern of ASBO use may be very different in this respect.

Table 2.6: Interim ASBOs Granted in Scotland 2003-2004 by local authority areas

Source: Email Survey

2.19 The variation in use of interim ASBOs was explored within the focus groups. The majority view was that Interim Orders were easier and faster to secure. This was principally due to the fact that less evidence was required to support the application. One local authority reported than Interim Orders could be obtained within one week, compared to two months or more for a full ASBO (though it was not clear whether this discrepancy was mainly due to the time needed to amass necessary evidence to support full ASBO application, or because of more lengthy court procedures where full ASBOs are sought). Focus group participants reported that Interim Orders are often used in more serious cases of harassment, where there is a need to take urgent action to resolve ASB, and/or where witnesses or victims are reluctant to provide evidence in court.

2.20 Focus group participants made the point that once an Interim Order is granted there may be no reason to pursue a full ASBO unless the ASB continues. Two organisations represented among focus group participants had established a standard procedure of applying for Interim Orders in the first instance (i.e. seeking a full ASBO only where an Interim Order appears to require extension).

2.21 Focus group evidence suggests a degree of inconsistency within the sheriff court system as regards Interim ASBOs. In some areas, it was reported, the evidential requirements laid down by sheriffs for such Orders were little different from what was deemed necessary to justify applications for full ASBOs. There were alleged instances of applications being rejected until a proof level submission was made. This raises wider questions about the consistency of sheriff decision-making and is an issue needing investigation in the course of the forthcoming case study research.

Reasons for the increasing use of ASBOs

2.22 Commenting on generally rising ASBO use, participants in both the RSL and local authority focus groups cited growing pressure - from both residents and elected members - for action on ASB. This was seen as following from the political priority ASB has assumed; a development, in turn, resulting in part from the high profile of the issue in the media. Concerns were expressed that central government places undue emphasis on simple ASBO application numbers and that this is encouraging too great a focus on punitive as opposed to constructive measures to tackle antisocial behaviour.

2.23 Many focus group participants - particularly among the local authority staff - saw the rising incidence of ASBO applications as reflecting a growing confidence in the effectiveness of the device. The gradual improvement of joint working on ASBOs involving local authorities, the police and other bodies was another factor cited. Similarly, some authorities (and probably RSLs) were becoming more confident that sheriffs would respond sympathetically to ASBO applications.

2.24 As in England and Wales, it may be that the option of applying for ASBOs on an interim basis has significantly widened the appeal of the device (because - like civil injunctions in England and Wales - it is now a useful remedy for serious offences calling for immediate action) (Pawson et al, 2005).

Reasons for geographical variation in the use of ASBOs

2.25 Clearly, the incidence of antisocial behaviour varies from one area to another and it would, therefore, be surprising if the incidence of ASBO applications (and Orders granted) was constant across the country. It is, however, clear from Tables 2.2 and 2.5 that the actual pattern is not only highly diverse, but also quite inconsistent with what might be anticipated in terms of the expected pattern of ASB. The most obvious example here is Glasgow - a local authority area where various forms of neighbourhood complaints run well above the national average ¹⁰, and yet the use of ASBOs has been low.

2.26 Some of the same factors cited above were seen as significant in helping to explain the substantial area to area variations in the use of ASBOs. In essence, individual local authorities and RSLs have been 'gearing up' for the new regime at different speeds. In some cases this was seen as being intimately linked with the local timetable for setting up a specialist ASB unit bringing together officers with appropriate legal and other expertise. With respect to Glasgow, for example, it was predicted that the establishment of such a unit (in December 2004) would lead to a marked increase in counter- ASB activity by the City Council, probably including the use of ASBOs.

2.27 A second factor said to be significant in influencing regional variations in approaches to tackling ASB was the varying attitude of the courts - and, indeed, the legal profession more broadly. In Falkirk, for example, it was believed by ASB officers from other LAs and RSLs that limited use of ASBOs was, in part, a response to a belief that the local court was unsympathetic to the ASBO model. Another part of the explanation for the low numbers of ASBOs in Glasgow was said to be the sceptical stance of legal professionals (both private solicitors and LA and RSL legal departments) as well as sheriffs. In some courts, focus group participants reported, interpretations of the ASBO legislation varied markedly between sheriffs.

2.28 Variations in court procedures could also be significant. For example, it was reported that legal aid had been granted to ASBO defendants in Glasgow but not in some other areas. Having representation in court might have an impact on the probability of an ASBO application being granted by the sheriff.

2.29 A third factor cited by some focus group participants as affecting regional patterns in ASBO use was the organisational location of the staff member(s) tasked with tackling antisocial behaviour. This issue, discussed in more detail below, was seen as potentially affecting both the scale and pattern (e.g. in relation to housing tenure) of ASBO use.

2.30 There was some focus group participant support for the hypothesis that a below average or unexpectedly low incidence of ASBOs could, in certain instances, reflect a positive LA/ RSL commitment to tackling ASB in other ways. Again, Falkirk was cited as an example of an authority strongly committed to mediation and, perhaps as a result, less inclined to seek ASBOs.

ASBOs and organisational structures

2.31 Table 2.7 below shows that housing departments (or equivalent) most commonly lead in progressing ASBO applications (19 or 65%).

2.32 In 21 authorities specialist teams or posts had been established to manage the organisation's response to ASB. These arrangements took a range of forms including:

• Specialist ASB or investigating officers
• Community safety teams within which a ASB unit operates
• Social protection teams involving wardens, investigators, police and street mediators
• Specialist team utilising Scottish Executive mainstream funding including a dedicated legal team, support workers and witness advice across all tenure
• Neighbourhood Relations team with dedicated staff and legal team, multi agency working and 'out of hours' service

2.33 In the local authority sector there was no clear relationship between the existence of specialist teams and the incidence of ASBOs. The ten local authorities with the lowest numbers of applications per 100,000 households all had specialist teams. Of the ten local authorities with the highest number of applications per 100,000 households, six had specialist teams. A number of these specialist teams are of recent origin and consequently it may be premature to make an assessment of their impact on ASBO usage. However, different teams may adopt different strategies. As such, the existence of a specialist team does not necessary equate to either high or low use of ASBOs.

2.34 Among RSLs specialist ASB posts or teams were comparatively rare. Only three of the 82 responding RSLs reported that such arrangements existed in their organisation. It is, however, notable that two of these (Glasgow HA and Melville HA) were among the highest in the country in relation to the numbers of ASBO applications during 2003/04.

Table 2.7: Organisational Practices and ASBO Applications and Granted per 100,000 households, 2003/04

Source: 2002/03 = CIH, 2003/04 DTZ email survey and APSR data, Scottish Executive 2002 Based Household Projections

2.35 The local authority focus group believed that specialist teams are more pro-active in their approach than mainstream housing management staff. More importantly, particularly where such teams are organisationally separate from housing management, they are thought to be more active in promoting and publicising their activities, and more inclined to deal with complaints from all sections of the community.

2.36 Participants in both the LA and the RSL focus groups also thought that specialist teams had demonstrated the capacity and skills to improve the speed and quality with which evidence was collected, therefore increasing the chances of a successful outcome in court. In fact, focus group participants claimed that few ASBO applications were rejected by the courts (though sheriffs sometimes required additional evidence). The impact of specialist teams on the effectiveness of ASBOs will need to be investigated in the forthcoming case study work. Where possible, these will examine whether ASBO prohibitions are better framed, whether Orders are more pro-actively monitored for breaches, and whether applications to court for further actions are any more successful than in organisations where ASB response is differently configured.

2.37 Relatively few RSLs have set up ASB teams - perhaps because of the cost of setting up and maintaining a specialist unit within small organisations. There are however indications that some RSLs are already (or planning to) buy into LA specialist teams - e.g. in Edinburgh. Glasgow Housing Association plans to market its counter- ASB services to other RSLs operating in the city.

Antisocial behaviour policies

2.38 The Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004 requires every local authority, together with relevant Chief Constable, to prepare, publish and review a strategy for dealing with antisocial behaviour in the local authority area. The strategy sets out an assessment of antisocial behaviour, arrangements for consulting community bodies, the services available and coordination with the police. Draft strategies are due to be completed by 31 March 2005. Although the strategies need not be submitted to the Scottish Executive by March, many will form the basis of Outcome Agreements for funding and will therefore be required by the Executive later in the year.

2.39 In preparing the strategy, local authorities are required to consult and inform relevant stakeholders - the Principal Reporter to the Children's Panel, RSLs and groups representing people affected by antisocial behaviour. Particular RSLs may be required to participate in the preparation, review and revision of strategies, particularly those RSLs that are major housing providers in the local authority area.

2.40 Local authorities and RSLs were asked about their ASBO policies and procedures. Only half of local authorities (and around a quarter of RSLs) reported having documented policies and practices 'in place'. Only 19 were collecting financial information about the cost of using ASBOs and other measures to tackle ASB. The RSL focus group revealed concerns about the cost of ASBOs, especially for smaller organisations.

Table 2.8: Number of local authorities with processes in place / in development

Source: Email survey

« Previous | Contents | Next »