Anti-social behaviour orders, tough love or too far?

The government’s latest plan to tackle the issue of youth violence is to identify, target, and work with 1,000 children who are at risk of turning to crime later in life. This move is part of a £218m 3-year package to prevent youth and children as young as 10 from developing criminal behaviour.

The opposition parties have criticised the government for applying sticking-plaster solutions to a widespread and deeply-rooted problem. But with such staggering figure as ‘95% of children have been the victim of a crime, including 72% who have been assaulted’, according to a survey by the Howard League for Penal Reform last year, it is no wonder that the government is turning to tough measures, or what can be interpreted as ‘tough love’.

While I do agree with the Children’s Minister, Beverly Hughes, who said yesterday that “We know that the best form of cure is prevention”, I do not consider directly singling out and tagging a small number of youth as ‘future criminals’ as preventative action. Rather, I think that the government’s decision to invest £23m in a youth capital fund that will help provide better arts and sports facilities to youth in disadvantaged areas, is the type of action that will have a lasting effect. We want to present young people with alternatives to crime. Investing in such things as community centres, extracurricular activities, as well as support and mentorship programmes, is a good way to start. But most importantly, what first needs to be done is to focus on the wider social issues behind this growing problem. Poverty, broken homes, drug and alcohol abuse are just a few factors that come to mind.

Ensuring that young people feel they are being supported, motivated and guided by their families, schools and communities is fundamental. I don’t believe that threatening youth with anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) and forcing them to sign a good behaviour contract will change much. Reaching out to all children before they begin to consider the idea of resorting to crime is definitely appropriate, but maybe this latest scheme is just a little too ‘tough’.