Antisocial Behaviour

Debate between John Lamont and Jim Shannon

Tuesday 10th November 2026 Westminster Hall

[John Lamont]

My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point. I think the police do an amazing job—certainly in my constituency, they work as hard as they possibly can to keep communities and residents as safe as they possibly can—but, as he highlights, morale is a big concern. The police are far too stretched. They are dealing with very stressful situations and worry about doing the best they can. In rural communities like mine and his, they cover a huge area, which compounds the stress. We need universality of standards and support to ensure that police officers are able to do the job we expect. We need new officers, because without them, antisocial behaviour will continue to escalate.

One form of antisocial behaviour that we have not heard much about today but concerns many people is cannabis smoking. In England and Wales, drug use and dealing are among the most commonly experienced or witnessed forms of antisocial behaviour. It is often shrugged off as harmless, yet a King’s College London review of 63 studies involving more than 265,000 people found that cannabis users were more likely both to commit violence and to fall victim to it. Users were around twice as likely to have committed a violent act. That is why the Conservative party has called for police intervention—a formal caution or immediate justice intervention for a first offence, and prosecution before a magistrate for a second offence—when someone is seen smoking cannabis in public. Public drug use cannot be tolerated.

[Jim Shannon]

Some of the figures in the press in the last week or 10 days indicate that there has been a massive rise in the number of over-50s taking cannabis and cocaine; it is not always young people. Does the hon. Gentleman share my concern that those in that age group are participating more than ever and that there has to be a focus on them, too?

[John Lamont]

The hon. Member makes an excellent point: it is much more prevalent. I am certainly much more aware of it when I walk down the street, and I am getting more and more complaints from constituents who are experiencing it in the home setting because they are smelling it from neighbouring flats or houses. I will come to that.

We have heard from a number of fellow Scots about the problems that we are facing in Scotland, but it is disappointing that there are no SNP MPs in the Chamber to talk about the antisocial behaviour that I am sure many of their constituents are experiencing. Policing and prosecution are devolved, but my constituents in the Scottish Borders feel the problem of antisocial behaviour, too.

A 2024 World Health Organisation study of 44 countries found that the rate of cannabis use among 15-year-old boys was highest in Scotland. That should shame us all. Since 2016, police in Scotland have been able to issue a recorded police warning for cannabis possession instead of reporting it to the procurator fiscal. In 2021, that was extended to all drugs, including those in class A.

The Crown insists that that is not decriminalisation, but that is not how it smells to any of my constituents sitting in their living rooms or playing with their children in their gardens. Hardly a week goes by without residents—families with young children, older people, those recovering from illness at home—contacting me about their neighbours’ cannabis smoke filling their homes. They report to it the police and the housing association, but they have come to expect that nothing will be done, because they know that the Crown Office is unlikely to prosecute. Whatever the legal technicalities, for those residents, that feels like effective decriminalisation. A law not enforced is not a law at all. People are losing faith that anyone will stand up for them.

With a new Lord Advocate in post since June, now is the time to review that approach so that police and housing associations have the backing they need to act. Yet as we heard from the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman), under the SNP, Police Scotland now has fewer officers than when it was created in 2013. In a rural area such as mine, officers are often expected to travel miles to deal with incidents. Will the Minister join me and the other Scottish Members who have spoken in pressing the Scottish Government to take a stronger approach to drug use in residential areas and ensure that rural communities have the police officers they need?

Antisocial behaviour in train and bus stations was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore). This week, Borders Buses wrote to me about antisocial behaviour in the Galashiels transport interchange, which is the gateway to the Borders railway. It gives a very useful worked example of what is happening in many bus and train stations across the country. Border Buses operates across all of Scotland, including in Glasgow, yet some of the worst antisocial behaviour it faces is in the Scottish Borders. Timetable leaflets have been set on fire, the customer service hub has had to be closed, and the customer service adviser had to be moved to another floor of the building for their own safety.

As the nights draw in, Border Buses is asking for a visible security presence and warns that, if things do not improve, they may have to consider withdrawing from the transport interchange altogether. For the many people in the Borders who do not drive, that would be a devastating loss. That is the true cost of antisocial behaviour: it robs communities of the services that people depend on. Border Buses staff at the interchange are crucial to local transport links, yet the Scottish Government’s new measures to tackle antisocial behaviour on buses do not include incidents at the train station itself.

It is also important to recognise that many of the incidents of antisocial behaviour involve older people with mental health difficulties who have fallen through the gaps in social care, rather than young people, which is a point that the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) made. Will the Minister join me in thanking Border Buses’ drivers and staff for their dedication and support, as well as in asking for stronger support and protection for those working in bus and train stations, such as those working in the Galashiels transport interchange?

There is no simple solution to antisocial behaviour, but without enforcement, we risk it simply becoming accepted. Our constituents are not asking for much. They want to feel safe in their homes and on their streets. They want to know that when they report an incident, something will happen. The Government are not delivering that yet and it is our job to make sure that they do.

Network Rail Timetable Changes: Rural Communities

Debate between John Lamont and Jim Shannon

Tuesday 9th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[John Lamont]

The hon. Lady makes an excellent point. Many rural communities depend on train services, bus services and public transport links because there are no alternatives. If the timetables, trains and services do not run on time, they have an even greater impact because there is no alternative compared with what happens in larger towns and big cities where, if one service does not turn up, people can jump on alternatives without too much trouble. For our constituencies—I think my constituency might be marginally bigger than the hon. Lady’s—it has a disproportionate impact.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. If there is a change in the rail service and how it works, there has to be something to take its place, at least in the short term in the rural communities that he and the hon. Member for Tiverton and Minehead (Rachel Gilmour) represent, and in those that I represent as well. There must be a bus service that can fill the gap and at least help to get people from A to B. I think in particular of those who have health appointments and those who have to get somewhere by a certain time. If the bus service is not there, that is a problem for those of us who live in rural areas and do not have a car. We really need to have a bus service to fill the gap.

[John Lamont]

The hon. Gentleman makes another excellent point. The argument put forward by Network Rail and LNER is that there will be alternative services, but it involves connecting to other trains. As I will go on to describe, if someone is disabled or an older person, the idea of making a connection is in itself sometimes daunting, and if they miss the connection the consequences can be far greater compared with the consequences for those of us who are perhaps more frequent travellers.

I use Berwick-upon-Tweed station regularly to travel to Westminster. The trains are well used and busy, so the decision to reduce services and make travel more complex does not make sense. Since the final timetable was published in September, I have been pleased to work cross-party with the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), whom I am pleased to see in his place. We met with Network Rail and LNER in September, so that they could explain why they had taken the decision to cut the number of services, on which our constituents rely.

I would like to thank Councillor Rosemary Mackenzie of Berwick-upon-Tweed town council for her campaigning on this issue, and Councillor Carol Hamilton from the Scottish Borders council and Councillor Richard Wearmouth from Northumberland county council for their work.

Electricity Infrastructure: Rural Communities

Debate between John Lamont and Jim Shannon

Tuesday 21st October 2025 Westminster Hall

[John Lamont]

The hon. Member makes a key point, which I will come to later, that often these projects generate many jobs while the developments are being constructed, but the jobs disappear as soon as they are finished. That is unlike nuclear power, which the hon. Member for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross (Jamie Stone) mentioned, with 300 jobs in Berwickshire alone directly connected to Torness power station. Those are permanent jobs, for people living and working in the local communities. We do not get the same employment opportunities with some of the current proposals for energy infrastructure.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The hon. Gentleman is right to mention resilience and modern technology. I declare an interest as a member of the Ulster Farmers Union. The National Farmers Union and the UFU have indicated that infrastructure needs to be upgraded to ensure that whenever storms come, there will not be loss of electricity or broadband outages. Does he agree that we must ensure the livelihoods of our rural constituents and their businesses when we look to the future?

[John Lamont]

The hon. Member makes a key point about the need to invest in the electricity network, but it needs to be done in a coherent and organised way with buy-in from the local communities. That is what is lacking dreadfully with some of the proposals.

I will make some progress. The issues are clear. First, the proximity of pylons to people’s homes will impact their quality of life and the visual amenity of their community. Secondly, our countryside will be scarred, damaging tourism and leaving businesses that are already badly suffering out of pocket. It will also damage our environment and natural habitats. Agricultural land will be damaged or lost, impacting farms, reducing the amount of produce made in the Borders and harming our drive for food security. We are not saying that we do not want any energy infrastructure—we already have a lot in the Borders. It is about finding the right solution that protects our rural communities.