Antisocial Behaviour

Ayoub Khan Excerpts

Tuesday 10th November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of anti-social behaviour.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I thank colleagues from across the House who have helped to make this debate possible, especially the hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Neil Coyle), who chairs the all-party parliamentary group on antisocial behaviour. I thank colleagues at Resolve, who work with victims, housing providers, councils and the police to help to address this issue. I also thank the French students from OMNES who have attended this debate to see how democracy works.

I was driven to secure this debate primarily by the people I represent—the residents of Birmingham Perry Barr—who are all proud to call our area home. However, for all its charms, the area also suffers from issues that successive Governments have failed to address. Among the worst of those issues is antisocial behaviour such as street drinking, begging, threatening behaviour, fly-tipping, criminal damage, noise nuisance and vandalism. For many, those are part of everyday life. Only a small minority of people commit such acts, but everyone feels their effects.

The facts back that up. Resolve estimates that more than 5 million incidents of antisocial behaviour occur in this country every year. Even worse, that figure is only an estimate, as the overwhelming majority of people who experience an incident do not even report it. According to Home Office statistics, up to 93% of incidents go unreported.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

The hon. Member is making a powerful speech. Does he agree that the reason incidents go unreported is that the public do not have faith that they will be dealt with?

[Ayoub Khan]

I will come on to the hon. Member’s point, but that is part and parcel of exactly why the problem occurs. People feel desensitised towards reporting matters, because little is ever done.

The problem is only getting worse. In a survey conducted by Resolve this year, 63% of respondents who had encountered antisocial behaviour in the previous three years had never reported it to anybody. Last year, that figure stood at 56%. Even worse, of those who experienced the behaviour at first hand, 28% said that it made them feel unsafe locally, 15% had considered moving because of it and 6% actually had moved.

Antisocial behaviour is happening in broad daylight, and too many people have so little confidence in the system that they no longer see the point in asking for help. Some would rather move out and start afresh than rely on local authorities and agencies helping them out. That is where we are failing. Victims are being asked to place their faith in a broken system where agencies dodge responsibility, access to justice is slow and the quality of support for victims is, unfortunately, a postcode lottery.

I welcome the introduction of stronger powers to tackle persistent offending. The Crime and Policing Act 2026 introduced respect orders, tougher penalties for breaches of certain notices and wider powers to tackle reoccurring disorder. However, new powers on paper do not make our streets safer; local agencies need the resources to enforce them and to give victims confidence that reporting will lead to action. Luckily, solutions exist, and frontline professionals across the country are already delivering results in challenging circumstances—for example, Resolve, which comprises many such expert voices, has made six recommendations, which this Government must take seriously.

We must start by putting victims at the heart of our response. They deserve consistent support and reassurance that somebody is taking responsibility for their case. Too often, police forces, councils and housing providers hold different pieces of information about the same individual or incident, but struggle to co-ordinate their responses. A single national agreement would enable those agencies to work together more effectively, identify patterns of behaviour and intervene earlier. We must also address the unacceptable delays in our civil justice system. The victims of persistent nuisance and intimidation are often left waiting months, sometimes years, for civil proceedings to conclude. The creation of a dedicated housing court would streamline such cases, reduce delays and ensure that justice is delivered before further harm is done.

However, none of those measures will succeed unless we make it easier for people to report what they see on their streets. That means creating a simple, standardised reporting system, and allowing victims to report anonymously and access help with cases. Also, we cannot afford to simply wait for disruptive behaviour to emerge before taking action. That is why we need greater investment in early-intervention measures aimed at supporting vulnerable individuals, engaging young people and addressing the underlying causes of antisocial behaviour. We need to direct sustained funding to community safety partnerships. Those organisations understand the challenges facing their neighbourhoods, and bring together the agencies best placed to resolve them, but they cannot deliver long-term solutions without proper support.

Those practical reforms would make an enormous difference, but alongside them we must look at the bigger picture and put an end to the austerity that causes people to lose pride in the places that they call home. Youth clubs, sports facilities, community spaces and mental health services must be protected and seen as the essential services that they are, rather than as optional extras.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful speech. Does he agree that, as well as shrinkage in youth facilities and clubs, the absence of police officers on the beat in our communities means that antisocial behaviour has increased, particularly with vehicles—loud music, speeding—including the e-scooters and bikes being ridden around our towns, on our pavements and perhaps even up one-way streets? That has never been addressed because there have been no officers on the streets.

[Ayoub Khan]

We certainly need extra policing in the west midlands region and the city of Birmingham—I will come to that. In my constituency, ever since Labour brought our city into bankruptcy, the absence of those services has been felt every day. We must work to restore what has been lost.

As I said, our police forces have also been deprived of the resources to tackle the issue. For that, the Government must take their share of the blame. West Midlands police have 540 fewer police officers and 500 fewer police community support officers than in 2010. Accounting for population growth, however, we are 1,200 police officers short of the number projected 20 years ago. Unfortunately, at a time when the need for safer streets is only rising, Labour has left our police force £43 million short every year.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

The hon. Gentleman has proposed a lot of positive solutions, and he rightly raises the issue of police funding. Dorset police is one of the worst funded police forces in the UK, and certainly the worst funded for PCSOs. Dorset police are trying to police 1,000 square miles. Does he agree that, until we address the central Government funding formula and give local forces the funds they need to provide the services that local communities require, we will never have an effective deterrent against antisocial behaviour?

[Ayoub Khan]

I wholeheartedly agree with the hon. Member. By way of example, 70% of the police forces up and down this country are operating with numbers equivalent to what they were in 2010. Some areas, such as the west midlands and his constituency, are not getting their fair share. We need to bring those numbers up enough to make a tangible impact. Labour has left the West Midlands police force short by £43 million every year, meaning that we could now lose another 80 officers unless we reverse that trend. Our police forces will be forced to prioritise more serious crime, leaving antisocial behaviour as an afterthought.

Causes of antisocial behaviour that are unique to each area also need rooting out. In Birmingham, one such cause is obvious: supported exempt accommodation. Birmingham houses 33,000 vulnerable people from across the country, with a fifth of the city’s units situated in my constituency. Although we must not stigmatise those who need care—we must offer them a place to rebuild their lives—residents in my constituency have repeatedly raised concerns about antisocial behaviour associated with poorly managed exempt accommodation, including even violence and property damage. When providers fail to properly support and supervise their residents, the problems play out in surrounding streets and leave neighbourhoods to suffer the consequences. The character of our streets is being actively degraded by poorly run exempt accommodation, yet the Government have done nothing to tackle the root cause. Labour councillors can blame the city council all they like, but they did nothing when they were in charge six months ago, because they know it is on the Government to end the crisis. The Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 promised us the powers to finally control the numbers of exempt properties in our city, but for over two years this Labour Government have done nothing but delay them, and now they are saying that we will not even get the powers until autumn next year.

We also need the resources to crack down on rogue providers and to support tenants. That is why we had the SEA pilot scheme, a unit that recovered millions in overpaid housing benefit and completed thousands of antisocial behaviour investigations. The scheme made a real, tangible difference, and yet the Government cut off its funding six months ago. Without urgent assistance, supported exempt accommodation will continue to drive antisocial behaviour in our streets. The Government know that, yet they continue to turn a blind eye—it is absurd. Instead of supporting the SEA pilot scheme, I understand that the Government are seeking a public inquiry into supported accommodation, which is likely to cost millions of pounds. It is absurd because everyone knows what the problem is. We do not need a public inquiry to understand the issue; we need the Government to implement the legislation that has already been passed. However, we all know what will happen: they will to use the inquiry as an excuse to delay when they already know what the solution is.

With colleagues, I will launch today a petition for the residents of Birmingham demanding that this Government implement the legislation rather than leaving it on a shelf to gather dust. I hope the Minister might be able to tell us today that that petition will not be necessary.

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

It is indeed an absurdity that we know what is happening in towns in my constituency, such as Holbeach, Long Sutton and Sutton Bridge, but the police are often tied down by bureaucracy in dealing with it. They need to be able to act quickly and decisively. Thugs and yobs are terrorising the community and what is seen as low-level crime can cause unbelievable distress to law-abiding people, so let us inject some common sense into the system, act quickly and decisively, and punish the guilty.

[Ayoub Khan]

I thank the right hon. Member for his intervention. He is eloquent and persuasive, as always, and I wholeheartedly agree with him. The police are forced to prioritise more serious crime because of the lack of resources. Ultimately, if we do not resource the agencies properly with a proper strategic plan, matters will get worse.

I hope the Minister can tell us today that the petition will not be necessary, that the legislation that has already been passed will be enacted, and that city councils up and down this country will be given the powers they need, but I fear that that is unlikely.

To conclude, perhaps most of all we need to change the way we treat antisocial behaviour, and appreciate that it is not low-level crime. It is destructive not in the same way as a violent or serious crime, but in the way it makes people and places feel unsafe. In many cases, it does not count as a criminal offence, but let there be no doubt: these are crimes against the community that drain the morale of our residents. I sincerely ask the Minister to commit to delivering Resolve’s six recommendations, and perhaps to meeting Resolve and me so that we can discuss how to properly address the scourge of antisocial behaviour once and for all and ensure that victims’ voices can be heard. People deserve the right to feel safe in the places they call home. It is the Government’s responsibility to make that happen.

[Dawn Butler (in the Chair)]

I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to be called in the debate.

--- Later in debate ---

[Ayoub Khan]

I thank every right hon. and hon. Member who contributed to this important debate. The theme seems to be that antisocial behaviour is not a low-level crime, and that it comes in many different forms—from e-scooters to intoxication, abandoned buildings on the high street and the like. It is also obvious that police presence is an important factor, and people recognise the importance of deterrence. Having the right police numbers will certainly assist with deterrence, so the Government need to look at how they can improve our police numbers. That work must also go with the early intervention programme. We have to take a holistic approach, as these silo-type approaches do not really offer benefit. I hope the Minister will meet me to discuss and resolve some of these matters.

I finish with the comment made by the hon. Member for Ashfield (Lee Anderson) when he addressed the students here. I promise them that they will see a difference in 10 years, because the vast majority of Members believe in hope over division. I am confident that, working together, we will be able to resolve many of the challenges that we face.

Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).