Monica Harding
Main Page: Monica Harding (Liberal Democrat - Esher and Walton)Department Debates - View all Monica Harding's debates with the Home Office
(1 day, 7 hours ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
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.
Max Wilkinson
My hon. Friend makes an important point. The answer is, of course, more community policing. After years of Conservative-led cuts to police numbers, people want visible, trusted local police officers who know their area and have the time and presence to prevent crime, not just to respond to it. For that to be effective, the police must be visible in the communities they serve.
Thanks to the decimation of proper community policing, we have seen a drastic decline in frontline police counters. In Bedfordshire the number of counters has reduced by 78%, in Surrey by 60%, in the west midlands by 58%, in West Yorkshire by 53% and in Greater London by 52%. That decline must be reversed by the installation of a police counter in every community across the country, as the Liberal Democrats have called for. They could be in community hubs such as libraries, shopping centres and town halls—convenient, accessible locations. That is how we will start to rebuild trust and improve police visibility in response to crime.
Monica Harding
I absolutely concur with my hon. Friend that we need more community policing and more visible policing. I have already made the point in the House that we need warranted officers on streets rather than at their desks or in call centres. Does he agree that the more the public report incidents of antisocial behaviour that they do not report at the moment, the more action we will get on it? Perhaps the Minister might think about how we can encourage the public to report the incidents they see.
Max Wilkinson
I commend my hon. Friend’s comments to the Minister.
Confusing legal frameworks make many instances of antisocial behaviour difficult to police. E-bikes, which have already been mentioned, are a common complaint in towns and city centres up and down the country, including in my constituency. Public concern is growing over the dangerous misuse of illegally modified high-speed e-bikes on pavements and in pedestrianised areas such as the High Street and the Promenade in Cheltenham. This is a particular concern to older people and parents with young children, but it can certainly alarm anyone—I speak from personal experience. It is antisocial behaviour in itself, but the suspicion is that these e-bikes are regularly used by drugs gangs and in county lines.
The legal framework for e-bikes is confusing, outdated and rarely enforced. As the hon. Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan) mentioned, high-power conversion kits and illegal bikes are readily available online with almost no regulatory oversight. That would be a good starting point for Ministers wanting to introduce measures to tackle antisocial behaviour. We must tackle illegal e-bikes, including by giving police forces updated training to spot, intercept and confiscate them. Will Ministers look at how these proposals might tackle antisocial behaviour?
We must also recognise that a huge quantity of serious crime has moved online, as Sir Mark warned last week. The latest strategic assessment from the National Crime Agency warned that rapid technological change is the primary driver in serious organised crime, with the threat set to increase. That change is diverting resources away from frontline policing, producing poorer outcomes for victims of other crimes, including antisocial behaviour. A dedicated online crime agency would ensure that online crime was treated with the seriousness that it merits and would free up officers’ time to focus on neighbourhood crime, including antisocial behaviour.
That online crime agency would be funded by a new online crime levy on the big tech and artificial intelligence companies whose platforms enable the most serious crimes that Sir Mark warned about last week: child sexual abuse, fraud and money laundering. It would stop neighbourhood police being dragged off their streets to deal with those forms of online crime, which in many cases they are not trained to deal with. Just last week, Sir Mark warned that the police risk heading for failure if reforms do not empower officers to keep up with modern criminals operating online. Will Ministers consider that proposal, which the Lib Dems have set out before, to establish an online crime agency in order to improve community response on our streets?
The Government have made positive steps on some of these issues through their neighbourhood policing guarantee, but the proof will be in its delivery, especially given the upcoming police reform legislation. They must get those reforms right, with a proper focus on community policing, or they risk placing communities at greater risk and harming public confidence in the system. If the merging of forces means that officers become more distant from the communities they serve and less able to respond to local crimes, the Government will be making a serious mistake. Worryingly, the agenda being set by the Home Office seems to run counter to the devolution direction being set by the Prime Minister, particularly in respect of the number of boundaries that will be set and accountability to regional mayors. When will we find out how police reform fits in with the Prime Minister’s flagship agenda?
My hon. Friend will know that Lord Ken Macdonald has done a review for the Home Secretary on protests more widely. The issue of intimidation at protests is very pertinent to that review, and we will soon publish our response. It is also the case that some police forces have PSPOs that ban face coverings and balaclavas in an area. That is another approach that some areas are taking, and it is one that I welcome.
I will not list them all, but we have introduced a raft of other changes through the 2026 Act that are explicitly designed to target antisocial behaviour. We will also gather more data, because one of the issues with antisocial behaviour is that we do not quite understand the data. Some of it is reported to local authorities and some to the police, so we do not quite understand the nature of the problems. We are gathering that data together.
Lots of Members talked about the trouble we are having across so many communities with e-bikes and e-scooters, which is a debate that we have had numerous times. We have changed the law so that the police can seize them without having to give notice, which is important, but we are looking at what else we can do with this problem—and I recognise that it is a problem. I am going to have a series of roundtables, and I am talking to MPs about both the challenges and the solutions. Some solutions will sit within other Departments—whether that is what was formerly called the Department for Business and Trade, or the Department for Transport—and some will sit within the Home Office, so we are looking at how we can have a collective approach to that challenge.
Some Members talked about persistent shoplifting offenders. It is the case that about 8% of the offenders are responsible for about 50% of the crime, and we will soon be able to announce some work on those prolific offenders in particular. Many Members talked about the underlying problems associated with some of this antisocial behaviour. When we look at prolific offenders, we often find drug addiction, homelessness and other challenges that we need to face collectively. We are considering how we target and support that cohort in a similar way to our rough sleeping cohort that the Prime Minister is so keen to champion. We need to think not just about housing but about the other support that those people need, and we are also trying to take that approach here.
Prevention was mentioned by many people, and I think it is really important. It plays a part in our respect orders and in our prolific offenders work, as well as the wider Government action on youth work and other support, including mental health support. All of these are core things. A lot of antisocial behaviour comes from people who are not getting the support that they might have received 10 or 15 years ago, so it is incredibly important that we look at that side of things.
I do not think I should, because I need to give the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr the opportunity to respond.
I will conclude by saying that antisocial behaviour is not a low-level problem. It is awful. I see it in my community, and we are absolutely committed to tackling it. We have introduced a raft of measures, but we need to go further and I will carry on this conversation to see what else we can do. All Members present today know that it is a top priority for our constituents, and we should act appropriately.