| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Amos: I think that the noble Lord and I will have to agree to disagree on this point. I have written to the noble Lord on a number of occasions setting out the consultation which has taken place and the fact that the relevant sponsoring departments have agreed this budget. I am aware that the noble Lord then requested the minutes of meetings which were held. I have explained to the noble Lord in the form of a Written Answer that under data protection legislation it is not possible to supply those minutes. Given that, I think that we will have to disagree. Although I have written to the noble Lord a number of times, it is clear that he does not accept the explanations I have given.
20 Jul 2004 : Column GC94
Perhaps I may repeat that the relevant sponsoring departments have agreed that the current budget allocation is an appropriate amount to meet the agency's basic care and maintenance needs for 2004.
Lord Laird: Again, agreed with whom? As a former chairman of the body, not to get access to minutes to prove that there was consultation seems somewhat unusual. There was no consultation in the sense of a discussion about policy. There was a telephone call to tell the agency what would be its budget and what had been agreed with the Irish. In my opinion, that does not constitute consultation, discussion or agreement. I cannot understand why, when policies were working successfully last year, they were not allowed to continue. If there was a good reason for their not being allowed to continue, if someone had a better policy, we should have liked to have heard about it. But to do that without discussion, consultation or agreement is crass in the extreme.
Baroness Amos: Perhaps I can remind the noble Lord that no money was taken away from the Ulster-Scots Agency. The agency received a year-on-year increase. It was not as high as the agency wanted, but many organisations find themselves in that situation. When they receive a year-on-year increase, they make decisions about their priorities. That is all that I can tell the Committee at this point. I am happy to maintain my correspondence with the noble Lord on that point, but I must tell him that I can add nothing further to what I have already said.
On the issue of minutes, again, I made clear to the noble Lord in a Written Answer on 23 April that, under Part 2, Paragraph 2 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, which covers internal discussion and advice, it would be inappropriate for the Government to disclose documentation relating to discussions on the budget for the language body.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: Perhaps I am slow on the uptake, but I should like the Minister to explain in more detail because I genuinely fail to understand how access to minutes of a public body can come under the scope of data protection to the extent that the democratic process can be undermined so that public representatives in this and another place do not have access to the minutes relating to the functioning of a public body. I fail to understand.
Baroness Amos: Clearly, if a public body is holding an open meeting discussing its budget, that information is widely available. If there is an internal discussion between the body and its parent department—Members of the Committee who have operated in public bodies will understand this—that is a matter of internal discussion and advice, which then goes to Ministers and is not in the public domain. There is no problem here. There is no other body in which that is recognised as being a problem.
The noble Lord, Lord Laird, also raised the issue of the staff of the North-South Ministerial Council secretariat having contact with the Ulster Political
20 Jul 2004 : Column GC95
Research Group. Staff from the secretariat, acting in their capacity as officials of the Irish Government and OFMDFM, have helped to facilitate meetings between members of the Ulster Political Research Group as part of the overall policy of community engagement endorsed by the British and Irish Governments. No other support or funding has been provided by the Government.
The noble Lord also raised the issue of funding for festivals. Review of funding for festivals has been undertaken to inform future strategy for government support of festivals. The report has been considered by Ministers and a policy and guidance framework based on the report's recommendations is being developed.
The noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, asked specifically about the removal of industrial derating. We have discussed the topic before in Grand Committee. I remind the noble Lord that firms will have had more than eight years from when the policy decision to remove industrial derating was first announced to prepare for the payment of full rates.
Finally, two other matters were raised. The first was the issue of economic inequalities between the north and the south, also raised by the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney. The Republic of Ireland economy has indeed grown dramatically during the past decade but it was starting from a very low base. It has also had fiscal and monetary autonomy, which Northern Ireland does not have, but the main economic indicators in both north and south are still heading in the same, favourable direction. The noble Lord, Lord Hylton, raised the specific issue of working to help those who want to cease a life of violence. I shall have to write to him on that.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
Anti-social Behaviour (Northern Ireland) Order 2004
Baroness Amos: I beg to move that the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the draft Anti-social Behaviour (Northern Ireland) Order 2004.
The proposals contained in the draft Anti-social Behaviour (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 represent measures to protect the public from behaviour which causes or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. The proposals focus on the introduction of anti-social behaviour orders. They form part of a wider range of measures, including restorative and rehabilitative responses, with the aim of ensuring that the justice system responds appropriately to behaviour which can blight communities and that people in Northern Ireland can enjoy a quality of life that is not ruined by fear of anti-social behaviour.
Anti-social behaviour is a matter of concern to the people of Northern Ireland. The 2001 Northern Ireland Crime Survey reported that more than half of
20 Jul 2004 : Column GC96
those who responded felt that anti-social behaviour had increased in their area in the previous two years. Fear can have a very disabling effect, particularly for those who are older or more vulnerable, but it is important to note that in this survey younger respondents felt anti-social behaviour to be even more of a problem than those who were older.
The Government fully believe that we must now address the issue legislatively. That decision is informed by findings in Northern Ireland and evidence from practice elsewhere. In June last year, an anti-social behaviour count day in Northern Ireland recorded 3,150 incidents of anti-social behaviour.
In a study commissioned by the Scottish Executive to monitor the use of ASBOs, 62 per cent of local authorities who responded reported a perceived improvement in the behaviour of those given ASBOs. In Manchester, available evidence shows that 60 per cent of those who have ASBOs have not been prosecuted at all, either for breach or for any other offence.
Innovative ways of using ASBOs in England and Wales—for example, in dealing with the blight of illegal advertising—have been recognised in a recent survey by the environmental group, Tidy Northern Ireland, which identified areas where graffiti and illegal advertising were a significant problem.
Anti-social behaviour orders were introduced in England and Wales in the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The provisions were added to by the Police Reform Act 2002, which gave criminal courts the power to issue an ASBO on conviction of a criminal offence and increased the number of bodies that could make application, and, most recently, by the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. Among other things, it provided that on ASBOs made on conviction, evidence used does not have to have been admissible in the proceedings in which the offender was convicted.
In April 2002, a consultation paper was published by the then Secretary of State on community safety in Northern Ireland. Issues identified that needed to be addressed included street violence, low-level neighbourhood disorder and anti-social behaviour. The resultant Community Safety Strategy published in March 2003 identified that anti-social behaviour legislation in England and Wales needed to be examined to see if it was appropriate for Northern Ireland. In the context of the findings in Northern Ireland and evidence from elsewhere, this draft legislation is brought forward.
Most respondents supported what the Government aimed to do. There were concerns from organisations involved with children. The points that they made were considered very carefully, and, as a result of the consultations, the Government included in the draft order the provision for courts to have discretion with regard to reporting restrictions for young people. The wording of the legislation clarifies that, where reporting restrictions are applied, they cover the whole application from start to finish.
20 Jul 2004 : Column GC97
5.45 p.m.
The Government concluded that, in the interests of the protection of all in the community, it was necessary to bring forward this legislation for consideration. It is worth noting that an application for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of the consultation and the process that the Government followed, brought by the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People, was refused. Indeed, the High Court found "no arguable case" for any of the arguments put before it.
It is essential in Northern Ireland that there is a partnership approach to dealing with anti-social behaviour. The draft order allows initially for three partners: the police, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive and district councils. Partnership involving the Housing Executive allows the use of ASBOs without conviction to deal with anti-social behaviour in housing estates where the Housing Executive is the major landlord. Partnership involving district councils will allow anti-social behaviour relating to noise pollution, enforcement of byelaws and licensing laws to be targeted. It may be possible for other bodies to become partners in future, just as the range of partner bodies in England and Wales has expanded.
The draft order provides for the introduction of anti-social behaviour orders as a statutory measure in Northern Ireland. It provides that where there is no associated conviction, the police, the relevant district council or the Northern Ireland Housing Executive would be able to seek an ASBO on application to a magistrates' court in respect of anti-social behaviour. It also provides that ASBOs may be made on conviction in criminal proceedings where the court is satisfied that the convicted person has acted in an anti-social manner and that an ASBO is necessary to protect persons within Northern Ireland from further anti-social acts by him. It further provides that breach of an ASBO would be a criminal offence subject to a penalty of up to five years' imprisonment or a fine or both.
The proposals will form part of the wider range of tools to deal with this kind of behaviour and it is important to note that the Criminal Justice Review proposed a range of restorative and rehabilitative responses to low level crime which are being implemented, including youth conferencing and the police's youth diversion scheme, which involves restorative cautioning for young people under 17.
The measures proposed here do not aim to replace existing measures but to complement them. It is essential that the Government send a clear message that anti-social behaviour is not acceptable and that there are effective sanctions if people choose to act in this way. The Government's aim is to continue to build a safe and tolerant society for all the people of Northern Ireland. I commend the draft order to the Grand Committee.
20 Jul 2004 : Column GC98
Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Anti-social Behaviour (Northern Ireland) Order 2004.—(Baroness Amos.)
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |