Fighting Crime (Public Engagement)

We are trying to build confidence in the criminal justice system. People will often debate, often without the full facts, what sentences should be given for crimes committed in a particular area. I am told—although this is where neighbourhood policing partnerships provide reassurance—that one of the things that most undermines the public's confidence in the police, in the criminal justice system and in Governments is their feeling that there is not a proper chance of people being apprehended for a crime. Of course we want people who commit crimes to be properly dealt with by the courts, and by and large they are. When people feel that police are working in their area and dealing with problems that are brought to their attention, their confidence will rise. No doubt that is what is happening in the hon. Gentleman's constituency and in constituencies around the country. Let me give one or two good examples of the things that are happening in communities. A local co-ordinator for the neighbourhood watch group on an estate in the Wirral assisted the neighbourhood policing team to gather intelligence on a family in her road who were the main cause of antisocial behaviour in the area. The road was highlighted at a tasking and co-ordinating meeting as the source of more than 50 per cent. of the police's antisocial behaviour calls. The community problem-solving, multi-agency approach has reduced these calls to zero, reducing the fear of crime and antisocial behaviour. That is a powerful example of what can be achieved. I know that Members on both sides of the House will have their own examples of what has happened in their constituencies when people have worked together to overcome problems. There is a lot of debate about us as a society doing the ““right thing””, and what that is. There are many ways for people to do this—not necessarily putting themselves in harm's way, but taking steps such as engaging with the neighbourhood policing team, reporting a crime, or even just dialling 999 and not turning a blind eye. Public engagement is not just about seeking people's views on what we are doing, or even their support, although of course both those things are important. We want to involve the public directly in what we are trying to achieve, delivering community-led solutions to matters of concern. That can be seen clearly in many aspects of our work, including on preventing violent extremism—one of the most important challenges that the Government are facing. A key element of our counter-terrorism strategy aims to stop people becoming or supporting terrorists or violent extremists in the first place and to draw back those who are already involved. We will support local leaders who want to stand up to violent extremism and racism, and increase their capacity to shape the future of their communities. I am sure that many Members are concerned about violent crime in their constituencies. We are determined to tackle that problem. We know that there are areas that have greater problems with knives, and that is why we are targeting 10 police force areas, just as we did four areas last year, to bring down gun and gang crime, which has since decreased by more than 50 per cent. In those areas, we did what the public asked us to do. They wanted to see tough enforcement of the law and to ensure that perpetrators or those who sought to use violence in their communities were dealt with robustly by the police. However, they also told us that as well as the robust action that had to lead the work that we were doing, it was important to try to prevent violence happening in the first place by diverting young people in particular away from a life of crime. By listening to the public, we identified how we would tackle those problems. We spent a long time talking not only to the police and to local authorities but to faith organisations, voluntary organisations and residents' associations about what we should be doing as a Government to try to tackle these issues. Part of the problem in these debates is that one can sometimes be seen as somebody who talks about the need for tough enforcement or, on the other hand, as somebody who believes only in prevention and diversion, whereas in reality, as we all know, we have to bring all those things together. The public told us not to engage in sterile debates about who is tougher than whom, because although tough enforcement is necessary we must also ensure that we do all the other things that are necessary.