Anti-social behaviour encompasses a broad range of behaviours including nuisance behaviour, intimidation and vandalism. Seventeen per cent of the population perceive high levels of anti-social behaviour in their area, with the young and the less well off being disproportionately affected, at a cost to government agencies of responding to reports of anti-social behaviour in England and Wales of around £3.4 billion per year. This report examines the work of the Home Office's Anti-Social Behaviour Unit set up in 2003 and measures introduced by the Home Office since 1997 to tackle anti-social behaviour, focusing on the impact of three of the most commonly used interventions: warning letters, Acceptable Behaviour Contracts and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. Using a sample of 893 cases, the report found that the majority of people who received one of these interventions did not re-engage in anti-social behaviour, but there were a number of perpetrators for whom interventions had limited impact, with about 20 per cent of the sample having received 55 per cent of the interventions issued. Recommendations include that the Home Office should undertake formal evaluation of the success of different interventions and the impact of combining these with support services at the local level. International research suggests that preventive programmes, such as education, counselling and training can be a cost effective way of addressing anti-social behaviour.
With the introduction of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, victims of anti-social behaviour also now have tools to enable them to insist on a response to a problem where nothing seems to have been done. It sets out the following six tools which came into use from October 2014: 1. Injunction 2. Criminal Behaviour Order 3. Dispersal Powers 4. Community Protection Notices and Orders 5. Public Spaces Protection Order 6. Closure of Premises Since the guidance was revised, there has been confusion within local authorities as to what the changes are, how their powers and orders should be adapted to comply with the new guidance. Fully updated and providing analysis of the revised guidance with commentary explaining what the changes are and what they mean for those working in this area, the second edition of Cornerstone on Anti-social Behaviour remains the first port of call for every one working in the area of, and carrying out ASB work.
The report examines the work of central and local government agencies and departments in the fight against environmental crime. The Committee applauds DEFRA for its consultations on fly-tipping. It is important that the person who is prosecuted for fly-tipping should not be the householder, if someone else is responsible for the actual fly-tipping. Special attention must be paid to the illegal dumping of construction, excavation and demotion wastes. The Environment Agency must be given appropriate levels of funding and appropriate powers. For example, local authorities and the Agency do not have computerised access to the records of the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency but have to obtain this information by post. The law should facilitate the investigation and prosecution of companies which pay for illegal advertising in the form of fly-posting, and maximum sentences for fly-posting should be raised further. Local authorities should ensure that best practice is always followed when dealing with litter and graffiti, and should liaise with local businesses which are known sources of litter. Every local authority should ensure that data on noise nuisance is regularly compiled and sent to DEFRA or the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health; this will aid policy makers.