How many police officers were serving on 7 June 2001; and how many there were on 1 May 1997. [610]

If he will call for a report on police numbers in Greater Manchester. [619]

If he will make a statement about police manpower in London. [622]

I last announced the figures on 28 June. There were 125,519 officers in post and, as I announced in the Queen's Speech debate last Wednesday, there were 127,158 officers at the same time in 1997. Numbers nationally have increased by 1,349 in the past 12 months—the largest annual increase for 13 years.

In the run-up to the 1997 general election, the Labour party promised thousands more officers on the beat, but, as we have just heard from the Secretary of State, the reality is that the number has fallen by 1,639 while it has been in office and resignations have increased. Resignations are running at 81 per cent. across the police. [Interruption.] Labour Members are not all that good at statistics. Resignations have risen by 81 per cent. That is exactly correct; those are the figures.

I am very pleased indeed that, despite the tale of woe, the crime figures show a 9.5 per cent. drop on the previous set of statistics—for which I am sure the hon. Gentleman is deeply grateful. As hon. Members know, we are embarking on a reform package, which will, of course, have to be considered by the police negotiating body in the usual way. I hope that we can consider how to recruit more effectively because the 76 additional officers allocated to Wiltshire in the crime fighting fund review would then be more easily attainable.

My right hon. Friend's comments about increased police numbers for Greater Manchester will be very welcome, but crime has gone up in the city of Manchester and the issue is right at the top of the agenda.

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. It is right that we should increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the police. The fact that police numbers in Greater Manchester will rise by next spring to 7,100 will assist, but the management and effective deployment of the force will be crucial.

I sincerely congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his new appointment, but may I remind him that there is no doubt that the number of police officers in the borough of Barnet has declined sharply while the level of crime has gone up? Does he recognise that, apart from the problems caused by early retirement, the Metropolitan police force faces the specific difficulty that it is unable to stop police officers being transferred of their own will to police forces in other parts of the country? Will he assure me that he is tackling the problem and that he will provide incentives so that police officers do not transfer to other police forces?

My predecessor as Home Secretary addressed strongly the issue of providing incentives to police officers. An uplift in special payments was made, and that is one reason why the Metropolitan police force is optimistic that it will be able to recruit more than 2,000 extra officers in the forthcoming period. The hon. Gentleman will know from his discussions with Commander Sue Akers that we face a real challenge, and it is one that we must face together.

The hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman) spoke about the recruitment difficulties faced by the Met. I represent a constituency that is five miles outside that area, but it has the same crime levels. In contrast to the hon. Gentleman's area, police officers in my area do not receive the extra benefits in terms of pay and costs of travel that Met officers receive. There is a recruitment crisis in areas around London—particularly in areas such as Slough that have high crime levels—and my judgment is that the police negotiating board has not addressed the problem sufficiently seriously. In coming new to this responsibility, will my right hon. Friend assure me that he will take steps to make sure that the board will consider such issues when it discusses police pay shortly?

My hon. Friend knows that I am very familiar with the problems of areas just outside that covered by the Met. I spent four years dealing with similar problems facing teachers.

Since taking up his new responsibilities, on which I warmly congratulate him, has the Home Secretary asked his Department to make up-to-date comparisons with other countries in north America or on the continent of Europe on the number of police officers per head of population? Even at this early stage, does he have any thoughts on whether the numbers that he is talking about rather optimistically will come anywhere near meeting the requirements and expectations of our hard-pressed city and rural communities?

We are always interested to learn what is taking place in north America. The Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth), met a senior police commissioner at the beginning of last week, and it seems to us that effective policing and effective management of policing are as important as the critical issue of raising numbers.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in addition to the 83 extra police officers in Suffolk who are being provided by the Government's crime fighting fund, Suffolk police authority is funding a further 100 officers from the council tax, having asked local people whether they wanted to pay a little more to get them? The fruits of that policy can be seen in the Lowestoft sector of my constituency, where 500 fewer crimes occurred last year than in the previous year. Will my right hon. Friend join me in congratulating Suffolk police authority, the chief constable of Suffolk and the Lowestoft sector commander, John Everett, for deciding to do that, and will he commend the policy to other police authorities?

Yes.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the considerable progress that has been made in London recruitment has been entirely negated by the high number of retirements and resignations, which amounted to 1,100 in the last financial year? What measures is he proposing to improve retention, and is he seriously considering retaining retired officers on a part-time basis?

I have the facility as an incoming Home Secretary to consider any measures to retain and improve occupational health and prevent seepage from the police force. I am prepared to receive suggestions from hon. Members on both sides of the House and will discuss those with the Police Federation, as I am doing later this week.

As the Home Secretary told my hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray) that the number of regular officers is now 1,639 fewer than at the same time in 1997, will he give the comparative figures for specials?

No, because I do not have them with me. However, I shall happily refer to the right hon. Lady's previous questions to the former Home Secretary so that I can remind her of his answers.

Perhaps I can assist the Home Secretary. There are 7,500 fewer special constables than in May 1997. Given that there are more than 1,600 fewer regulars and more than 7,000 fewer specials, what comfort can he give to people who suffer from menacing activities? I have in mind the reports in today's newspapers of someone who was harassed literally to death. That person, to whom I referred in the Queen's Speech debate last week, was harassed so often that he put the police number on his "Friends and Family" list with BT. Such harassment occurs daily and makes people's lives a living hell, in particular—although not exclusively—on big estates. As this is likely to be the last question that I ask him from the Dispatch Box, can he give a straightforward explanation of what he will do for people who live in those conditions?

I am deeply sorry that this is likely to be the last question that the right hon. Lady asks me from the Dispatch Box and I wish her well in whatever guise she takes on in the House.

My right hon. Friend will be pleased to hear that Gloucestershire has more police than in 1997, but we need a proper debate on the visibility of the police and the effectiveness of the way in which they operate, which is no less relevant to rural areas. More than anything, we need a proper reform of the way in which we fund policing, especially in the light of the previous Tory Government's failure to fund police authorities properly.

That is absolutely true. It is why the additional money from the spending review, £500 million in the coming year and £300 million the year after, will be good news for everyone who wants us to tackle head-on the disorder, antisocial behaviour and thuggery that make people's lives a misery.

What proposals he has to introduce league tables for performance for police authorities in Wales. [611]

There are currently no plans to publish performance data specifically for Welsh police authorities. However, recorded crime statistics, to be released later this month, will be published in families of comparable basic command units and crime and disorder reduction partnerships. That will allow comparison of local police performance with similar areas elsewhere in England and Wales.

I hope that such proposals do not emerge and that there are no league tables for police performance in Wales. Will the Minister say a little more about the performance indicators that he mentioned? How can they measure non-numerative advances in policing? I think especially of progress in restorative justice and in community policing, such as today's decision not to prosecute people for the possession of cannabis in parts of London, and the steps being taken in decision-led policing, which is increasingly being used in a sophisticated approach to solving crime. How can any performance measures take account of those? Does the Minister have anything to say about the use of performance measures to enhance the retention of police officers?

I agree that modern policing requires the effective use of resources, which must be devoted to the right targets to ensure that we are tackling and reducing crime. It is important that performance indicators, which are used, for example, in best value, are capable of capturing a range of different measures of the effectiveness of the police and of reinforcing best practice.

Does my right hon. Friend think that it was a sensible use of police time for a Welsh police authority, two years ago, to have prosecuted and subsequently jailed two men for using cannabis, although they were suffering from severe illnesses? That drug is now being decriminalised in parts of London. Is it right that the police are doing the job that we politicians have dodged? Is it sensible to have creeping decriminalisation by postcode? Should we not stop wasting the time of the police, the jails and the courts in prosecuting people for using a drug that is far less dangerous than alcohol or tobacco?

My hon. Friend is wrong about the position in London. In Brixton, the divisional commander has made a decision about the use of police resources so that he can prioritise those crimes that do most damage to the community, particularly the peddling of hard drugs. It is not the case that cannabis has been decriminalised or the law changed. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has expressed his interest in the experiment in Brixton and his belief that resources need to be targeted at hard drugs. My hon. Friend knows well that there is a research programme dealing with the potential medicinal use of cannabis or its extracts that is akin to the research for any prescribable drug. We all await the results of those tests.

Does the Minister agree that we need league tables for English and Welsh police authorities if we are to spread best practice, as we must? Will he confirm, however, that he cares about the independence of all police authorities?

Nothing that has been said by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State or any other Minister in this Government has suggested that we should remove the operational autonomy of chief constables. It is quite right that we should publish information showing how well the police service is performing and, through the new standards unit, be able to identify best practice and ensure that it is spread as quickly and effectively as possible across police forces throughout England and Wales.

If he will make a statement on the number of antisocial behaviour orders that have been successfully sought since their introduction. [612]

I offer my congratulations to my hon. Friend.

Will my right hon. Friend be able to take steps to ensure a much more widespread use of antisocial behaviour orders? Does he share my concern that I have come across many people in my constituency who have been disappointed that the police and the local authority are not making greater use of such orders, which, together with measures to tackle the causes of crime, represent a potent weapon in the fight against crime and disorder?

Yes, I do. I am sorry that it looks as though only one antisocial behaviour order has so far been issued in my hon. Friend's area. I hope that, by examining any suggestions for slimming down the procedures and speeding up the process, we shall be able to persuade local authorities and the police to take them up. Of course, they are civil orders—and were opposed for that reason—as opposed to criminal orders, which are available as part of broader community sentencing.

Three years ago, when considering the proposals in Committee, I warned the Government that antisocial behaviour orders would be unworkable and over-bureaucratic. Ministers responded that more than 5,000 would probably be made every year. Is not the fact that only just over 200 have been made evidence that this flagship policy has been an utter failure and flop? What will the Government do to stop these orders? They are an absolute waste of time.

So, we have someone who warned before the orders were introduced that they would be a failure, and who now thinks that, because the procedures adopted are not in line with what he believes, the orders are a failure—even though more than 200 have been issued and only 10 per cent. have failed to achieve their goal, which is a tremendous record compared with other aspects of the application of the law. Other Conservative Members want us to slim down the procedure so that the orders might be used more effectively. I wonder which faction the hon. Gentleman will be backing and which of the candidates for the leadership are for or against antisocial behaviour orders. On the Government Benches, we are wholeheartedly in favour of using them to protect people in the neighbourhoods and on the estates that are bedevilled by crime.

May I assure my right hon. Friend that antisocial behaviour orders are working—despite what is said from the Opposition Benches? In Dudley, some eight have been issued already and another seven are in the pipeline. They are having a ripple effect in the community. However, there are some technical problems. One is non-appearance by defendants. Cases can of course be proved in absence, but there is a reluctance among the authorities to do so because that means releasing to defendants the details of complainants. Will my right hon. Friend look at some of the technical problems to ensure that antisocial behaviour orders have a beneficial effect in all parts of the UK?

My hon. and learned Friend is absolutely right, and yes we will.

Like the constituents of a number of Members, some of my constituents—some elderly and others young families—are having their lives made a misery by the activities of neighbouring households. The right hon. Gentleman has, effectively, challenged my right hon. Friends and I on what we would do to deal with such people. The way is to make it easier to have them evicted. The one prospect that really puts fear into those people is that of eviction. No one should be allowed to use security of tenure as an excuse to enable them to continue to terrorise their neighbours.

One thing that is undeniable is that a considerably greater number of people whose lives are bedevilled by antisocial behaviour by their neighbours come to Labour Members' surgeries—including mine—than come to most Opposition Members' surgeries. That is because the incidence of such crime and nuisance tends to lie in areas of greatest disadvantage, and that is why we are totally committed to doing something about it. I shall co-ordinate plans with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions to take whatever steps are necessary—whether using social housing or some other means—to ensure that we get such measures in place. However, simply evicting people, without a court order, would be denounced overnight by the Opposition—and quite rightly, too.

What plans he has to confiscate the assets of serious criminals. [613]

As part of our manifesto commitment to crack down on crime, we announced the proceeds of crime Bill in the Queen's Speech. The Bill will attack the profit motive that drives organised crime. It will reform confiscation procedures, modernise the criminal law on money laundering, establish an agency with powers to recover criminal assets—including through a new form of civil litigation—extend the provisions for forfeiture of cash derived from or intended for use in crime, and provide for the taxation of criminal gains.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. He will be aware that there has been substantial investment in the new Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency, which has been welcomed universally by those in my constituency who try to fight drugs. However, a drug knows no boundaries, so how does my hon. Friend envisage his Department's scope in relation to the Scottish Executive in fighting that evil trade throughout the whole country?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the proceeds of crime Bill will apply in Scotland as well as in England and Wales. We are discussing its provisions with, and have received full co-operation from, members of the Scottish Executive. That consultation process will continue to make absolutely certain that there are no loopholes when dealing with the purveyors of organised crime, many of whom are involved in drugs trafficking.

The Minister will probably know that in the Republic of Ireland there is a Criminal Assets Bureau dealing with confiscation of such assets. Is he aware that many of those who have dealt with the bureau—myself included—believe that the balance is tilted too much in favour of the bureau? It is very important to establish law that ensures that, if there is to be a confiscation of criminal assets, the burden of proving the fact that they are indeed criminal assets must rest firmly on those seeking the order, and that the standard of proof is a high one. Otherwise, injustice will be done.

If the right hon. and learned Gentleman has studied the Irish experience, he will know that our country's record on the recovery of the proceeds of crime is not good. Taking into account the different sizes of economies, we recover about a quarter of that which the United States recovers, and about a tenth of that which Ireland manages to recover. I hope that the right hon. and learned Gentleman supports our general thrust, which is to make certain that we bear down on the profits of crime and that we improve our record considerably.

In my constituency, historically, many problems were sorted out down the pit, but a previous Government shut the vast majority of the pits in my constituency. Can we expect this Government to continue to pursue stronger policies that will lead to the harassment of the harassers and allow ordinary, decent people in my constituency to go about their business in peace?

The proceeds of crime Bill is about bearing down on organised crime rather than issues of harassment. I assure my hon. Friend that it should apply underground as well as overground.

I welcome the Minister and his right hon. and hon. Friends to their new posts. Does he recognise that the Government have created a problem for themselves with their proposals, given that the Prime Minister decided that none of the previous Home Office Ministers should continue in their posts, so the entire team was either promoted, moved or fired; and given that the new team of which the hon. Gentleman is a part does not have a single legal qualification among its members?

We will introduce the Bill after the summer recess. I hope that we will have the co-operation of Opposition Members, even if they are legally qualified. We shall obviously seek to ensure that our proposals are compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998. I have confidence that we shall be able to do so.

If he will make a statement on the effectiveness of youth inclusion projects in high-crime areas. [614]

There are currently 64 youth inclusion projects helping about 3,500 hard-to-reach young people in the most deprived neighbourhoods in England and Wales.

I thank the Minister and welcome him to his new post. Does he agree that it is vital to involve young people in constructive activities, such as the programme called "make a difference", which was introduced by the chief constable for Greater Manchester and which encourages schools to take part in community environmental projects and community security projects for pensioners, to refer to only two examples? There is also the youth inclusion project on the Langley estate in Middleton in my constituency, which does a similar job. Surely this is the way to re-engage young people with communities and to help to reduce youth crime.

I welcome the initiative taken by Greater Manchester police and the fact that the youth inclusion project on the Langley estate has so far attracted about 200 young people—13 to 16-year-olds—in a variety of projects in the area, which I know well as a Manchester Member. The early feedback from the project shows a positive reaction from the young people, the workers who are involved and the volunteers who are also working with the scheme. I hope that we shall be able to extend it in future years, to ensure that we target more young people who are at risk in the community.

I understand that when Home Office Ministers arrived in the Department they were briefed that the two major issues of concern to the public were the amount of violent crime and the amount of recurring crime committed by young people, especially in urban areas. Evidence shows that many of the young people concerned live in areas of high unemployment with few prospects of alternative activity. Police clear-up rates are extremely low, being a quarter or less. The punishments that are normally given to the youngsters involved are noticeably unsuccessful at stopping early reoffending.

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that, while there are briefings in the Home Office when new Ministers arrive, we also brief ourselves from our experience in our own communities. Certainly, from my own experience in Manchester, I am aware that the issue of youth crime is of great importance. I only have to talk to my own constituents to be reinforced in our drive to ensure that we have effective policies, including sentencing policy, for that particular group. I can also repeat the Home Secretary's assurance and offer last week: that everyone in the House, of every party, is welcome to give their views on the matter. We want to develop measures consensually and ensure that everyone has the opportunity to express positive views so that we can reflect on them before we introduce legislation.

What plans he has to ensure that all young offenders with drug problems are identified, assessed and treated for their drugs problems. [616]

Our aim is to reduce repeat offending among all drug misusing offenders by 25 per cent. by 2005, and by 50 per cent. by 2008. For young offenders in particular, we have introduced a raft of measures to tackle the problem of drug abuse, including a comprehensive drug strategy for young offenders in prison; the Youth Justice Board is extending the drug treatment programmes and services available to juveniles. In addition, we have introduced the drug treatment and testing order, a new community sentence targeted at problem drug users aged 16 and over.

I thank my hon. Friend for her reply. In Leyland, in my constituency, there is genuine concern that young people with drug problems who are not classed as young offenders still have to wait far too long to get access to drug treatment; they often have to leave Leyland and go to other places to get treatment. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is crucial that local drug services be readily available, both for offenders and non-offending young people with drug problems? I am highlighting Leyland in my constituency, but such problems exist in many areas, which is unacceptable. If the drug strategy on which the Cabinet Office, the Home Office and the Department of Health are working is to be effective, those waiting times need to be speeded up and access to facilities improved.

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend, not least because we want to prevent young people who may be misusing substances from getting into offending. My hon. Friend therefore makes an important point, and I commend him on the interest that he has taken in the issue in his own constituency. Under the 10-year strategy, £153 million has been allocated to young people's services over the next three years. Only £24 million of that sum is for youth justice; the rest is to be used to develop non-offending specific services for young people. The new National Treatment Agency, established in April, will oversee that development.

I congratulate the Minister on her appointment. Do she and her right hon. Friend the Home Secretary rule out any possibility whatever, during their tenure at the Home Office, of the decriminalisation of cannabis?

Let me make it clear: in our 10-year national drug strategy, we had a top priority—

Answer the question: yes or no.

I shall answer the question in my own time and in my own way. Our priority is to deal with class A drugs, which do the greatest harm. The Government have no intention of legalising controlled drugs, but we are interested in the experiment in Lambeth and in what it can help us to understand about the effective policing of the drugs that do most damage to our young people.

Does my hon. Friend agree that many young offenders are multiple drug abusers, and that one of the drugs for which there seems to be insufficient detoxification units in London is alcohol? If the Government do not yet have an alcohol strategy ready, will she consider including the abuse of alcohol in the existing drugs strategy?

I agree with my hon. Friend. So far, services for alcohol misusers have concentrated too much on adults and not sufficiently on young people. My hon. Friend will know that, by March next year, the new drug action teams are required to produce plans for their areas to deal with young people's substance misuse across the spectrum of drugs, including alcohol. In the light of those plans, we shall be discussing with the Department of Health what we need to do to put the focus on alcohol misuse. I agree with my hon. Friend that such a focus is necessary.

If he will make a statement about police recruitment in Hampshire. [617]

Recruitment by Hampshire police has increased in each of the past two years. The force took on 192 new officers in 2000–01, compared with 152 in 1999–2000, and 117 in 1998–99. Hampshire has been allocated 243 recruits from the crime fighting fund over the three years to March 2003. The force recruited 19 CFF officers in 2000–01. The force's latest forecast is that it will take on 121 officers through the CFF in the current year.

The Minister will be aware that crime in Hampshire is rising—it is up by 7 per cent. Notwithstanding what he said, there are fewer police officers in Hampshire than there were at the time of the 1997 election: we are running faster just to stand still. The Minister knows that the recruitment of officers under the crime fighting fund last year had to be deferred to this year because officers of the right calibre could not be found. Does that surprise him, given that a trainee manager at a McDonald's restaurant can earn more than a Hampshire police recruit?

The hon. Gentleman and I share a common interest in ensuring that Hampshire is successful in recruiting police officers, as we both represent Hampshire constituencies. The Hampshire constabulary was the first that I was able to visit and see at close hand after my appointment to my present job. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this year, which is the first year in which the impact of the new allowances agreed earlier this year will be felt, we will see the increase in recruitment to the Hampshire constabulary that everyone wants. Right across the country, police numbers are going up as a result of the ring-fenced funding—the crime fighting fund—that is going to the police force. Because those numbers are going up, we can be confident that we will achieve record numbers of police officers in England and Wales in the lifetime of this Parliament.

I wish I could share the Minister's optimism, but unfortunately in Romsey we are only too acutely aware of the decrease in police numbers, as we have lost seven officers recently. Bearing in mind the fact that many young police men and women in Hampshire cannot contribute to the police pension fund because they simply cannot manage on the money, and that the chief constable asked for £2,000 a year extra as the Hampshire weighting and that was not given, how will the Minister redress the problems that are not being resolved? Will he take notice of the chief constable of Hampshire?

The hon. Lady is also a Hampshire Member of Parliament, and it does not do a great deal for police recruitment in Hampshire to overstate its problems, as she has been doing. The wastage from the Hampshire police service is lower than in any of the other seven forces covered by the new allowance agreed by the police negotiating body. However, I assure the hon. Lady that I am not in any way complacent. Despite those figures, I hear stories and concerns, and I assure her that I will consider carefully whether there are any trends in recruitment or people leaving the force that we should be concerned about, so that we can make sure that we have the best practice in recruitment and retention in place in every police service.

I welcome the Minister to his new responsibilities. Does he agree that police morale is at the heart of the recruitment and retention problems both in Hampshire and across the country? Is he aware that there has been a very large increase every year in the number of officers who voluntarily resign from the regular police service and that the number of special constables—which is down by one third since 1997—has collapsed?

I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman about police morale. Whenever I meet front-line officers, I am struck by their commitment to the job that they are doing and by their love for the job. However, the hon. Gentleman was right on one point: front-line police officers express frustration about aspects of their job that prevent them from doing the job of policing as they would like. The hon. Gentleman mentioned bureaucracy. As he will know, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I have already instituted a study of the daily diary of police officers on the front line to identify how that issue can be tackled.

If he will set up a royal commission on drug abuse. [620]

I am not in favour of royal commissions and never have been. They are a way of putting off decisions that should be taken by those who carry responsibility for them. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Stretford and Urmston (Beverley Hughes) said in answering Question 6, we are of course prepared to update and respond to information and advice, including that from the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, in developing the 10-year drug strategy.

I thank the Home Secretary for that reply. Does he not think that, halfway through the 10-year strategy, this is an appropriate time to stand back and examine the effectiveness of the current drug policy? The most recent independent inquiry was conducted 18 months ago by the Police Foundation, and some of the proposals that are now being implemented in Lambeth were recommended in that report by Ruth Runciman. Those recommendations have only now been accepted by the Government.

I accept that there is room for an adult and sensible debate that has, as a common cause, the need to deal with the misuse of class A drugs, which bring misery to individuals, families and the wider community. The fact is that 30 per cent. of those who are arrested are found to have taken heroin or crack cocaine. In some parts of the country, the situation is desperate for the families involved. We all need to discuss the issues openly and sensibly, without blunt questions such as "yes or no: are you or are you not?", so that we can have sensible answers that respond to the public need.

The trials for the medicinal use of cannabis have now entered their third phase, which suggests to me that it is highly likely that evidence will be available shortly that cannabis has medicinal properties. If that is proved to be the case later this year, will it lead to a reclassification of the substance?

There is a difference between the classification of the substance and the use of the residue in terms of medical application. I shall be interested to see the evidence as soon as possible on the latter point, and to deal with it accordingly.

I agree with the Home Secretary that royal commissions are just a way of playing issues into the long grass—appropriate, perhaps, for cannabis. Does the Home Secretary accept that the issue is becoming urgent? When statutes and penalties that are on the statute book are not being applied on the streets, that brings the law, the police force and, ultimately, this place into disrepute. Should not these matters be brought into line sooner rather than later?

I liked the joke. I noticed in an article in a newspaper for which I normally have a great deal of time that what is an experiment has been dubbed "chaotic policy". We need to monitor, and we need the police to use discretion without there being a feeling that the whole policy is unravelling. That is part of a sane and sensible debate. Credibility in terms of prioritisation of the use of police time and resources has to be applied on the ground, and it is, day in, day out; not just in terms of wider substance abuse, but in the way in which local communities are policed. Since taking office, I have heard cries that, on the one hand, we should allow the police discretion and, on the other, that any discretion would somehow dismantle the overall policy.

What measures he plans to introduce to tackle antisocial behaviour. [625]

What plans he has to tackle antisocial behaviour in local communities. [626]

The Government are determined to tackle antisocial behaviour and disorder and have taken a range of initiatives. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 introduced crime and disorder partnerships, antisocial behaviour orders and changes to the youth justice system.

During the general election campaign, the biggest single issue raised with me was antisocial behaviour and nuisance caused by young people, from which the communities around Dundalk road and Our Lady's Roman Catholic church in particular have suffered over the last six months. One of the problems is that some parents—albeit a minority—think that there is nothing wrong with a 12, 13, 14 or 15-year-old having alcohol and being dropped off at a local trouble spot and left there until 11 or 12 o'clock at night. Clearly, there is a problem in terms of community involvement. What initiatives can be taken in this regard? In Widnes, on a number of weekend evenings, there have been only two police officers available to deal with the problems. While we are getting some extra officers in the near future, police numbers need to be increased substantially in areas such as mine.

My hon. Friend is right, and anyone who has been on the doorsteps in the last month or two will have had the same experience. We all understand the importance of cracking down on disorder and antisocial behaviour. This matter needs to be taken seriously by parents, people in communities and the authorities. My hon. Friend may want to know that, in September, the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 will introduce provisions that will allow public drinking to be banned from particular areas. That will make it a lot easier for police enforcement, because there will not be a problem with local byelaws.

Will my hon. Friend look at the measures that we as a Government can take to put pressure on local authorities to use the powers they have to tackle antisocial behaviour in their communities, in conjunction with the police? In particular, will my hon. Friend look at the powers that local authorities have to do something about antisocial tenants who sign a tenancy agreement that, frankly, as far as Gedling borough council is concerned—and, I am sure, many others—is not worth the paper it is written on, since the tenants continue to have noisy parties, to abuse their neighbours, to have untidy gardens and to carry on in a way that the vast majority of law-abiding citizens find an absolute disgrace?

I am not sure that we should have compulsory gardening, much as I would like that. However, we need to take the issue seriously. On 1 October, there will be new housing and land rules that will enable courts to deal with serious harassment more quickly. There is also an issue in the private sector that has yet to be tackled.

Does the Minister appreciate that most people concerned with tackling antisocial behaviour want not new initiatives but more police officers? Since the Labour Government came to office, the Thames Valley force has increased its strength by just eight officers. Indeed, over the past year, the number of officers in the area fell by 37.

It is important, when people are having the life tormented out of them by antisocial behaviour, that the police and local authorities take it seriously and take responsibility for dealing with it, ensuring that such behaviour stops. That is where antisocial behaviour orders can be very useful. Clearly, Home Office Ministers will receive delegations from Members who want to present information to them. I am sure that, if the hon. Gentleman gets in touch with my right hon. Friend, he will be on his way to the Home Office—at least, as part of a delegation—after the summer.