What resources will be invested in the police service in the financial years 2001–02 to 2003–04. [137444]

Spending for the police will rise from £7.7 billion this year to £9.3 billion in 2003–04, which is a 12 per cent. increase in real terms over the three years. The real increase for next year is the largest for almost two decades.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that north Wales police are very grateful for their share of the £15 million that has been made available in the current financial year to improve policing in rural areas? Will he confirm that an additional £30 million, which is the equivalent of a full year's funding for this purpose, will be made available next year? What conditions will apply to the extra funding, and will the funding continue in future years?

I am very glad to know that the funding was well received in north Wales, as I believe it has been in other areas. I can confirm that £30 million of such funding will be made available for next year and the following year, and that the normal conditions for allocation under the standard spending assessment will apply, as will be made clear when the police SSAs are published very shortly. The funding emphasises our commitment to rural policing. It is also in very stark contrast with what happened under the previous Administration, when, for example, in the space of three years, 50 rural police stations in north Wales were closed.

Last year, Humberside police force sought funding of £7.5 million to increase policing, but its request was turned down. Fortunately, the privatisation of the Kingston upon Hull communications company allowed the local authority to make up some of the shortfall. The result of that was a 12 per cent. reduction in crime in Hull. There was not, however, such a good result in rural areas, because that is not where the extra police were. Does the Home Secretary agree that the example demonstrates that extra policing has an effect on reducing crime, and will he take that into account when deciding on funding for Humberside next year?

We certainly take into account Humberside's needs. As the right hon. Gentleman knows, funding is distributed partly in accordance with the standard spending assessment, but also under specific provision that is made to cover, for example, the new police radio system. Under the crime fighting fund, Humberside has been allocated 137 officers in addition to its normal recruitment.

The Home Secretary may recall that, a little while ago, I was told in a parliamentary reply that no figures were available on the duration of suspension and total cost of police officers who are suspended from duty. There are now a significant number of suspensions not only in the Metropolitan police area but in other areas. Can he say whether such figures are now available, bearing in mind the very significant drain that such costs have on police resources?

As you would expect, Mr. Speaker, the answer that my hon. Friend was given is correct. Although the figures are not collected centrally, I can certainly provide him with the figures for the Metropolitan police and the Essex police areas. However, I do not think there is any evidence that the number of suspensions is higher than it was. We are certainly reducing the numbers in respect of other matters, such as sickness and early retirement.

Does the Home Secretary agree that the special constabulary is one of the most effective ways of increasing police numbers on the street, especially in rural areas? Against that background, will he consider whether it might become possible to pay members of the special constabulary along the model of the Territorial Army?

Yes is the answer to the right hon. and learned Gentleman's question. I agree with him, first, that special constables can make a big difference, not least in rural areas. Secondly, although I know that it has been considered before, and people have always found difficulties, I think that we should continue examining ways of providing some recompense to special constables in the same way as recompense is provided to members of the Territorial Army.

I thank the Home Secretary for making resources available to ensure that police in my part of Berkshire can receive £2,000 extra in their pay. I wonder, however, whether he is certain that that will be enough, because I am not. Slough is an area of high crime and high cost, and we are finding that, although we have been given resources for more police officers, we cannot recruit them. If it turns out that the extra sum is not enough, will he increase it?

I cannot guarantee that. My main concern at the moment is to try to get the money paid. As I shall explain when I answer the question tabled by the hon. Member for West Chelmsford (Mr. Burns), an offer has been made to increase the allowances for those in the home counties police forces, initially up to a 30-mile band and then in a 30 to 40-mile band, by £2,000 and £1,000 respectively.

I remind the Home Secretary of a document that found its way into the public domain not long ago, following a meeting between the Prime Minister, the Home Secretary, the Minister of State, Home Office, the Member for Norwich, South (Mr. Clarke), and others, at which the Home Secretary mentioned

a new agenda for reform

it risked alienating the police at a crucial time.

The right hon. Lady did not need to refer to an allegedly leaked document. We have been perfectly open about this matter. All the proposals under discussion about police reform have been openly discussed with representatives of all the police associations, not least at a major one-day seminar that took place at Lancaster house four weeks ago.

We have just heard the Home Secretary refuse to tell the House what the reform is. If the reform is so openly in the public domain, why does its revelation risk alienating the police at this crucial time? Why will the reform not please the police? Will the right hon. Gentleman also tell us what the reform is? He is looking through his documents to see if he can find it. He looks rather tired, but it is his duty to come here and to answer questions. If he is tired at the beginning of Question Time, I wonder what he will look like at the end of it.

If I were not such a generous man, I might reply that the right hon. Lady had gone to pot. The document for which I was looking—and which, happily, I have now found—contains a quotation from Mr. Fred Broughton of the Police Federation, speaking on 26 September 2000. He said:

From the mid-90s onwards, the police service found itself facing a rapidly declining manpower situation … The principle reason, without any doubt, is the damage that was done by the decision of the last Government to take housing allowance away from new recruits.

If he will make a statement on trends in the level of crime in England and Wales since 1997. [137445]

The British crime survey published last month shows that there was an overall fall of 10 per cent. in crime levels between 1997 and 1999. It showed that there had been a 4 per cent. reduction in violent crime, a 15 per cent. reduction in vehicle-related thefts and a 21 per cent. reduction in domestic burglary.

I am not going to pot like the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) and I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, both for his answer and for the granting of up to £33 million for schemes to install closed circuit television in various parts of the country, which has benefited my constituency and helped to reduce the level of crime there. I am aware of the second annual report on the Government's anti-drugs strategy. How does my right hon. Friend intend to tackle the problem of drug dealers targeting younger people?

We have put in place a range of schemes the better to tackle drug dealers and those who are associated with them, including street robbers. A lot of street robberies take place with a view to gaining cash to deal in drugs, as do many domestic and other burglaries. We have already implemented section 3 of the Crime (Sentences) Act 1997, so that those who are convicted of second or subsequent offences of dealing in class A drugs will receive a minimum sentence of at least seven years. We are doing a great deal of other work under the crime reduction programme—for example, CCTV has been of major assistance in ensuring that the police are better able to detect and then gain convictions for drug offences, among others—and we are putting a huge amount of money into the police, the probation service and the Prison Service, to target better those who are addicted to drugs and consequently committing a great deal of crime.

As so many of the crimes are committed by people who have already been through the prison system, and given its recent serious failures, as manifested in places such as Feltham, Brixton and Blantyre House, it cannot be possible for the Prison Service to concentrate on its stated objective of reducing reoffending. It is distracted by those serious failures of management and it is clear that there is something very rotten in parts of the Prison Service. Will the Home Secretary and his colleagues be as tough on the Prison Service and its failures as they are, rightly, on crime and the causes of crime? Will he make it a target to try to increase the number of prisoners who are helped by the Prison Service to avoid reoffending, so that we can get down the figures that are so high now, because the Prison Service fails the offenders and lets society down?

Where there are failures by individual staff of the Prison Service, be it in terms of maintaining a proper regime or because of their attitudes to issues of race or other matters, we take those seriously. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, the Commission for Racial Equality has established an independent investigation into aspects of the matters to which he referred. That was announced last Friday and has our full support and endorsement.

I welcome the continued reduction in crime in Lincolnshire, which makes it one of the safest places to live in the country, but is the Home Secretary aware of the excellent contribution made by Lincoln city council's urban rangers, who provide such a reassuring presence on the streets in my constituency? Does my right hon. Friend have plans to work with other Departments to promote and encourage innovative schemes such as this so that we may continue to tackle crime and the fear of crime?

Yes, I would like to congratulate the Lincolnshire constabulary and the city of Lincoln on their excellent work in reducing crime. It is indeed one of the safest areas in the country. The imaginative city rangers scheme emphasises that the fight against crime and disorder cannot be dealt with by the police alone, as the police themselves recognise. The more that others are used and the more we use the resources of the local authorities as well as those of the police service, the better able we are, in partnership, to drive crime and disorder down.

Given that the Home Secretary told the House on 24 July that the level of crime was for the criminals to determine, that violent crime in the year to March 2000 rose by 100,000 offences, that the British crime survey suggests that actual crime is approximately four and a half times the level of that which is recorded, and that the Government have chucked out of jail no fewer than 27,000 criminals early—typically after they have served only half their sentence—is it any wonder that the right hon. Gentleman is so widely regarded as a lily-livered liberal, and that the criminal classes of this country are praying for a Labour election victory?

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his first performance at the Dispatch Box and look forward to many more. I am told by my friends that as to whether I am a liberal or not, I have no reputation to lose. However, it looks as though the hon. Gentleman will resurrect it and make me popular in Hampstead as well as in places such as Blackburn, where I hope that I am already popular.

What recent discussions he has had with chief constables concerning greater protection for elderly people against attacks; and if he will make a statement. [137446]

I have regular discussions with chief constables on all aspects of crime. We are working with the police and other agencies to reduce all violent crime, including the despicable offence of attacks on the elderly. We have provided up to £12 million for locks for pensioners—part of a two-year scheme that will allow low-income pensioners to be provided with proper locks for their homes. We are also taking action against the despicable crime of distraction burglary, when bogus callers deceive the vulnerable and elderly to gain entry to their homes. At present, 21 projects are working across the country to support older residents within their communities.

I thank my hon. Friend for his response. Does he share my concern about the number of elderly and disabled people who are attacked in their own homes with a view to robbery, and agree that we must do more to help these unfortunate people? In the areas which have police and public partnerships, because there is no significant increase in the number of attacks on old people, this is not regarded as an emergency cause. That must be reviewed, because one old or disabled person who is attacked at home merits further investigation. Will my hon. Friend assure me that his Department will review the situation to protect our old people, particularly in their own homes?

I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. The most serious crime in this regard is often called distraction burglary, and 16,500 cases of that were reported last year. In those cases, old people often let into their homes strangers who purport to be from the utilities, local government or other agencies. A taskforce was set up a year ago to work with local authorities and utility companies—gas, water and electricity—to target this appalling crime, which hits the most vulnerable and oldest. I can give my hon. Friend the assurances that he seeks.

How many attacks on the elderly have been perpetrated by convicted criminals who are on early release under the Government's scheme?

I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any figures, but can say that more prisoners were released under the previous Government, whom he supported.

Does my hon. Friend agree that when elderly people are attacked, the work done by Victim Support is vital? The victim's charter contains an obligation to make victim support available for those who require it, and there is a growing expectation that local victim support organisations will be involved in partnerships. Given those facts, is my hon. Friend willing to reconsider core funding for local groups? 1 know that the Government have made more money available for development work, but some groups are running on a shoestring.

I entirely commend the excellent work of Victim Support and other organisations. We have increased funding significantly and are currently reviewing ways to extend our support to a wide range of different victim organisations. Indeed, we intend that support for victims should be a much more central part of the criminal justice system, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has announced measures whereby the views of victims can be taken much more fully into account by the criminal justice system. Victims of crime are the greatest sufferers from the malfunctions of our current system, and they deserve and need more support. We are reviewing funding in the way my hon. Friend suggested.

Does the Minister agree that the greatest reassurance for elderly people would come from an increase in the number of officers on the streets? The New Forest area, which has a high proportion of elderly people living in it, has suffered a reduction of 60 officers over the past four years, despite the fact that Hampshire police underspent their recruitment budget last year because insufficient officers of the proper quality could be found. When will the Minister do something about police morale so that we can recruit the officers we require?

The hon. Gentleman's force, Hampshire, predicts an increase in numbers that will meet the points that he has made. I must emphasise that for old people and others the question of local police presence—bobbies on the beat—relies both on police numbers and on how officers are deployed and the leadership shown in using them. I have seen a variety of projects—I am sure that there are some in Hampshire, and perhaps in New Forest, West—which suggest that using police well and targeting their deployment makes it possible to offer the kind of reassurance that the hon. Gentleman rightly highlights. That target is at least as important as that of increasing police numbers, to which we have referred many times before.

How many parenting orders have been imposed under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; and how many are being processed. [137447]

Information from the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales indicates that between 30 September 1998 and 31 March 2000, some 284 parenting orders were made in the pilot areas. Information on the number of parenting orders currently being considered is not available centrally, but the order became available nationally on 1 June 2000.

I recognise the success of the parenting orders in the pilot areas, but does my right hon. Friend share my concern about the reluctance—certainly in Portsmouth—of local authorities and police to take up anti-social behaviour orders? Can the Government do anything to encourage organisations to get together to use a facility that will reduce crime and the causes of crime?

Fortunately, reluctance is being overcome—some 130 ASBOs have been successfully obtained and are making a real difference. It is to be hoped that the same degree of perseverance and focus that was shown by my hon. Friend's local authority and by the police covering the Wessex youth offender team, if applied to anti-social behaviour, will have the same success. They were successful with the YOT and with parenting orders; they can do it with the ASBOs, and we look forward to their doing so.

If only about 100 ASBOs have been obtained in a year and a half, can the Minister really say that Labour legislation is working properly?

Certainly that is the experience both of the police and of local authorities and also of those neighbours and fellow citizens who have seen peace and tranquillity return to their neighbourhoods as a result of the ASBOs.

How many?

One hundred and thirty. It would help if Conservative Members, who constantly bewail the so-called failure of ASBOs, did not call for them to be torn up—their helpful contribution to the debate. The Conservatives let down honest, decent people who seek a quiet and tranquil life; ASBOs meet the needs of those people—it is time that the Opposition woke up to that fact.

In the spring, the chief constable of Gloucester said that at last we had a Government who understand the causes of youth crime. We have put measures in place, but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, North (Mr. Rapson) pointed out, they need to be expanded rapidly. In my constituency, there are estates where elderly people in particular look forward to the early implementation of such orders. Will my right hon. Friend encourage chief constables to look again at the application of such orders?

I was in Gloucester yesterday; the measures certainly have made a difference there. Chief constables are responding positively to the most recent guidance issued by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary. All the signs are that it is beginning to make a difference. Regional crime directors are now in place in order to get the message home. The difference is becoming apparent on the ground. We want, efforts to be redoubled to ensure that we take forward that important initiative.

If he will make a statement on the level of allowances made to Metropolitan police officers and the effect on recruitment of officers from other forces. [137449]

I increased the London allowance for Metropolitan police officers who joined after 1 September 1994 by around £3,300, bringing it to £6,051, with effect from July 2000. That and other changes now appear to be easing that force' s recruitment.

I am grateful to the Home Secretary for that reply. Is he aware that in the county of Essex, the number of police officers is 129 below the funded establishment, and that part of the problem in the current recruitment campaign is the distorting effect of the London allowance? May I press the right hon. Gentleman on two points? First, is the 30-mile band realistic? A town such as Chelmsford—a major commuting area—will be outside that band; £1,000 will not be an attractive enough sum to stop people seeking a career in the Met rather than in Essex.

We think that the 30-mile band is realistic, but obviously we are open to argument about the overall amount of money that has been allocated.

Officers in my constituency have welcomed the increase in allowances, but recruitment is still affected by the supply of affordable housing. Will my right hon. Friend continue to liaise with his colleagues in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions to promote the potential for local authorities to introduce a requirement for key worker housing in planning applications for housing developments above a certain scale? Will he report to the House on that as soon as possible?

My hon. Friend raises an important point. He has my support, and I shall report to the House and to him about it.

Does the Home Secretary accept that, despite the very welcome increase in allowances, the monthly figures for recruitment suggest that they are insufficient to prevent a further decline in Metropolitan police numbers? What further measures does he have under consideration to alleviate a position that is no longer just a problem, but is becoming a critical emergency in many parts of London?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's point. All the evidence now suggests that overall police numbers—including, we hope, in the Metropolitan police area—are beginning to bottom out, although there are inevitably lags in terms of getting recruits into the system. He will have seen reports in the newspapers from the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis showing the relative success of recruitment inside the Metropolitan police. In addition to improving recruitment and increasing the speed of getting recruits into the training schools, which has been a big problem in the past, the Commissioner of Police is putting much effort into dealing with the problem of retaining officers in the service. The combination of those measures and the additional funds that we have provided will ensure that police numbers start to rise.

What recent representations he has received about police numbers in Sussex.[137450]

I have received a number of representations in recent months from residents of Sussex about police numbers, including a petition from the Memorial Square residents action group. The hon. Gentleman also wrote to me on 27 July about the petition and the policing of Eastbourne, and I replied fairly fully in August.

Does the Minister accept that the more than 15,000 people who signed the petition are angry? Despite pre-election promises, there are 150 fewer police officers in Sussex than there were at the time of the last election. Those people are sick and tired of excuses from the Home Office, so will he commit himself to ensuring that, by the time of the next election, we will have at least as many police officers on the beat in Sussex as we did in 1997?

I made three points clear in my letter to the hon. Gentleman. First, there has been a 3.7 per cent. increase in spending in Sussex in the past year; secondly, we have allocated through the crime fighting fund an extra 206 officers for Sussex over that period; and, thirdly, Sussex police anticipate an increase in police numbers of between 70 and 76 next year. As the hon. Gentleman will understand, it is a matter for the chief constable to decide where he allocates officers within his police authority area, and neither he nor I would want to second-guess him on that. The Government have a strong record of which we can be proud.

What assessment he has made of the contribution of the fire services community programmes to crime reduction strategies; and if he will make a statement. [137451]

I welcome increasing fire service involvement in community programmes, crime reduction strategies, in the reduction of accidental fires and injury and in issues connected with arson, hoax calls and juvenile fire setting.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. May I commend to him the project run by the Cheshire fire service at Blackbrook in my constituency where, working with the residents, it has trained young people to check smoke alarms? It also arranges to sell batteries for smoke alarms cheaply. As a result, there has been a reduction the number of fires and in the number of hoax calls and, according to the local school, a vast improvement in the behaviour of the young people with whom it worked. Will my hon. Friend join me in congratulating the people involved in the project and will he undertake to consider how, as a matter of urgency, such good practice can be encouraged elsewhere?

I shall indeed. The Government welcome the Blackbrook community safety initiative. Many brigades will wish to follow that model. The fire service as a whole is to be commended for the range of community-based initiatives that it undertakes across the country to address the twin problems of fire safety in the home and disaffected youth.

Although I welcome what the Minister said in praise of firemen at every level in every part of the country, does he recognise that chief fire officers and chief executives are telling us that many of the problems with the strategies are caused by far too much bureaucracy before they are set in place? Does he recognise that the same problem of anti-social behaviour orders was raised earlier by his Back Benchers and has been repeatedly raised by Back Benchers of all parties to the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for Brent, South (Mr. Boateng)? People—including fire officers—want action; we do not want strategies that are bogged down in bureaucracy.

It is a great surprise to hear the hon. Gentleman say that because, as I understood it, he has been calling for anti-social behaviour orders to be torn up. He has said that he does not accept that they are a good thing, but they are a key component of our fight to deal with a problem that the previous Government failed to address. We are tackling anti-social behaviour, which is what the people elected us to do.

How many people (a) are employed and (b) were employed in May 1997 in his Department's press office. [137453]

A total of 27 people are employed in the press office–22 press officers, a chief immigration officer on attachment and four administrative grade staff. In May 1997, a total of 19 people were employed in the press office–15 press officers and four administrative grade staff.

My constituents want fewer spin doctors at Westminster and more police officers for Leicestershire. Does the hon. Lady agree that if we are to have a modern and efficient police service in Leicestershire in the new millennium, we need new police stations such as that proposed at Wood street in Hinckley? What benefits does she think are likely to accrue to the town of Hinckley if that modern police station, with its closed circuit television viewing area and special detention cells, is built in the near future?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for kindly faxing me today a copy of a letter from his local superintendent about Hinckley, which seems to be involved in a very good project. The chief superintendent says:

Policing levels have seen a steady increase in Hinckley and are now over 45 per cent. higher than they were in 1995. I am also delighted to be able to say that the figure is set to grow even more.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that many people who are employed in her Department's press office will be spending their time dealing with inquiries about the activities of cowboy wheel-dampers and kerb crawling? Both activities have caused immense problems in my constituency. Will she confirm now, and through her press officers, that her Department intends to legislate to curb the cowboy dampers and to clamp down on the kerb crawlers?

May I reflect the sentiments of the whole House and congratulate my hon. Friend on the absolute dexterity with which she framed her question? On a more serious note, I understand very well her concern about the matter which has been of concern for some years. It is a serious issue and we intend to legislate on it as soon as possible.

Will the Department's press officers—whose numbers have increased by more than 40 per cent.—spend some of their time preparing to explain the reforms that risk alienating the police at a critical time? Will the Minister help to relieve the burden on her press officers by explaining to Parliament what the reforms are?

Let me say to the hon. Gentleman that this question has been asked before in Home Office questions, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary answered it.

The hon. Lady should try answering it.

I should be grateful if the right hon. Lady restrained herself. I know that she has difficulties at the moment, but she should not exacerbate them.

What criteria he will use to allocate funding from the crime fighting fund in the next financial year. [137444]

Police forces that have recruited officers through the crime fighting fund in the current financial year will receive continuation funding to meet the cost of those officers next year. All forces have also received a provisional allocation of further CFF recruits for the next financial year. The continuation criteria link the provision of extra resources to improved performance, and cover whether the agreed additional numbers have been recruited and deployed to front-line policing and whether forces are meeting efficiency gain targets. The criteria also look at forces' progress on targets for crime reduction, police officers' sickness absence and ethnic minority recruitment.

I thank my hon. Friend the Minister for his reply. Is he aware that, although Tower Hamlets had the biggest increase in street crime in the Metropolitan police area, the CFF's criteria meant that it was excluded from receiving extra police on the street? I welcome the Government's commitment to a 20 per cent. increase in police spending over the next three years—which would be imperilled by Tory spending cuts—but may I urge my hon. Friend to review the CFF' s criteria so that an area such as Tower Hamlets can have extra police on the streets, which we desperately need?

We are in correspondence and discussion with my hon. Friend on this matter, which she has raised consistently and coherently. I do not accept that the CFF's criteria need to be reviewed in the way that she suggests. However, there is currently a misunderstanding between Tower Hamlets, the Metropolitan police and the Home Office, which we are now seeking to sort out, as my hon. Friend urged. The obligation to allocate extra officers is on the Metropolitan police, who are seeking to get more bobbies on the beat—more police on the streets in constituencies such as my hon. Friend's, where crime is very high.

May I welcome the fact that the CFF has helped the police in Surrey, now that the whole of Surrey is under the Surrey constabulary. However, will the Minister take note of the fact that there is grave concern in Surrey that police who have been recruited or are even on the beat may be lost to the Metropolitan police because post-1994 officers effectively receive £6,000 less than those in the Metropolitan police? That serious problem may well undermine the CFF's objectives.

I am sure that the whole House wishes the hon. Gentleman all the best in his reselection battle against the mavericks of the Tory ultra-right—[Interruption.] I am referring to the Conservative Front Bench.

Will the Minister give money to the pub watch scheme? As he knows, one has been set up in Blyth Valley, with the involvement of the police, publicans and myself. There has been a dramatic decrease in violent crime in Blyth Valley. The only problem is that those who have been barred are now threatening me. However, will the Minister consider the matter?

I certainly shall consider that. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend: the Blyth Valley pub watch scheme is renowned for being an effective and good scheme—although my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary tells me that, just the other day, he visited one in Preston that is also an extremely strong example. Through our alcohol-crime seminar, we are addressing with national pub watch and a variety of local organisations how to spread the practice of pub watch from such leading examples. We are, in principle, prepared to make funding available, but we must first establish the best framework for that purpose. The concept is a powerful one which brings the positive effects to which my hon. Friend refers.

Does the Minister agree that the best way in which to fight crime, especially in rural areas, is to have more police officers, and does he share my regret at the fact that North Yorkshire police force will be 43 officers down by the end of the year? Will he see fit to increase the crime fighting fund to ensure that there are more police officers on the streets and especially on the beat in rural areas?

I am sure that the hon. Lady shares my regret at the fact that, before 1997, North Yorkshire police authority closed 75 police stations in rural areas of North Yorkshire. I agree that the number of police officers in rural areas is important but, as I said earlier, a series of factors, of which police numbers is only one, can be adduced to strengthen rural policing. Mobile police stations, partnerships with local authorities and targeting patrols on areas of special difficulty can and do make a significant difference in many parts of the country. I shall be happy to discuss with the hon. Lady how policing might be made more effective in North Yorkshire.

What estimate he has made of the number of cases that resulted in an acquittal that would be the subject of a new trial were the double jeopardy rule relaxed in line with the Law Commission's current proposals; and how many of them would result from the application of DNA testing. [137455]

It is not possible to make an informed estimate. That is because the existing doctrine of autre fois acquit means that the police do not generally seek fresh evidence in relation to someone acquitted of an offence.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for his attempt to answer my question. Does he agree that protection against being tried twice for the same crime is a fundamental protection in our law that has existed for many centuries, and that it exists to safeguard the individual against the power of the state? Before we tamper with such a safeguard, we ought to have answers to the sort of question that I have put today. Until we have detailed evidence, we should go no further in considering a change to our law.

I must resist the temptation either to agree or to disagree with my hon. Friend, bearing in mind that the matter is being considered by the Law Commission. We have promised to reflect on its final submissions; when we have done so, I shall be able to give my hon. Friend some satisfaction, one way or the other.

Can the Minister confirm that the Government are not merely considering relaxing the protection against double jeopardy, but contemplating doing so retrospectively? Given that the Government have now attacked most of the spheres in which people know there are protections in the law and care about them—the right to trial by jury, the presumption of innocence and now the relaxation of the rule against double jeopardy—is not justice being put in jeopardy and people's confidence in the law being undermined?

The criminal law, rightly, takes a dim view of retrospectivity. The Government will, of course, consider the recommendation of the Law Commission, when it comes, but I should be extremely surprised if the Law Commission recommended retrospectivity.

Would it not be useful for the critics to study the recent publication by the Select Committee on Home Affairs on the subject? I recognise that the issue cannot be lightly decided, but let me illustrate the essence of the matter. If a person has been acquitted of murder, but DNA evidence later demonstrates that there can be hardly any doubt that that person was involved in that serious crime, what consideration are we giving the victim of that terrible crime if we proceed on the basis that, regardless of any evidence, an individual who has been acquitted should not be brought before a court again?

We had a good debate on the issue in Westminster Hall. The House has now heard the two sides of the argument. The recommendations and conclusions of the Home Affairs Committee, of which my hon. Friend is a member, were well argued and highly persuasive. No doubt the Law Commission will take them into account when reaching its final opinion.

Does the Minister agree that the Lawrence report recommended that there should be a change in the law because in exceptional cases where there is overwhelming evidence—for example, from DNA testing—it is wrong that someone cannot be tried because of the current law on double jeopardy?

The hon. Gentleman, like my hon. Friend the Member for Walsall, North (Mr. Winnick), who sits on the Select Committee on Home Affairs, makes a powerful point on behalf of the victim, a point that the Government will surely take into account when reflecting on the Law Commission's final recommendations.

If he will make a statement on recent trends in the incidence of domestic burglaries. [137457]

The reported crime figures published in July 2000 show a fall in the total numbers of domestic burglaries of 24 per cent. in the past three years—down from 582,000 in the year ending March 1997 to fewer than 443,000 in the year ending March 2000.

I welcome my hon. Friend's statement. I welcome especially the Government's efforts to reduce crime, particularly that of burglary. May I suggest that Governments cannot act alone? We need the police and voluntary organisations such as neighbourhood watch and Hillfields watch in Coventry. More importantly, of the 150,000 pensioner households that may come within the new lock scheme, what proportion will be in the west midlands, and what proportion of that will be in Coventry?

I shall write to my hon. Friend about the precise breakdown. The schemes have been available and we have tried to target those who are in most need. I agree with my hon. Friend that the figures reflect a partnership approach, with the public, community groups and the police coming together to fight crime. Today's announcements on youth justice reform will also assist with the national roll-out of electronically monitored curfew orders for juvenile offenders.

What assessment he has made of the responses to the liquor licensing reform White Paper. [137458]

We are considering responses to the White Paper. We hope to announce decisions on the way forward very soon. I am pleased by the level of support for the proposed modernisation of the system.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the responses to the White Paper indicate a widespread acceptance of the principle that more flexible opening hours for licensed premises would improve public order because no longer at closing time would many people, including some who had been drinking against the clock, spill out on to the streets at exactly the same time chasing fast food or transport home? Will he note the response of a Scottish publican who recently observed, rather pityingly, of the English and Welsh, "Even Cinderella was allowed to stay up until midnight"?

My hon. Friend is right. There is strong support from the police for the way in which we are reforming our licensing system. The system that we inherited was out of date and bureaucratic. Our reforms will provide a streamlined and simplified system of licensing for the vast majority of premises that provide hospitality. We shall reduce the red tape that has constrained the industry and provide safeguards against drunkenness, other anti-social behaviour and under-age drinking. We want to ensure that the police are given powers to deal with problems of anti-social behaviour that are associated with drunkenness. We have had support from landlords and community groups for our proposals.

Will the Minister confirm press reports saying that the Government do not now intend to introduce early legislation to reform licensing hours? If that is true, does he accept that many members of the public and many in the industry will feel extremely let down? When will he publish the consultation responses and explain the Government's change of heart? The Minister has told us for four months that he will do so shortly. Will he promise to make his announcement to the House before telling the outside world his conclusions? Does he agree that it would be monstrous if he made the announcement in his speech to the Local Government Association licensing conference tomorrow, without having told the House first?

I was not proposing to make a big announcement tomorrow, so the hon. Gentleman need not fear. The White Paper is long overdue. His party failed to deal seriously with licensing. The Government have introduced serious proposals which have received widespread support from the industry and from the police. We are giving serious consideration to the 1,200 responses to the White Paper. I shall ensure that those are available in the House of Commons Library when we have had the chance—[Interruption.] There were 1,200 responses. The White Paper provoked considerable comment, which we shall examine with great care. We want to ensure that we have a licensing system that works—something that we did not inherit from the hon. Gentleman's Government.