What plans he has to extend the use of intensive supervision and surveillance programmes for young offenders. [82302]

The intensive supervision and surveillance programme is a Home Office-funded Youth Justice Board initiative. It is the strongest community sentence for serious and prolific young offenders, and it is aimed at the 3 per cent. of young people who are responsible for 25 per cent. of juvenile offences. The scheme has just been extended to cover all 10 areas covered by the street crime initiative. It now covers four fifths of England and Wales, including all the big conurbations.

In the light of Friday's court ruling pointing to the inappropriateness of prison for children, will the Minister now agree to extend completely, to all youth areas, this valuable programme, which has been shown to be much more effective than prison in deterring reoffending and which costs the taxpayer only one quarter as much as a young offenders institution place?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's support for the intensive supervision and surveillance programme. Early indications are encouraging, but we must wait for the full assessment, which is to be undertaken by Oxford university, with the results available in 2004. One of the reasons that we introduced the programme was to minimise the chances of young people having to go into custody, although we recognise that that may be necessary for a small proportion of offenders.

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the best ways to supervise young offenders is to have a vigilant police authority, but that police authorities in many areas are composed of people who do not come from high-crime areas? I do not expect him to answer off the cuff today, but will he undertake to examine the balance of representation on police authorities, especially in areas such as mine, where there are very few people representing the city of Nottingham, but where the majority of the shire's crime takes place?

I agree that it is important that police authorities should be representative of the communities they serve, not only in dealing with young offenders, but in dealing with all types of crime. I am happy to write to my hon. Friend.

Does the Minister agree that for that minority who have to be imprisoned, the key to rehabilitation lies in structured programmes both while they are in custody and on their release? In that context, should there not be concern if the early release programme under tagging of 60 days, extendable to 90 days, is leading to young offenders being released part way through programmes undertaken while they are in custody?

The hon. Gentleman is aware that when applying the early release programme under home detention curfew, prisons will, in anticipation of prisoners coming out, take account of that in their programmes. On his first point, he is absolutely right: structured programmes are important to tackle the problems created by young offenders. That is precisely why in recent years we have invested £50 million in improving those programmes under the auspices of the YJB.

What plans he has to change the age limit at which air weapons can be used; and if he will make a statement. [82303]

What plans he has to amend legislation on possession and use of airguns. [82313]

The misuse of air weapons is a serious problem. We are considering a number of options for dealing with the difficulties that people have faced, and I intend to introduce proposals in the new year under the new antisocial behaviour legislation.

I am grateful for that reply, but had hoped that the Home Secretary would be able to go a little further and say precisely what he had in mind. Will he confirm that among the options he is considering are raising the age ban on ownership to 17 and increasing the powers of police to confiscate the weapons; and whether he has any plans to deal with replica weapons?

I am deeply sympathetic on all three counts. The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth), has been pulling together a package of measures for me, and I hope to be able to announce some of those very shortly.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his response. Further to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland, South (Mr. Mullin), is the Home Secretary considering the introduction of a licensing system for the use of airguns? That would be popular with many local councils, particularly in Barnsley and Doncaster, but I know that it would be difficult to achieve given that about 4 million unlicensed air weapons are already in circulation in this country.

My hon. Friend has identified a real problem in both the bureaucracy and our ability to enforce the law. He will be aware of the way in which the categorisation works at the moment—the six foot-pounds, as they are known, which are already prohibited under the handgun ban. Obviously, there are a number of ways in which the use of handguns can be dealt with as an offence, including firearms offences. I am sympathetic to the problem, and am seeking a way forward that will not bog everyone down in a bureaucratic nightmare but will result in a solution.

I thank the Home Secretary for his final remark about not seeking to trap everyone in a bureaucratic quagmire, but does he agree that tens of thousands of young people handle airguns extremely responsibly and learn a great deal about the art of target shooting and rifle shooting, particularly the basic rudiments of weapons safety, from shooting with airguns? Does he agree that it is extremely important that they should not be prevented from enjoying the perfectly legitimate and wholly satisfactory use of their weapons?

I would agree, but that is primarily because they are properly supervised and trained, and understand the nature of the weapon that they are handling. If that can be done in properly supervised surroundings, so much the better.

May I emphasise to the Home Secretary the fact that the ban on handguns, to which he referred just now, demonstrates clearly that banning does not necessarily reduce the criminal use of handguns? I remind him of the Prime Minister's public pledge not to place further restrictions on shooting sports. In that spirit, and in the spirit of the Home Secretary's own remarks on the record that he wants any changes in airgun legislation to have cross-party support, I urge him to reject proposals on licensing and raising ages because, as my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames) said, they will penalise the vast majority who participate in the lawful, sensible and safe use of airguns. Will he consider simply extending section 16 of the Firearms Act 1968, which would make it an arrestable offence to carry an airgun in a public place unless someone could prove that they had good reason for doing so? That would have our party's support.

I am prepared to consider the hon. Gentleman's proposition, but I want to make it clear that there is an enormous difference between holding, owning and using airguns for sport and using them to maim, terrorise and undermine the order that we expect in our communities.

On the question of weapons in general, the Home Secretary will be aware of the rising tide of gun crime in London. Is he aware that the Metropolitan police aim to get the minimum sentence for carrying a weapon raised to at least five years? Will he also do something about the production of Brocock replica weapons?

I am aware of representations. There is good reason for treating the issue seriously and considering whether we should add it to the Criminal Justice and Sentencing Bill.

Like my hon. Friends, I very much welcome the moderate approach that the Home Secretary has outlined this afternoon. However, will he clarify something? Rather puzzlingly, he told the Select Committee on Home Affairs that he would examine why people under 17 could purchase air weapons. Is he not aware that that is already illegal? Between 14 and 17, people can borrow and use air weapons—we all agree that that is sensible—but they have to be over 17 to buy them.

You can be under 17 to own one—that is an interesting anomaly. We can banter about the niceties across the Dispatch Box till kingdom come, but in the spirit of our earlier discussion, we are all trying to find a genuine solution.

What plans he has for funding further CCTV installations by local authorities. [82304]

Under the crime reduction programme closed circuit television initiative, a potential £170 million will be spent funding 684 CCTV schemes. Although bids for that initiative are now closed, other opportunities for funding CCTV schemes currently exist under the safer communities, communities against drugs, and the small retailers in deprived areas initiatives.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that CCTV cameras are effective in deterring and detecting crime, especially when they are used in conjunction with other measures such as lighting? The people who live in Stafford town and Penkridge village are delighted with their cameras and would like more. How, as a result of my right hon. Friend's reply, will local authorities such as Stafford borough and south Staffordshire district obtain funding for more CCTV cameras?

I am delighted to hear of the success of the CCTV scheme in Penkridge village. That experience is shared in many parts of the country. Funds will continue to be available for crime reduction through crime reduction partnerships. In response to many requests from local councils, we are tending to move away from central ring-fenced budgets for specific purposes to enable decisions on priorities to be made locally. Funds will continue to be available for crime reduction in my hon. Friend's constituency and those of other hon. Members.

What is the percentage difference in crime detection in town centres that have CCTV by comparison with those that do not?

The major evaluation of the 684 schemes that the Home Office and the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister are undertaking will give us the detailed information about impact that the hon. Gentleman seeks. As well as the increase in crime detection, crime in car parks decreases by more than 40 per cent. when CCTV is introduced. We are seeking a reduction in crime and the fear of crime, not simply an increase in detection.

Does my right hon. Friend know that CCTV cameras in metropolitan areas are concentrated in the larger towns and cities? What help does he offer the smaller urban authorities, such as former urban district councils, to obtain the services of CCTV? Is it possible to have mobile CCTV in some of our communities?

The money that we made available through the safer communities initiative and the communities against drugs funds can be used to finance CCTV schemes. They have been used in many different areas. I visited an extensive network in Surrey recently that was funded through such initiatives and other sources. Mobile or relocatable schemes can play a useful part when that is the most appropriate method of tackling the problem.

What recent assessment he has made of the benefits drug rehabilitation has for a community. [82306]

Drug treatment, including rehabilitation, works. Research has shown that for every £1 spent on treatment, £3 is saved in criminal justice and victim costs of crime. The longer problematic drug users remain in treatment, the greater the savings ratio. Rehabilitation is only one aspect of treatment and is not always the most appropriate intervention.

I have talked to those who work with the homeless in my constituency, and they are concerned that the wait of three to six months for treatment is too long, and that the treatment periods are too short to be effective. Given the benefits of rehabilitation that the Under-Secretary outlined in his answer, is it not time to spend more money on treatment and on increasing the number of rehabilitation places and their effectiveness, for the sake of our addicts and the communities where they live?

I welcome—I really do—the Conservative party's conversion to providing treatment for drug addicts. It is a shame that it happened only a couple of months ago, before the party conference. We realised the benefits just after we took power in 1997, and we have increased the amount of treatment available by 8 per cent. every year since then. We plan to continue to do that. Although things are not currently adequate, waiting times are decreasing. We need to reduce them further.

Retailers in the shopping centre in Milton Keynes have become aware of the huge cost of shoplifting by a relatively small number of drug addicts, who do it to finance their drug habit. The retailers are considering making a financial contribution towards increasing the number of drug rehabilitation places that are available locally as a better way of dealing with the problem than simply locking people up. What is my hon. Friend's response to that proposal?

My hon. Friend hits on an important point. Retail partnerships are increasing in our towns and cities. They have some knowledge of the problem. We need to plug such partnerships properly into all our crime reduction initiatives, including our ability to get drug addicts into treatment. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Policing, Crime Reduction and Community Safety recently held discussions along those lines with the Birmingham partnership. We are actively considering the matter to ascertain what can be done in conjunction with retail partnerships in towns such as Milton Keynes.

With an estimated 300 heroin addicts in Gosport alone, each needing something like £20,000 a year to feed their habit, is it not obvious that the 1,882 places available for treatment are woefully inadequate, and that platitudes and reassurances must be backed up by action?

I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is prepared to listen to any answer that is given to him in that regard. We have 118,000 people in treatment in this country. We need to double that figure, and we plan to do so. By the end of the drugs strategy period, we plan to have more than 200,000 problematic drug users in treatment. There is not enough treatment at the moment, but we need people of the right quality to remedy that, and those people need to be trained. We also need the input of GPs. This is not something that can happen overnight. We have been increasing the amount of treatment available consistently since 1998, and we plan to continue to do so. I might say that that is in marked contrast to what went on before.

When the Minister answered a recent written question by saying that 118,500 individuals were reported as being "in contact with" treatment agencies, what did he mean? How many of those individuals are in fact being maintained on methadone? Is it true that almost half of them are in that condition?

What I meant was that 118,000 people are receiving a whole range of treatment services—not merely rehabilitation—including specialist drugs advice and information, harm reduction advice, in-patient detoxification services, specialist prescribing services, GP drug prescribing services, and counselling services, as well as residential rehabilitation. The right hon. Gentleman appears to be putting across a very simplistic view of what treatment is or needs to be. Treatment needs to be tailored to particular needs, and I would suggest that what is needed in a particular locality does not need to be dictated at national level. Local people need to decide what is needed in their area.

If such matters do not need to be dictated at national level—I have some sympathy with the Minister on that—is it also the case that there is no need for national targets? In 2000, the Home Secretary set targets to reduce the proportion of people under 25 using class A drugs by 25 per cent., and to reduce by 25 per cent. the level of repeat offending by people misusing drugs. Was it because the Home Secretary and the Minister did not believe that there was a need for a national strategy that they removed those targets in 2002? What is their proposal in relation to their new statement on drugs? Are we going to hear that targets are to disappear altogether?

The right hon. Gentleman should be a little more patient. As I have said, he discovered the drug problem two months ago, just before his party conference. If he waits a short while, and if he is prepared to engage in an adult debate on this issue, he will see that there are better focused targets, which are measurable and achievable, in what we announce.

Question 5. please.

What criteria are used to determine the performance of the National Treatment Agency. [82307]

Sorry, Mr. Speaker.

So are we all.

The National Treatment Agency is assessed by the Department of Health. The following criteria are used: access to treatment, in terms of progress on meeting the national drugs strategy target of doubling the people in treatment by 2008; capacity, in regard to the extent to which there is work force capacity to meet the target; efficiency, in terms of the reduction of waiting times; and effectiveness, in regard to the increase in the proportion of people successfully completing or appropriately sustaining treatment.

I wish to follow up the fourth aspect—the quantification of what determines success. I have investigated that at length in ray constituency, but nobody from the drug treatment services has been able to quantify success—for example, whether it means people coming off drugs, stabilising, reducing intake or eliminating criminal activity. Will my hon. Friend consider how that specific fourth target can be tightened to hold the National Treatment Agency accountable?

My hon. Friend is right. All treatment has to be aimed at attempting to achieve abstinence, but maintaining people on treatment can in itself lead to significant reductions in crime. The treatments offered have therefore to be tailored to individuals, and keeping people in treatment, picking them up when they fail, and readmitting them to treatment all need to be looked at positively. However, we need adequate ways to measure exactly what is being achieved, locally as well as nationally.

The Minister is right to refer to cost-effectiveness, and rehabilitation treatment is important in the criminal sphere, since between 50 and 60 per cent. of property crime is drugs related. A few weeks ago, I put to him the possibility of ring-fencing the proceeds of drug trading, millions of pounds of which are rightly confiscated each week in the Crown courts. Why do we not ring-fence that money to create more rehab places for that very important category of person? May I also remind him that there are only 38 rehabilitation beds in the whole of Wales? That does not deal with the problems in a single valley.

The hon. Gentleman should not look to recovered assets—not at the moment, in any case—as the panacea for all those problems. We managed to recover about £20 million of criminal assets last year, and over half that was redistributed through the recovered asset fund. That money on its own will not make such a difference, and it will not deal with the treatment that is needed and al ready planned in the drugs strategy. I accept what he says—it can play an important part—but there needs to be a lot more input than just recovered criminal assets.

What recent discussions he has had with the chief constable of Thames Valley police about recruitment and retention of police officers; and if he will make a statement. [82308]

I have discussed the chief constable's concern about retention in the Thames Valley area on a number of occasions in the past year, most recently in the past few weeks. Thames Valley police has been recruiting strongly in recent years, but the force has recently experienced retention difficulties, including a net outflow of transfers. We are working with chief constables, police authorities and staff associations in London and the south-east, including Thames Valley, to consider all the associated issues and to develop practical solutions.

I am grateful for that answer and I am glad that the Minister has spoken to the chief constable of Thames Valley police, to whom I spoke this morning. I have to tell the Minister that the retention situation is still dire. Is he aware that, in parts of the Thames Valley area, over 60 per cent. of front-line officers are probationers? Will he consider increasing the extra allowance for Thames Valley officers in the south-east of England and giving the chief constable more flexibility over his budget, particularly in respect of overtime and the special priority payments? We must try to keep some of those officers in the Thames Valley force rather than see them go all over the country.

There are a number of things that we need to consider, including how the additional special priority posts money will be implemented in Thames Valley and other forces in the new year. Thames Valley officers already receive an additional allowance compared with the norm of £2,000 a year, and we are helping in other ways—for example, 171 of the starter homes under the starter homes initiative will be for the benefit of Thames Valley officers. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we take the issues facing a few of the south-east forces very seriously and we are considering what measures we can take to assist.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that 22 officers have left the Chiltern Vale force since April, which is some 10 per cent. of the total? I was told by a senior officer this morning that that will have grave consequences if something is not done quickly; so will he please, this afternoon, commit himself to extra allowances, as my hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr. Cameron) requested?

As I have said, additional resources are on the way as a result of the pay deal with the Police Federation and the employers earlier this year. We need to discuss how they can be used. We are considering, among other things, giving the forces help with housing. I am due to meet the forces in the south-east before Christmas to look at a range of options.

What plans he has to promote community engagement and active citizenship. [82309]

As I think my hon. and learned Friend knows, we believe that the active involvement of local people in their communities is essential to achieving safe, cohesive communities and can make a real difference to the quality of life in an area. We want to increase voluntary activity and promote active citizenship, and the active community unit is leading that work across Government.

I agree that good public services are not simply a matter of bureaucracy up here providing services for a community down there. That applies particularly to deprived communities. How, though, is my hon. Friend ensuring that Home Office services in my area actively involve local people—and, if I may be blunt, what Home Office resources are available to those people?

My hon. and learned Friend is right. If we are to involve the voluntary and community sector more in the delivery of public services, which is what we want to do, local people must be involved in both defining and shaping the way in which services are delivered. They must become involved in the voluntary and community organisations that we want to engage in public service delivery.

Order. Let the hon. Lady finish.

There is also a specific amount, £330,000, for development of voluntary and community networks in Dudley.

The Minister rightly spoke of the important role that the voluntary sector can play in our deprived communities in particular. It now costs some £22,000 a year to keep a young person locked up in a young offenders unit. Would it not be better to invest that money in our young people through the recognised youth organisations, perhaps helping them to hire school halls; and would not our communities be a lot better for it?

As the hon. Gentleman will know from the policy we have published, we consider community-based solutions appropriate for many young people, and the voluntary sector has a key role to play in that.

When an active citizen who has witnessed a serious crime is scared off from giving evidence at a criminal trial, does that not underline the need to strengthen the law so that some of the thugs on our streets who are getting away with serious assault and worse are brought to justice? If people are to be active citizens and support their communities, they too need support from the law of the land.

I agree that the concept of active citizenship is not only about involvement in voluntary activity. It also means being able to play a proper role as a participant in the criminal justice system. Our White Paper and the Bill that will follow will make the system work so that victims and witnesses can play their proper role.

How many special constables were employed in England in (a) 1997 and (b) 2002. [82310]

On 31 March 1997 there were 19,874 special constables in England and. Wales. On 31 March 2002 there were 11,598.

Those figures reveal the total collapse in the number of special constables employed in this country. In my county, the number has fallen by more than 50 per cent. The Government say they are committed to increasing the number of specials, and regularly organise recruitment campaigns. Why have they failed so spectacularly?

We of course agree that the special constabulary has a very important part to play—[Interruption.] If Opposition Members want to hear the answer to the question, I suggest that they listen. If they go on making noise, they will not hear the answer—[Interruption.] There you go, Mr. Speaker.

Order. I call Mr. Jenkins.

Does my hon. Friend recognise the demise in the number of special police officers—a development that starkly highlights the drop in the number of people in our society who do voluntary work and who make a voluntary commitment? That is happening across the youth sector, and it certainly worries me. Has any work been done on that, and is it happening because too many people now lead hectic lives and do not have sufficient time, or because for 18 years they were told that there is no such thing as society?

My hon. Friend is right, and he draws attention to a very valuable point. There are many reasons why the numbers are falling, a key one of which is that we are having difficulty in retaining special constables. Recruitment is not a problem: last year, we recruited 1,700 new special constables, which is a significant achievement. The problem is that we are losing more of them, and a key reason why is exactly as my hon. Friend describes. More than 50 per cent. of special constables leave because of family commitments, and work and study commitments. Significantly, one in five leave to join the regular police force, which shows our success in transforming the state of policing in this country. Anecdotal evidence shows that, in many areas, as many as 40 per cent. leave the specials to join the regular police force, which we should all welcome.

Who bears the greatest responsibility for the hon. Gentleman's failure, Attlee or Thatcher? [Laughter.]

I assume that that was a debating point, rather than a serious question. The responsibility falls not to any Prime Minister, but to long-standing changes in society. It is a measure of the failure of the Conservatives that they do not realise that some things have to be tackled systematically, coherently and with proper funding, and that is what we are doing.

If he will ensure that all crime and disorder partnerships include measures to combat alcohol-related crime as part of their strategies. [823111

Initial analysis of the crime and disorder partnerships shows that some 53 per cent. of them have included prioritisation of alcohol abuse in their policies for reducing crime.

Given that the aims of the Government's Licensing Bill include allowing more flexible hours for pubs and creating a more civilised atmosphere late at night in our town and city centres—making them attractive not just to the young, but to those who are young at heart, such as my right hon. Friend and me—does he agree that it is more important than ever that crime and disorder partnerships prioritise by trying to make the night-time economy as safe as possible?

I would encourage all crime and disorder partnerships to take a further look at their strategies in view of the real problems of binge drinking. More than half of those who commit crime are seen to have been involved in drink or drugs, and we know that that causes devastation.

Given that the Government have had it trailed in the press this week that we are about to have the relaunch of the drugs strategy and that it is widely known that the most recent British crime survey showed that 40 per cent. of violent crimes are fuelled by alcohol, can the Home Secretary tell us when we will get the Government's alcohol strategy, which is hugely important and was trailed nearly five years ago? When will they give crimes fuelled by alcohol equal priority with crimes fuelled by other dangerous drugs?

The Department of Health and the Home Office are working with the forward strategy unit on developing a proper programme that is integrated with and related to the updated drugs strategy that we will publish this week. I do not disagree with the need to tackle this problem, and I do not think that anyone would, given that a high percentage of stranger violence is committed by people who are under the influence of drink.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how effective exclusion orders are in banning perpetrators of violent crime from licensed premises, particularly where partnerships exist between the police, the local authority, magistrates and landlords? Unfortunately, their application is patchy. Will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to point out again to local crime and disorder partnerships how effective exclusion orders can be and ask them to reconsider using them in their armoury to combat violent alcohol-related crime?

I should very much like to do that, in conjunction with the proposals in the Licensing Bill. Not least, I commend those alcohol outlets, particularly in city and town centres, which have made an agreement with the police, often using radiocommunications, and are prepared to contribute a little towards making those outlets more attractive. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and I are looking at how to strengthen that.

When he expects to appoint the independent monitor of accommodation centres. [82312]

We intend to ensure that the monitor is appointed in good time for him or her to be able to monitor the operation of accommodation centres from the date at which the first centre is open.

Would it not be sensible for the monitor to be able to advise on whether a location is suitable to meet the needs of asylum seekers before hundreds of pounds are spent on a public inquiry and millions are spent on building an accommodation centre rather than after?

The role of the monitor was discussed here and in the House of Lords during the passage of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill, including the implications of the late amendment on location. The hon. Gentleman has put that point before. Lord Firkin wrote to him on 15 November, making it clear that the monitor is not an adjudicator or an arbiter of whether a location would be suitable for an accommodation centre and that decisions about where to locate the centres will be made by the Secretary of State subject to the planning process. The monitor will not be involved in selecting sites.

Does the Minister accept that there is sufficient ambiguity in the drafting of the last-minute concession in the Bill to allow plenty of argument about the right time to appoint the monitor for him or her to be able to advise on whether all the services can be provided to residents in a particular locality? If she remains so confident that she is right and all the interest groups are wrong when she says that all the services can be provided in remote rural areas, why will she not take the generous interpretation, appoint the monitor soon and allow him or her to comment on the policy of putting all these people in very remote rural places?

I have already said that that is not the role of the monitor—he or she will be monitoring the operation of the centre. I think that the right hon. and learned Gentleman believes that some areas of the country, including his own, are not suitable for asylum seekers and accommodation centres, but we do not take that view. In the annual report to the Secretary of State, the monitor will be able to comment on whether a need of residents is not being adequately met in a particular location. We can then take action to ensure that that need is met properly.

We support the concepts of accommodation centres and of an independent monitor, but will the Minister tell us what impact they will have, first on the current record number of applications for asylum—29,000 plus in the last quarter; secondly, on her collapsed policy of removing failed asylum seekers; and, finally, on the backlog of claims, 16,000 of which have been outstanding for more than a year?

The accommodation centres themselves are part of an end-to-end strategy for keeping in much closer contact with asylum seekers so that we are able to remove people if their claim is refused. The hon. Gentleman will also know that the Act was implemented only three weeks ago. We had to fight tooth and nail with the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues in the House of Lords for many of the most important provisions in that Act, and when we are able to implement them, as we shall be doing during the next few months, they will have the impact on the intake of asylum claims that we anticipate.

What support he has given to Sussex police to operate the amber alert pilot scheme to help counter child abduction. [82314]

We are very interested in the lead being taken by Sussex police and the Association of Chief Police Officers' homicide working group in piloting the child rescue project. We wish it success and will closely monitor its progress over the coming months.

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. May I draw his attention to early-day motion 70, which has been signed by me and 84 hon. Members and praises the amber alert scheme as it operates in the United States and wishes the Sussex police well in their pilot? However, as Sussex has only a limited amount of motorway, and as the scheme relies on breaking into media broadcasts and on broadcasting on motorway and other traffic signs, will he monitor it closely and give us an undertaking that, if it goes well, it will be piloted more extensively in other constabularies throughout the country, so that at least something positive might come from the horrific murders and abductions that have occurred during this and previous years to deter other such tragedies in the future?

I agree wholeheartedly. The scheme is imaginative and is aimed at using all the resources of the community to try to intervene quickly when a child abduction appears to have taken place. We know that those early hours are crucial if we are to find a child who has been abducted. I gladly undertake to monitor carefully the success of the scheme. I am sure that other forces will be looking with great interest at the work that Sussex is doing and I should be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman and officers from the Sussex force when the pilot period is over so that we can consider how to spread that good idea elsewhere.

What plans he has to improve the rate of recruitment and retention of police officers. [82315]

What plans he has to improve the rate of recruitment and retention of police officers. [82317]

The police service in England and Wales is recruiting very successfully; 10,215 officers joined it in the year to March 2002–38 per cent. more than the previous year and the highest number of recruits since 1975. The number of police officers leaving the service annually remains low at about 5 per cent. of strength. However there are variations between forces, and we are working with chief constables and others to identify measures that can be taken where there are local retention problems.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his answer. He will be well aware that, early next year, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 becomes law and will allow the police to seize the assets of the drug barons and Mr. Bigs of the criminal world. What talks has my right hon. Friend held with the Scottish Executive on police staffing on both sides of the border, especially in relation to cross-border co-operation?

The Scottish Executive have been closely involved in all stages of the development of the policy and the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for Coventry, North-East (Mr. Ainsworth) has taken a close personal interest in the implementation of the Act, as has the Minister for Justice in Scotland, Jim Wallace. The operation of the Act is a devolved matter, but the Scottish Executive have recently appointed the heads of the new criminal confiscation and civil recovery units. The Scottish police college is delivering comprehensive financial investigation training to police officers in Scotland and that is being developed in consultation with the police service in London.

I welcome the measures that the Minister has announced for retaining police officers, particularly in the south-east, but is he aware that the same pressures apply to civilians working in the police force, and those who work alongside the police, such as the new neighbourhood wardens being piloted in my constituency? Will he ensure that the measures do not create unintended or artificial barriers for those who support the police in their duties?

Of course I am keen to ensure that nothing we do to support police officer retention has an adverse effect on those who fulfil an important role as police staff. I am pleased to say that there has been good and strong recruitment of civilian staff in my hon. Friend's local police service and all the police services in the south-east.

Special constables are by definition police officers, and we have already heard that there has been a serious collapse in their numbers. Would the Minister consider paying them, invoking the precedent of paying retained firemen and the Territorial Army?

We recently invited the current deputy chief constable of Surrey, soon to be the chief constable of Cheshire, Peter Fahy, to act as the leader of a new project to investigate the recruitment, retention, training and deployment of specials in an endeavour to increase their numbers. The question of payment is controversial among specials. I recently approved a pilot project in Workington in Cumbria that, subject to changes in parliamentary regulations, would enable modest local payment to specials in the area. I anticipate, as part of the specials project, that that may happen in a few other areas, too, but we need to be careful not to upset the essentially voluntary nature of the special constabulary, which I know from experience is highly valued by many specials. I accept in principle the question that the right hon. and learned Gentleman raises, but we must proceed with due caution with some pilot projects, to see how it works out.

Is there not a distinction between paying specials and introducing a new status of retained officer, an omnicompetent officer working part-time, which would help to retain experienced officers? Ministers have said repeatedly over the years that they are considering the case for such retained officers. When will they reach a conclusion?

We have been considering not a salary but a bonus payment or modest enhancement in allowances. We have no active plans to introduce other types of working for specials, save that, as part of the pay negotiating body agreement last year, we are making the use of part-time paid police officers more flexible than in the past, by allowing engagement for less than 16 hours a week.

Does the Minister share my concern about the effect of congestion charging on the retention of police officers in inner London? Is he aware that many of the officers in my constituency have to travel by car because of their shift hours? Is anyone likely to provide the extra £1,000 that they will have to pay?

That is the responsibility of the Mayor of London and the Metropolitan police service, as the officers' employers. [HON. MEMBERS: "Aha."] I know how much the Conservative party would resist any suggestion that the Home Secretary or I should interfere in these matters. The issues are under active consideration by the Metropolitan police service, and were touched on in recent discussions that I had with the deputy assistant commissioner.

What the incidence of rural crime was in (a) April 1997 and (b) April 2002. [82316]

A comparison of the British crime survey figures for 1997–98 with those that I announced in July shows that, for rural areas, burglary was down 44 per cent., violent crime down 35 per cent. and vehicle theft down 34 per cent.

Will the Home Secretary take the time to come and visit Thirsk, one of the market towns in the Vale of York, where burglaries of both homes and properties appear to be on the increase? Will he consider closely the question of improving closed circuit television cameras, to ensure that the clarity of the picture is sufficient to be able to apprehend criminals, rather than merely showing the crime that they have committed?

Yes, I would. I am very pleased that the community safety partnerships have been using resources allocated by the Home Office to extend CCTV, and I should like to take the opportunity to congratulate the Hambleton crime reduction partnership in a neighbouring area on being one of only two groups in the country to be awarded beacon status for their efforts in crime reduction in rural areas.

I welcome my right hon. Friend's statistics and the downturn in crime in rural areas, but there are also hot spots in rural areas. In my constituency, there is a lot of car crime and vehicles being dumped, and we would like to see more high-visibility policing in the rural area. What resources can he make available to allow to that to happen?

I hope that, later this week, we can indicate the necessary resources and encouragement to help forces to recruit and to use those recruits effectively in terms of imaginative single manning where appropriate and, of course, show the importance of restoring the rural element to police funding, which will help across the country.

What steps he is taking to tackle antisocial behaviour by travellers. [82318]

The Government are committed to tackling all forms of antisocial behaviour. That is why we will introduce an antisocial behaviour Bill in the current Session. In addition, we have announced new proposals to deal with unauthorised encampments and the problems of antisocial behaviour that can sometimes arise from them.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. We have been promised some more detailed guidance—I understand that my hon. Friend's Department is working on it with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister—and we had expected to receive it during the summer. When will we receive that guidance? Although many travellers pass through Swindon and cause us no difficulties at all, some serious antisocial behaviour has been associated with travellers, and we would like to have the guidance to be able to improve the way in which that is managed.

My hon. Friend and, indeed, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, my hon. Friend the Member for North Swindon (Mr. Wills) have made me aware that they have a particular problem in their area. She knows that, in relation to unauthorised encampments, we have promised new legislation to evict from unauthorised sites where local authorities have authorised sites. The strategic and operational guidance to police and local authorities will be forthcoming very shortly and, in addition, there will be funding to build more authorised sites.

What measures he is taking to tackle persistent youth offenders. [82319]

We are tackling the causes of persistent youth offending through our work to overcome social and economic exclusion, and we are coupling that with tougher action to bring home to persistent offenders the severe consequences that will follow continued offending, including antisocial behaviour orders, acceptable behaviour contracts, parenting orders and local child curfews.

May I commend the excellent work being done by the Enfield youth offending team, which my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary visited earlier this year? Its restorative justice programme is nipping in the bud the sort of behaviour that leads to antisocial offending. What steps is my hon. Friend taking to expand that type of programme so that we can address the sort of antisocial behaviour that leads to youth offending?

My hon. Friend is right. We have to take a range of measures to deal with this problem. The sort of measures that he mentions are very welcome, and we know that they are beginning to work. The proof of the success of the measures that we are taking is that we have reduced the reconviction rate by 14.6 per cent. during the past five years, which is important, and that we have delivered on our pledge to halve the time between arrest and sentence. My hon. Friend will agree that those measures are working. We want to see more of them, and we will continue to fund them.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the social inquiry reports that are sometimes produced in court when young offenders appear before magistrates and in other courts are inadequate? Does he also agree that, because the wider family context is often relevant, it would be helpful in the raft of legislation that is to follow to make family reports available to criminal courts as well as family courts?

My hon. Friend makes a very important point, and we will certainly consider it very carefully in framing the legislation.

What plans he has to increase and enhance the role of support staff in the police. [82320]

We are keen to enhance the role of police support staff. Community support officers are already being deployed in London, and we expect up to 1,200 to be working by the end of March. Today sees the implementation of section 38 of the Police Reform Act 2002, which enables chief officers of police to designate suitably skilled and trained support staff to exercise certain police powers.

I am grateful to the Minister for that response. On the issue of community support officers, does he share my puzzlement that although many police forces are actively recruiting community support officers, as they believe that that will improve the effectiveness of their force, North Wales police have decided not to do so, ostensibly because of lack of funding? Would he agree to discuss this issue with me in the near future?

I would be pleased to discuss the matter with my hon. Friend. Under the scheme, as he will be aware, forces were invited to bid. From memory, 27 forces were successful, all of which bid first time round. A new round of bidding will occur in the new year. Speaking for myself and my constituency, I cannot wait to see the arrival of the community support officers who will be deployed in West Yorkshire, because of the benefit that I know that my constituents will derive from their presence.