It’s the media that’s obsessed with anti-social behaviour orders, not the Government, says Britain’s “respect agenda” tsar.
Herpreet Kaur Grewal
It’s the media that’s obsessed with anti-social behaviour orders, not the Government, says Britain’s “respect agenda” tsar. Asbos are just one technique in Labour’s well-stocked toolbox.
Louise Casey says she’s not obsessed with anti-social behaviour orders (Asbos). But she’s certainly a cheerleader for them: the Government’s anti-social behaviour tsar has publicly described the orders as having brought “peace and security to thousands of people’s lives”. In fact, says Casey, she is “more obsessed with parenting than anything else”; she is “utterly convinced” that focusing on children’s upbringing is the most effective way to combat disorderly behaviour. Few would disagree, but it is between such preventative action and the punitive Asbo that the debate about anti-social behaviour still rages.
Appointed director of the Anti-Social Behaviour Unit in 2003, Casey was later asked to establish the Respect Task Force. She admits that she is “no social scientist” and is known for her hands-on approach. In 1997 she was the Government’s homelessness tsar, and created a stir by criticising soup kitchens and the handing out of sleeping bags, claiming that they perpetuate the misery of those sleeping rough.
Being chosen by the Prime Minister to lead the anti-social behaviour drive has put her under a particularly bright media spotlight: the press has had a field day with her big, brash style. In an infamous after-dinner speech in 2005 Casey mocked the Government’s campaign to tackle binge drinking and joked about drinking on the job. No surprise then that she has a sign on her office wall that reads: “Keep calm and carry on.”
Two weeks ago Regeneration & Renewal reported a wide variation in the number of Asbo breaches across the country after obtaining figures through a request under the Freedom of Information Act (R&R, 9 February, p.1).
The figures showed that Durham had the highest breach rate with 74 per cent, and Northamptonshire the lowest with 11 per cent: the implication was that some local authorities were issuing and managing the orders better than others.
This gaping disparity does not bother Casey: “It’s not for me to judge whether an (individual) Asbo is right or wrong,” she says, sipping green tea from a Respect agenda mug. “It’s up to the court to decide whether the Asbo is warranted and it’s up to the person to decide whether they are going to sort their behaviour out or not.” She is visibly annoyed by the fixation on Asbos. “To say you have a league table of Asbo (breaches) is – to be honest – an incredibly crude approach to take in terms of tackling anti-social behaviour, and not one the Government would support.”
Crude or not, think-tanks such as the Runnymede Trust say that the breach figures underline a “real concern” and that more information needs to be compiled on the effectiveness of Asbos in tackling anti-social behaviour. High breach rates could signal that a large number of Asbos are being given to vulnerable people who are more likely to breach their orders.
Campaign group Asbo Concern has voiced fears that the Asbos are being used against people with conditions such as Asperger’s Syndrome. However, Casey argues that the groups that make such claims have never presented any “hard evidence”.
Nevertheless, at a recent parliamentary Public Accounts Committee meeting, Casey was quizzed on the issue of “evidence-based policy” – a term which in the past has provoked her exasperation. She admitted that more evaluation work could be done on Asbos and now says there will be a review to measure the effects of the Government’s strategies to tackle anti-social behaviour.
“You wouldn’t have been able to justify the amount of money a research report needed for such a minor tool before, but now it’s used quite significantly – though nowhere near as significantly as people think – and we can do a review of how they work.” She adds that, to her, it is “really clear” that the Asbo is not an overused measure, as many seem to think; she points out that, in a population of 57 million, only 10,000 Asbos have been issued over four or five years. “Can we get some perspective on how often that tool is used? It’s not used as frequently as people may be led to believe when they pick up newspapers.”
She argues that Asbos are only one tool available to authorities in fighting local disorder. The Government’s approach to anti-social behaviour is “a damn sight more sophisticated than an Asbo and a discussion about an Asbo breach,” she says. “You have to remember that the vast majority of people working out there to tackle anti-social behaviour use a range of tools.” These other tools include warning letters, acceptable behaviour contracts and individual support orders.
Even so, Asbos have entered the public consciousness as the Labour Government’s main weapon in the fight against the scourge of bad behaviour. Casey denies that this is something the Government itself has encouraged, claiming that the Home Office has relentlessly tried to make sure that Asbos are used appropriately.
Casey sees her role quite simply. She says the “respect agenda” – including all the tools in the anti-social behaviour toolkit – is all about rules, and it is her role to ensure that they are enforced. “If you’re a social worker you call them boundaries; if you’re a teacher you call them rules; if you’re a law enforcement officer you call them laws,” she says. “We all need boundaries, rules, laws, and when they are broken, there has to be a consequence. Otherwise, what’s the point of having them? You may as well have anarchy.”
CV HIGHLIGHTS
1990: Runs charity the Homeless Network in London.
1992: Made deputy director of homelessness charity Shelter.
1997: Heads the Government’s Homelessness Unit; founds its Homelessness Directorate.
2003: Made national director of the Government’s Anti-Social Behaviour Unit.
2005: Appointed coordinator of the Respect Task Force.