My son is a Met copper of 7 years’ standing. From what I gather, fines for antisocial behaviour - even if levied - are frequently ineffective, as such behaviour usually comes from individuals with no money. After great expense in time for the police and justice system they are then ordered to pay the fine by a nominal deduction from their benefits. This makes it a weak tool; but the alternative is presumably gaol, and we have no cells…
I think there are a lot of small things that drive polite and reasonable people crazy on a daily basis. But they feel powerless to do anything about it because there is no consensus of what is reasonable. Talking about it is a good start…
A lot of Neil's suggestions would be nice to have, but he doesn't mention one of my pet hates. That is folk who park 'momentarily' in busy roads where parking is forbidden. They may only be popping out for a few moments but their selfishness can disturb a lot of traffic and delay many others.
This Tory MP is concerned about the selfishness of people behaving badly on public transport or defacing the streets with graffiti, but doesn't seem to notice the selfishness of the more affluent.
For example those rich enough to not mind how many parking tickets they get. Why not go for punitive measures (removal of licence?) against the so-called 'selfish rich bastards' too?
Incredible. Another tory mp waxing lyrical about the good old days, completely forgetting the travesty of government that was the last 14 years of austerity, fear mongering about brexit, immigration and corruption. 14 years. I'm nearly 40. I graduated university in 2010. Most of my working life (although I started my studies later after working a bit) has been under Conservative rule and nothing got better. Not public services, not the deficit, not investment. The antisocial behavior of today is largely nothing to do with multiculturalism and mostly to do with a government that in prose abandoned it but in practice kept immigration ridiculously high, allowed a race to the bottom on employment rights and gutted every social project that could have mitigated many of these issues so they weren't as extreme. But no it's the current government to blame after only 4 months.
This is a fascinating read for a number of reasons - partly because of what it doesn't say. It doesn't say, for example, how councils are expected to carry out the new functions you want to give them. This is irritatingly normal in British politics - local government is simply handed responsibilities by central, without a thought for how they are meant to resource them; or, indeed, the resources. It's all well and good to focus on policing, but local councils are increasingly only able to fund social care and not much else; any serious effort to reduce littering, improve streetscapes, or reduce crime would also need local government budgets to be freed up (or expanded) considerably to fund these things.
Of course, there is also the minor fact that you were a minister for some of the time this was going on - and your party was in government. Standing here now, in the aftermath of the 2024 election, blithely wondering how things could've gotten this way, seems a little artificial. It would be healthier for our democracy, and your party, to be more direct with us - why are things so bad after 14 years in power? What things did your party do that contributed to that? This isn't an ideological exercise, this is a question of working or not working. So when it comes to, say, Stop and Search, it would account for the clear evidence that it is not very effective as a tool to fight crime - https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/article/185/3/1370/7068916 - which would make restricting it a success, rather than a failure. On the other hand, it would make Eric Pickles legacy with local government to be perhaps the central failure of the last governments; deregulation without care, defunding without a plan, and responsibilities without a budget.
It's a shame you spend so much time politicking and attacking what you think your followers want to hear about the bad things the other guys are doing.
Because this public demand for civility extends into government. We all want a safer country we are all proud of, but ideas like being able to expel rough students won't deal with the problems, they just moves them along. Same with tougher sentencing, nastier prisons, zero tolerances, etc.
Hardman, "right wing" rhetoric is designed to win at politics but it fails as policy. We need to actually fix the problem: there are too many people with too little to engage them. We need policy that engages these people: Youth centres, mens sheds, FREE vocational education designed to give people a purpose, help them into the jobs we require. Proper SEND provision is critical.
Nigel and his lot will never understand this but we need to drag politics back to the model we want for society. Less rhetoric and tribalism, more consensus and trying to understand each other.
For those not practicing what they preach - "the block" - see Rob Henderson's concept of "luxury beliefs". For the well-to-do, caring about order and beauty, for example, denotes low status, because it is precisely the least well off who are most affected by disorder and ugliness. According to Henderson, in the 21st century it is no longer through luxury goods (which have become relatively plentiful), but through these kinds of luxury beliefs that one signals social standing.
No one in the modern West is interested in subordinating their will to another for the benefit of the whole. Me least of all. And I recognize that road leads to civilizational collapse and the extinction of the human race... yet I can't bring myself to accept any higher authority to myself. I'd rather see the end of the human race than willingly agree that governments should be formed and laws passed / enforced because that would be to admit another's dominion over me. I didn't blame you if you think I'm nuts 😄
Fully agree with this, and we're seeing a lot of the same things in the U.S.
It has become functionally legal to shoplift here, and store owners are no longer even allowed to do anything about it. It's totally pathetic.
We're so busy trying to "understand" and "help" criminals and misfits, deploying so much compassion all over them, that we've forgotten that it’s actually necessary to hold them accountable for their actions.
Like you said - if you want a good society, you have to punish misfits harshly. It's really not optional. The beauty of it is, then you get fewer misfits over time. And everybody wins. Especially the people who did nothing wrong in the first place.
A strange article which just seems to exist to divert attention away from most decisions made over a 14 year period in favour of diverting fear towards the current government who have had power for about 2 seconds. And some of the demands made in the final bullet points are absurd and not feasible. It's fine to want civility and order but you won't get it by insisting on being distracted by tabloid talking points but should instead focus on fundamental issues such as: every single dwelling in the UK is far, far overpriced. Why was this allowed to happen? It is the main issue and prevents any of your bullet points from being achievable.
Good stuff - my four-year-old has already got his own litter picker so I am very happy with all your suggestions! I would add that we should set maximum volumes for car stereos and exhausts, and be more robust about people playing unreasonably loud music at home.
Two other points. First, I think it's obvious that worklessness and family breakdown are the engines of a lot of disorderly living - the houses near me with rubbish-filled front gardens and clouds of weed smoke are not inhabited by gainfully employed intact families. Second, immigration is a separate point and contra some comments here we really shouldn't assume that recent arrivals don't want a safe and orderly society just as much as the rest of us.
> National ban on playing music out loud on all public transport, enforced with more staff onboard and large and instant fines until the norm is changed.
A culture that requires a "national ban" for that has much deeper problems, which has to solve. Such a ban would fix nothing - and fixing the deeper problems would mean no ban would be required anymore.
If such a ban were reliably enforced it would make trains and buses much pleasanter for a lot of people, and quickly. Yes, you want people to internalise these things as well and not WANT to inflict their music on others, but the law is a teacher.
My son is a Met copper of 7 years’ standing. From what I gather, fines for antisocial behaviour - even if levied - are frequently ineffective, as such behaviour usually comes from individuals with no money. After great expense in time for the police and justice system they are then ordered to pay the fine by a nominal deduction from their benefits. This makes it a weak tool; but the alternative is presumably gaol, and we have no cells…
I think there are a lot of small things that drive polite and reasonable people crazy on a daily basis. But they feel powerless to do anything about it because there is no consensus of what is reasonable. Talking about it is a good start…
The overwhelming amount of these types of crimes are a direct result of mass immigration. Why don’t you mention that ?
A lot of Neil's suggestions would be nice to have, but he doesn't mention one of my pet hates. That is folk who park 'momentarily' in busy roads where parking is forbidden. They may only be popping out for a few moments but their selfishness can disturb a lot of traffic and delay many others.
This Tory MP is concerned about the selfishness of people behaving badly on public transport or defacing the streets with graffiti, but doesn't seem to notice the selfishness of the more affluent.
For example those rich enough to not mind how many parking tickets they get. Why not go for punitive measures (removal of licence?) against the so-called 'selfish rich bastards' too?
Incredible. Another tory mp waxing lyrical about the good old days, completely forgetting the travesty of government that was the last 14 years of austerity, fear mongering about brexit, immigration and corruption. 14 years. I'm nearly 40. I graduated university in 2010. Most of my working life (although I started my studies later after working a bit) has been under Conservative rule and nothing got better. Not public services, not the deficit, not investment. The antisocial behavior of today is largely nothing to do with multiculturalism and mostly to do with a government that in prose abandoned it but in practice kept immigration ridiculously high, allowed a race to the bottom on employment rights and gutted every social project that could have mitigated many of these issues so they weren't as extreme. But no it's the current government to blame after only 4 months.
Exciting propositions Neil, perhaps we could have fines for squandering billions of pounds of tax payer's money too, maybe even prison sentences. 🤔
This is a fascinating read for a number of reasons - partly because of what it doesn't say. It doesn't say, for example, how councils are expected to carry out the new functions you want to give them. This is irritatingly normal in British politics - local government is simply handed responsibilities by central, without a thought for how they are meant to resource them; or, indeed, the resources. It's all well and good to focus on policing, but local councils are increasingly only able to fund social care and not much else; any serious effort to reduce littering, improve streetscapes, or reduce crime would also need local government budgets to be freed up (or expanded) considerably to fund these things.
Of course, there is also the minor fact that you were a minister for some of the time this was going on - and your party was in government. Standing here now, in the aftermath of the 2024 election, blithely wondering how things could've gotten this way, seems a little artificial. It would be healthier for our democracy, and your party, to be more direct with us - why are things so bad after 14 years in power? What things did your party do that contributed to that? This isn't an ideological exercise, this is a question of working or not working. So when it comes to, say, Stop and Search, it would account for the clear evidence that it is not very effective as a tool to fight crime - https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/article/185/3/1370/7068916 - which would make restricting it a success, rather than a failure. On the other hand, it would make Eric Pickles legacy with local government to be perhaps the central failure of the last governments; deregulation without care, defunding without a plan, and responsibilities without a budget.
It's a shame you spend so much time politicking and attacking what you think your followers want to hear about the bad things the other guys are doing.
Because this public demand for civility extends into government. We all want a safer country we are all proud of, but ideas like being able to expel rough students won't deal with the problems, they just moves them along. Same with tougher sentencing, nastier prisons, zero tolerances, etc.
Hardman, "right wing" rhetoric is designed to win at politics but it fails as policy. We need to actually fix the problem: there are too many people with too little to engage them. We need policy that engages these people: Youth centres, mens sheds, FREE vocational education designed to give people a purpose, help them into the jobs we require. Proper SEND provision is critical.
Nigel and his lot will never understand this but we need to drag politics back to the model we want for society. Less rhetoric and tribalism, more consensus and trying to understand each other.
Best of luck improving your community.
For those not practicing what they preach - "the block" - see Rob Henderson's concept of "luxury beliefs". For the well-to-do, caring about order and beauty, for example, denotes low status, because it is precisely the least well off who are most affected by disorder and ugliness. According to Henderson, in the 21st century it is no longer through luxury goods (which have become relatively plentiful), but through these kinds of luxury beliefs that one signals social standing.
No one in the modern West is interested in subordinating their will to another for the benefit of the whole. Me least of all. And I recognize that road leads to civilizational collapse and the extinction of the human race... yet I can't bring myself to accept any higher authority to myself. I'd rather see the end of the human race than willingly agree that governments should be formed and laws passed / enforced because that would be to admit another's dominion over me. I didn't blame you if you think I'm nuts 😄
You've been an MP since 2017. Things got dramatically worse throughout the entire time you were in office, and in power.
The problems you list were caused by you and your policies. Council funding is down 20% in real terms per person.
I find it completely baffling that you scare monger about the current government whilst having been in charge of the decline yourself.
It would also be rather more persuasive if you included any evidence whatsoever that your proposed remedies work.
What was council funding in real terms per person in 1950?
Fully agree with this, and we're seeing a lot of the same things in the U.S.
It has become functionally legal to shoplift here, and store owners are no longer even allowed to do anything about it. It's totally pathetic.
We're so busy trying to "understand" and "help" criminals and misfits, deploying so much compassion all over them, that we've forgotten that it’s actually necessary to hold them accountable for their actions.
Like you said - if you want a good society, you have to punish misfits harshly. It's really not optional. The beauty of it is, then you get fewer misfits over time. And everybody wins. Especially the people who did nothing wrong in the first place.
A strange article which just seems to exist to divert attention away from most decisions made over a 14 year period in favour of diverting fear towards the current government who have had power for about 2 seconds. And some of the demands made in the final bullet points are absurd and not feasible. It's fine to want civility and order but you won't get it by insisting on being distracted by tabloid talking points but should instead focus on fundamental issues such as: every single dwelling in the UK is far, far overpriced. Why was this allowed to happen? It is the main issue and prevents any of your bullet points from being achievable.
Good stuff - my four-year-old has already got his own litter picker so I am very happy with all your suggestions! I would add that we should set maximum volumes for car stereos and exhausts, and be more robust about people playing unreasonably loud music at home.
Two other points. First, I think it's obvious that worklessness and family breakdown are the engines of a lot of disorderly living - the houses near me with rubbish-filled front gardens and clouds of weed smoke are not inhabited by gainfully employed intact families. Second, immigration is a separate point and contra some comments here we really shouldn't assume that recent arrivals don't want a safe and orderly society just as much as the rest of us.
> National ban on playing music out loud on all public transport, enforced with more staff onboard and large and instant fines until the norm is changed.
A culture that requires a "national ban" for that has much deeper problems, which has to solve. Such a ban would fix nothing - and fixing the deeper problems would mean no ban would be required anymore.
If such a ban were reliably enforced it would make trains and buses much pleasanter for a lot of people, and quickly. Yes, you want people to internalise these things as well and not WANT to inflict their music on others, but the law is a teacher.
I'm now following Bobbie on Twitter, thanks