On the beat

I'm very grateful to Inspector Gormlie and the officers of the Calton Community Policing team, who allowed me to accompany them on shift for four hours on Saturday night.

I'd asked to go along to get an insight into the issues they face, and how they deal with the problems reported to them by constituents. The team is sizable, and there are always community police officers out on patrol; as I found out though, the team use their resources wisely to ensure that the area is well-covered and they can react to changing circumstances.

I joined the team at their briefing before they headed out. Six officers were to head out in the police minibus to add to those already out on patrol. The Sergeant ran through the impact earlier incidents that day could have on the evening's shift, relayed information on individuals who were known to be in the area with the potential to cause trouble, and officers in return shared intelligence which they felt the team should be aware of. They knew their localities well, and knew who they should be looking out for.

We headed out to the minibus, and started by going round areas where people were known to congregate to drink and cause trouble. Checks were done to see if people had been there already, and any discarded bottles removed. We went to the Calton burial ground on Abercromby Street, Tullis Street memorial gardens, and went through Glasgow Green.

On heading up the Saltmarket, the sharp-eyed Sergeant spotted a group of teenagers hanging about a shop doorway - the van drew up, and almost instantly the officers were fining them for urinating (despite protests, the puddle around one guy's feet and the action of doing up his fly as we stopped gave him away!) and drinking in the street. A nearly empty bottle of MD 20/20 was confiscated, and the group was asked to split up and head home.

The six officers briefly split into twos to deal with a couple of other issues - a noisy group heading back into a close with a carry-out were asked to respect their neighbours, and a fight which looked like kicking off between smokers outside a pub was calmed. Two officers popped into another pub to gauge the mood and make their presence felt. Then it was back in the bus, and off to support officers in another part of the ward.

Calls came in on the radio steadily - groups of people drinking and sitting on parked cars, possible sighting of drug dealers, vandalism in closes, and a missing person spotted. Some of these were picked up locally, some the team went along to support. It makes quite an impact, especially when dealing with groups.

I'm a bit concerned by the notion that police are seen to be cracking down on groups of young people - but I also see the point of view of residents, who don't want groups of a dozen teenagers mucking about under their window or making them feel intimidated walking along the street. It's a difficult balance, and as far as I could see, the intentions of the officers I was out with were good. They wanted to keep the young people from getting into trouble; they knew from experience that fights could break out, and that some of them were likely to be putting themselves at risk. Most of the group seemed to accept the police advice, and looked to be heading home, although the police were keeping a close eye on the ringleaders.

More worrying was the group of girls who we picked up at around nine o'clock. They were under sixteen, and had been arrested many times for vandalism and violence; they had absolutely no notion of the consequences of their actions, and were instantly verbally abusive to the officers. The benefit of the doubt was quickly expended, and the police were certain that if the girls were allowed to go on their way, malevolence would ensue. As I was dropped off at the end of my time, the girls were attempting to bite the officers supervising them on their way to the cells.

I'm still struggling to disentangle the implications of what I saw, and I'm really not sure how as a society we deal with people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions.

I do, however, feel quite reassured that if a constituent calls the police on a Saturday night, the team will do their utmost to respond. The Community officers knew their areas well; the risks, the people, the hidey-holes. The numbers of police available meant that they were on top of the calls, and the support of the officers in the minibus added extra flexibility.

I hope to be able to join the team again at some point in the future; it was very interesting, and I can't thank them enough for letting me tag along.

More police on the beat, fewer crimes

Good news today on police numbers in Scotland; new figures show that the SNP Government has surpassed its manifesto commitment to increase police numbers by 1000.

At the end of 2009 there were 17,273 police officers in Scotland – 1039 more than when the SNP came to power, and 1272 more than in 2005. This record number is reflected in the Community Police in my own ward, who have been popping into my surgeries to say hello and keep me updated on what's been going on. There are a lot of faces and names to remember! They now cover smaller geographical areas, and are getting about on foot and on bikes to see and be seen.

It's not just my ward that's been so well covered - every single Police Force area in Scotland has seen an increase in the number of police officers. This is due to record funding for police recruitment under the SNP, and has helped crime rates hit a 30 year low.

I suppose in this context, the news yesterday that youth offending in Glasgow has dropped by almost a third in the past two years shouldn't be a surprise. Glasgow's Youth Justice Strategy Group has been diligently working away all the while when Labour have been screeching and fudging. The Intensive Monitoring and Support Service is an alternative to jail for young people, and re-directs them from a life blighted by a cycle of re-offending, anti-social behaviour and crime.

According to the Evening Times:

The number of under 18s in Glasgow identified by Strathclyde Police as having committed an offence last year:

Attempted murder, serious assault, robbery, threats – 343 (down 11%)

Indecency – 39 (down 35%)

Housebreaking, theft, fraud, other dishonesty – 1541 (up 3%)

Fire raising, vandalism, malicious mischief – 1209 (down 15%)

Possession of offensive weapon, knife carrying, drugs offences – 2476 (down 17%)

Petty assault, breach of the peace, consuming alcohol – 6782 (down 5%)

Driving offences – 396 (down 20%)

Total – 12,786 (down 9%)

Yes, that's right - instances of young people carrying an offensive weapon or getting involved in drugs are down a massive 17%. Coupled with the work being done by CIRV, I think that should be commended, and Labour should be ashamed at their opportunistic scaremongering. Of course there's still a lot to be done, but the figures show real progress. Well done to all involved.

Labour refuse to debate serious crime in Glasgow

Dramatic gestures are best used sparingly or they fail to be effective. Today, the SNP group in Glasgow City Council felt the need for such a gesture.

As a group, we left the Chamber with disappointment and heavy hearts as a result of the Labour group’s refusal to debate serious and organised crime in this city.

All groups have the right to submit a motion for debate at the full meeting of the Council. The motion we submitted for today’s meeting, despite being advised by the Council’s lawyer that it was legally sound, was rejected by the Lord Provost. Under article 7(1) of the Council’s Standing Orders, the LP will decide all matters of order, competence and relevance.

This is the motion as it stood – I think most people would agree that it is relevant and competent to the people of Glasgow. Sadly, Labour don’t see it that way.

“Council affirms its commitment to tackling serious and organised crime in partnership with Strathclyde Police and other organisations.

Council notes that a triple shooting and murder was carried out at Applerow Motors, 730 Balmore Road, during working hours. A development of luxury flats next to the MOT station, both of which are owned and/or affiliated with the Lyons family, was burned down on two separate occasions, the most recent being in February of this year. The Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police wrote to the Licensing Committee to say that the owner of the MOT station was involved in serious crime including the trafficking and supply of Class A drugs.

Council notes that whilst the Licensing Committee has as a result refused the second hand car dealership licence at the site, the UK Secretary of State for Transport has so far declined to exercise his powers to revoke the MOT authorised examiner licence.

Council resolves to formally request that the UK Secretary of State for Transport exercise his powers to revoke the MOT authorised examiner licence from David Lyons and the premises of Applerow Motors, Lambhill.”

CIRV

I was invited on Wednesday 30th September to go along to the CIRV football awards; what makes this particularly interesting is what makes this football project different from you and your friends having a bit of a knock-about in the park. This celebration of football and sportsmanship was actually a very significant step in reducing violence in the east of Glasgow, and saving the lives and futures of young people in the area.

Partners from the agencies made clear to me afterwards that actually bringing together the young men from these gangs in the one room was a real achievement. Having them celebrating each other's success and leaving afterwards without any threat of violence was remarkable. I was told that at the start of the project, many of these young men couldn't be in the same room together without violence breaking out. This change in behaviour had been achieved through a lot of hard work, investment, support and a focus on positive alternatives.

I was impressed by the description, but keen to find out more.

I've attended presentations by people from CIRV, and readers may already be familiar with CIRV through Cherie Blair's Dispatches documentary on Channel Four. It's certainly worth watching to get a handle on what is being done. The discription on their website reads thus:

The Community Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV – pronounced ‘Serve’) is a multi-agency initiative designed to reduce gang violence across Glasgow. CIRV aims to reduce the impact and incidence of antisocial behaviour and violence, the involvement of young people in crime and the fear of crime – there will be other positive outcomes that are supplementary to these aims.

The staff who work on the programme invited me along to a gang 'call in' at the Sheriff Court a week ago last Friday. The Evening Times carried the story yesterday. I found it deeply moving on many levels.

Court 8 had been set up in such a way that 30-40 young gang members were on one side, and all the staff and speakers on the other. Each speaker in turn would rise, and move over to the side of the court the young people were on to make their points.

A number of speakers related the options open to the young people in the room - prison, death, or changing their ways. Two surgeons from Medics Against Violence showed graphic pictures of the damage a baseball bat, a knife and a gun can do. People who had committed crimes in the past, including murder, spoke movingly about how this affected them. Karen, a very strong and brave mother, described the impact on her life and family of her son's stabbing. The police were firm and made it clear that the law would catch up with these gang members, one after the next, if they chose not to get out.

All the way through, there was a emphasis on the alternatives and the chance for each of the young people to be supported and to make something of their life if they got out of the gang culture.

The young people were given an opportunity to sign up there and then, and given a card away with them should they want to think it over and come to the programme later. It's clear that breaking from the people you've grown up with and spent your life with is difficult, but all the speakers were equally clear that those people who hold you back in life are not your friends, and that better things lie ahead. The choice is in their hands.

Reconviction rates

I use Google Reader to manage news and blog feeds, and noticed today a lot of news on re-offending figures from the 2005-2007 cohort of offenders. Kenny MacAskill is quite clear that short term sentences are ineffective, and I would tend to agree.

The figures show that of those who have served a sentence of six months or less, 70% are likely to be re-convicted of another crime within two years. Somewhat shockingly, this cycle applies disproportionately young people.

Labour and the Tories are very keen on locking people up, but it seems to me that six months will achieve very little by way of rehabilitation. I have heard that many schemes in prison to help give offenders a better chance in life are oversubscribed, and by the time comes for release, the offender will not have had a chance to access them. It's expensive to keep people locked up for six months, and gives little meaningful benefit to the community.

Locking people up for six months gives communities a bit of respite, but as my constituents have told me, when someone comes back after serving a short 3-6 month sentence it's like a slap in the face. They will come back to the same place and often start to wreak havoc all over again. If there is no change in behaviour or attitude, what has been achieved?

Judges must have the right to decide on appropriate sentences, but they should really take the community impact into account as well. The police tell me that they often recommend longer sentences for offenders, because they know the impact short sentences have on communities.

Interestingly, For those sentenced to a Community Service Order, the reconviction rate fell from 47 per cent for the 1996-97 cohort to 42 per cent for the 2005-06 cohort. I don't believe that this is appropriate for every offender, but at least this means that there can be some benefit, and a sense of 'working off' the sentence. This should be balanced of course with public safety concerns and be closely supervised. If it allows for a better route back into employment or training, picking up some practical skills on the way and getting into a routine, than this surely must be more effective.

It's clear that prison has become a revolving door for many offenders, and that does society no justice at all.

Safety on the streets

I was a left a bit bemused by this article in the Sunday Times, which reveals that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has admitted she would not feel safe walking around London after dark.

Let's firstly get out of the way the major issue here - that if you are a Minister of the party which has governed the country for more than ten years and you don't feel that you could safely walk outside in the dark, that's surely an admission of some kind. OK, you could argue that London is a very very big city, and that it follows that as a vulnerable solo woman in that city you might feel that you'd be more likely to be a victim of crime.

However, there's also the issue of the Minister being entirely out of touch with reality:

In the interview, Smith, the first woman home secretary, was asked whether she would feel safe walking on her own around Hackney at midnight. She replied: “Well, no, but I don’t think I’d ever have done. You know, I would never have done that, at any point during my life.” Asked why not, she answered: “Well, I just don’t think that’s a thing that people do, is it, really?”

People sometimes have no choice; no access to a private car (never mind a Ministerial car!), no trains, no buses, no cash for a taxi, so shank's pony is the only way home. If the Home Secretary doesn't appreciate that, she really has lost touch with the very people she is supposed to be looking after.

I'm perhaps a bit too reckless for my own good but I have wandered home on many occasions on my own at night, most regularly in Glasgow these days, but also when I was at Uni in Aberdeen and when I was an intern in Brussels. I've been lucky, as no harm has come to me so far. I do know people, including my partner, who have been attacked. What reassures me (in a strange way) is that all of the incidents I know about have been random, pure bad luck and the result of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. I believe that I'm likely to be a victim at some point, but that there's no point in worrying about it as there's little you can do in that situation.

Since I was elected, I've often walked home from my surgeries, on my own, in the dark. Do I feel vulnerable? Occasionally. There's nothing like a drunken learly football fan to make you want to cross the road and hurry on your way. Do I fold and avoid walking in Glasgow at night? Absolutely not - what kind of public representative, what kind of person, would that make me? Perhaps one like Jacqui Smith.

One final footnote:

After the interview, a worried aide called The Sunday Times saying the wording had not come out as the home secretary had intended. She said Smith had recently “bought a kebab in Peckham” at night. The south London district is one of the most deprived in the capital.

Aye, right!