Problem families "need the nanny state"

Tony Blair writing in today's Telegraph says he disagrees with both the Blair of 1992 and the Cameron of 2007 in his analysis of crime and anti-social behaviour.  I don't follow his logic in parts but his underlying idea seems to be that a rising tide doesn't lift all ships, that a disruptive minority in society haven't responded to public investment or societal pressures and needs to be controlled:

"What I have learnt over these 10 years is that the original analysis I had was incomplete and therefore misguided, ie, guiding us to the wrong policy conclusion, not in the sense that investment in poorer neighbourhoods and regeneration was wrong - it has been absolutely right - but in the sense that it will not deal with this small and unrepresentative minority.

Likewise, when David Cameron argues that ASB laws are "counter-productive" because we all have to take responsibility, that is also misguided. Repealing ASB laws is the last thing we need. And it's not the state that is using them. It is local communities; and, where used, they make a real difference.

The true point is that they are not enough. I now think that the proper answer is to add to the ASB laws measures that target failing and dysfunctional families early, and place those families within a proper, structured, disciplined framework of help and insistence on proper behaviour."

Anti-social behaviour is one area in which a dose of authoritarianism has its popular appeal, but when talking about societal problems Cameron has often been careful to say that it's not the government's place to use coercion on them. Blair appears to have given up on being "tough on the causes of crime", the causes being concentrated in a rotten core of families that need disciplining.

Deputy Editor

Comments

[Yet Another Anon]

There needs to be a reversal of most of the restrictions placed on the police throughout the 20th century and into the 21st century, different forms of Capital Punishment & other forms of punishment need to be introduced, prisons need to be far harder than they are, all prisoners should be held in solitary confinement and the size of prison cells should be reduced to fit more in, in addition more prisons should be built, there should be more mandatory sentencing and the law should be vigorously enforced, jury trials should be abolished, a biometric database on everyone in or passing through the UK and anyone else information can be gleaned on would help identify people in crime cases. In addition anyone considered potentially to pose a general nuisance or threat to the public should be able to be detained even if they have not yet committed any crime.

There needs to be more money spent on the police and justice in general. Stepping up surveillance especially of trouble spots will also help reduce crime.

In addition the amount of drug related crime could be reduced by legalising currently banned drugs on a licensing system and having a joint minimum age for purchase with cigarettes and alcohol. Duties and VAT on sales would bring in extra revenue and because the price would fall then this would reduce the likliehood of crimes committed for the purpose of raising money to obtain the drugs - the people who are destroying themselves on drugs will find some way of doing it anyway so why bother trying to protect them from themselves. In addition I think the government should stop openly promoting gambling, gambling has no usefulness - it is a by product of economic endeavour and merely impoverishes many poor people to little purpose - as with drugs there is no point actually banning it because it simply wouldn't work but scrapping the National Lottery and not opening casinos, and in addition properly taxing it will help discourage it.

[TomTom]

But Labour does not believe in horses for courses - it opposes academic selection; it opposes letting people live their lives without interference and focusing on the feckless and troublesome because it wants control.

It pursues therapy not punishment; and therapy becomes group-therapy, and to avoid the stigma of being selected for therapy Labour imposes therapy on all.

Children get lessons on oral sex, heroin, racism - even if they have no inkling of what it is all about....because some children know, all children must be told by the Indoctrinating State

[Mark Barber]

I read Bliar's article over coffee this morning. It has a very confused thesis.... I presume no decent speechwriters want to work for a lame duck eh.

[David Cooper]

Mr Blair, as soon as you have stepped down and found yourself with a little more time on your hands, read James Bartholomew's "The Welfare State We're In." When you have finished it, read it again.

[MrB]

Well, thats his "Broken record" answer to every PMQs question gone! "The Tories voted against every penny piece of investment so we'll take no lessons from them" Is what he likes to say isn't it?

Now Cameron can rebuff that by quoting the above comments regarding the effectiveness of high levels of spending.

[Mike A]

a) The Welfare State We're In is lousy. Absolutely daft. Misunderstandings, internally incoherent and Bartholomew's view of history is barking mad. No. Don't read it. Ever. It's bunkum. The reason it wouldn't get published for ages is not because it was 'brave'. It's lousy.

b) Blair is right to realise that black swan events like teenage shootings are long tail events which do not require national policy responses. If we had anyone who understood basic statistics in Government (or our front bench), that would be obvious.

[J.Johns]

I can't see us saying much, if anything, about all this, because, let's face it,we seem to have lost our zest for opposing him/them and even debating most things over the last year or two.We have severely damaged what was left of the Conservative image by holding hands openly with the Liberal Democrats and Labours Dyke just to get a shot at the London Mayoral title.How can this happen?Has it come down to the fact that we haven't even one Conservative capable of standing a chance against the likes of Livingstone?Or,is it the case4 that we are only making a show and really don't care or mind him being in power for another term or two?Shame on us I'm afraid on this one.Let's hope next weeks local election results give us something to raise our spirits and put us on the long road to recovery.

[Denis Cooper]

Every family is potentially a problem family, just as we're all potential criminals and therefore automatically viewed with suspicion by the police and other state agencies. This is why when Thames Valley Police rang us up here about my daughter's car the policewoman said "I cannot divulge that information" when I asked where it had been found, except that it was in Oxfordshire, but no, not in Oxford itself, instead "in a village outside Oxford". That "village" eventually turned out to be Didcot, and the car was exactly where she had left it before setting off on the school trip she was taking to the Isle of Wight for the weekend. No wonder crime is rife when the police behave with such crass stupidity, wasting their time as well as that of the public, and alienating the public in the process.

[Gildas]

b) Blair is right to realise that black swan events like teenage shootings are long tail events which do not require national policy responses. If we had anyone who understood basic statistics in Government (or our front bench), that would be obvious.

Ha! Statistically irrelevant events not requiring national policy responses? So, can we expect a repeal of the two Firearms Acts of 1997 then?

[David Sergeant]

I do wonder if this is one of the many ocasions when we are taking Blair too seriously. As far as I know Cameron has not proposed to repeal the ASBO laws. Given the "headline" the Telegraph has obligeingly provided I suspect this is a way of getting at Cameron who is getting some attention on this sort of issue. Usual Blair stuff, pretend the Tories will do something they won't, bash the Tories and then sound off all caring.

[matt wright]

I genuinely think Cameron is trying to get to the root of the issue - that we cannot pass laws to make people responsible and the fact that we keep trying to do this and failing should be a lesson to any rational person. We have to re-introduce core values into society and it will be a long battle,

Matt

[Jonathan]

I thought the point he was making about the uselessness of throwing money at problems was very brave given that his whole period of government has been predicated on the opposite assumption

But even when he is eventually right he is wrong. The answer to all these problems is not the Nanny State but a resurgence of public morality. Not something this government (or Major's) would be noticeably capable of achieving. Try any of the following
More difficult divorce by which I mean less bias in settlements in favour of the woman, through prenuptial agreements
No child benefit after the third child. No child benefit for single mothers.
Remove the automatic right of pregnant women to social housing.
All measures to be prospective not retrospective of course.

[Dave B]

I second David Cooper's recommendation of 'The Welfare State We're In'.

I have no idea why 'Mike A' above is so strongly against it. A stunning, eye-opener of a book.