‘It used to be your teenage daughter that you worried about when they went out now it's your teenage son'. My conversation with a London cab driver summed up many of the fears and concerns of all parents. The government response to youth crime is confused, with central agencies competing with each other and no distinction between punishment and rehabilitation. Which is why the Whitehall tug-of-war between the Ministry of Justice and Department of Children, Schools and Family (DCSF) over direction of the Youth Crime Action Plan is so important. The DCSF is proposing that Children's Trusts, led by local councils, are given responsibility and funding for the estimated 3,000 under 18-year-olds in jail and youth offending institutions. If the DSCF view prevails it presents opportunities to local government. Sure, we want knife murderers and thugs locked up for a long time, but we also want a greater emphasis on early intervention with failing families and alternatives to street culture which breeds crime and violence. A survey for the Prison Reform Trust showed only one in 10 believes prison turns young offenders into law-abiding citizens. Local government has the possibility to develop a focused and coherent policy towards youth offending, which allows for local leadership and effective partnership with relevant agencies. It also allows local councils to develop a meaningful dialogue with young people under 18 about personal safety and responsibility and appropriate sanctions for offenders. There are risks for councillors. Concerns about youth crime are sky high and not just in London. But it is because it is so important to so many people that local government should take the lead and develop alternatives to the failed policies. We have to avoid politics such as the 1980s fad to ban amateur boxing, which provided a controlled outlet for male aggression. There is an African proverb that ‘it takes a village to raise a child'. Now is the time to prove it.
