Youth crime and violence is at the top of the political agenda nationally and locally, so the Innovation Forum, sponsored by Odgers, Ray and Berndtson, put some of the top heads in l;ocal government together to think of solutions. You only have to glance at the news to see the latest teenage stabbings and shootings. And with the local elections on the horizon, it seems that all politicians are clamouring to show who can offer voters the ‘safest streets' and the toughest action on crime. The streets of Britain are, apparently, awash with drunken, drug-fuelled youths, intent on violence and crime. But between the political posturing and the media frenzy, the Innovation Forum recently pulled together some of the top councils in local government to debate the issue of tackling youth aggression and crime. Unsurprisingly, the group decided there is a lot of hype around the whole issue - which doesn't help. Nor is it anything new. The forum heard how there have been moral panics over youth behaviour every twenty years or so since 1840 - so roughly one panic for every new generation. However, the issues are different this time, for a number of reasons, and the solutions of the 1950s - of youth clubs and things to do - will not work for the current ‘facebook' generation. There was a perception that youth violence problems are worse now than in the past for a number of reasons: · The is more access to weapons · income inequality was seen as a factor · family breakdown was also seen as a problem - with gangs often offering the support that families failed to bring · Drug abuse may be cited as an issue, and it can be, but it has no where near the impact of alcohol So what should be done about tackling youth aggression? The good news is that there were lots of potential answers on the table, and there is already a lot of good practice around, which should be used more widely and spread. The Government should not develop any sort of action plan on youth crime, and instead should sit back and create the space for local solutions. However, it was expected to provide the funding for solutions. The debate also suggested the Government avoided ‘hyping' youth crime. Another suggestion was that the Government be brave about targeting resources, rather than spreading cash to thinly. So for example, money should be spent on cutting youth crime in key areas in parts of Manchester, Liverpool and London, where youth crime is more of a problem. The final ‘ask' of the government, was that it should sort out anomalies in its policies. For example police are encouraged to formalise their encounters with young people as part of their targets. On the other hand, young people who are in the system tend to go on to commit more crimes. The Youth justice system itself came under attack for being ‘part of the problem. New offenders, it was decided, should be dealt with in a different way to prolific offenders. Locally, it is the police rather than local authorities who are more likely to be able to young people at risk of falling into crime. A study by the University of Edinburgh shows 76% of violent young offenders aged 17 were not known to social care or youth justice agencies, but were almost all known to the police by the time they were 15. Evidently, the police are key. However, there is also a software system available to councils to identify those at risk. It was considered to be a useful tool for wider use. As part of the prevention of youth crime, the debate considered help for parents to develop their parenting skills, as well as parent to parent learning, and the possibility of putting parenting skills onto the curriculum in schools. There was the suggestion of an inter-generational initiative - bridging the divide between young and older people to help tackle the fear of crime. Young people should also be allowed to come up with some of their own solutions and be helped to make decisions for themselves. They should be safe places for them to hang out and activities for them to do. Changes to the 14-19 education system, which will give a range of options for practical and academic learning, including training and employment, will also help address the issue of youth crime. Young people who are no longer interested in school will be allowed to work in their early teens, with the opportunity to go back to the education system later on in life should they wish to. However, one of the major recommendations of the debate, was to tackle problems with alcohol. A number of suggestions were give to cut the cheap alcohol, including: · increasing tax - especially on alcopops · ending happy hours · making the drinks industry pay for policy city centres at night · improving education about alcohol misuse The government should: · Avoid national strategies · Target resources where they are needed most · avoid hyping youth crime · consider the problems of the youth justice system · cut targets for police which pull teenagers into the system The police and youth justice system should: · help identify those at risk of offending · overhaul the youth justice system · youth services need to connect with youths, not the government · treat new and prolific offenders differently Councils and partners should: · use software to identify those at risk of offending · increase help for parents · use intergenerational work · allow young people to design their own solutions · provide places to ‘hang out' · tackle cheap alcohol
