Clause 2 - Orders on an application to magistrates' court
Violent Crime Reduction Bill
4:16 pm

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey and Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)
As I was saying, amendment No. 121 deals with age, as do amendments Nos. 125 and 126, and the lead amendment, No. 12. Clause 10(9)(a) removes reporting restrictions. Even though at that stage the proceedings would not be criminal, there should be a presumption that the spirit of the United Nations convention on the rights of the child will be observed. We need to think carefully about how such matters should be publicised, because it is obvious that licensees, the police and interested parties such as youth offending teams will need to know who has received a drinking banning order, otherwise there would be no enforcement—which I have been keen on demanding today. It would not be appropriate for such publicity to stray into public notices in newspapers, leaflets through doors or anything like that. At the very least, it should be restricted to the categories that I mentioned. We tabled the amendment to establish the Government's intentions with regard to publicising the names and photographs of children—albeit that 16 and 17-year-olds are a particular category of children, who need a lot of observation.
My other concern, and another reason for the amendment, is that publication will do little to discourage 16 and 17-year-olds from such behaviour. There is an added danger that it would become a badge of honour, as has happened with some antisocial behaviour orders, and that drinking banning orders would become a sort of status symbol, particularly because drinking is sometimes regarded as being a macho occupation. Young people may well compete with each other.
It would be improper to breach the spirit of the UN convention, and there may be an anomaly in that a 16-year-old accused of breaching an ASBO can be identified in the media, but one accused of murder cannot. We need to clear this matter up so that the law is consistently protective.
As for amendment No. 125, there is still potential for offenders to be sent to prison if they persistently and wilfully breach their community sentences—
