Anti-social behaviour 'will not be tolerated'
An MP said anti-social behaviour "cannot and will not be tolerated" after more than 900 incidents were recorded in her constituency in 2023.
Alice Macdonald, Labour MP for Norwich North, held a debate in Westminster Hall on Tuesday regarding anti-social behaviour in the East of England, while welcoming the government's Police and Crime Bill.
During 2023, she said, about 8,800 incidents of anti-social behaviour were recorded across Norfolk, with 948 of these in her own constituency.
She said: "Nothing has the power to disturb our experiences like anti-social behaviour; it can make people's lives a living hell."
Ms Macdonald said anti-social behaviour could come in many forms, including fly-tipping, nuisance neighbours, loud music and off-road bikes.
During her speech, she said Norwich City Council had started to lock gates again in parks and cemeteries after receiving reports of drug use and vandalism.
One of the parks affected, Waterloo Park in Norwich, is home to The Feed, a social enterprise cafe that has experienced issues including broken glass and its benches being thrown in fountains.
While the charity is unable to fund CCTV, Ms Macdonald said she would be backing a call for this.
She said where derelict sites had not been secured properly, they had become "hotspots".
In January, 17 fire appliances were called to a fire at the derelict Van-Dal shoe factory on Dibden Road, Norwich.
It took firefighters up to four hours to get the blaze under control.
Ms Macdonald said: "Norwich is a great place to live, and indeed we have seen communities rally round to support each other after anti-social behaviour, but a small minority can cause misery for many."
She said Norfolk Police was expected to receive about £235m in funding this year, but that with more resources, would be able to tackle such issues.
"Anti-social behaviour is a blight on all our communities. It cannot and will not be tolerated," she said.
"I applaud the government's actions in taking efforts and action to tackle it and put more police on our streets, but there is, of course a long way to go."
Policing minister Dame Diana Johnson said the government was working with the National Police Chiefs' Council on a rural crime strategy.
Follow Norfolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Shoppers welcome new anti-social behaviour powers
Cafe 'will not back down' despite damage and abuse
Parks to be locked at night in council U-turn
Parliament UK
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
31 minutes ago
- CNBC
Where the axe might fall during the UK's spending review
The U.K. Treasury is poised to set out day-to-day spending and investment plans for all government departments on Wednesday, with markets and voters watching where budget cuts could fall. In its 'Spending Review,' the Labour government will set out how public money will be allocated over the next three to four years, ranging from spending on public services like schools and police to welfare budgets and investments in energy, infrastructure, science and tech projects that can drive economic growth. The review covers resource spending — the government's day-to-day running and administration costs — as well as capital expenditure, which goes toward improving infrastructure and public services such as new roads, hospitals and military equipment. Now, U.K. watchers are waiting to see where the axe falls when it comes to individual government department budgets, and which ones get a windfall or are constrained. The government has already committed to higher spending on defense, transport and health, but cuts are expected elsewhere. Departments overseeing policing, affordable housing, the environment and local government reportedly faced funding squeezes, making for awkward negotiations in recent weeks between U.K. Finance Minister Rachel Reeves and various government ministers as they looked for bigger budgets from the Treasury. The prime minister's official spokesperson on Monday said that negotiations over the spending review were finally over. "The spending review is settled — we will be focused on investing in Britain's renewal so that all working people are better off," he said. "The first job of the government was to stabilize the British economy and the public finances, and now we move into a new chapter to deliver the promise and change." The spending review will reveal a lot about British Prime Minister Keir Starmer's priorities and Reeves' spending choices, the independent Institute for Government think tank noted ahead of the announcement, flagging that disappointment was inevitable for some government departments. "The government will have no choice to but prioritise where the money goes at this spending review, meaning some departments will be left disappointed," it said in analysis last week. "Day-to-day spending is only set to increase by 1.2% per year in real terms, which implies a 1.3% cut on average for many areas after taking into account likely above-average settlements for health, childcare and defence." Investment spending will be much higher than in previous years but there will still not be enough public funding to meet the long list of department demands, the IfG warned, "especially as the government's ambitions to tackle NHS waiting lists, accelerate the decarbonisation of the grid, and support growth all require sufficient well-targeted public spending." The 2025 spending review is billed as a huge moment for the Labour government and a fine balancing act for Reeves. Governments often increase borrowing to fund public spending, but Reeves has vowed to get the U.K.'s public finances in order. She has committed to self-imposed "fiscal rules" that dictate that day-to-day spending must be met by tax revenues and that public debt is falling as a share of economic output by 2029-30. As such, Chancellor Reeves has left herself little room for maneuver unless she breaks her own restrictions, hikes taxes again or cuts spending further with economists "Everything about this [spending review] is political – does the chancellor want to lean into welfare cuts – probably not. We know that defence is being earmarked for more cash. We know that the chancellor will be sticking to her fiscal rules resolutely, although she could tweak them to accommodate more spending," Neil Wilson, U.K. Investor Strategist at Saxo Markets, noted Tuesday. "The easiest way to balance the books is tax hikes – it's no surprise that given some big spending cuts required we are also hearing concerns about potential changes to tax on investments in the autumn," he added. Some economists are skeptical that the government's spending and investment plans will drive the hoped-for growth, meaning that further tax rises will be needed to boost economic activity. "With weak business and consumer confidence compounded by global trade uncertainty, the U.K.'s economic fortunes seem unlikely to improve anytime soon," Andrew Hunter, senior economist at Moody's Analytics, said in a note ahead of the spending review. "As the government inches towards breaking its fiscal rules, further tax hikes at the next budget later this year look all-but inevitable."
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Do married pensioners both get the winter fuel payment?
The government's U-turn on the winter fuel payment will impact millions of pensioners - but how will it benefit those who are in a couple? On Monday, chancellor Rachel Reeves reversed her controversial policy introduced last year to restrict the payment to only those on pension credit. It means that nine million pensioners in England and Wales who have an annual income of £35,000 or less will be eligible for a winter fuel payment. Yahoo News examines how the payment will work this winter, who will receive it and how much they can expect to get if they are married. Normally paid in November or December, the winter fuel payment was previously paid to all pensioners to help them with their energy bills during the coldest periods of the year. However, after the Labour government came to power in July 2024, the chancellor announced that the payment would only be received by pensioners on low incomes who received benefits such as pension credit. The move meant that more than 10 million pensioners didn't receive a winter fuel payment at the end of last year, and was believed to have contributed heavily to Labour's losses in May's local elections. The payment is £300 for homes that include someone aged 80 or over and it is £200 for households including someone between state pension age and 79. To be eligible for the winter fuel allowance, a person will need to have reached the state pension age of 66 by the week starting 15 September this year. The changes announced on Monday by Reeves mean that pensioners with an annual income of £35,000 or less are eligible, a total of about nine million people. The winter fuel payment will be automatically given to all pensioners, but those with incomes of £35,000 and above - about two million people - will have it recovered through their PAYE or their self-assessment tax form, or they will be given the opportunity to opt out of receiving the payment in the first place. The allowance is paid per household, not to individuals, meaning that an eligible couple will have to share the payment if they are not receiving an income related benefit such as pension credit. An eligible couple made up of two pensioners who are both under 80 will be given a winter fuel payment of £100 each, for a total of £200. If both members of the couple are 80 or over, they will receive £150 each, or £300. If one member of the couple is 80 or over and their partner is under 80, they will again receive a total of £300, but the older person will get £200 and the other will receive £100. If one member of the couple living together has an income above £35,000 while the other earns less, the higher income pensioner will have their payment clawed back while the lower income pensioner will receive half the payment, either £100 or £150 depending on whether they are under 80 or not. Because the thresholds are based on individual incomes, yes, there could be some slightly odd scenarios, as a household with someone with a six-figure income will still receive a payment if their partner receives £35,000 or less. Meanwhile, a couple who each earn slightly more than that level will not be eligible. This was pointed out by Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), who posted on X: "WFP [winter fuel payment] will now be paid at £100 to each member of a couple. So rich pensioner couples, where one has say £100k and the other £30k, will still get £100. "If both members of the couple have £36k then they get nothing. Messy."
Epoch Times
39 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Scots ‘Voted for Change', Says Starmer After Labour's Surprise By-election Win
Sir Keir Starmer has said people in Scotland have 'voted for change' following Labour's shock win in the Hamilton by-election. The prime minister congratulated Labour's new MSP Davy Russell and looked ahead to next year's Scottish Parliament election, saying it is a chance to 'turbo-charge delivery.' Russell took the seat vacated by the death of Scottish Government minister and SNP MSP Christina McKelvie. Posting on social media on Friday morning, Starmer said: 'People in Scotland have once again voted for change. 'Next year there is a chance to turbo-charge delivery by putting Labour in power on both sides of the border. 'I look forward to working with you.' Related Stories 2/3/2025 6/2/2025 Labour's candidate, who is the deputy lord lieutenant of Lanarkshire, beat the SNP's Katy Loudon, who fell to her third defeat since 2023. The win comes against the backdrop of national polls which place Scottish Labour in third place behind the SNP and Reform UK, and will undoubtedly give a boost to Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar's bid to become first minister in next year's election. Sarwar told BBC Radio Scotland's 'Good Morning Scotland' programme he is confident Labour can win that contest. When asked if his party can defeat the SNP, which has been in power in Scotland since 2007, Sarwar declared: 'Absolutely. 'I believed it before this by-election and I continue to believe it now. 'Next year the choice is simple—a third decade of the SNP with John Swinney as first minister or a new direction for Scotland with me as first minister. 'That is the choice facing the people of Scotland, that is the campaign over the next year, and that is a campaign I am confident we can win. 'I think what the people of Hamilton, Larkhall, and Stonehouse did yesterday was lead the way to that change of government next year and a Scottish Labour government next year.' He also said he will 'continue to challenge the poison of Reform,' making clear he is 'talking about the people who lead Reform' and not those who 'may be tempted' to vote for them. Mach of the Hamilton campaign had been dominated by a Reform advert—branded 'racist' by Labour and others—which had alleged Sarwar would 'prioritise' the Pakistani community. A surge in support for Nigel Farage's party saw it come in third place in Hamilton, just 800 votes behind the SNP, although there had been speculation Reform could come second or possibly even win the seat. Reform deputy leader Richard Tice insisted the party is 'delighted' with the result. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's 'Today' programme, he said: 'It's truly remarkable. 'We've come from nowhere to being in a three-way marginal, and we're within 750 votes of winning that by-election and just a few hundred votes of defeating the SNP, so it's an incredible result.' At the election count earlier, Tice told the PA news agency he was 'thrilled to bits' with the result. When the votes were counted, Russell polled 8,559, Loudon took 7,957 votes, and Reform's Ross Lambie secured 7,088. Speaking to PA after the declaration, Sarwar said: 'I think people need to change the script, because we've proven the pollsters wrong. 'We've proven the commentators wrong, we've proven the bookies wrong. 'We've proven John Swinney wrong and so many others wrong too.' In the final days of the campaign, the first minister had said it was a 'two-horse race' between the SNP and Reform, and Sarwar asked what it says about a government that has been in power for 18 years when 'all it has to offer in a campaign is vote SNP to stop Farage.' Swinney said Loudon had 'fought a superb SNP campaign' and that he was 'clearly disappointed' his party was unable to win. 'Labour won by an absolute landslide in this area less than a year ago—we came much closer tonight, but the people of Hamilton, Larkhall, and Stonehouse have made clear that we still have work to do,' he added. 'Over the next few days, we will take time to consider the result fully.'
