|
7 May 2004 |
Defeat for Anti Social Behaviour Bill |
|
The Campaign for Socialism congratulates its convener Elaine Smith MSP, in her successful attempt at amending the Antisocial Behaviour (Scotland) Bill at Stage Two. The amendment was promoted by Shelter. The Antisocial Behaviour Bill currently before parliament will build on the provision in the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001, where, in the case of the short tenancy, unlike any other tenancy, the landlord can evict the tenant without providing grounds or reasons for the eviction. This means that anyone living in social housing, who is served with an Antisocial Behaviour Order (ASBO), or anyone who lives with this person, faces the threat of eviction. There is no such threat faced by people who are living in private rented or owner occupied accommodation. This has created a two-tier system in housing law; one law for owner-occupiers, and another, more severe one, for social tenants. Before the amendment, the Bill would give sheriffs the power to serve ASBOs to under 16s leading to the behaviour of a child impacting on the tenancy of a whole family. In the most extreme cases this could cause homelessness. Even if the offending antisocial behaviour is not housing related, for example, is carried out in a local supermarket, the bill will give a landlord the power to convert the tenancy, and ultimately, to evict the whole family. The effect of the amendment is to remove under 16s from the scope of the Bill. Speaking on behalf of the Campaign for Socialism, its Chair Pauline Bryan said: ‘No-one is denying the problems of anti social behaviour but Labour MSPs should look in an entirely different direction from that outlined by the Bill. This would take political courage and leadership. They could demand the use of public resources to regenerate local economies, to create jobs not schemes, and improve local amenities. This would of course bring them head to head with the New Labour Government, whose behaviour is by any definition antisocial.’ Elaine Smith Convener of CfS said: ‘What this part of the bill means is that the parents and family of a child living in owner occupied residence will not be affected in terms of their housing by the child’s behaviour whereas those living in socially rented housing will be. This means that the law would treat differently those living in rented housing to those living in bought houses. This strikes me as one law for the richer in society and another for the poorer. That is unfair and runs counter to the principles of social justice as does the fact that other people in a household may be punished for the actions of another, in this case a child, and yet have committed no anti social behaviour themselves. This amendment would ensure that all children are treated the same whether they live with their rich parents in owner occupied housing in Morningside or within poorer families dependent on socially rented housing in Sikeside. Anti social behaviour is not confined to the children of the working class living in rented accommodation and responses to it, enshrined in law, should not discriminate on that basis.’ ENDS Contact: Vince Mills 0781 461 5224 |
|