# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Theresa May unveils new anti-yob laws to replace Labour's Asbos

Officials will target those guilty of 'persistent, unreasonable behaviour'

Bonfire of Labour's anti-lout legislation, with 19 powers reduced to six

'Three strikes and you're out' crackdown on yobs to compel police to act

Householders who regularly dump rubbish in their own garden will be guilty of a criminal offence and hit with a hefty fine.

The penalty will also apply to anyone who leaves an old sofa or fridge in their garden, or has mountains of pizza boxes or takeaway cartons lying around.

They will receive an on-the-spot fine of up to £100 or be taken to court - where the maximum fine would be £2,500.

The new Community Protection Notice is a key part of new anti-yob laws unveiled by Theresa May today.

Scroll down for video

Ministers want to stop irresponsible homeowners or tenants from blighting whole streets or neighbourhoods by turning their front garden into a 'dumping ground'.

The powers will apply to privately owned homes as well as council houses. Officials will target only those guilty of 'persistent, unreasonable behaviour'.

They will be given a warning and told to clear the rubbish away. If they ignore the notice, they will then be guilty of a crime.

Officials do not want to target law-abiding householders who are forced to have rubbish in their gardens at certain times of the week because of the complicated recycling policies introduced by many councils.

And the law will be worded to protect homeowners from over-zealous council officials patrolling the streets looking to make money by issuing on-the-spot fines.

Residents have been given penalty notices for putting their rubbish out on the wrong day or for not shutting their dustbin lid properly under existing 'bin laws'.

But the new rules will apply only to repeat offenders. They will be given a fixed period of time to clean up their garden before any fine is issued.

Today's antisocial behaviour White Paper also sounds the death knell for Labour's flagship Anti-Social Behaviour Order, which is to be scrapped.

There will be a bonfire of Labour's anti-lout legislation - with 19 powers reduced to only six.

The Community Protection Notice could be issued to an individual or responsible person within a business, such as a takeaway shop.

It will also give police - and not just town halls - the power to deal with noisy neighbours in the middle of the night.

Officials say examples of where it could be used include:

an individual who regularly allows their dog to foul in a communal garden (this situation is not covered by current notices).

an individual who regularly dumps rubbish in their front garden.

a takeaway which persistently allows customers to drop litter on the pavement outside and causes noise nuisance late at night.

Breach of any requirement in the notice, without reasonable excuse, would be a criminal offence, subject to a Fixed Penalty Notice or prosecution.

Speaking after meeting residents in Hulme, Manchester, she added: 'I want to see the police dealing with anti-social behaviour when it happens and when people are reporting it.'

But victims were saying that time and time again nothing was happening, she said.

'What we've seen over the years is too many people having their lives blighted by anti-social behaviour.

'The community trigger will give people, either individuals or local communities, the opportunity to say the point has come where the police are required to do something, look into it, investigate, find out what's happening and take action.'

She went on: 'What we will see is anti-social behaviour being taken seriously and being dealt with.

'What we're doing is giving people the confidence that when they call the police something will be done.'

Ministers are determined to get a grip on low-level thuggish behaviour. The Asbos were routinely breached by thugs, who quickly considered having one of the orders to be a 'badge of honour'.

They were also given out in some bizarre circumstances. A woman who tried to kill herself four times by jumping off bridges was banned from loitering on bridges, going on to railway lines or entering multi-storey car parks unaccompanied. And an 88-year-old man from Merseyside was banned from swearing or making sarcastic remarks.

Asbos will be replaced by Crime Prevention Injunctions, which officials say will be easier and faster to impose.

Unlike the Asbo, the injunction would not require a magistrate to be certain that the defendant had acted in an antisocial manner.

It would instead be secured against a lower burden of proof.

Those who breach the orders would be deemed in contempt of court and face penalties including jail. It would be made available to a broader range of agencies.

When sentenced in court, those found guilty of antisocial behaviour could also be issued with a new Criminal Behaviour Order, which would force prolific offenders to attend courses to change their ways.

The White Paper will also include a 'three strikes and you're out' crackdown on yobs which will compel police to act if they receive three complaints from one individual about antisocial behaviour.

The 'community trigger' will also apply if five different households lodge the same complaint.

The legislation is designed to prevent a repeat of the tragic case of Fiona Pilkington, who killed herself and her 18-year-old disabled daughter Francecca after sustained harassment by youngsters.

She dialled 999 33 times over ten years to complain but police failed to act, classing her case as a 'low priority'.

A new Directions Power will give police the power to move on troublemakers without having to first designate a specific 'dispersal zone' in advance.

But a victims' group said the new measures still did not go far enough.

The plans to enable residents to force police to take action over anti-social behaviour after three separate incidents or five complaints is still insufficient.

Victims deserve to be taken seriously as soon as they make a report to police,Victim Support said.

Javed Khan, the group's chief executive, said: 'We hope that the new criminal behaviour order will deliver the rapid response for victims that is needed.

'But just dishing out the orders won't be enough.

'If the Government really wants to put victims first, tough enforcement and follow-up will be required, to avoid making the CBO an empty sanction.'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
£100 fine if your garden is a tip: Homeowners who dump rubbish face on-the-spot penalties

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theresa May unveils new anti-yob laws to replace Labour's Asbos Officials will target those guilty of 'persistent, unreasonable behaviour' Bonfire of Labour's anti-lout legislation, with 19 powers reduced to six 'Three strikes and you're out' crackdown on yobs to compel police to act Householders who regularly dump rubbish in their own garden will be guilty of a criminal offence and hit with a hefty fine.

# data[].attributes.headline
Joe Dobson - 'ASB Crime and Policing Act 2014'

# data[].attributes.subject
Joe Dobson - 'ASB Crime and Policing Act 2014'

# data[].attributes.headline
Hannah P - 'ASBOs replaced in new government proposals' 

# data[].attributes.subject
Hannah P - 'ASBOs replaced in new government proposals' 

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18155579

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The government has announced new plans to tackle anti-social behaviour in England and Wales, including orders to replace Asbos.

Proposals in the government's White Paper include cutting the number of different orders from 19 to six.

A "community trigger" would also force police, councils and agencies to act if five households made a complaint.

Labour said the new measures were a "weaker rebrand" of powers to tackle anti-social behaviour.

The government says it wants to take the existing 19 powers and reduce them to six which are connected to the behaviour of people, the protection of places and the powers of the police.

Under the new proposals:

Manchester community campaigner Lesley Pullman

The trigger that they're talking about - five people causes trigger - is it five people on the same street? Five people in the community? Have four people got to suffer unless they can get a fifth person to come forward?

The bottom line with Asbos - and any minor problems with them - is that the people that are getting them, the victims, they don't have enough support.

And everything that comes out of the Home Office since I started in to them 10 years ago, there is never funding to support the victims and witnesses to anti-social behaviour.

People may report anti-social behaviour to the police, but they might not follow it through with a statement in writing and that is the problem. And that is going to be the problem with this.

They've still got to get people to come forward and report. I couldn't get five people on my street to report anything - regardless of what I've done over the years here.

They might report it, but they won't follow it through and that's the problem, it's the fear factor.

Source: BBC Radio 5Live

Asbos and six related orders relating to the behaviour of people, such as Drink Banning Orders, will be replaced in England and Wales by two orders: the Criminal Behaviour Order (CBO) and a Crime Prevention Injunction (CPI)

The CBO will be available to be used against people convicted of crime

The CPI is a civil order and similar to the existing Asbos - but ministers say it will be available at an earlier stage of bad behaviour and be easier and faster to use

CBO and CPI have a lower standard of proof and could be put in place in days or even hours, the government says

Ten current laws relating to protection of places will be reduced to three types of Community Protection Orders

Police powers to allow them to force people to move on are to be consolidated into a single power under which the police will not need to designate a dispersal zone in advance and can order people to leave an area for up to 48 hours

People who fail to comply with the order face a £2,500 fine or three months imprisonment

'Easier and faster'

Home Secretary Theresa May told the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) annual conference in Manchester that the government's approach "empowers local communities, places victims' needs at its heart and puts more trust in the professionals than ever before".

Mrs May said the community trigger would be piloted in three areas - Manchester, Brighton and Hove and West Lindsey, in Lincolnshire, from 1 June. It will force the police, councils and other agencies to act if five households complain, or the same individual complains three times.

And she told Acpo the new approach "will not dump all of society's problems on the police".

Six new orders

Crime Prevention Injunction - allowing agencies to protect victims from hooligans and vandals at short notice

Criminal Behaviour Order - to stop convicted criminals from engaging in particular activities or going to certain places

Community Protection Notice- issued to an individual to deal with a range of problems affecting quality of life in a community

Community Protection Order (Public Space) - a flexible local authority power to address a range of anti-social behaviour and prevent future problems

Community Protection Order (Closure) - would simplify existing powers to close particular premises that cause severe anti-social behaviour

Directions Power - will consolidate existing police dispersal powers into a single, less bureaucratic power, meaning police can deal quickly with emerging trouble

"We are challenging local agencies to do more to prevent crime and anti-social behaviour in the first place - lowering the burden on the police - and our new powers are available to range of agencies and explicitly include actions to change an offender's behaviour and stop future incidents."

Mrs May earlier told the BBC that Asbos were "too bureaucratic" and took too long to put into place.

The Home Office first signalled an end to Asbos, introduced under Tony Blair's Labour government, earlier at the start of last year.

It believes the orders are seen by some youths as a badge of honour and it has pointed out that more than half are breached at least once.

The shadow home office minister, Gloria De Piero, says while Asbos are imperfect, the new measures will only make matters worse.

"Asbos are sometimes breached and that's a really serious thing. That's why you get a criminal record.

"Actually half of the people who breach Asbos end up behind bars, that's how seriously Labour took it. The new Crime Prevention Injunction, you won't even get a criminal record."

'Take victims seriously'

One woman from Backworth in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, who has been a repeated victim of anti-social behaviour, told the BBC she supported the move to lower the burden of proof for anti-social acts.

"You have to have a level of trust in the community, that people like me do not make things up.

"But the main problem is that there is not enough of a multi-agency approach to the problem.

"In my experience the police are proactive in trying to identify and find those who threaten us but the local authority is not.

"There needs to be more intelligence shared between the agencies."

Javed Khan, chief executive of Victim Support, said victims of anti-social behaviour should be taken seriously as soon as they made a report to the police.

He added: "We hope that the new Criminal Behaviour Order will deliver the rapid response for victims that is needed.

"But just dishing out the orders won't be enough. If the government really wants to put victims first, tough enforcement and follow-up will be required, to avoid making the CBO an empty sanction."

The key changes explained; Existing powers on the left, proposed powers on the right

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The government has announced new plans to tackle anti-social behaviour in England and Wales, including orders to replace Asbos. Proposals in the government's White Paper include cutting the number of different orders from 19 to six. A "community trigger" would also force police, councils and agencies to act if five households made a complaint.

# data[].attributes.headline
Hannah Wooller- 'growing up' behaviour too often labelled anti social... 

# data[].attributes.subject
Hannah Wooller- 'growing up' behaviour too often labelled anti social... 

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/11/antisocial-behaviour-police-chief-young-people

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A senior police officer has warned that too many young people are being criminalised for behaviour that a generation ago would simply have been regarded as "growing up".

Jacqui Cheer, the chief constable of Cleveland, and the Association of Chief Police Officers' lead on children and youth, said society was becoming "quite intolerant" of young people in public spaces, and the public and police were too ready to label "what looks like growing up to me as antisocial behaviour".

She said police and public had to understand that antisocial behaviour "is not just being annoying or being in the wrong place at the wrong time or there's more than three of you". And she said she feared that new legislation would mean treating more childhood behaviour as antisocial.

"It's a personal view that behaviour that at the moment is not included will be included into the future," she said.

Under Theresa May's new antisocial behaviour bill, which received its second reading in the House of Lords last week and is expected to be law by Christmas, children as young as 10 can receive injunctions for "causing nuisance", and older children can be jailed for breaching such injunctions.

Cheer told the all-party parliamentary group on children that it was not surprising that children gathered in the streets when a lot of the places they could go had been closed down or fenced off.

"What's antisocial to one person is just what I did and what many young people do," said Cheer. "We've closed down a lot of places that people are allowed to go to. We've fenced off school grounds, I get it, but where do people collect? When you're in a crowd of three or four it can get a bit noisy, is that antisocial? When you're walking down a street and might be having a bit of a laugh and joke, is that antisocial?"

She said police were already penalising what she regarded as normal "growing up behaviour". "But we need help from all of our partners because if we have closed down all the public spaces and if we are not providing places for young people to meet and to push the boundaries in a safe environment, we have sort of created this ourselves," Cheer told MPs.

She said frontline police officers were receiving calls from the members of the public about the presence of young people and were being faced with a decision about whether to speak to them, perhaps antagonising them by asking them what they are up to or to be quiet or even to move on. If the officer did nothing then they risked a complaint from the member of the public who complained in the first place, she said.

"I'm not saying that we will tolerate behaviour that is harassing, that is making people feel fearful, that is preventing other young people from going out because they don't want to walk down that street or through that park. That is our job. We are here to protect everybody. But we need to be careful where the line is," Cheer said.

Her intervention was welcomed by the chief executive of the National Children's Bureau, Hilary Emery, who predicted that the antisocial behaviour bill would have perverse and harmful consequences.

"We are concerned that children and teenagers will get into trouble with the law just for being annoying, and that it will penalise them from doing things that all children do as part of growing up - playing in the street, kicking a ball around in a public space or hanging around with their friends," Emery said. "It threatens to further increase the divide between generations, alienate children and divert the police from fighting genuine crimes."

Home Office ministers say new "streamlined and flexible" measures are needed to replace antisocial behaviour orders, more than half of which are breached at least once. Other measures have proved ineffective or inadequate.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Growing up' behaviour too often labelled antisocial, says police chief

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A senior police officer has warned that too many young people are being criminalised for behaviour that a generation ago would simply have been regarded as "growing up".

# data[].attributes.headline
Ruth P - useful reading from Kate Brown reporting on experience of ASBOs

# data[].attributes.subject
Ruth P - useful reading from Kate Brown reporting on experience of ASBOs

# data[].attributes.body
(Ruth P)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Last updated at 09:35 24 January 2007

For many people, the bathroom is the best place for singing, safe from the jeers of the outside world.

But Caroline Bishop will have to content herself with miming in future.

The 39-year-old mother of two has had an Asbo imposed on her after her neighbours complained about the noise.

If she is overheard belting out her favourite Gary Glitter hits again, she could face five years in jail.

Magistrates in Lincoln imposed the bizarre condition after a three-day hearing, despite pleas from Mrs Bishop's lawyers that it was trivialising the use of Asbos.

Neighbours Alistair and Kerry Law complained about Bishop after allegedly enduring harassment from her between October 2005 and March last year.

Mrs Law told the court that much of the problem was caused by Bishop's singing at her home in Ingham, Lincolnshire.

She said: "It was daft stuff like Gary Glitter and children's songs. She sings old Gary Glitter songs like 'I'm the Leader of the Gang'.

"It's loud singing, day in and day out. It was aimed at us. You can hear it from my kitchen when I have my window closed and she's in her bathroom."

Mrs Law said Bishop also made false claims against her to the police and RSPCA, stared at her and her husband and made rude gestures.

Belinda Moore, for West Lindsey District Council, which applied for the Asbo, said: "These complaints could have been seen as trivial, but it is their ongoing nature that causes concern.

"All these incidents are caused by Mrs Bishop's inability to live peacefully next to her neighbours.

"Mrs Bishop did admit that she sings and that she sings Gary Glitter songs. It is clear that her behaviour became unacceptable to the Laws.

"It is very sad that the council had to come to court to sort out this problems, but all this had led the Laws to be caused a degree of distress."

Bishop denied she was a problem neighbour and claimed she had been the victim in the case.

She told magistrates her dog was savaged by the Laws' Alsatian and her car was sprayed while they were painting a fence.

She admitted singing Gary Glitter songs but told the court: "I want people to know I haven't done anything wrong. We are being victimised."

Her partner Fred Gilliatt added: "Under extreme provocation and harassment Caroline gets frustrated."

Under the Asbo, which will run for two years, Bishop is banned from singing or shouting so loudly that she can be heard outside her house.

She is also banned from taking photographs of the Laws - including with mobile phones - and shouting abuse at them.

She is further forbidden to behave in a way that would cause harassment to the Laws or to another neighbouring couple, Colin and Annie Briggs.

Bishop's solicitor, Gordon Holt, branded the case ridiculous.

He told the court: "Now there is a risk that Mrs Bishop could be arrested and locked up for five years for singing in her own home.

"You can't give an Asbo against someone just because they sing. This is purely a neighbours' dispute. The Laws don't like her and want her out."
Sign up for the latest news alerts
After the case Mrs Law would only say: "I'm just pleased this is all over. It has badly affected us."

Bishop, who faces possible eviction proceedings by her landlord, ACIS Housing, stayed silent.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Asbo for singing in bath... well it was a Gary Glitter song

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For many people, the bathroom is the best place for singing, safe from the jeers of the outside world. But Caroline Bishop will have to content herself with miming in future. The 39-year-old mother of two has had an Asbo imposed on her after her neighbours complained about the noise

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh -                                             Alex Sturrock// People with Asbos

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh -                                             Alex Sturrock// People with Asbos

# data[].attributes.body
a project surrounding asbo recipients

"not allowed to be in a public place with more
than one person without it being an organised event such as a football match"

# data[].attributes.body
UK's annoying behavior law threatens protesters, criminalizes childhood

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nuisance Nuance: UK's annoying behavior law threatens protesters, criminalizes childhood

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Causing a nuisance in Britain could get you 2 years in jail or an unlimited fine if new anti-social laws are pushed through. And it could even apply to children as young as ten, which is really worrying civil liberties groups. RT's Polly Boiko has more.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh  - The Birth of a Police State: UK Police to be Granted Sweeping New Powers

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh  - The Birth of a Police State: UK Police to be Granted Sweeping New Powers

# data[].attributes.body
Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (IPNAS) to replace ABSO’S

grants local authorities, police and even private security firms sweeping powers to bar citizens from assembling lawfully in public spaces

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bluehost - Top rated web hosting provider - Free 1 click installs For blogs, shopping carts, and more. Get a free domain name, real NON-outsourced 24/7 support, and superior speed. web hosting provider php hosting cheap web hosting, Web hosting, domain names, front page hosting, email hosting.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh - At last, a law to stop almost anyone from doing almost anything

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh - At last, a law to stop almost anyone from doing almost anything

# data[].attributes.body
They [Asbos] have been used to enforce a kind of caste prohibition: personalised rules which prevent the untouchables from intruding into the lives of others

-  these injunctions "set the young, vulnerable or mentally ill up to fail", and fast-track them into the criminal justice system

-

It would replace asbos with ipnas (injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance), which would not only forbid certain forms of behaviour, but also force the recipient to discharge positive obligations. (which could, the law proposes, remain in force for the rest of their lives)

public space protection orders, which can prevent either everybody or particular kinds of people from doing certain things in certain places. It creates new dispersal powers, which can be used by the police to exclude people from an area (there is no size limit), whether or not they have done anything wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Until the late 19th century much of our city space was owned by private landlords. Squares were gated, streets were controlled by turnpikes. The great unwashed, many of whom had been expelled from the countryside by acts of enclosure, were also excluded from desirable parts of town.

Social reformers and democratic movements tore down the barriers, and public space became a right, not a privilege. But social exclusion follows inequality as night follows day, and now, with little public debate, our city centres are again being privatised or semi-privatised. They are being turned by the companies that run them into soulless, cheerless, pasteurised piazzas, in which plastic policemen harry anyone loitering without intent to shop.

Street life in these places is reduced to a trance-world of consumerism, of conformity and atomisation in which nothing unpredictable or disconcerting happens, a world made safe for selling mountains of pointless junk to tranquillised shoppers. Spontaneous gatherings of any other kind - unruly, exuberant, open-ended, oppositional - are banned. Young, homeless and eccentric people are, in the eyes of those upholding this dead-eyed, sanitised version of public order, guilty until proven innocent.

Now this dreary ethos is creeping into places that are not, ostensibly, owned or controlled by corporations. It is enforced less by gates and barriers (though plenty of these are reappearing) than by legal instruments, used to exclude or control the ever widening class of undesirables.

The existing rules are bad enough. Introduced by the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act, antisocial behaviour orders (asbos) have criminalised an apparently endless range of activities, subjecting thousands - mostly young and poor - to bespoke laws. They have been used to enforce a kind of caste prohibition: personalised rules which prevent the untouchables from intruding into the lives of others.

You get an asbo for behaving in a manner deemed by a magistrate as likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to other people. Under this injunction, the proscribed behaviour becomes a criminal offence. Asbos have been granted which forbid the carrying of condoms by a prostitute, homeless alcoholics from possessing alcohol in a public place, a young man from walking down any road other than his own, children from playing football in the street. They were used to ban peaceful protests against the Olympic clearances.

Inevitably, more than half the people subject to asbos break them. As Liberty says, these injunctions "set the young, vulnerable or mentally ill up to fail", and fast-track them into the criminal justice system. They allow the courts to imprison people for offences which are not otherwise imprisonable. One homeless young man was sentenced to five years in jail for begging: an offence for which no custodial sentence exists. Asbos permit the police and courts to create their own laws and their own penal codes.

All this is about to get much worse. On Wednesday the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill reaches its report stage (close to the end of the process) in the House of Lords. It is remarkable how little fuss has been made about it, and how little we know of what is about to hit us.

The bill would permit injunctions against anyone of 10 or older who "has engaged or threatens to engage in conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person". It would replace asbos with ipnas ( injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance), which would not only forbid certain forms of behaviour, but also force the recipient to discharge positive obligations. In other words, they can impose a kind of community service order on people who have committed no crime, which could, the law proposes, remain in force for the rest of their lives.

The bill also introduces public space protection orders, which can prevent either everybody or particular kinds of people from doing certain things in certain places. It creates new dispersal powers, which can be used by the police to exclude people from an area (there is no size limit), whether or not they have done anything wrong.

While, as a result of a successful legal challenge, asbos can be granted only if a court is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that antisocial behaviour took place, ipnas can be granted on the balance of probabilities. Breaching them will not be classed as a criminal offence, but can still carry a custodial sentence: without committing a crime, you can be imprisoned for up to two years. Children, who cannot currently be detained for contempt of court, will be subject to an inspiring new range of punishments for breaking an ipna, including three months in a young offenders' centre.

Lord Macdonald, formerly the director of public prosecutions, points out that "it is difficult to imagine a broader concept than causing 'nuisance' or 'annoyance'". The phrase is apt to catch a vast range of everyday behaviours to an extent that may have serious implications for the rule of law". Protesters, buskers, preachers: all, he argues, could end up with ipnas.

The Home Office minister, Norman Baker, once a defender of civil liberties, now the architect of the most oppressive bill pushed through any recent parliament, claims that the amendments he offered in December will "reassure people that basic liberties will not be affected". But Liberty describes them as "a little bit of window-dressing: nothing substantial has changed."

The new injunctions and the new dispersal orders create a system in which the authorities can prevent anyone from doing more or less anything. But they won't be deployed against anyone. Advertisers, who cause plenty of nuisance and annoyance, have nothing to fear; nor do opera lovers hogging the pavements of Covent Garden. Annoyance and nuisance are what young people cause; they are inflicted by oddballs, the underclass, those who dispute the claims of power.

These laws will be used to stamp out plurality and difference, to douse the exuberance of youth, to pursue children for the crime of being young and together in a public place, to help turn this nation into a money-making monoculture, controlled, homogenised, lifeless, strifeless and bland. For a government which represents the old and the rich, that must sound like paradise.

* This article was amended on 23 January 2014. The original said that an asbo had been granted which prevented "a soup kitchen from giving food to the poor".This has been corrected.
A fully referenced version of this article can be found at monbiot.com Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
At last, a law to stop almost anyone from doing almost anything | George Monbiot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Until the late 19th century much of our city space was owned by private landlords. Squares were gated, streets were controlled by turnpikes. The great unwashed, many of whom had been expelled from the countryside by acts of enclosure, were also excluded from desirable parts of town.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh - Generation F*cked How Britain is Eating Its Young

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh - Generation F*cked How Britain is Eating Its Young

# data[].attributes.body
"[..]many of the problems might in part stem from the government’s unparalleled obsession with monitoring, measuring and homogenizing the very children it once sought to cherish.

Aside from handing out more than 10,000 Asbos (Antisocial Behaviour Orders, a cross between a human parking ticket and the sort of condemned notice you sometimes see on the walls of derelict buildings), the petty misanthropy that bans hoodie-wearing teenagers from shopping malls, forces parenting classes on failing single mums, and allows 79 percent of police forces to impose curfews on children, comes easily to a nation that thought up the idea that its young should be seen and not heard. But never before have we put them under this degree of surveillance while simultaneously turning a blind eye to our adult responsibilities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh - The ridiculous legacy of Labour's beloved Asbo

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh - The ridiculous legacy of Labour's beloved Asbo

# data[].attributes.body
CROSSING THE STREET

SKIMPY NIGHTWEAR

NOISY SEX

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
So farewell, Labour's beloved Asbo. Launched in 1999 by Tony Blair to crack down on low-level loutish behaviour, they were well intentioned and - at first - carefully targeted on harassment, criminal damage, graffiti and public drunkenness.

But Labour became obsessed with how many were being given out, rather than whether they were being used properly. Teenagers began to see them as a 'badge of honour' - you were nobody on some tough estates unless you had one. They were also breached many, many times over in some parts of the country.

Predictably, Labour is sniping away this morning, saying the replacement to the Asbo - criminal behaviour injunctions - won't be as 'tough'. But, before shedding too many tears over the end of the Asbo, here's a reminder of some of the more notorious moments from the Labour years...

SKIMPY NIGHTWEAR

Caroline Shepherd, 27, was given an Asbo after neighbours complained about her wearing skimpy underwear when answering her door or using the garden. Before the ban was imposed, Ms Shepherd, of Lanarkshire, said she had been wearing a new bikini for gardening.

SUICIDE ATTEMPTS

Kim Sutton, 23, who had tried to kill herself four times by jumping off bridges was effectively banned from attempting suicide. She was banned from going into rivers, canals or open water, loitering on bridges, going on to railway lines or entering multistorey car parks unaccompanied.

NAUGHTY PIGS

Even animals were not spared at the height of Asbo mania, Brian Hagan, 62, who had a pig farm in Briston, Norfolk, was ordered to stop his animals repeatedly damaging crops in neighbouring fields. The case was eventually dropped.

SARCASM

One of the oldest recipients was Alexander Muat, 88, of Huyton, Merseyside. His order banned him from taking photographs of his neighbours, banging doors, swearing or - most controversially - making sarcastic remarks at them.

NOISY SEX

Probably the most embarrassing breach case involved Caroline Cartwright. The 48-year-old's Asbo had banned her from making excessive noise. Neighbours said she had flouted the order by groaning as her bed banged against the wall at her home in Washington, Wearside.

CROSSING THE STREET

For many, their Asbos made life near impossible. Fifteen-year-old Callum Trick, from Swansea, was even banned from crossing his own street. Magistrates ruled the order was stop him harassing his neighbours.

GOLF GLOVE

Asbos first took on a sartorial element when teenagers were banned from wearing hooded tops. Magistrates went further when dealing with Nathan Wadley, 16. He was barred from showing his tattoos in public or wearing a single golf glove, said to signify gang membership.

GRASS

Asbos were even slapped on the use of single words. Zachary Tutin, a 14-year-old from north Manchester, was prohibited him from using the word 'grass', after saying his neighbours were police informers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The ridiculous legacy of Labour's beloved Asbo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
So farewell, Labour's beloved Asbo. Launched in 1999 by Tony Blair to crack down on low-level loutish behaviour, they were well intentioned and - at first - carefully targeted on harassment, criminal damage, graffiti and public drunkenness. But Labour became obsessed with how many were being given out, rather than whether they were being used properly.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh - Middle-class asbos: what behaviour warrants one?

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh - Middle-class asbos: what behaviour warrants one?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Robert Thomas, who plagued his neighbours by playing Radio 4 at full volume at all hours has appeared in court charged with breaking his asbo. While this case escalated rapidly - Thomas ended up with vandalism charges and sprayed his neighbours with a garden hose - his Radio 4 obsession initially struck me as a rather genteel form of noise pollution. When I think of noisy neighbours, I think of those who pump out happy hardcore at 3pm, not the ones avidly listening to the The Archers omnibus.

How many other stories concerning antisocial behaviour don't we hear about in the media? While you will often read gleeful stories in the tabloids about terrible neighbours who fight all day long or leave rubbish strewn around, you'll rarely hear much of the apparently mild-mannered man up the road who aggressively blocks your parking space every day just to get a rise out of you. I'd bet that most middle-class people would deny behaving badly in any social situation, imagining their conduct to always be absolutely appropriate. Yet I can think of many examples of situations in which the more fortunate in society enrage, irritate and provoke. Below are just a few of my candidates for middle-class asbos:

* The darling son of your next-door neighbour who is learning to play the violin. "Yes, little Gabriel has just started and already has such a gift! And he's so committed, he plays for at least an hour a day. Sometimes when he's feeling really inspired, he wanders around the garden, lost in the music he's creating!" Gabriel is a moron who makes a noise like scraping nails on a blackboard. On this occasion, playing happy hardcore is positively encouraged. Or you could do what Giles Coren did, and get in rather more trouble.

* People who buy those buggies that seem more hi-tech than your car, and take up more space. Try to overtake someone with one of those buggies, I dare you. The driver will miraculously weave across the pavement and cut you up, usually while looking harassed because they can't control the damn thing. And if you see one in a small cafe, give up your principles and just go to Starbucks. Big corporation, wide aisles.

* People without real allergies who order off-menu. Of course some people have coeliac disease, and some people can't eat nuts. But there seem to be a suspicious amount of them in trendy establishments. "I'd really love the risotto, but is it possible to order it without the tomatoes/parsley/oil? I'm just really intolerant." They are making the waiter's life harder, and assuming the chef has time to create a whole new dish. Be intolerant of these people instead.

* People who build massive, obnoxious extensions. Since Grand Designs, everyone with a urge to have their own glass-roof yoga room seems to think it's acceptable to tear half their house down and then invite the builders to stay for what seems like an eternity. You end up facing a monstrosity of steel and mirrors, and the foundations of your flat will most likely crumble to dust in the next five years. Thanks Kevin McCloud!

* The businessman who cannot put his Blackberry or iPhone down. He is so important, so desperately needed, that he'll order a coffee while not looking up from firing off a missive to some unpaid intern. He'll sit next to you on the train tapping away frantically for six hours, while simultaneously shouting importantly into his phone about quarterly figures. He is more successful than you; suck it up, underlings.

Those are some of my worst, but what have I missed? Can you help me build a comprehensive list of middle-class asbos? Give me yours below.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Middle-class asbos: what behaviour warrants one? | Bella Mackie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Robert Thomas, who plagued his neighbours by playing Radio 4 at full volume at all hours has appeared in court charged with breaking his asbo. While this case escalated rapidly - Thomas ended up with vandalism charges and sprayed his neighbours with a garden hose - his Radio 4 obsession initially struck me as a rather genteel form of noise pollution.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh -  Asbos focused public attention on low-level yobbery and youthful misdemeanour, and criminalised a generation of young people

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh -  Asbos focused public attention on low-level yobbery and youthful misdemeanour, and criminalised a generation of young people

# data[].attributes.body
-Almost 90% of young people admit to committing some form of antisocial offence

-used as a punitive measure – preventing an individual from mixing in certain circles and certain areas, setting a curfew and so on

- asbo agenda increased the public and media focus on youth behaviour and in particular contributed to the sense that Britain is somehow broken and in decline, that parents are no longer able to parent

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The much maligned asbo agenda may be coming to an end: Theresa May has joined the troop of pointy-heads and generally sensible types who have argued for years that with a breach-rate of around 50% and evidence that the agenda has increased the numbers of young people being sentenced, they simply do not work. Some of us would go further and say that they have made things a lot worse.

Asbos were introduced by Tony Blair and brought to prominence as part of his ambitious Respect agenda, launched in 2006. Respect was aimed at treating the causes of crime and creating a framework for a non-criminal response to the low-level offences that blight local communities across the country.

The motive behind their introduction was utterly reasonable: many of us, particularly in deprived communities, suffer much more from low-level crime like public drunkenness, "yobbery" and the vandalism of public places than they do from violence or theft. Basically, this is because the former are far more prolific. Almost 90% of young people admit to committing some form of antisocial offence during their teenage years, around one in 10 do so frequently and veer towards criminality. Blair's aim was to nip them in the bud and thus prevent misbehaviour from turning into something more protracted and serious. And, as he said at the time, to reassure the public that something was being done to restore order to their streets. But asbos did not do this.

The actual agenda was rife with problems and misreading of the evidence: early intervention does work, but only if it involves tailored treatment to address the causes of the problem behaviour. The stats on the use of the antisocial behaviour legislation shows that overwhelmingly, rather than being used to refer a young person for treatment, they were used as a punitive measure - preventing an individual from mixing in certain circles and certain areas, setting a curfew and so on.

The psychological impact of being officially labelled as antisocial and experiencing the shock of the criminal justice system does not prevent a young person from progressing to more serious crime. More than half (55%) of young people who were given an asbo in 2004 went on to commit further offences, with just less than half (46%) of those resulting in a custodial sentence. This shows that asbo legislation, rather than preventing youth involvement in crime, can in fact fast-track young people through the criminal justice system, locking them into reoffending.

And the fact that so many young people struggled to meet the terms of their order (no wonder, when you consider they were served on individuals as young as 10) meant hundreds of otherwise law-abiding young people have found themselves incarcerated. Breaches of statutory orders, such as asbos, increased by 93% between 2002-03 and 2006-07 and it is this that has led to the increase in the conviction rate of young people, not more crime.

Although asbos have become synonymous with young people, they were initially aimed primarily at adults. But my research at Demos shows that the asbo agenda increased the public and media focus on youth behaviour and in particular contributed to the sense that Britain is somehow broken and in decline, that parents are no longer able to parent and we are powerless in the face of a group of teenagers drinking cider. Britons are less likely to feel able to intervene in youth yobbery than anyone else in Europe: just 34% say they would intervene to stop a group of 14-year-old boys from vandalising a bus shelter, compared to 65% of Germans.

In practice, asbos became a means of criminalising behaviour that in another era might simply have been labelled as youthful misdemeanour. Given that most young people have committed some form of antisocial behaviour but only a small minority go on to commit a crime, it seems plausible that most offenders will simply grow out of this "phase" without intervention.

I do not mean to devalue the significant impact that antisocial behaviour has on people's lives. But I look forward to the time when I can play loud music late at night safe in the knowledge that soon it will be up to my neighbour to pick up the phone if she wants me to turn it down, rather than bother the cops.
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Asbos helped make Britain look broken | Julia Margo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The much maligned asbo agenda may be coming to an end: Theresa May has joined the troop of pointy-heads and generally sensible types who have argued for years that with a breach-rate of around 50% and evidence that the agenda has increased the numbers of young people being sentenced, they simply do not work.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nneka Mmeh - ASBOS 'promote intolerance of youth'

# data[].attributes.subject
Nneka Mmeh - ASBOS 'promote intolerance of youth'

# data[].attributes.body
Where do teenagers have a place in society?

antisocial behaviour orders (asbos) to be replaced by new Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (ipnas)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
New laws to clamp down on anti-social behaviour will "promote intolerance of youth" and damage the relationship between young people and the police, the children's commissioner and leading organisations representing young people warn today.

In a letter to the Observer Dr Maggie Atkinson, children's commissioner f in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill going through parliament.

They say the proposed clampdown on unruly behaviour will "punish children over the age of 10 simply for being children" by widening the definition of antisocial behaviour and reducing the burden of proof so sharply that the effect could be to "outlaw everyday activities" such as skateboarding or ball games. The Home Office argues that the measures will deliver speedier and more effective curbs on unruly activity.

Under the proposals antisocial behaviour orders (asbos) will be replaced by new Injunctions to Prevent Nuisance and Annoyance (ipnas).Currently, to be given an asbo a person must have behaved in a way that "caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress". But under the new law, a person would have to have behaved only in a way that is "capable of causing nuisance or annoyance" to get an injunction.

For a court to grant an asbo, it must be satisfied "beyond reasonable doubt" that a person has behaved antisocially and conclude that an asbo is necessary to protect others from further antisocial acts.

But to grant one of the new injunctions, the court would have to believe only that "on the balance of probabilities" a person had behaved antisocially and to conclude that it is "just and convenient" to grant an injunction to stop their antisocial behaviour.

Opponents say that under the new law, if the police or local council believe that "on the balance of probabilities" a weekly basketball game is capable of annoying residents and that an injunction would be a convenient way to stop the game, they could ask the court to issue an injunction against the players. This would restrict where the players could go and what they could do. If the players were over 14 and they flouted the injunction, they could be imprisoned for up to three months.

Signatories to the letter, who also include the chief executive of the National Children's Bureau, Dr Hilary Emery, say that the measures amount to an overreaction which is particularly unfortunate at a time when youth services are being cut across the country.

They write: "We acknowledge that antisocial behaviour can blight the lives of individuals and communities, but this bill is not the answer. It promotes intolerance of youth, is a blow for civil liberties and will damage children's relationship with the police. Children learn the importance of right and wrong from their parents, teachers and communities. We do not need to create more laws to do it."

Last week the human rights joint committee of both houses of parliament also called on government to amend the Bill "to make the test for anti-social behaviour more precise".

Penelope Gibbs, chair of the Standing Committee for Youth Justice, said:"It's hard to believe that the government is planning to outlaw teenagers just for being annoying - unopposed by Labour. Many teenagers already feel they are pariahs in their communities. What are teenagers supposed to do? Youth services have been cut, they are told not to spend too much time indoors playing computer games. Yet this law means they may be afraid to skateboard on the street or just hang out with their friends."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New asbos 'will punish children for being children'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
New laws to clamp down on anti-social behaviour will "promote intolerance of youth" and damage the relationship between young people and the police, the children's commissioner and leading organisations representing young people warn today. In a letter to the Observer Dr Maggie Atkinson, children's commissioner f in the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill going through parliament.

# data[].attributes.body
These kinds of examples problematise the notion of what counts as anti-social behaviour.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
DON'T laugh. Don't stare. Don't clap your hands.

They sound like the sort of instructions a primary school teacher would bark at his unruly pupils.

But these ruthless restrictions have been imposed on a father after a long dispute with neighbours over speed bumps.

Stuart Hunt, 45 is also banned from waving objects at people and adopting a menacing stance.

The long list of bizarre prohibitions is contained in an anti-social behaviour order (Asbo) delivered to Mr Hunt, of Drumnadrochit in Inverness-shire.

"The Asbo just dropped through my door without any warning. I'm not meant to stare at people or laugh. You wouldn't think it was the basis of an Asbo. It's wishy-washy nonsense," said Mr Hunt.

Mr Hunt is to challenge the terms of the Asbo. He appeared at Inverness Sheriff Court this week accused of breaching the order.

His lawyer, George Mathers, said the terms of the Asbo were "nonsensical". He said: "It contravenes any individual's human rights, a right to a proper, family life. How can you do that if you are not allowed to laugh at anyone. He would technically be breaching his order if he laughs at a joke."

He added: "It is ludicrous. This restricts the fundamental rights of an individual. The Asbo is pretty meaningless. It certainly proposes obligations way beyond what is proportionate.

"We are look at lodging a bill of suspension, which is a form of criminal appeal. We are claiming the Asbo is incompetent and, if it was accepted and there was no Asbo, then Mr Hunt would not face an alleged breach of threat."

Highland Council yesterday attracted ridicule for drawing up the Asbo conditions.

Matt Foot, a lawyer who founded the UK group Asbo Concern, said Mr Hunt's order was probably the most bizarre he had come across.

"It's absolutely ridiculous. Someone else was recently threatened about being sarcastic, but this one is unbelievable. If a person isn't allowed to laugh then we really are living in Stalin's Russia.

"You can imagine some wonderful defences, like 'I wasn't laughing, I was smirking', or 'I wasn't staring, I was just looking'."

"I'm amazed the court let this one through. Not only is it ridiculously prohibitive, it is also totally unenforceable."

The order was issued because of Mr Hunt's feud with Stuart and Shirley Latham. Two years ago they forced Mr Hunt to remove unlawful speed-bumps he had put near their home.

A spokesman for Highland Council refused to discuss why the conditions were drawn up but a statement said: "The council is confident that the order is competent."

So many bizarre ways to be antisocial

A NAKED would-be opera singer was among the bizarre list of people handed Asbos in Scotland last year. Other unusual orders:

&#149 A man from Wales was banned from hospitals except in real emergencies after he faked drug overdoses to stay in hospital.

&#149 A mother-of-two from Lincolnshire was banned from singing as her voice was so bad.

&#149 A man from Rugby was banned from borrowing money from a friend.

&#149 A Clackmannanshire man was banned from shouting at his television.

&#149 An 18-year-old from Swindon was banned from playing football in the street.

&#149 A Somerset man was banned from having a rooster.

&#149 A country and western fan from Leeds who plagued neighbours by playing Dolly Parton songs around the clock was banned from playing music in her home.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
They sound like the sort of instructions a primary school teacher would bark at his unruly pupils. But these ruthless restrictions have been imposed on a father after a long dispute with neighbours over speed bumps. Stuart Hunt, 45 is also banned from waving objects at people and adopting a menacing stance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Richard Sennett - The ASBO is a symbol of New Labour's negligence

# data[].attributes.subject
Richard Sennett - The ASBO is a symbol of New Labour's negligence

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The asbo is an icon of New Labour's negligence | Richard Sennett

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Richard Sennett: Asbos don't work because they come from the top down. Good behaviour is instilled by family life

# data[].attributes.headline
Newport: should Asbos ban hoodie wearing?

# data[].attributes.subject
Newport: should Asbos ban hoodie wearing?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two brothers from Newport in south Wales have been given Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbos) to stop them wearing hoodies.
One of them, Mark Wainfur, 20, has threatened to carry on wearing his.

This is despite risk of arrest and up to two years in jail. He says he has "got nothing else" to wear.

A condition of the Asbo bans them from wearing "hoodies or scarves to hide their identities".

The pair were banned by Newport magistrates from gathering in large groups of people, pestering their neighbours or insulting police officers and council employees.

Mark Wainfur, who is unemployed, said: "I'm never going to stop wearing hoodies. They are my favourite clothes.

"All my tops are hoodies - I haven't got anything else to wear. It's stupid."

Hoodies have created controversy after bans in some shopping centres and pubs, due to fears the clothing can hide potential offenders' identities or are "threatening".

Is this ban reasonable or should the law get involved in dictating what people can and can't wear? Do you wear a "hoodie"?

Thanks for your views. The discussion is now closed but below is a selection of your responses:

Hoodies are being worn for disguising the person who may be about to commit an offence
john ryan,

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
BBC NEWS | UK | Wales | South East Wales | Should Asbos ban hoodie wearing?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two brothers from Newport in south Wales have been given Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (Asbos) to stop them wearing hoodies. One of them, Mark Wainfur, 20, has threatened to carry on wearing his. This is despite risk of arrest and up to two years in jail. He says he has "got nothing else" to wear.

# data[].attributes.body
Documentary which touches on some of themes of this week - it is particularly interesting in regards to the representation of anti-social behaviour in estates, and how these might contribute to fears around anti-social behaviour and resultant policy interventions. See here for a response from residents of Shadsworth estate, who thought that the area had been heavily misrepresented in the Panorama documentary - http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/9927013.Videos__Blackburn_s_Shadsworth_estate_outraged_by_BBC_Panorama__hatchet_job_/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Panorama visits a housing estate in Shadsworth, Blackburn, learning what it is like to live there. The programme follows families, children and police, and goes undercover with drug dealers.