PREVENT must start to live up to it's name.

More publicity for the Knives Down campaign.

By the time someone is killed, the killer has on most occasions been caught carrying a knife previously.

No second chances, first time caught with a knife should be a custodial sentence.

Its just heartbreaking. How those poor families cope. What a waste of young life with the world in front if them,
Saw on tv yesterday one killer of a lovely young man, let out of prisone early, making songs boasting of what he had done. I would like to send hime on a boat in the high seas on a boat with a leak, he is back inside for what use that is, just holding pens,

Prevent is for spotting terrorist activities- not random knife crime.

Investing in our young people's services might be a better way of fighting knife crime than Prevent.

We have seriously let our children down because no one really cares about them anymore.

keepingquiet

Prevent is for spotting terrorist activities- not random knife crime.

Investing in our young people's services might be a better way of fighting knife crime than Prevent.

We have seriously let our children down because no one really cares about them anymore.

This!

I never really worried about my stepsons going out and about when they were teenagers but did worry about my daughter. However, it seems that parents need to worry as much about their boys these days. Knife crime is the equivalent to USA’s gun crimes here now.

I read a few years ago that Prevent was a useless initiative.

I know that Prevent is to head off would be terrorists.

The OP mentioned it and knife crime.

The Home Secretary asked the Home Office to do an in-depth investigation into expanding Prevent. They suggested to include misogynistic threats along with far left terror threats.

It is being reported on breakfast news that the HS has dismissed the suggestions and Prevent will continue to concentrate on threats from Islamists and Far Right.

I think this is a mistake and find myself agreeing with our PM in that terrorism is constantly evolving and so should we…

Cossy parents need to take responsibility for their children, mothers and fathers.

Where are the extended families?

Everyone in government knows but dare not say, that more prisons need to be built. We cannot go on stuffing people who may be capable of rehabilitation into overcrowded and unsanitary buildings with too few staff to operate safely and be effective.

I am not concerned with the unrepentant and sadistic killers and rapists who are serving long sentences and won’t see the light of day again anyway. It is the ones who are going to come out. And to what?

This surely has to mean more juvenile prisons as well because with these young criminals ( 14 for Gods sake) it is essential they are NOT themselves groomed into further criminality during their sentences because unless detained for the whole of life means whole of their lives then they will be out and living amongst “normal people” in ours and our children’s and grandchildren’s lifetimes.
Something must be done to alter the course of their lives as soon as possible. It is several things really and we have to start with a decent home and safeguards in place on day one.

GrannyGravy13

Cossy parents need to take responsibility for their children, mothers and fathers.

Where are the extended families?

It’s no good blaming parents and extended families when they are clearly failing, or powerless, to prevent participation in the knife culture. It’s not going to change anything.

I think it’s ridiculous to add more and more to Prevent’s core activity, it would just end up badly funded and overstretched; like the teachers who have had more and more non teaching expectations loaded on them over the years.

I can just hear the howls of outrage if we had a major terrorist outrage in the future and it turned out that Prevent had missed vital signs in the perpetrators because they were too busy trying to prevent knife crime in teenagers..

The problem with Prevent is that teachers are too scared of reporting their concerns as they WILL be branded as racists. Their parents storm down to the school with various ‘representatives’ from their culture, friends and relatives in tow. The far right are just as bad as they make threats against teachers making them quite fearful for their safety.

Prevent is a lose lose.

MaizieD parents have responsibility for their children from birth.

Whilst I agree that other agencies should be there to offer guidance and step in when there are obvious issues (which doesn’t happen often enough)

Parents should be aware of their children’s activities and mental wellbeing.

Prevent should be as the name says. It should prevent any crime, not just terrorism. Cases like the Southport killer of those three young girls attending a fance glass. was known to Prevent, mental health and apparently the school reported him many times. Also for carrying a knife and assault but nothing was done. Even his father reported him. So obviously no joined up action was taken. This tragedy could have been prevented.

Dance class

* GrannyGravy* there are often no extended families and this might be because their own parents weren’t very good at parenting or got no help themselves and so it goes down the generations. We live what we see.

People are no longer in and out of each others houses and society is so much more insular now that everyone supposedly has a bearable standard of living.
They won’t tolerate each because they don’t need to, unlike years ago when teenage newlyweds were commonly living with parents or in-laws until a home of their own was affordable, and similarly elderly parents now rarely cared for in their adult children’s homes when they become infirm.
Bonds were in the past forged out of real physical needs and a sense of moral duty.
Now people are so afraid family will think they are needy in the psychological sense they daren’t say either a word out of place in case they should be estranged or ask for help in case they get labelled as a burden.
It is all falling to a society that is often unwilling to accept where need is let alone finance it, until it directly impinges on their lives as it inevitably and surely will at some stage of the game.

Prevent is purely intended to spot the signs of radicalisation of young people. This might also involve knife crime of course.
God it's all so depressing ....

If family life/home circumstances are dire then kids will look to their peers for bonding and a feeling of ‘worth’ within a group. Some peer groups are healthy - boxing clubs, gyms with mentors and some, sadly are very much not.

The school took the proper course of action with Radakubana when they discovered his violent tendencies and carrying of knives, probably saving the lives of their pupils. He was suspended, excluded and referred to two special Schools, which he apparently chose not to attend.

This is where action should have kicked in; several agencies were working with him and were aware of his penchant for violence but he was left mainly to his own devices, for which the parents should be held responsible. There are residential Special schools where he could and should have been sent, but nothing was done and three girls lost their lives as a result. No doubt many meetings of officials but no action taken, and always somebody else's fault.

Why should one agency be expected to do the work of another?

You wouldn't expect a podiatry department to handle hip surgery.

More focus on CAMHS and youth services (and then youth offending) would help early on.

Prevent has a specified remit.

Maybe if the Prevent programme doesn't do what people want we need another service to fill the gap... If it isn't there? And then they need to work together where necessary.

Don't call the fire service when you have a burglary and expect a successful outcome.

NotSpaghetti

Why should one agency be expected to do the work of another?

You wouldn't expect a podiatry department to handle hip surgery.

More focus on CAMHS and youth services (and then youth offending) would help early on.

Prevent has a specified remit.

Maybe if the Prevent programme doesn't do what people want we need another service to fill the gap... If it isn't there? And then they need to work together where necessary.

Don't call the fire service when you have a burglary and expect a successful outcome.

I absolutely agree, NotSpaghetti

I also suspect that a completely new service would attract more funding than would be given to an existing service to extend its remit.

I realised that I didn't know much about how Prevent works or who is actually involved, so I tried to find out. I must admit I'm not much the wiser. It seems that it's a strategy rather than a service with clearly defined roles and lines of responsibility. If anybody knows any more, I'd be interested in hearing about it.

I agree with others that prevent should stick to terrorism (according to the current definition), but there needs to be a total rethink about some kind of integrated service to deal with people who are potentially dangerous. It shouldn't be limited to under 18s.

This Mi5 report shows which activities/groups are defined as terrorist and with current threat levels assessed as "substantial" I dont think resources can possibly be stretched to cover all knife crime.

In the report it notes several times that some terrorist groups have changed their way of working from organised groups to individuals accessing information and acting alone.

I think that is what KS is referring to when looking at what Prevent can best spend time on.

It is hard to find information on PREVENT I tried to growstuff but presumably some of it is not in the public domain. Google comes up with

"While Prevent is a part of the UK's overall counter-terrorism strategy and is closely linked to MI5, it is not directly run by MI5; instead, it is a multi-agency program involving various organisations like local authorities, police, and other community groups, all working together to identify and support individuals at risk of radicalization, with MI5 providing intelligence and expertise in the background to inform the programme'

I agree "but there needs to be a total rethink about some kind of integrated service to deal with people who are potentially dangerous. It shouldn't be limited to under 18s"

MaizieD

NotSpaghetti

Why should one agency be expected to do the work of another?

You wouldn't expect a podiatry department to handle hip surgery.

More focus on CAMHS and youth services (and then youth offending) would help early on.

Prevent has a specified remit.

Maybe if the Prevent programme doesn't do what people want we need another service to fill the gap... If it isn't there? And then they need to work together where necessary.

Don't call the fire service when you have a burglary and expect a successful outcome.

I absolutely agree, NotSpaghetti

I also suspect that a completely new service would attract more funding than would be given to an existing service to extend its remit.

Well said, both of you.

I thought, at the very least, that whoever is ultimately in charge would be named. I assume the Home Office is ultimately responsible (but I'm not even sure about that).

My daughter works for the National Crime Agency. For obvious reasons, much of their work isn't in the public domain. Nevertheless, it has a website and senior staff are named. There are some general details about the work they do. I naively thought Prevent would be the same.