IT'S a common thought: Why should somebody be allowed to saunter around all day, seemingly without a care in the world, when you can't afford to be a minute late for your 9-to-5 job? The Government wants to end what they see as the 'something for nothing' culture among claimants and seems determined to force home the point that the world owes nobody a living. Home Secretary and Blackburn MP Jack Straw has come up with a plan to stop social security payments to criminals who fail to comply with court orders, as part of a major drive to reform the welfare system. Benefits could be stopped if convicted offenders fail to comply with strict new requirements such as actively looking for work and abiding by probation or community service orders. But will the idea work?

ANDREA MULDOON reports.

ANDREW Riley is 24 and has a conviction for theft.

Tell him that Jack Straw is planning to cut benefits to criminals who misbehave and his reponse is blunt: "The reason I stole was to get money to live on. If my benefits had been stopped it would have made things even worse.

"My main concern at the time was where my next meal and bed was coming from. I would have had to get money from somewhere."

Andrew's sentiments are echoed by other residents at Hyndburn Christian Stable, in Russia Street, Accrington, which provides emergency accommodation and drop-in facilities for people aged 16 to 25.

Resident Lisa Smith, 18, who has been homeless on and off for three years, added: "It is not always easy keeping appointments or proving you are looking for work.

"Taking benefits from people who are already depressed and having problems will force them to find other ways of getting money to live. They could end up turning to crime or drugs."

Paul Cavadino, director of policy of the National Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders, said the proposal would cause more crime than it would prevent. This is a view supported, in part, by Blackburn, Darwen and District Victim Support.

Co-ordinator Les James said: "Any initiative designed to prevent reoffending is supported. However, to stop social security benefits would appear to be an extension of the sentencing process and the powers of the court.

"Such an initiative would probably directly affect dependants rather that the offender.

"We are sympathetic to the view point that by increasing poverty the chance of committing further crime is also increased.

"Any changes should be victim orientated. For instance, when a compensation order is made by a court this should be paid immediately out of public funds."

Linda Sharratt and other workers at Blackburn's Nightsafe charity, which helps homeless young people, said: "It will mean they have even less to lose by committing crime. It will make the situation worse not better.

"The people being targeted often lead very chaotic lives and stopping their income for something like missing an appointment could be dangerous."

Lancashire Probation Service have also been vocal on the subject.

John Crawforth, chief probation officer, said: "We recognise how important it is that court orders and prison licences are enforced vigorously and effectively.

"The public has a right to expect this. Good enforcement reduces the risk of further offending and is a fundamental part of our job in supervising offenders. "The proposal to withhold social security benefits from offenders who don't comply with probation supervision, breaks new ground and we have yet to see the details.

"We will want to consider the practical implications very carefully but we support the emphasis that the Government is placing on good enforcement and welcome any constructive proposals to improve it."

The moral aspect of the debate has been considered by the Rev Paul Battersby, social responsibility officer for the Church of England in Lancashire.

He said: "I do think it is right for the Government to campaign for people to shop benefit cheats and I understand their dilemmas in this area.

"However, it would be vital that a proper safety net was put in place to allow for the families of offenders, otherwise they would also be punished through no fault of their own if benefits were stopped."

The idea of docking some of the benefit from convicted criminals who break probation or community service orders was suggested by Mr Straw to his fellow Cabinet Minister and Social Security supremo Alistair Darling.

Mr Straw said: "There's a problem concerning people who break probation and community service orders.

"When people are given these orders, they actually have to sign a form giving their consent. They are entering into a contract with the state to observe the conditions of the court orders.

"If they break their side of that contract, it is appropriate that the State should consider whether it should withdraw from some part of its side of the bargain in terms of payment to those offenders in receipt of Social Security benefit."

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.