THE Prime Minister's statement that no tactic was off the table was his answer to calls for more robust policing prompted by the shocking scenes of mayhem and looting on the streets of English cities this week.

A series of measures including extra powers for the police to demand suspected criminals remove face masks, extending gang injunctions to cover children as well as adults, contingency plans to use water cannon and the possibility of the Army taking on some tasks to free police officers for the front line were announced to a recalled House of Commons. Amid the tough talk, designed to intimidate the offenders and reassure the victims, the reference to the programme used by Strathclyde Police to tackle gang culture might well be missed. Nevertheless, this is the tactic that should not only be on the table but form the basis of policy. If adopted by the Metropolitan Police and other forces in England, it will be more effective in the long term than beefing up their powers.

In 2008 Strathclyde Police adopted a programme that had dramatically reduced gang murders in the US. The Community Initiative to Reduce Violence (CIRV) in the East End of Glasgow has almost halved the number of violent offences committed by the 400 gang members who have signed up to the scheme. It works on the individual level by confronting gang members with the consequences of their actions in the form of hearing from a surgeon who treats victims of knife crime and a mother whose son was killed in a fight. Those who move away from the gang culture and violence are given access to support and training. At the political and economic level it more than pays for the funding by saving the police, court and prison costs that would have been incurred if the offending behaviour had continued.

The cost is particularly significant in terms of the political issue which divides MPs. Underlying the unanimous condemnation of the violence and approval of swift arrests and fast-tracked court hearings is unease about the initial failure of the police response and their future ability to have enough officers available at short notice.

That makes it reasonable as well as political to ask whether, in the light of the riots, police budgets should be exempted from the spending cuts which form the central pillar of the Government’s deficit reduction programme. Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, broke party ranks to make the case to maintain police numbers and was followed yesterday by a number of Labour MPs.

David Cameron insists that the projected cuts over four years can be made while protecting the front line, but some authorities are already seeking the early retirement of experienced officers.

The lesson of the experience in Strathclyde is that intervention is not only better but cheaper than punishment. Positive action is also much more likely to avoid future unrest and make unnecessary such draconian measures as blocking social networks and mobile phone signals which cannot be easily contemplated in a democracy. The threat of eviction may stop some young thugs in their tracks but few of them think about the consequences of their actions. Evicting criminals is more likely to cost money in rehousing them. Prevention is always better than cure.