Have Scottish Executive ministers created a rod for their collective back with the high-profile campaign against persistent youth offending? The figures suggest they might have. Ministers set a target to reduce the number of persistent young offenders (PYOs) by 10% by March 2006 and by a further 10% by the same month next year. Since the target was set, the number has increased, not fallen. Figures published yesterday show there were 1388 young people classed as PYOs in 2005-6 compared with the 2003-4 baseline figure of 1201; this despite a near 20-fold increase in funding for youth justice services in the past six years.

Have Scottish Executive ministers created a rod for their collective back with the high-profile campaign against persistent youth offending? The figures suggest they might have. Ministers set a target to reduce the number of persistent young offenders (PYOs) by 10% by March 2006 and by a further 10% by the same month next year. Since the target was set, the number has increased, not fallen. Figures published yesterday show there were 1388 young people classed as PYOs in 2005-6 compared with the 2003-4 baseline figure of 1201; this despite a near 20-fold increase in funding for youth justice services in the past six years.

But it would be wrong to infer that money is being poured wantonly into a bottomless pit populated by nasty 14-18-year-olds up to no good. The services encompass the carrot (giving serious young offenders expert help and advice to direct them towards the straight and narrow) and the stick (tags to keep them off the streets). These services come into play when teenagers are classified as PYOs (if they are involved in five offending episodes each equivalent to a Children's Panel referral within six months).

The intention is that, having progressed through the system, they will be turned into responsible young adults capable of leading fulfilling lives. Three cheers to that sentiment. That more teenagers are being classified as PYOs gives an idea of the scale of the challenge. Or does it? The question is begged by misgivings about the exact nature of the problem, and what the numbers mean for overloading the very system in place to address it.

While the new figures confirm a rise in persistent youth offending, they also show that, in some local authority areas, there has been a drop. Is this because the councils involved are better at addressing this before it becomes a statistic? Is it because they do not have a problem? Or is it because they are reluctant to follow the path laid out by the executive because they believe tagging is counterproductive?

The raw figures do not provide the answers. What is clear, however, from the example of Glasgow is that taking a muscular approach, including tagging, inflates the figures and puts more strain on already overburdened social services. The city, which has reported the biggest increase in persistent youth offending, does not appear to have any qualms about tagging (as part of a wider approach, to be fair) and anticipates using the sanction more in the future. Across Scotland, PYOs are a problem that must be addressed since they blight communities and, left unchecked and unrehabilitated, they can go on to commit graver crimes. Setting a target that was unattainable, in part because the numbers involved were not known (and are still not clear), has proved to be a hindrance that could, and should, have been avoided.