
A Labour-controlled council has sparked controversy by deploying powerful anti-gangster legislation against small businesses accused of minor planning breaches, in a move critics are calling 'completely disproportionate'.
Weapons Against Organised Crime Turned on Local Firms
Hammersmith and Fulham Council in West London is utilising Serious Crime Prevention Orders (SCPOs) - laws originally designed to dismantle organised crime networks and drug gangs - to target local businesses over planning regulation violations. These orders, typically reserved for combating serious criminal enterprises, are being wielded against companies for offences that would normally result in standard planning enforcement actions.
Legal Heavy Artillery for Planning Disputes
The revelation has raised alarm among business groups and legal experts who question whether using such draconian measures represents an appropriate response to planning matters. SCPOs carry significant legal weight and can impose severe restrictions on business operations, travel, and financial activities.
One local business owner affected by the policy told reporters: 'We're talking about paperwork issues and minor building modifications, not drug trafficking or violent crime. Using laws designed for gangsters against hard-working small businesses feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.'
Council Defends Controversial Approach
The council has defended its position, arguing that persistent planning breaches warrant stronger measures. A spokesperson stated that SCPOs are being considered in cases where conventional enforcement has failed to achieve compliance.
However, business advocacy groups have expressed deep concern about the precedent being set. 'This represents a worrying escalation in local authority powers,' said a representative from the Federation of Small Businesses. 'Planning disputes should be resolved through the proper planning channels, not through laws created to combat serious organised crime.'
Broader Implications for Business Regulation
The case has ignited a wider debate about the appropriate use of powerful legal instruments and whether local authorities are overstepping their remit in dealing with regulatory non-compliance. Legal experts warn that blurring the lines between administrative violations and serious criminal behaviour could undermine both the planning system and the fight against genuine organised crime.
As the controversy grows, calls are mounting for clearer guidelines on when and how such powerful legal tools should be deployed against businesses, with many arguing that their use should be restricted to genuinely serious criminal cases rather than regulatory matters.