Much is being made in the press, by Nanny and by other politicians of the "yob" culture that seemingly has engulfed Britain.
We are being bombarded with stories about yobbish behaviour, ranging from stories about youths "hanging around in shopping centres" to violent assaults.
It is clear that something needs to be done to "correct" this situation.
Nanny is happily issuing a veritable avalanche of legislation that she claims will address this issue. ASBO's, "respect" and street patrols are being used to fight the yob epidemic.
Unfortunately not all of Nanny's chums are on message, Professor Morgan of the Youth Justice Board has said that the current debate about youth crime was sending out "contradictory messages".
On the one hand children were represented as the "country's aspirations", and on the other the were "condemned as thugs in hooded tops".
"We use the word 'yob' without distinguishing between very young children - who haven't chosen their parents, their neighbourhoods or their circumstances and can't walk away from them, and young adults...I don't think the word 'yob' should ever be used in relation to young children."
He said respect - the new buzzword for Labour's third term ambition to cut anti-social behaviour - was a "two-way street" and needed to be earned by adults.
I have a degree of sympathy with Professor Morgan's point about contradictory messages; the more you inflate a teenager's ego by telling him/her that they are the centre of the universe, the more likely they are to behave in a spoilt and uncontrollable way.
Even the phrase "yob" may be wrong.
Let us take the well publicised case of the 3 teen mothers (age range 12 to 16) who all live in the same council house, they are sisters, who have all had babies and who now claim £31K per year from us the tax payers.
Their mother blames the school for their pregnancies; funny that, I thought that getting pregnant involved having sex.
Are they yobs?
They are feckless scum.
Let us forget the nonsense about labels and using the levers of state to control teenagers.
Teenagers, as we all know, are useless lumps of overheated hormones that need to be strictly controlled until their frontal lobes have developed enough to enable them to control themselves.
The most effective form of control comes from the family, not Nanny and the state.
The most effective means of making the family take responsibility for the behaviour of their offspring is to make the family suffer when their offspring misbehave.
Nanny thinks jail and fines may be the answer to this.
The most effective way to make a family of scum bags suffer is to remove their TV set and to lock them up in their own house, without the TV, together.
Once deprived of the electronic mogadon the family would be forced to interact with each other, and the parents would see precisely how loutish and unpleasant their children had become.
I am sure that a few weeks of enforced interaction between the generations would stimulate the parents enough, to take the necessary corrective measures to bring their offspring back onto the "straight and narrow".
A firm hand from a parent is far more effecitve than an "intervention" from Nanny.