Parents of persistent truants could be forced to attend classes

The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, warned that the plans might be seen as "draconian" and "an extreme example of the nanny state" - and fall foul of European human rights legislation.

Home Secretary David Blunkett has proposed giving courts the power to impose parenting orders on families.

They could require parents of persistent truants or children engaged in anti-social behaviour to attend residential parenting courses for weeks.

The measures are part of the Government's new Anti-Social Behaviour Bill, perceived as a general crackdown on "yob culture", outlined in the House of Commons last month.

In a letter to the prime minister and other Cabinet ministers, leaked to the Sunday Times, Lord Irvine said he backed the move "in principle".

But he said: "We need to recognise that the change is in fact quite radical.

Some will regard a court imposing a residence requirement on a person who has not been convicted of any offence as draconian Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine

"There are plainly human rights implications here under article eight [of the European convention on human rights]."

He said the prevention of offending and protection of others could justify the proposals.

But "some will regard a court imposing a residence requirement on a person who has not been convicted of any offence as draconian, or an extreme example of the nanny state".

Alternative methods

He also raised the question of who would care for children while parents undertook the training, according to the paper.

A Home Office spokesman said the department did not comment on leaked reports.

But in a statement, the Home Office said: "When the home secretary introduced the Anti-Social Behaviour he made it plain that those people who have no experience of the misery that anti-social behaviour can bring should not stand in the way of those people wanting to take measures to do something about it. That remains his position."

Blunkett has already clashed with judges over sentencing

Alan Beith, the Liberal Democrat MP who chairs the Commons committee overseeing Lord Irvine's department, said Mr Blunkett should expect to have his plans challenged by judges and other ministers.

That's anti-social behaviour at Cabinet level," he told BBC Radio 4's The World At One.

"The home secretary has never liked anybody getting in his way when he has conceived what the solution should be.

"So whether it's the judiciary, or the House of Lords, or in this case the lord chancellor, his reaction is to fly off the handle pretty quickly and say 'nobody can possibly challenge my right to interpret what is the solution to this problem'."

Resources call

Conservative shadow home secretary Oliver Letwin said the row was symptomatic of the way law and order issues were causing divisions in government.

Mr Letwin said: "In 18 months at the Home Office, David Blunkett has quite failed to come up with a serious coherent programme for getting the police back on to the streets in any number, and for getting young people off the conveyor belt of crime."

Mr Blunkett's measures were moving away from what many people in the country thought was a "reasonable way of going about things", said Mr Letwin.

Simon Hughes MP, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: "The lord chancellor is right to point out the nanny state nature of many recent Home Office proposals.

"Of course there are parents who could benefit from help to improve their parenting skills, and there are children who could benefit from training to make them more responsible citizens.

"But much of this does not require new laws. It needs more resources to social services, other projects and the Probation Service."