| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Prosecutions (Staffordshire)
31. Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): If he will make a statement on the CPS's success rate in prosecutions in south Staffordshire. [131295]
The Solicitor-General (Mr. Ross Cranston): In the year ending March 2000, the south Staffordshire branch of the Crown Prosecution Service secured 11,228 convictions in magistrates courts, representing 98.7 per cent. of all cases proceeding to a hearing. A further 596 convictions were recorded in the Crown court, amounting to 87.8 per cent. of hearings. These figures indicate that the service is making a strong and effective contribution to criminal justice in that part of the country.
Mr. Fabricant: The Government are becoming renowned not only for their contempt for Parliament, but for their contempt for traditions. The Solicitor-General will be aware that the magistrates court in Lichfield closed a few months ago, after 600 years of progress. When will he meet the witness service in Staffordshire, which tells me that it is becoming increasingly difficulty to get witnesses to travel from Lichfield to Tamworth and other parts of Staffordshire and the west midlands to give evidence? When will he accept that his Government's decision to close Lichfield magistrates court was the wrong decision?
The Solicitor-General: I know that the hon. Gentleman has campaigned strongly on this matter, although the strength of the argument does not increase with repetition. There is a tension between efficiency and effectiveness in the processing of cases through the courts on the one hand and local justice on the other. A balance has to be struck and, in the case of Lichfield, the balance was struck by a decision to close the court. That was only after a careful evaluation of the need for witnesses to travel distances to other courts. I believe that the decision was a right one.
Mr. David Kidney (Stafford): Does my hon. Friend recall the times that I have pressed him to increase the funding for Staffordshire's CPS? Will he say how last week's magnificent settlement in the spending review will help the CPS to employ more prosecutors and be more effective in prosecuting offenders?
The Solicitor-General: I cannot disagree that the settlement was magnificent, and the result is a 12 per cent. real-terms increase for 2001-02, which will continue over the three years of the comprehensive spending review. The result for front-line services in Staffordshire, and elsewhere, is that the CPS will now be able to prosecute
more cases. When the CPS was established by the previous Government, it was underfunded. We have redressed that problem.
Mr. John Burnett (Torridge and West Devon): Presumably the success rate of the CPS in south Staffordshire is among the matters considered by the chief inspector of the CPS. Given low morale in the CPS, will
the Solicitor-General arrange for the chief inspector to make an urgent report into CPS efficiency and morale, and publish it as soon as possible?
The Solicitor-General: As a result of increased spending on the CPS, morale has risen enormously. The CPS is now in a position to play its role in the criminal justice system.
Business of the House
12.31 pm
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire): May I ask the Leader of the House to give us the business for the first week after the recess?
The President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons (Mrs. Margaret Beckett): The business for the first week after the summer recess will be as follows:
Monday 23 October--The House will meet to elect a Speaker.
Tuesday 24 October--Second Reading of the Insolvency Bill [Lords].
Wednesday 25 October--Opposition Day [18th Allotted Day]. There will be a debate on an Opposition motion, subject to be announced.
Thursday 26 October--Debate on defence procurement on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
Friday 27 October--The House will not be sitting.
The provisional business for the following week will include:
Monday 30 October--There will be a debate on the Seventh Report from the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee on the Rural White Paper and the Eleventh Report from the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee on the Urban White Paper, followed by a debate on the Ninth Report from the Trade and Industry Committee on the proposed public-private partnership for British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. Both debates will arise on a motion for the Adjournment of the House.
I should also like to inform the House that the business in Westminster Hall for the first two weeks after the summer recess will be:
Thursday 26 October--Debate on the Third Report from the Select Committee on Home Affairs on the double jeopardy rule.
Thursday 2 November--Debate on the Third Report from the Select Committee on Trade and Industry on the future of the Export Credits Guarantee Department.
Sir George Young: The House is grateful for the business for the first week back, and for the hint of the business for the following week.
I welcome the debate on defence procurement. Can the Leader of the House confirm that we will also have the normal two-day defence debate during the spill-over session? Will that take place on a defence White Paper?
May we have a debate on early-day motion 1027, which has been has been signed by two former Home Secretaries and a former Attorney-General?
[That this House condemns the Home Secretary for his statement during the second reading of the Criminal Justice (Mode of Trial) (No. 2) Bill that the bill enjoyed "the active endorsement of the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Bingham" (Official Report, Volume 345, No. 58, column 886), when correspondence between the Noble and Learned Lord and the Home Secretary now shows that this was not the case; and calls on the Home Secretary to apologise to the Noble and Learned Lord, and to the House.]
Before we rise, may we also have a statement from the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on his decision to recommend a royal prerogative of mercy for James McArdle, who was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment in 1998 following the docklands bombing in which two civilians were killed? That decision has aroused the deepest concern, and the House expects a full explanation.
Today sees the publication of the Government's response to the Sutherland commission on long-term care, which is of great interest to the House and our constituents. Can the right hon. Lady find time for an early debate on it?
Can the Leader of the House shed any light on the likely date of the state opening of Parliament?
Finally, today's Order Paper contains two written questions about the future of the dome. It would be quite wrong for a decision to be slipped out by written answer as the House rises for the summer. Can the right hon. Lady confirm that the Deputy Prime Minister will make a full statement to the House tomorrow to explain how much or how little the taxpayer will receive from its disposal?
Mrs. Beckett: I can confirm that there will be a two-day debate on defence, but cannot say on what document it will be taken.
The right hon. Gentleman asked me to comment on an early-day motion calling on the Home Secretary to make an apology. My right hon. Friend has already dealt extensively with that matter in debate in the House, and I see no need for a further debate.
The right hon. Gentleman also asked for a statement from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. I cannot anticipate granting that request. The right hon. Gentleman will probably know that, had it not been for the action taken by my right hon. Friend, Mr. McArdle would have spent longer in prison than those who were convicted at the same time as he was--the co-defendants who were convicted at the same time, two of whom were given longer sentences.
The right hon. Gentleman also asked me about the royal commission on long-term care. I am aware that the House takes an on-going interest in that matter. I cannot promise an early debate on it, however, nor indeed can I give him more illumination on the state opening, although that will no doubt be addressed in the overspill period.
On the dome, I understand that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions anticipates answering the question of my hon. Friend the Member for Gillingham (Mr. Clark) later today. I am surprised at the suggestion that the House would want a statement tomorrow, particularly as it comes from those on the Conservative Benches, who normally resist statements on a Friday.
Mr. Dale Campbell-Savours (Workington): My right hon. Friend will know that many of us believe strongly in the principle of rotation of the speakership, which means that we will support only a Conservative or Liberal candidate as Speaker--that will mean saying no to some good friends. With that in mind, would my right hon. Friend invite the Procedure Committee to meet during the recess, which I understand is possible, to consider a revision of the rules and make a recommendation so that the House can convene during the recess to agree that?
Then, when we return after the recess, we can deal with the speakership under the new rules. Some of us feel strongly and are most unhappy about the way in which matters may proceed.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |