| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Stasi Agents
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will provide an occupational breakdown of the British Stasi agents investigated since 1989; [137495]
- (2) if the activities of the former Stasi spy controller in the United Kingdom, publicly identified in October, (a) have been, (b) are being or (c) will be investigated; [137494]
(3) if he will investigate the circumstances of the payment by the Stasi of sums to British Stasi agents between 1985 and 1989 in relation to discoveries made in October on which information has been supplied to him; and if those agents' identities have been discovered; [137493]
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 532W
(4) what assessment he has made of the risks to the safety of defecting former FSB officers if they are returned to Russia. [137490]
Mr. Straw: I can add nothing to the reply that I gave the hon. Member about the East German Stasi on 2 November 2000, Official Report, column 610W, and 9 November 2000, Official Report, column 398W.
Human Rights Act 1998
Mrs. Ann Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the implementation of the Human Rights Act 1998. [137620]
Mr. Mike O'Brien: The Human Rights Act 1998 received Royal Assent on 9 November 1998 and came into full effect on 2 October 2000. During that interval Whitehall Departments reviewed legislation, policy and procedures in the light of the Act's provisions and a range of training and awareness raising initiatives were undertaken for the judiciary and public authorities. The Human Rights Task Force played an important part in helping public authorities prepare for the Human Rights Act, issuing guidance and publicity materials and raising awareness of the Act among the general public. Financial provision has been made for dealing with challenges based on the Convention rights, especially in the initial period of operation.
Private Prisons
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many certified prison custody officers are employed in each private prison in England and Wales. [137846]
Mr. Boateng: The number of prisoner custody officers at each privately managed prison is:
| Privately managed prison | Number |
|---|---|
| Wolds | 139 |
| Blakenhurst | 231 |
| Doncaster | 249 |
| Parc | 256 |
| Altcourse | 292 |
| Lowdham Grange | 117 |
| Ashfield | 134 |
| Forest Bank | 215 |
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost was of the contracts and competitions group within the Prison Service in each of the last three years. [137845]
Mr. Boateng: The costs requested are:
| Year | £ |
|---|---|
| 1997-98 | 939,134 |
| 1998-99 | 1,122,844 |
| 1999-2000 | 1,379,395 |
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 533W
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish the Wilson report on the comparative costs of state and private prisons; and if he will make a statement. [137848]
Mr. Boateng: I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary gave my hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster, Central (Ms Winterton) on 25 June 1998, Official Report, column 587W. The Wilson report is one of the two reviews referred to in that reply.
Jackie Ballard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average cost is of a prison place in each contracted out prison. [137804]
Mr. Boateng: The cost of a prison place in each contracted out prison is:
| Prison | £ |
|---|---|
| Wolds | 26,224 |
| Blakenhurst | 22,622 |
| Doncaster | 25,335 |
| Parc | 39,546 |
| Altcourse | 57,908 |
| Lowdham Grange | 30,160 |
| Ashfield | 39,120 |
| Forest Bank | 28,886 |
The figures represent costs at the end of September 2000 annualised over 2000-01. The average cost per place for the eight prisons is £33,725. The costs for Private Finance Initiative prisons include an element for the repayment of the capital financing charge.
Jackie Ballard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what sum Premier Prison Services has repaid to the Prison Service as a result of the refinancing of PFI schemes for HM Prisons (a) Lowdham Grange, (b) Ashfield, (c) Dovegate and (d) Hassockfield Secure Training Centre. [137798]
Mr. Boateng: Premier Prison Services Ltd. (PPS) has not refinanced its Private Finance Initiative (PFI) schemes. In late 1999 the holding companies of relevant PFI projects and their parent companies were restructured. This mechanical change did not alter the charges paid by the Prison Service or its lender liabilities in respect of Lowdham Grange, Ashfield or Dovegate prisons. The same applies to the Hassockfield Secure Training Centre which is a Home Office project.
Jackie Ballard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much it has cost on average to build a prison place in each of the contracted out prisons. [137803]
Mr. Boateng: The capital cost for each Private Finance Initiative (PFI) prison place is:
| £ | |
|---|---|
| Parc | 53,750 |
| Altcourse | 105,000 |
| Lowdham Grange | 56,000 |
| Ashfield | 75,000 |
| Forest Bank | 62,500 |
| Rye Hill | 66,667 |
| Dovegate | 86,250 |
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 534W
The average capital cost per place for the seven PFI prisons is £72,167.
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many accredited offender programmes are running in each private prison in England and Wales. [137847]
Mr. Boateng: Blakenhurst, Doncaster and Forest Bank prisons each run one accredited cognitive behavioural programme--the Enhanced Thinking Skills programme. Wolds prison runs two accredited programmes: the CALM (Controlling Anger and Learning to Manage It) programme and the Reasoning and Rehabilitation programme. Parc prison is due to introduce Reasoning and Rehabilitation later this financial year.
Rye Hill prison is due to introduce Reasoning and Rehabilitation later this financial year, and the Sex Offender Treatment Programme within the next financial year. Dovegate prison is due to introduce the Sex Offender Treatment Programme within the next financial year. Altcourse and Ashfield prisons do not run any accredited programmes at present.
Reoffenders
Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reoffending rates are within two years of completion of (a) one year probation orders without any conditions, (b) one year probation orders with conditions and (c) the pathfinder initiatives. [137849]
Mr. Boateng: Information on reoffending rates is not available.
However, the percentage of offenders who were reconvicted within two years of completing a one year probation order with no additional requirements which was made during the first quarter of 1996 was 54 per cent. The analogous rate for those on a one year probation order with additional requirements was 58 per cent.
There are no reconviction or reoffending rates available for the pathfinder initiatives, since they have not been running long enough to provide the necessary data. Arrangements are in place for the evaluation of the programmes, which will include the production of reconviction rates.
Firearms
Mr. Tyler: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many offences involving firearms were recorded by (a) each police force in England and Wales and (b) in total in the year ending 31 March. [137739]
Mr. Charles Clarke: The requested data are not yet available.
The Verne Prison
Jackie Ballard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funding his Department provides for the evaluation of the Kainos programme at Her Majesty's Prison The Verne. [137717]
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 535W
Mr. Boateng: None. The independent evaluation of the work of the Kainos programme in prisons is funded by the Kainos Community, and is guided by a steering group which includes representation from the Home Office Research and Statistics Directorate, the Prison Service and the Kainos Community.
Home Detention Curfew Scheme
Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list, for the period between the commencement of the Home Detention Curfew scheme on 28 January 1999 and 30 September 2000, inclusive, (a) the total number of prisoners released on the scheme, (b) the number of prisoners convicted of each specific offence who were released on the scheme, with as detailed a breakdown as possible of the offences committed, including the specific offences committed by prisoners normally classified under the categories (i) other homicide and attempted homicide, (ii) other violence against the person, (iii) drug offences, (iv) assaults, and (v) other offences, including a breakdown of the prisoners normally classified in the sub-category of other offences called other offences, (c) the average sentence (1) received and (2) served, and the average period spent on the scheme, in respect of each specific offence, (d) the number of prisoners released on the scheme, with as detailed a breakdown as possible of the offences committed, who (A) breached the conditions of the curfew, (B) disappeared and were recaptured, (C) disappeared and remain unlawfully at large, and (D) had their licences revoked, and for what reasons, (e) as detailed a breakdown as possible of the specific offences committed by prisoners released on the scheme while on the scheme including all offences committed by prisoners who committed more than one offence and (f) as detailed a breakdown as possible of the specific offences committed by prisoners released on the scheme who committed a further offence while on the scheme that was similar in character to that for which they were originally convicted, including all offences committed by prisoners who committed more than one offence; and if he will make a statement. [134862]
Mr. Boateng [holding answer 26 October 2000]: The information provided in my reply is for the period up to 30 September 2000. As of that date, a total of 26,609 prisoners had been placed on Home Detention Curfew since the scheme commenced on 28 January 1999.
The original offences committed by prisoners released under the scheme during the period, the number of prisoners convicted of each specific offence, the average sentence received and served for those offences, and the average period spent on the scheme in respect of prisoners convicted of each specific offence, are shown in Table 1. The data are taken from the Prison Service's inmate information system, based on the data recorded by each prison. The table provides as detailed a breakdown as is possible from central records.
As at 30 September, a total of 854 prisoners placed on the scheme had breached the conditions of their curfew. A breakdown of this number showing the original offences committed by those curfewees is shown in Table 2.
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 536W
Information on curfewees whose licences are revoked and who disappear before being recaptured is not held centrally. However, information is held on the number of curfewees unlawfully at large at any one time. On 30 September there were 44 curfewees who remained unlawfully at large. This represents fewer than 4 per cent. of the total number of revocations.
Details of the offences committed by those 44 curfewees who remained unlawfully at large on 30 September 2000 can be found in Table 3.
As at 30 September 2000, 1,294 curfewees had their licences revoked, using the powers available to the Secretary of State under sections 38A(1) and 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991. The reasons for revocation were as follows:
- breach of the curfew (section 38A(1)(a) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991)
- the curfewee's whereabouts could no longer be electronically monitored (section 38A(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991)
- it was necessary to protect the public from serious harm (section 38A(1)(c) of the Criminal Justice Act 1991)
- the curfewee had committed an offence or breached any other requirement of probation supervision (section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991). Curfewees who are charged with a new offence may also be recalled on any of the preceding grounds depending upon the circumstances of the case.
A breakdown of the original offences committed by the 1,294 recalled curfewees, together with a breakdown of the reasons for their recall, is at Table 4.
Table 5 gives a breakdown of the cases where a prisoner placed on Home Detention Curfew is known to have been convicted, cautioned in respect of an offence committed while on Home Detention Curfew, or where a prisoner is known to be pending prosecution for such an offence. Where a curfewee has been charged with more than one offence, these have been shown separately.
Table 6 gives a breakdown of cases involving prisoners placed on the scheme who are known to have been convicted, cautioned or have a prosecution pending in respect of an offence committed while on Home Detention Curfew which is similar in character to the index offence or offences for which they were originally convicted.
The scheme is designed to ensure a better transition for short term offenders between custody and the community. Prisoners are placed on Home Detention Curfew only after a careful risk assessment, and the safety of the public is paramount at all times.
13 Nov 2000 : Column: 537W
Tables 1-6 have been placed in the Library.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals convicted of offences of domestic violence have been released under the Home Detention Curfew Scheme. [137813]
Mr. Boateng: Domestic violence is not a separate category of index offence. It would not be possible to provide this number, except at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if individuals who have received custodial sentences for offences of domestic violence are eligible for release under the home detention curfew scheme. [137877]
Mr. Boateng: Domestic violence is not one of the statutory exclusions from eligibility from the Home Detention Curfew scheme. Providing a prisoner meets the general criteria for eligibility--that they have reached the age of 18 and are serving a sentence over three months but less than four years--they are eligible for consideration for the scheme.
All prisoners considered for the scheme are assessed specifically in relation to the potential risk, to the victim or to other members of the public, posed by their release. Prisoners who present a clear and immediate threat to either the victim or the public will not be released on the scheme.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |