Select Committee on Home Affairs Minutes of Evidence


Replies by the Home Office to Written Questions from the Home Affairs Committee on the Home Office Annual Report 2001-02

  1.   PSA Target 1 (Reductions in vehicle crime, domestic burglary and robbery): the latest outturn figures are all from March 2001. Are no more recent figures available? Why not? (page 16)

  As the Annual Report was going to publication in June and the crime statistics for 2001-02 were not due to be published until 12 July, the figures for the 12 months to March 2001 were the latest available at the time.

  Recorded crime statistics are currently published annually and the data to March 2001 cited in the Annual Report represented the latest published figures. The data for the 12 months to 31 March 2002 was published on 12 July.

  The Home Secretary recently announced (at ACPO conference) that we were working with the police on moving towards quarterly publication of crime data. This is in line with the Home Office and ACPO's stated desire to gather and publish better data whilst reducing the demands that this places on the police service.

  The Recorded Crime Statistics have been published alongside the latest British Crime Survey figures for the first time, and with an explanation of the effects of the National Crime Recording Standard.

  2.   PSA8(i) (Reduction in the time from arrest to sentence): Why is the target—which was due to be set by March 2001—not yet specified? According to the latest outturn entry, "work is ongoing to ensure target is consistent with other priority areas . . . and does not distort or over-complicate action on the ground"—has this been the experience of the effect of other targets? Which ones? (page 17)

  The quotation in the question taken from the annual report was made strictly in relation to the arrest to sentence target and does not relate to any other target. Our experience is however that specifying targets and relevant performance parameters is sometimes complicated by the need to avoid perverse outcomes and unexpected impacts on other targets. There has been delay in specifying this CJS target (on which LCD lead) and agreeing how it should be specified in the context of wider CJS targets has required detailed discussion with wider CJS partners about the interaction between delay targets and other targets, especially on attrition (the Justice Gap), and proposals for reform of the CJS. It was also necessary to take account of fresh priorities set in the Government's manifesto—for example, the 10-year plan to double the chance of a persistent offender being caught and punished. This was further complicated by the negotiation of revised PSA targets for the SR2002 review.

  Nevertheless, whilst specific targets were not specified or published by March 2001, criminal justice agencies have been focussed on the need for timeliness and have achieved significant improvements in performance in all areas. Particular achievements are with other CJS agencies, and ahead of schedule, halving the time from arrest to sentence for persistent young offenders:

    —  Substantial improvements in the time taken to deal with young people in the youth court who are not persistent offenders. In 2001 the average time between charge or laying the information and completion was 57 days. This compares to 87 days in 1997.

    —  These are significant achievements towards achieving this target.

  3.   PSA 8(iii) The average time from arrest to sentence for persistent young offenders has successfully been halved to 67 days at February 2002. What is the equivalent average time for adult offenders and how does this compare with previous years? (page 17)

  Information to calculate the exact equivalent time period for adult offenders is not collected centrally. The average time from charge or laying of information to completion for adult defendants in the Magistrates' Courts in March 2002 was 62 days.

  There are no figures available for the average time between arrest and sentence for cases which are completed in the Crown Court. At present, all cases commence in the Magistrates' Courts, and if necessary are committed for either trial or sentence in the Crown Court.

  Average times for cases in the Crown Court therefore start once the case has been committed and do not include the arrest to charge period. Details of proceedings in the Crown Court are not collected as part of the Lord Chancellor's Department Time Intervals Survey.

  The table below shows the average in days for adult defendants from charge or laying of information to completion from February 1999 to March 2002.
All adult
defendants
February 199984
June 199967
October 199972
February 200066
June 200069
September 200060
December 200064
March 200162
June 200164
September 200162
December 200159
March 200262
Source: Lord Chancellor's Department Time Intervals Survey.


  4.   During 2001-02, responsibility for seventeen areas of policy was changed across the Home Office, with two incoming and fifteen outgoing. What impact has this had on Home Office resources, in terms of both staff and funding? (page 26)

  The impact on Home Office Resources has been a net reduction of £183 million in 2001-02, £137 million in 2002-03, and £127 million in 2003-04. The figure in 2001-02 includes £46 million for General Election Expenses transferred to DTLR.

  The responsibilities and number of staff transferred are set out in Table 1. Some minor adjustments have occurred to the figures since a Parliamentary Question from John Bercow was originally answered on 28 June 2001. Some Home Office staff have transferred on loan only.

Table 1
Responsibility changesFrom ToHO Directorate No inNo out
Work permits Formerly Department of Education & Employment Home OfficeImmigration & Nationality Directorate 255    0
UK Anti-drugs Co-ordination Cabinet Office Home OfficePolicing & Crime Reduction Group   30    0
Liquor licensing, Gambling and Horseracing Home OfficeDepartment for Culture, Media & Sport Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate / Legal Adviser's Branch     0  12
Planning for the Queen's Golden Jubilee Home OfficeDepartment for Culture, Media & Sport Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0  10+
Functions relating to film and video licensing* Home OfficeDepartment for Culture, Media & Sport Criminal Policy Group    0     0
Functions relating to Public Entertainments* Home OfficeDepartment for Culture, Media & Sport Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    0
The Fire ServicesHome Office Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions Fire & Emergency Planning Directorate / Research Development & Statistics Directorate     0146
Fire Service CollegeHome Office Agency Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions Home Office Agency    0 188
Contingency/Emergency planningHome Office Cabinet OfficeFire & Emergency Planning Directorate     0  67
ByelawsHome OfficeDepartment for Transport, Local Government & the Regions Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    3
Electoral LawHome Office Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    6
Open Government, Freedom of Information, Data Protection and developing policy on National Identity cards Home OfficeLord Chancellor's Department Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate / Legal Adviser's Branch     0  13
Channel Islands/Isle of Man, Royal and Church matters, Hereditary Peers and Lord Lieutenants Home OfficeLord Chancellor's Department Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0  18
Human RightsHome Office Lord Chancellor's DepartmentConstitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    4
Animal Welfare Home Office Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    2
Hunting BillHome Office Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    3+
Sunday trading, Summer time, Easter *Home Office Department of Trade & IndustryConstitutional & Community Policy Directorate     0    0
Gaming BoardNon-Departmental Public Body Department for Culture, Media & Sport     0  40
TOTALS 285512

+Going on Loan. * No transfer of staff as there was less than one full-time person working on these functions.

  5.   The Report describes the establishment of the Criminal Records Bureau as an important step in reducing crime and making our communities safer. Why was the opening of the Bureau delayed? Why have backlogs already built up within two months of opening? (page 39)

  The start of Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) live operations was delayed due to the extension in the development programme and our decision to add additional testing and a pilot operations phase to reduce risk and improve readiness for Disclosure production.

  Despite these precautions and lessons learned from earlier government IT programmes, a number of teething problems have been encountered during early live operations and there is a backlog of applications awaiting processing.

  A process improvement plan has been established to improve productivity and throughput and this plan is being implemented.

  CRB performance is improving and it is anticipated that turnaround times will meet published service standards by end August.

  The lessons learned will be passed on to other projects.

  6.   In 2001-02 the target for violent crime was sub-divided into targets for different types of violent crime. In Section 3, however, the target on violent crime for 2002-03 is an overall one. Have the targets on domestic violence and offences involving firearms been dropped? If so, why? The latest outturn on reduction of domestic violence against the business plan 2001-02 states that a large but unreliable reduction has been measured—is anything being done to improve the data? (pages 156 and 45)

  Targets on domestic violence and offences involving firearms have not been dropped, they are key components of our violent crime target. However, the Aim 1 business plan in section 3 of the annual report focuses on the smaller number of high level delivery targets that reflect our overall objectives. The domestic violence and firearms targets will continue to be a focus of attention in the department as reducing crime in these areas is a high priority in itself and part of our strategy for achieving the main target; the unreliability of domestic violence data in the British Crime Survey arises mainly because respondents interviewed in the course of the survey are not always willing to disclose information about this sensitive crime. The most recent BCS survey, published on 12 July, includes an inter-personal violence module with a self-completion survey covering domestic violence, to be repeated every three years; we believe that this should produce a substantial improvement in reliability.

  7.   How will the target on reducing recorded robbery be met, given that the latest outturn shows a 13 per cent rise? (pages 156 and 46)

  We acknowledge that there has been a problem in meeting this target. We are taking action and the Prime Minister has said that this will result in getting the problem under control by the end of September.

  In fact, the Street Crime Initiative is already having an impact especially in the Metropolitan Police. Their latest published figures (June 2002) show that street crime is at its lowest level for 13 months.

  The Initiative combines work, across-Government, on policing and other criminal justice operations with action focusing on the causes of street crime.

  This work—for example the effectiveness of local partnership working—will be continuously developed to drive further progress towards the 2005 target.

  8.   Has the target on reducing rural crime been dropped? If so, why? (page 157)

  Reducing rural crime remains part of the objective of reducing overall crime. As mentioned in the answer to question 6 the Aim 1 business plan focuses on the smaller number of high level delivery targets that reflect our overall objectives. Rural areas will benefit from achievement of our targets directed at the reduction of specific types of crime and the fear of crime. In working towards achievement of these targets in rural areas, it will be necessary for specific rural considerations to be taken into account and levels of rural crime will continue to be monitored.

  9.   Has the target on reducing the economic cost of crime been dropped? If so, why? (page 157)

  At the time of writing of the annual report the economic cost of crime target was under review as a target as part of the SR2002 process. As stated in a written answer from John Denham to Mr John Bercow on 29 April (Column 612W) "The Criminal Justice Departments and Her Majesty's Treasury have not yet agreed how best to measure progress. There are no cost of crime targets for 2000-01 or 2001-02. Although there are no interim targets until 2004, we are making every effort to ensure that we reduce crimes with a high economic cost."

  Whilst under the SR2002 PSAs published on Monday 15 July economic cost of crime will no longer be a PSA target, we remain committed to seeing the cost of crime driven down along with the other negative consequences of crime. Currently we remain on course to meet the target as recorded in the Table of PSAs in the annual report (page 3—PSA Target Number 3) which states that the economic cost of crime fell by about 20 per cent in 2000-01.

  10.   Improving the standard by which the CJS meets the rights of defendants: is this still a target (not listed in Section 3)? If not, why not? (page 162)

  Yes, it is in the Home Office SDA and CJS PSA.

  Section 3 (page 74) of the Home Office Annual Report refers to the Home Office PSA on public confidence in the CJS. This is also a CJS PSA. One of the five performance areas being used to measure this is the treatment of defendants. Specifically the target on defendants is to "Improve the standard by which the CJS meets the rights of defendants" by achieving by 31 March 2002 100 per cent of targets in basket of measures (published in the CJS Annual Business Plan 2001-2003, in June 2002) and by 31 March 2004 100 per cent of more challenging targets in the basket.

  The current agreed basket of measures is:

    —  98 per cent of prisons by March 2002 to have a Legal Services Officer so as to ensure that all prisoners receive information about legal services on reception and know who can assist them with applications for public funding;

    —  50 per cent of Magistrates' Courts to have full access to a comprehensive courts-based bail information scheme by March 2002, rising to 80 per cent by March 2003;

    —  80 per cent of prisons holding remand prisoners to have a bail information scheme by March 2002, rising to 90 per cent by March 2003; and

    —  90 per cent of people in police stations requesting the services of a duty solicitor to receive the service within 45 minutes by March 2002.

  Of these four targets, LCD have met the first three. They are still collecting data for the duty solicitors' measure in the last quarter of 2001-02, so this will not be available for targeting purposes until the first quarter of 2002-03. They are collecting and monitoring data in other areas of the CJS to find suitable new measures, which will be added to the basket. The outcome of the current Allnut review of data collection within the CJS should give much more data on which to base targets for development. We are collecting and monitoring data in other areas of the CJS to find suitable new measures, which we will add to the basket.

  11.   In 2001-02, £100 million of the £525 million Criminal Justice Reserve was spent. Please provide a list of how this money was spent and provide an indication of how much of the CJR will be spent in 2002-03 and on what. (page 66)

  A total of £76.6 million from the CJS Reserve was spent in 2001-02. A further £232 million has been allocated from the CJS Reserve for work in 2002-03."

Funding Position 2002-03
Resource £m Capital £mTotal £m
CJS Reserve140.0060.00 200.00
plus unallocated/unspent from 2001-023.23 15.8519.08
Sub Total143.23 75.85219.08
Convert capital to resource (please note: agreed by letter from Chief Sec of HMT to Home Sec 26 June 2002) 13.8513.850.00
Sub Total157.08 62.00219.08
less existing and new allocations (see below) 166.9365.11232.04
Overcommitment -9.85 -3.11 -12.96



 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2003
Prepared 31 January 2003