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 1999 | 84 |
| June 1999 | 67 |
| October 1999 | 72 |
| February 2000 | 66 |
| June 2000 | 69 |
| September 2000 | 60 |
| December 2000 | 64 |
| March 2001 | 62 |
| June 2001 | 64 |
| September 2001 | 62 |
| December 2001 | 59 |
| March 2002 | 62 |
| 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 changes | From
| To | HO Directorate
| No in | No out
|
| Work permits | Formerly Department of Education & Employment
| Home Office | Immigration & Nationality Directorate
| 255 | 0 |
| UK Anti-drugs Co-ordination | Cabinet Office
| Home Office | Policing & Crime Reduction Group
| 30 | 0 |
| Liquor licensing, Gambling and Horseracing |
Home Office | Department for Culture, Media & Sport
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate / Legal Adviser's Branch
| 0 | 12 |
| Planning for the Queen's Golden Jubilee |
Home Office | Department for Culture, Media & Sport
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 10+ |
| Functions relating to film and video licensing*
| Home Office | Department for Culture, Media & Sport
| Criminal Policy Group | 0
| 0 |
| Functions relating to Public Entertainments*
| Home Office | Department for Culture, Media & Sport
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 0 |
| The Fire Services | Home Office
| Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions
| Fire & Emergency Planning Directorate / Research Development & Statistics Directorate
| 0 | 146 |
| Fire Service College | Home Office Agency
| Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions
| Home Office Agency | 0
| 188 |
| Contingency/Emergency planning | Home Office
| Cabinet Office | Fire & Emergency Planning Directorate
| 0 | 67 |
| Byelaws | Home Office | Department for Transport, Local Government & the Regions
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 3 |
| Electoral Law | Home 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 Office | Lord 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 Office | Lord Chancellor's Department
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 18 |
| Human Rights | Home Office |
Lord Chancellor's Department | Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 4 |
| Animal Welfare | Home Office
| Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 2 |
| Hunting Bill | Home Office |
Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs
| Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 3+ |
| Sunday trading, Summer time, Easter * | Home Office
| Department of Trade & Industry | Constitutional & Community Policy Directorate
| 0 | 0 |
| Gaming Board | Non-Departmental Public Body
| Department for Culture, Media & Sport |
| 0 | 40
|
| | | TOTALS
| 285 | 512 |
+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 £m | Total £m
|
| CJS Reserve | 140.00 | 60.00
| 200.00 |
| plus unallocated/unspent from 2001-02 | 3.23
| 15.85 | 19.08 |
| Sub Total | 143.23 |
75.85 | 219.08 |
| Convert capital to resource (please note: agreed by letter from Chief Sec of HMT to Home Sec 26 June 2002)
| 13.85 | 13.85 | 0.00
|
| Sub Total | 157.08
| 62.00 | 219.08 |
| less existing and new allocations (see below)
| 166.93 | 65.11 | 232.04
|
| Overcommitment |
-9.85 |
-3.11 |
-12.96 |
| 
