Replies from the Home Office to Written
Questions from the Home Affairs Committee on the Home Office Departmental
Report 2003
Unless otherwise indicated, page references
are to the Home Office Departmental Report 2003 (Cm 5908).
GENERAL POINTS
1. Why was the Home Office Targets Delivery
Report published in February 2003 rather than in autumn 2002?
The Department wished to give a coherent account
of likely activities, to deliver its new targets, presented in
the context of latest published outturn against the old SR2000
targets. The new targets came into force on 1 April 2003. Activities
to deliver the new targets were identified in the run-up to the
new target year. Only in February 2003 was there a sufficiently
robust indication of activities, across the breadth of the Department's
portfolio, to allow publication of a single document which would
give a coherent account.
2. According to a Written Answer, the cost
of publishing the Annual Report 2001 was £8,053,766 (HC Deb
3.6.03, 92W). Was this figure a mistake? What was the cost of
producing the Annual Report 2003?
We can confirm that the cost of printing and
publishing Annual Reports in 2000-01,2001-02 and 2002-03 came
to £80,538; £48,379 and £34,252 respectively.
Figures include design and printing costs but
exclude staff time involved within the Department. Compiling these
would involve disproportionate cost.
The £8,053,766 figure cited for 2000-01
is an error, reflecting a misplaced decimal. Cost figures for
the 2001 and 2002 Annual Reports can also be found in Written
Answers 23 July 2002, 1080W.
AIM 1 (CRIME)
Figures
3. Why are vehicle
crime and domestic burglary measured using the British Crime Survey
but robbery is measured by police recorded crime (p 3, SR2002
Public Service Agreement Technical Notes)?
The British Crime Survey (BCS) is used
to measure vehicle crime and domestic burglary nationally but,
because robbery is less common, the numbers of robbery victims
in the sample are too few to provide statistically reliable measures
of national trends. In addition the robbery target itself relates
only to the ten Street Crime Initiative areas which are not specifically
identified in the BCS.
Police recorded crime provides a good measure
of trends in well-reported crimes, are an important indicator
of police workload, and can be used for local crime pattern analysis.
For the crime types it covers, the BCS can provide a better reflection
of the true extent of crime because it includes crimes that are
not reported to the police. The BCS count also gives a better
indication of trends in crime over time because it is unaffected
by changes in levels of reporting to the police, and in police
recording practices.
4. How many applications for Anti-Social
Behaviour Orders were refused (p 52)? Is there a figure for the
number of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders granted since November
2002?
The latest available information on the number
of applications for Anti-Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) covers
the period up to 30 November 2002. Out of a total of 814 applications
for ASBOs since their introduction in England and Wales on 1 April
1999, 785 have been granted and 29 (3.5%) refused.
The figure for the number of Anti-Social Behaviour
Orders granted from 1 December 2002 to 30 March 2003 will be available
on 9 July.
5. The cost of crime was estimated to be
£60 billion in 2000 (p 42) and in its replies to the Select
Committee's written questions on the Departmental Annual Report
2001-02, the Home Office stated that it remained committed to
seeing the cost of crime driven down. On the basis of the graph
on p 16 it would appear that the cost of crime is increasing.
What estimate has the Home Office made of the costs of crime in
2001-02 and 2002-03?
The latest cost of crime figures, for 2001-02,
are 5% below the 1999 baseline and on-target (see page 16). We
continue to place high importance on reducing the impact of crime
in our activities across the Group. We are planning a significant
update to our estimates of the total cost of crime and this will
incorporate 2002-03 BCS data. The revised estimates will be published
in a report probably early next year.
Resources
6. Table 1 (p 169) shows planned resource
spending on Aim 1 for 2003-04 to 2005-06 to be considerably below
outturn for 2002-03. Are the figures for 2003-04 to 2005-06 in
Table 1 robust? How is this reduction to be achieved?
The apparent reduction between 2002-03 and 2003-04
is caused by a technical change determined by HM Treasury. In
2002-03 civilian support staff in the Metropolitan Police transferred
from the Metropolitan Police Civil Staff Superannuation Scheme
to the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme. This required a
transfer of £1.69 billion pounds from the Treasury to the
Home Office and on to the Metropolitan Police who in turn passed
it to the Cabinet Office. The transfer had the effect of inflating
our outturn figure for 2002-03 by £1.69 billion.
The figures for 2003-04 are firm and include
provision transferred from Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
(ODPM) and the National Assembly for Wales as part of the
Local Government Finance Settlement for 2003-04. Comparable transfers
are expected to take place in respect of 2004-05 and 2005-06,
so the figures in the table understate the likely provision for
those years.
7. More specifically, Table 2 shows planned
resource spending on the police for 2003-04 to 2005-06 to be considerably
below outturn for 2002-03. Are the figures for 2003-04 to 2005-06
robust? How is this reduction to be achieved?
As stated in answer to question six, the apparent
reduction between 2002-03 and 2003-04 is caused by a technical
change determined by HM Treasury.
8. Table 2 also shows planned resource spending
on the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) for 2003-04 to be considerably
below outturn for 2002-03. Are the figures for 2003-04 in line
with the Home Office's latest and best estimates? Is it the Home
Office's intention for the CRB to become self-financing by the
end of 2003-04? Will the CRB be expected to repay any of the costs
incurred in setting it up?
On 5 June, the Home Secretary announced (Official
Report col 27-29WS) that in the short term, that is for 2003-04
and 2004-05, the costs of the CRB would continue to be met through
a combination of fee receipts and contributions from the Home
Office, the Department of Health and the Department for Education
and Skills. As we move towards full cost recovery it has been
necessary to increase Disclosure fees. From 1 July the fee for
a Standard Disclosure will be £24 and that for an Enhanced
disclosure will be £29. Volunteers will continue to receive
free Disclosures.
As a result of this increase in fees, the net
resource requirement for the CRB in 2003-04 will be £18.8
million, of which the Departments of Health and Education will
each contribute £7.4 million. The CRB is expected to become
self-financing from 2005-06. There are currently no plans to recover
through Disclosure fees the costs incurred in setting up the CRB,
but we will keep the matter under review.
9. How much has the Criminal Records Bureau
cost the tax-payer to date?
The CRB's start up costs/operating deficits
since 2000-01 are as follows:
| 2000-01 | £4,645k[1]
|
| 2001-02 | £26,071k[2]
|
| 2002-03 (estimate) | £41,300k
|
TARGETS
10. Are baseline figures available for the youth crime
target (p 134)? If not, when will the baseline figures be available?
Baseline figures for the youth crime target will be provided
by the new Home Office Crime and Justice Survey and will be available
in January 2004, based on survey interviews conducted during 2003.
The figures will be published in a Home Office Statistical Bulletin
that will present the key results from the 2002-03 survey.
The survey will subsequently provide a measure of progress
in meeting the target, by providing a year-on-year measure of
levels of youth offending.
11. What is the level of robbery in the worst areas and
the level in the best areas? Has the difference between the best
and the worst areas increased or decreased in 2002-03?
The PSA target on robbery applies to the police forces in
the 10 areas covered by the Street Crime Initiative. The 10 areas
were included in the Initiative, on the basis of the volume
of robbery within them (together they accounted for 83% of recorded
robbery in 2001-02), not on the basis of local force performance.
Based on the latest published statistics, the attached table sets
out comparisons of robbery levels in the 10 forces comparing the
nine month period April to December 2001 with the same period
in 2002. For each period, the table ranks the forces according
to their volume of robbery in England and Wales. It shows that
robbery fell by 15% in the 10 forces April to December 2002 compared
with the same period in 2001. It also shows, comparing the same
periods, that robbery fell in the Metropolitan Police Service
by 22%, although the Service continues to have the highest volume
of robbery in England and Wales.
SCI Force
| Robbery Apr 01 to
Dec 01
| Robbery Apr 02 to
Dec 02
| % difference between 9 months 01 and
9 months 02
| Volume difference between 9 months 01 and 9 months 02
|
| Volume | Rank for all forces in E&W
| Volume | Rank for all
forces in
E&W
| | |
| MPS | 40,055 | 1
| 31,248 | 1 | -22%
| -8,807 |
| West Midlands | 9,808 | 2
| 7,681 | 3 | -22%
| -2,127 |
| GMP | 7,933 | 3
| 8,138 | 2 | 3%
| 205 |
| West Yorkshire | 3,855 | 4
| 3,705 | 4 | -4%
| -150 |
Avon and Somerset
3,333
| 5 | 2,763 | 5
| -17% | -570 |
| Merseyside | 2,223 | 6
| 2,297 | 6 | 3%
| 74 |
| Thames Valley | 2,099 | 7
| 1,816 | 8 | -13%
| -283 |
| Nottinghamshire | 1,897 | 8
| 2,077 | 7 | 9%
| 180 |
| South Yorkshire | 1,393 | 9
| 1,642 | 9 | 18%
| 249 |
| Lancashire | 1,206 | 10
| 1,089 | 12 | -10%
| -117 |
| Total | 73,802 |
| 62,456 | | -15%
| -11,346 |
12. In SR2000 the PSA target was to produce a reduction
in the level of recorded robbery in principal cities by 14% against
a baseline of 1999-2000 whereas in the SR2002 PSA it is to reduce
robbery in the 10 Street Crime Initiative areas by 14% from 1999-2000
to 2005. What is the reason for, and effect of, the change in
the PSA target covering robbery in cities?
The SR2000 target for robbery was based on the cumulative
estimated impact of five police forces (the Metropolitan Police
Service, West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire and
Merseyside) each achieving their Best Value Performance Indicator
(BVPI) on robbery. On 17 March 2002, the Street Crime Initiative
was announced following continued rises in robbery and, in the
summer of 2002, the PSA was extended to a further five forces
(Avon and Somerset, Thames Valley, Nottinghamshire, South Yorkshire
and Lancashire). The purpose of the change was to apply the PSA
to the areas with the vast majority of robbery in England and
Wales: the ten forces together accounted for 83% of recorded robbery
in 2001-02. The achievement of the revised PSA will deliver a
greater reduction in robbery than would otherwise have been the
case.
13. New PSA 2 (SR2002) requires improvement in the performance
of all police forces, and significant reduction in the performance
gap between the best and worst performing forces, and a significant
increase in the proportion of time spent on frontline duties.
Is the Home Office able to outline what "significant"
means in each of these instances? When will the baseline be established
and when will the first results be available?
Policing performance in the 43 local police forces in England
and Wales will be evaluated using the Policing Performance Assessment
Framework (PPAF). This will assess policing performance in six
"domains" (reducing crime, investigating crime, promoting
public safety, providing assistance, citizen focus and resource
usage).
The target for significantly reducing the performance gap
between the best and worst performing forces will be met if, in
2005-06, no forces performance is x% worse, in any domain,
than the average for its Most Similar Forces (MSF) in 2002-03,
as set out in the performance monitors (the graphical illustration
of police performance—the first set of which was published
in February 2003). The determination of this percentage change
(x) is in progress. The MSF groupings need to be revised following
the publication of 2001 census data. We expect to finalise the
definition in the autumn, following the publication of a new set
of performance monitors, when we will have a clear idea of the
performance gaps which need to be closed. This will be in time
for inclusion in a revision of the National Policing Plan in November.
Results will be published annually—as part of the performance
monitors publication.
We expect to finalise shortly a detailed definition of what
constitutes "frontline policing". There are important
ramifications in this in policy and operational terms. A measure
for this element of the PSA 2 target is being developed which
will be based on an Activity Analysis element of the Activity
Based Costing model for the police. This will demonstrate the
proportion of police time, which is expended on frontline policing.
We anticipate that data will be available from forces by November
this year, allowing baselines to be determined—against which
improvements can be measured during the remainder of the target
period.
14. What work is being done to improve the rate of early
retirement on the grounds of ill-health from the police service?
Has the Police Standards Unit done any work on this, and if so,
what has been the impact?
We published in the National Policing Plan in November targets
for forces to reduce ill-health retirement to 6.5 medical retirements
per 1,000 police strength by 2005-06.
Arrangements for improvement in the management of ill-health
were included in the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) Agreement
reached in May 2002. Guidance, agreed by both Sides of the PNB,
on the key areas of managing ill-health retirement was issued
to forces in March 2003 to come into effect on 1 July. Where necessary
the agreed best practice has been supported through changes to
the Police Pensions Regulations in Police Pensions. The Amendment
Regulations (Statutory Instrument 2003/535) came into force on
1 April 2003.
The Strategy for a Healthy Police was launched last October,
and took full effect on 1 April 2003, The Strategy has been supported
by £15 million worth of funding over the next three financial
years at £5 million per year. Much of the money allocated
in the first year has been spent on fast-track treatment with
the aim that sicknesses will not escalate to the point where they
render police officers or staff permanently unfit for duty.
Attendance management procedures have also been addressed
so that the Police (Efficiency) Regulations 1999 as amended from
1 April 2003 encourage an attendance culture within which sickness
absence management demonstrates a supportive attitude towards
officers and in terms of the efficiency of the organisation. Secretary
of State guidance was issued in March.
The PNB Agreement also included agreement that regional boards
of medical referees will replace the current system of single
medical referees appointed by the Home Office. This will be an
important step towards achieving the more robust appeals system
that is needed to underpin a fair and transparent system of medical
retirement. It is intended to award the contract in July 2003
and the new system is scheduled to commence from September 2003.
The Police Standards Unit does not undertake any work on
this as it is being driven forward by the Police Personnel Unit
AIM 2 (ORGANISED
AND INTERNATIONAL
CRIME)
Targets
15. Can the Home Office update the figures given in
response to the Home Affairs Committee's written question 3 on
the Annual Report 2001-02 providing the average time in days from
charge or laying of information to completion for adult defendants?
The table below shows the average time in days for adult
defendants from charge or laying of information to completion
from February 1999 to March 2003. Recent figures are on the same
basis as those provided as part of last year's report.
| All adult defendants
|
| Feb 99 | 84 |
| Jun 99 | 67 |
| Oct 99 | 72 |
| Feb 00 | 66 |
| Jun 00 | 69 |
| Sep 00 | 60 |
| Dec 00 | 64 |
| Mar 01 | 62 |
| Jun 01 | 64 |
| Sep 01 | 62 |
| Dec 01 | 59 |
| Mar 02 | 62 |
| Jun 02 | 64 |
| Sep 02 | 62 |
| Dec 02 | 62 |
| Mar 03 | 62 |
Source: The Department for Constitutional Affairs
Time Intervals Survey
16. New PSA 4 (SR 2002) target is for improvement in the level
of public confidence in the Criminal Justice System. The SR2002
Public Sector Agreement Technical Notes state that the Department
is working to identify the best way of measuring performance.
When will this measure be available and when will the first results
come out?
The measure will be available very shortly. It has taken
considerable time to develop, not least because neither confidence
nor satisfaction lend themselves easily to measurement. We hope
that the Technical Note can be issued soon. The first results
from the measure will be available in July 2004.
Miscellaneous
17. How many cases has the Assets Recovery Agency pursued
since it came into operation? How much has been recovered and
where has this money gone?
Since the Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) commenced operations
on 24 February 2003, 47 cases have been referred to ARA to consider
civil recovery or taxation action; 24 of these are under active
investigation, relating to assets estimated to be in excess of
£12 million. Four applications have been made to the High
Court in civil recovery cases (three for interim receiving orders
or freezing orders, and one for an investigation order), all of
which have been successful. ARA investigators are also working
closely with law enforcement colleagues in two criminal confiscation
cases, relating to assets in excess of £2 million. In the
short time the Agency has been operational, no money has yet been
recovered.
18. When will the recommendations of the Wheeler Report
on airport security be fully implemented (p 139)?
The Government is acting on all of Sir John Wheeler's recommendations.
Priority is being given to those that will most quickly improve
security on the ground, and to leading significant work on multi
agency threat and risk assessments at airports. Sir John's recommendations
amounted to a substantial programme of work, some of which requires
further policy decisions and wider consultation. These will take
a little more time to complete in full. We expect most of the
recommendations to be completed or well on the way to full implementation
by around the end of the year.
AIM 3 (CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM)
Resources
19. Table 1 (p 169) shows planned resource spending
on Aim 3 for 2003-04 to 2005-06 to be considerably below outturn
for 2002-03. Are the figures for 2003-04 to 2005-06, particularly
for criminal injuries compensation, robust? How is the reduction
to be achieved?
Recorded resource expenditure on criminal injuries compensation
rose during 2002-03 largely because of a provision of £170
million was taken out to meet the cost in future years of residual
claims lodged (before 1.4.96) under the former common law damages
scheme. In addition, funding was increased by £25 million
in year to meet the higher than expected costs of claims arising
under that former scheme. From 2003-04 onwards the costs of residual
old scheme cases will be met from the provision of £170 million,
thus reducing the call on resources which will now only have to
meet the costs of the tariff-based scheme (effective for all claims
lodged on or after 1April 1996).
20. In 2002-03 how much of the Criminal Justice Reserve
was spent, and on what? How much of the Reserve will be spent
in 2003-04 and on what?
In 2002-03 total spending from the CJS Reserve is estimated
as £207.7 million ( Final figures remain to be confirmed
by Departments). A further £225 million is planned to be
spent from the CJS Reserve in 2003-04.
The following table shows what the CJS Reserve was spent
on in 2002-03.
| Departments £000's | Initiative
| Resource | Capital
| Total |
| (HO) CJIT | ICT | 5,498
| 12,800 | 18,298 |
| (HO) CJS | Performance Management
| 538 | 105 | 643
|
| CJS | Support to Local CJ Boards
| 251 | — | 251
|
| CJS | Criminal Justice Units
| 176 | 138 | 314
|
ACJSC Beds, Herts, Suffolk &
Surrey
| Case Tracking Pilot | 23 |
— | 23 |
| ACJSC Cheshire | Victim/Witness Research Project
| 32 | — | 32
|
| ACJSC Nottinghamshire | Joint Criminal Justice Plan
| 30 | — | 30
|
| ACJSC Greater Manchester | MOD Project Worker
| 28 | — | 28
|
| (HO) HMPS | Attrition | 400
| — | 400 |
| (HO) NPS—Local Boards | Attrition
| 1,285 | — | 1,285
|
| (HO) JVWU | Witness Support
| 1,100 | — | 1,100
|
| (HO) JVWU | Victim personal statements
| 70 | — | 70
|
| (HO) HMPS | Magistrates Courts extended sitting
| 893 | — | 893
|
| (HO) NPS/Local Boards | Magistrates Courts extended sitting
| 39 | — | 39
|
| (HO) JVWU | Magistrates Courts extended sitting
| 13 | — | 13
|
| (HO) YJB | Magistrates Courts extended sitting
| 58 | — | 58
|
| (HO) PCRG (CRCSG) | Magistrates Courts extended sitting
| 505 | — | 505
|
| (HO) CPG—JVU | Vulnerable/Intimidated witnesses
| 3 | — | 3
|
| (HO) NPS—Local Boards | Persistent Offenders
| 463 | — | 463
|
| (HO) CPG—JGAT | Persistent Offenders
| 196 | 4,281 | 4,477
|
| (HO) HMPS | Street Crime Initiative
| 25,200 | 22,000 | 47,200
|
| (HO) YJB | Street Crime Initiative
| 600 | — | 600
|
| (HO) CPG—EMT | Street Crime Initiative
| 9,506 | — | 9,506
|
| (HO) PCRG (CRCSG) | Street Crime Initiative
| 3,400 | 14,800 | 18,200
|
| CPS | Attrition | 8,700
| — | 8,700 |
| CPS | Crown Court Sitting days
| 5,000 | — | 5,000
|
| CPS | Youth Court Time targets
| 4,000 | — | 4,000
|
| CPS | Victim Personal Statements
| 5,000 | — | 5,000
|
| CPS | Direct Communication with Victims
| 3,800 | — | 3,800
|
| CPS | Unified Fee Scheme |
1,000 | — | 1,000
|
| CPS | Magistrates Courts Extended Sitting
| 240 | — | 240
|
| CPS | Casework Directorate |
1,000 | — | 1,000
|
| CPS | Cross Border Crime |
1,800 | — | 1,800
|
| CPS | CPS Support in Years 2 & 3
| 15,000 | — | 15,000
|
| CPS | Vulnerable & Intimidated Witnesses
| 6,550 | 700 | 7,250
|
| CPS | Street Crime Initiative
| 6,100 | — | 6,100
|
| LCD (now DCA) | Attrition |
11,100 | — | 11,100
|
| LCD | Crown Court Sitting Days
| 6,340 | — | 6,340
|
| LCD | Case Progression Officers
| 5,000 | — | 5,000
|
| LCD | Youth Court Time Targets
| 3,500 | — | 3,500
|
| LCD | Fine Enforcement |
283 | — | 283
|
| LCD | Victim Personal Statements
| 3,600 | — | 3,600
|
| LCD | Auld Implementation |
500 | — | 500
|
| LCD | Magistrates Courts Extended Sitting
| 812 | — | 812
|
| LCD | ICT | —
| 4,700 | 4,700 |
| LCD | Vulnerable/Intimidated Witnesses
| 1,000 | — | 1,000
|
| LCD | Street Crime Initiative
| 4,250 | 3,300 | 7,550
|
| Grand Total | | 144,882
| 62,824 | 207,706 |
The following table shows proposed CJS Reserve allocations
for 2003-04.
| Initiatives (£000's) | Resource
| Capital | Total
|
| Attrition | 81,700 | 9,000
| 90,700 |
| Crime reduction programme | 0
| 40,000 | 40,000 |
| Crown Court sitting days | 11,340
| 0 | 11,340 |
| Vulnerable & intimitated witnesses |
10,100 | 0 | 10,100
|
| Persistent offenders | 1,000
| 5,180 | 6,180 |
| CJS performance | 2,090 |
200 | 2,290 |
| CJS accommodation | 700 |
170 | 870 |
| Case Progression Officers | 5,000
| 0 | 5,000 |
| Casework Directorate | 1,500
| 0 | 1,500 |
| Cross border crime | 3,000 |
0 | 3,000 |
| Witness support | 500 | 0
| 500 |
| Victim personal statements | 8,700
| 0 | 8,700 |
| Direct communication with victims | 3,200
| 0 | 3,200 |
| CJS IT | 200 | 13,120
| 13,320 |
| National/local funding | 2,300
| 0 | 2,300 |
| Youth Court time targets | 7,500
| 0 | 7,500 |
| Fine enforcement | 2,000 |
0 | 2,000 |
| Auld implementation | 500 |
0 | 500 |
| Unified fee scheme | 1,000 |
0 | 1,000 |
| CPS support | 15,000 | 0
| 15,000 |
| TOTAL PROPOSED | 157,330 |
67,670 | 225,000 |
21. How much will the DNA database cost (p 144)?
The DNA Expansion Programme will spend £183 million
between April 2000 and March 2004. (This covers the full costs
of expanding the database to cover the whole known active criminal
population, including the costs of employing additional scene
of crime investigators to collect samples from scenes that may
contain DNA, and IT upgrades for the database). The cost of processing
samples taken from individuals and scenes of crime during the
same period, to extract DNA which can be added to the database,
is estimated to be £116 million.
Targets
22. The Annual Report states at p 66 that the reasons
for the slippage against target ("Narrowing the Justice Gap")
between March 2000 and September 2001 were difficult to pinpoint,
as are the reasons for its subsequent reversal. What difficulties
does this pose in formulating a strategy to meet the target of
bringing 1.2 million offences to court each year?
A better understanding of the reasons for the slippage and
subsequent reversal should indeed contribute to improving performance,
and we are continuing to seek it. But the strategy we have already
formulated to meet the target (set out in the document "Narrowing
the Justice Gap: Framework" produced in October 2002, and
in subsequent associated guidance) is based on widespread and
substantial evidence and experience, in particular: research conducted
by Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) on each stage of
the criminal justice process up to charging; studies by PA Consulting
of why crimes that have been prosecuted fail to result in a conviction,
and of cracked and ineffective trials in the Crown Court; the
lessons of the Street Crime Initiative and of the delivery of
the Persistent Young Offender pledge, and Home Office research
on persistent offenders. All of this leads us to expect that the
strategy of tackling weaknesses in the criminal justice process,
targeting types of offender, and targeting types of crime will
lead to more offences being brought to justice.
23. How great a variation is there in the "Justice
Gap" between criminal justice areas? What are the reasons
for the variations?
One way in which "justice gap" performance can
be compared between areas is by comparing offences brought to
justice as a proportion of recorded crime. For the year ending
September 2002, offences brought to justice as a proportion of
recorded crime by criminal justice area ranged between 12% and
45.9% (national average 18%). Some of this variation is thought
to be due to differences in the relative incidence of types of
crime between areas. Some of it is likely to relate to varying
success in addressing the weaknesses referred to in the previous
answer. We are currently analysing the justice gap performance
of some CJS areas where there has been a recent decline in performance,
which should shed more light on the reasons for variation between
areas.
24. A "substantial investment" is being made
in IT over the next few years to improve working and provide better
services (p 73). How dependent is the Home Office on IT for improvements
and meeting targets?
As is now true across most organisations, IT plays an important
part within the Home Office and the Services it funds in securing
delivery improvement and meeting targets. As is also true elsewhere,
this contribution needs to be seen alongside other factors such
as having access to a well managed and appropriately skilled workforce
and working with our partners both at national and local levels.
The specific role played by IT varies across the piece and it
is often difficult to quantify its impact on specific targets—not
least because funding for targets is often not separately identified
and because getting value from IT investment often depends on
broader changes (eg to working practices).
Some examples of how IT plays into and supports improvement
and target delivery are given below:
— POLICE: key projects, being taken forward in partnership
by the Police Information Technology Organisation, include:
— Airwave, the new radio system for the police service.
This will, by provided enhanced and secure communications
improve the efficiency and safety of police officers. As such
it will contribute to reduced crime (PSA 1) and enhanced police
effectiveness (PSA 2);
— Custody & Case Preparation applications, two
software products that will support the processing of criminal
cases from the point of custody, making better use of the information
available locally throughout forces, via its shared availability
nationally, contributing directly to PSAs 1 and 3 and indirectly
to PSA 4;
— National Management Information System (NMIS),
a software product to collect, store and use Police Forces management
information at a national level. This contributes, in particular
to PSAs 1, 2 and 10.
— PRISONS: QUANTUM has delivered a major refresh
of the Service's basic IT infrastructure. The service is now developing
a programme of IT enabled business change which will consist of
a number of specific projects intended to enhance delivery capability.
Priorities include the:
— Replacement of existing prisoner information system,
to ensure that the best use is made of capacity and that prisoners
are housed in conditions consistent with their escape risk (PSA
5); This in turn will allow the Service to play a full part in
CJIT plans to join up the entire CJS electronically by means of
a "virtual case record exchange" system;
— Introduction of an IT-based Offender Assessment
system ("OASys") to support reduced re-offending by
better assessing prisoner rehabilitation needs (PSA 5) and facilitate
joint working with the Probation Service (indirectly supporting
PSA 4); Roll out started in April. Replacement of the existing
finance and personnel systems with a single ORACLE package which
will enable better use of human and financial resources, supporting
prioritisation and value for money (PSA 10);
— PROBATION: the updating and phased replacement
of the present NPSISS case-management systems with one that is
more capable and user-friendly, increasing effectiveness and help
secure greater public protection and reductions in re-offending
(PSA 5) through enhanced interpretability with other CJS agencies
(indirectly supporting PSA 4);
— OTHER CJS: in addition to spend by Home Office
agencies, that undertaken by other CJS partners, within the £1.2
billion total over the next three years, will support delivery
of targets for which the Home Office shares responsibility. For
example: better IT support in Courts and linked case management
systems to other CJS agencies will help reduce ineffective trials
(PSA 3) and, by helping reduce delay, improve confidence (PSA
4). A national benefits model is being developed which will identify
the linkages between PSA targets, key problems in the CJS (such
as unnecessary adjournments) and their root causes (such as witness
non-attendance), and the information flows which can impact on
them. Work is being carried out to align detailed IT plans with
relevant delivery plans both nationally and locally;
— ND: Many of IND's difficulties in coping with
the spiralling volume of casework stemmed from its reliance on
paper files. The Directorate's Case Information Database (CID),
rolled out in 2001-02, provides a single, high quality, case information
database producing robust, reliable and timely management information.
This allowed management to drive up performance throughout the
business and in particular meeting the target for consideration
of initial asylum decisions within two months. Other benefits
include the facilitation of continuous process improvement and
the establishment of an IT infrastructure as a platform for continued
modernisation.
The CID Enhancement Programme, began in mid 2002, underpins
much of IND's delivery plan for PSA 7. This includes the implementation
of critical business projects which will deliver improvements
in border control and screening, initial decision making, induction
centres and asylum support cost reduction, appeals and removals
and managed migration. The Programme also supports the introduction
of Application Registration Cards and cash payments to asylum
seekers. The project is due for completion at the end of June
by which time CID will have been successfully rolled-out to over
10,000 IND staff.
25. What are the reasons for the 11% increase in cases
going to the Criminal Cases Review Commission? Has the number
of cases continued at this high level? How will the Commission
achieve its target to reduce the number of cases awaiting review?
Will extra resources be provided to the Commission?
The probability is that the increase in applications to the
Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is due to the combination
of the greater awareness of the Commission and the higher prison
population. The number of applications to the Commission in 2002-03
at 932 was 11.75% more than for 2001-02. Despite this, over the
year the CCRC achieved a 7.8% reduction in the number of cases
awaiting a decision. Corporate planning had assumed 828 applications
for the year and had allowed for staff numbers to decline in line
with the projected decrease in case accumulation (in order to
avoid the necessity for future redundancies). The increased level
of applications has led the Commission to recommence recruitment.
The Home Office had authorised a higher number of staff than the
CCRC chose to employ and provided sufficient funding for this.
26. Why is the detection rate for crime not a PSA target?
Our overall objective for criminal justice (expressed in
PSA 3) is to improve the ability of the process as a whole to
deliver justice to victims. Detecting crime is the first stage
in this process, but it is not an end in itself—we need
to ensure that more offences are detected, charged and brought
to justice. This requires both an improvement in the detection
rate, and close co-operation between the police and the Crown
Prosecution Service to ensure that offences charged can be successfully
prosecuted.
PSA3 is to improve the delivery of justice by increasing
the number of crimes for which an offender is brought to justice
to 1.2 million by 2005-06 with an improvement in all CJS areas,
a greater increase in the worse performing areas and a reduction
in the proportion of ineffective trials. Achieving this target
requires contributions from the police, Crown Prosecution Service
and the Courts. The police will contribute in a range of ways
including improving their detection rates.
PSA2 is to improve the performance of all police forces,
and significantly reduce the performance gap between the best
and worst performing forces; and significantly increase the proportion
of time spent on front line duties. Improving the detection rate
is one of the monitors used to measure police performance for
PSA2.
AIM 4 (PRISON
AND PROBATION
SERVICES)
Targets
27. Can the Home Office prove the effectiveness of
its current programmes to reduce re-offending?
Yes, using a few different types of evidence:
— Evaluation of several programmes including drug
treatment programmes[3]currently
in use have shown reduced reoffending with some offenders in both
prison and community[4]settings
in the UK. For example "thinking" skills programmes
in prison produced 3 to 14 percentage point reduction in reconviction[5]and
Sex Offender Treatment Programmes showed 0.1 to 12 percentage
point reduction[6]after
two years. Other programmes are currently being evaluated with
results expected in 2003-04;
— Studies of the international literature on What
Works in reducing reoffending[7]support
current programmes and interventions in UK Corrections.
28. How many young people in custody completed 30 hours
of purposeful activity per week in 2002-03?
2,019 (70%) of young people in custody completed 30 hours
of purposeful activity during 2002-03 using the Youth Justice
Board's definition which includes personal development and recreational
activities in addition to education and training. [This figure
includes lower reported levels of 33% during the first three quarters
of 2002-03 as the data collected from the Prison Service for these
three quarters was based on a much narrower definition of purposeful
activity covering only education and training.]
29. How many a) suicides and b) attempted suicides have
occurred in prisons over the past year, and of these, how many
occurred in "safe cells"?
There were 105 self-inflicted deaths during 2002-03, five
of which occurred in safer cells. Research had demonstrated a
problem with under-reporting of prisoner self-harm (by about a
third), so a new, more reliable method for recording and reporting
such incidents was introduced from 1 December 2002. There were
8,980 incidents of self-harm in 2002-03, of which 299 occurred
in safer cells during the four month period December 2002 to March
2003. Of the 8,980, 354 were serious incidents of self-harm occurring
between December 2002 to March 2003, of which 11 were in safer
cells.
30. In the Annual Report 2001-02 the Home Office predicted,
with caveats, that "we are on course to exceed the 2004 target
[on juvenile re-offending] ahead of time". What is the Home
Office's current prediction for juvenile and adult offenders?
Why did the Home Office not include a prediction in the Annual
Report for 2003?
The juvenile one-year reconviction rate for the January-March
2001 cohort showed 22.5% fewer offenders were reconvicted than
predicted. This is the second year in which the target rate has
been exceeded. We remain on course to exceed the target. The two-year
reconviction rate for adult offenders sentenced to prison or community
penalties for the first quarter of 1999 shows 3.2% fewer offenders
were reconvicted than predicted.
Future Delivery
31. What recent improvements have been seen in Young Offenders
Institutions, in particular in Feltham Young Offenders Institution?
Additional funding from the Youth Justice Board has meant
a significant improvement in both the quality and quantity of
provision. This has resulted in the recruitment of additional
qualified teachers and managers, and the introduction of Learning
Support Assistants in establishments holding juveniles. Across
the juvenile estate level 2 accreditations in literacy and numeracy
saw a yearly increase of 23% during 2002-03. Basic skills accreditations
were 3,898, and 2,237 key work skills were achieved, the level
of assaults decreased by 8% during 2002-03, compared with 2001-02.
Feltham B (18-20 site) has delivered considerable improvements
to the provision for young offenders over the past year. Specific
improvements for 2002-03 (unless specified), include:
— 24.3% increase in of prisoners Voluntary Drug
testing compacts and a 6% reduction in positive Mandatory Drug
Test results;?
— Average of 27 hours purposeful activity against
a target of 20 hours from March 2003;?
— A 37% reduction in assaults;
— Self-harm procedures in the establishment received
a rating of Good from the Prison Service Standards Audit Unit;
627 key work skills were achieved for the year against a target
set of 125.
32. To what extent have rises in the prison population
over the past year eroded prisoner rehabilitation such as the
attainment of qualifications?
Although there are no indications yet that the number of
prisoners is significantly affecting the provision of rehabilitative
interventions in prisons, it is inevitable that at times of high
population pressure, such provision may be disrupted. During 2002-03
prisons achieved, and in many cases far exceeded their targets,
delivering over 41,500 basic skills qualifications against a target
of 28,800 and 89,00 work skills against a target of 45,000. Employment
and Offending Behaviour Programmes targets were also met.
33. How is the Prison Service coping with continued levels
of overcrowding?
Despite increased levels of population, the Prison Service
continues to provide positive regimes that focus on the reduction
of reoffending.
We are providing additional capacity. Funding has been made
available for 2,820 additional prison places to be built at existing
prisons. Two new prisons will also be opened at Ashford and Peterborough.
Together with building programmes in progress, these will increase
the total useable capacity of the Prison Service estate from 74,156
(as at 18 June 2003) to around 78,700 by 2006.
The Prison Service continues to investigate options for providing
further increases in capacity over the coming years, and as part
of the Government's prison modernisation strategy. This is based
on a combination of expanding capacity in existing prisons that
we want to keep in the long term, and a programme to build new
concept large multi-functional prisons.
34. What steps have been taken to improve conditions at
prisons which have recently been the subject of highly critical
inspection reports from HM Chief Inspector of Prisons? (in particular
Wandsworth and Pentonville)
The Director-General acknowledges the Chief Inspector's recommendation
on reducing the Operational Capacity of HMP Wandsworth, however,
given the current prison population, the only alternative would
be to hold prisoners in police cells. This would, for those held
in police cells, provide an impoverished regime below that available
at Wandsworth and would divert resources away form policing and
be expensive.
Although when fully overcrowded Wandsworth offers less than
either the Prison Service or the Chief Inspector would like it
does provide prisoners with the basic requirements of a decent
and, as the Chief Inspector acknowledges, safe environment.
Since the inspection in January, new staff arrangements have
been introduced at Wandsworth and this is already having a significant
effect on access to association, phones and showers. New workshops
have since opened thus increasing time out of cell.
The problems facing Pentonville at the time of the inspection
in September 2002 have been acknowledged by the Chief Inspector.
However, Pentonville's regime over the past six months has consistently
met its targets on purposeful activity and education. The prison
completed the highest number of offending behaviour accreditations
of any prison and prisoners now have daily access to showers.
Pentonville is a safe and decent prison coping professionally
and compassionately with the huge numbers of prisoners passing
through the gates every day.
As with all reports from HM Chief Inspector the Prison Service
produces an action plan based on her recommendations. These action
plans are cleared by Home Office Ministers and are subject to
rigorous monitoring.
35. The Home Office's aim set out at p 79 is to provide
healthcare for prisoners equivalent to that of the general population.
How far below NHS standards is the prison healthcare system and
what changes does the Home Office plan to make? Has the Home Office
a date by which it plans to achieve parity?
Acute care aside, prison health services have historically
operated more or less independently of the NHS, leading to concerns
in the 1990s about growing isolation and the emergence of a significant
shortfall in standards of care relative to the NHS. In response
to these concerns, a formal partnership between the Prison Service
and the NHS was established in 2000. Two new joint units, a Prison
Health Policy Unit and a Prison Healthcare Task Force, were appointed
to lead and manage a programme of work designed to modernise prison
health services, step up NHS engagement with the prison population
and introduce much better performance monitoring arrangements.
Principal priorities included developing better mental health
services (including the development of NHS funded in-reach teams),
supporting improvements in primary care services, developing the
prison health workforce and improving the prison health care estate.
This was accompanied by new investment to tackle, amongst other
issues, substance misuse, mental health problems and communicable
disease. This work programme is continuing but the two joint units
were merged into one, Prison Health, from December 2002.
As a natural development of the Prison Service/NHS partnership
and in support of the established objective of broad equivalence
with wider NHS services, financial responsibility for prison health
was transferred from the Home Office to the Department of Health
(in England) and the Welsh Assembly Government from 1 April 2003.
A Development Network of prisons and PCTs is being established
to provide a test-bed for the transfer at operational level. This
is likely to lead to some PCTs assuming effective commissioning
responsibility for prison health services in their localities
from April 2004. By April 2006 responsibility for commissioning
prison health services in England will be fully devolved to NHS
Primary Care Trusts (PCTs), thus effectively mainstreaming this
activity within the NHS.
36. In February Martin Narey was appointed first Commissioner
for Correctional Services. Why was this position created? How
does the new Board, which Mr Narey chairs, operate? What matters
come before the Board? What sentencing issues, investment strategy,
allocation of resources and staff matters come before it? What
is its relationship to the Group Executive Board of the Home Office?
Martin Narey was appointed as the first Commissioner for
Correctional Services with the task of setting the strategic direction
for the correctional services and ensuring the effective, joint
working of the Prison and Probation Services and the Youth Justice
Board.
Mr Narey chairs a monthly Programme Board which reviews the
progress of each of the three core agencies (HM Prison Service,
the National Probation Service, and the Youth Justice Board) on
delivery of initiatives to meet the PSA target to reduce re-offending
by 5%, and which supports effective interaction between these
core agencies and other agencies with a key role in helping re-integrate
offenders successfully into society. The Board collegiately supports
the Commissioner in his role advising Ministers on delivery of
the PSA target to reduce re-offending. The Board reports monthly
to the Group Executive Board on its action and progress on delivering
the target.
Issues considered recently by the Board have included achieving
more effective partnership between prisons and Drug Action Teams
in providing through-the-gate provision for offenders, work on
tackling difficulties in ensuring prisoners have stable accommodation
in which to be resettled, and work by Home Office researchers
on developing better estimates of the potential impact of initiatives
already in place on reconviction rates. Sentencing issues, investment
strategy, allocation of resources and staff matters are considered
by the Board where these affect the ability to deliver the PSA
target, but these issues are dealt with primarily through existing
structures, which take into account the plans for meeting the
PSA target.
37. In May Martin Narey said, in an interview with The
Times newspaper, that the merger of the Prison and National Probation
Services "may be a possibility" (20.05.03). At what
stage is this proposal? What would be the reasons for such a merger?
Martin Narey said merger was a possibility but explicitly
not a proposal, and had not been discussed with ministers.
Resources
38. In the three years 2000-01 to 2002-03 the average
increase in resources for Aim 4 was 11%, but in 2003-04 to 2005-06
it is 4% (Table 1, p 169). How will the Home Office be able to
maintain and carry through its plans within the SR2002 settlement?
The system of funding probation services changed with the
creation of the National Probation Service in April 2001. Prior
to that date the Home Office provided a large part, but not all,
of probation funding. Adjusting for this means the Aim 4 resource
spending increase in the first period (three years to 2002-03)
was just over 8% pa while in the second period (three years to
2005-06) it is planned to be just under 5% pa. In both periods
the increase in resource spending on a comparable basis is in
excess of actual and anticipated rates of inflation. This reflects
planning for increased numbers held in custody, expansion of the
work of the Youth Justice Board, increased workloads for the probation
services, the introduction of new court community-based disposals
and the costs of training new probation officers to provide them.
39. Why is there a 22% increase in funding for the Probation
service in 2005-06 on 2004-05 (Table 2, p 170)?
The forecast increase of 22% for Probation from 2004-05 to
2005-06 is £149 million of which £20 million relates
to anticipated inflation pressures and £129 million to the
cost of implementing the Criminal Justice Bill currently before
Parliament, primarily the introduction of "Custody Plus".
Accounting Matters
40. What is the accounting treatment of prisons constructed
under PFI? Are they on or off balance sheet?
The Prison Service has entered into a number of PFI contracts
which include the provision of buildings and services. The accounting
treatment of these contracts has been accounted for in accordance
with "Technical Note No.1 (Revised)" as required by
the Resource and Accounting Manual. The Asset is recorded as fixed
assets and the liability to pay for it is accounted for as a finance
lease. Assets arising from these prisons constructed under PFI
contracts are, therefore, on balance sheet.
AIM 5 (DRUG
ABUSE AND
CRIME)
Figures
41. What proportion of Afghanistan's poppy production
does the Home Office estimate has been eliminated to date (p 85)?
How sustainable is this?
The Afghan authorities believe that 17,300 hectares of opium
poppy have been destroyed to date. A long-term strategy to reduce
Afghan poppy cultivation has been drawn up, with the goal of eliminating
production by 2013. The UK Government will be releasing £70
million over the next three years specifically to fund drug control
activities in support of the Afghan authorities' efforts.
42. On the basis of the total public expenditure figures
in Table 1 (p 169) why will spending on Aim 5 fall in 2003-04
and then more than double in 2004-05?
The resource figures for drugs given in Tables 1 and 2 of
the Annual Report (pages 169 and 170) did not reflect the full
spending review settlement. There were one or two aspects of the
detailed division of the settlement between Home Office aims and
policy areas which were not completely resolved by the deadline
for producing data to be published in the annual report, and hence
this figure is not accurate.
The Aim 5 plan figures for 2003-04 to 2005-06 should be as
follows:
| 2003-04: | £181.7 million
|
| 2004-05: | £264.9 million
|
| 2005-06: | £336.9 million
|
| |
Overall Home Office spending figures are correspondingly
higher (ie by £91.8/£49.5/£2.4 million).
The increasing profile for drugs expenditure over the three
years reflects the importance the Government places on taking
action to tackle drug abuse, in particular measures to tackle
drugs related crime.
Targets
43. Have any targets been set for Drug Action Teams on
treatment waiting times? If they have, what are they?
Yes. As follows:
| 2002-03 | 2004
|
| In-patient detox | 4 weeks |
2 weeks |
| Community prescribing | 6 weeks
| |
| Structured counselling | |
2 weeks |
| Specialist GPs | 4 weeks |
2 weeks |
| Daycare | 4 weeks | 3 weeks
|
| Residential rehabilitation | 4 weeks
| 3 weeks |
44. What percentage of GPs offer drug treatment through
a shared care scheme on basis of data available in May 2003 (p
151)?
23% of GPs are involved with shared care nationally (in England).
45. In new PSA 5 (SR 2002) will the repeat offending target
in PSA 2000—to reduce the levels of repeat offending amongst
problem drug-misusing offenders by 25% by 2005, and by 50% by
2008—be measured? If not, why not?
Reductions in drug-related crime is a broader, more meaningful
measure than repeat offending. The old target was measured using
the "NEW-ADAM" survey, which no longer exists. It would,
in principle, be possible to measure the old target with the new
Arrestee Survey. However, the two statistics would not be directly
comparable given the different bases for sampling in the two surveys.
46. In new PSA 5 (SR 2002) will the drug treatment target
in PSA 2000—to increase participation of problem drug users
in drug treatment programmes by 55% by 2004, and by 100% by 2008—be
measured? If not, why not?
This will be measured annually through the National Drug
Treatment Monitoring System (NDTMS) against projections set in
the delivery plan. The next set of full data for 2001-02 and 2002-03
will be available in September 2003. Interim data for 2001-02
on those presenting for treatment indicate that we remain broadly
on track.
47. The Annual Report states at p 88 that "the range
of outcomes [of drug treatment] is greater within the same treatment
modes that between them". What does this mean and what effect
will it have on Home Office policy and programmes?
It means that outcomes within individual types of treatment
(for instance methodone maintenance or residential rehab), vary
more than between different treatment types. The Home Office is
working with the Department of Health and the National Treatment
Agency to improve the quality and standard of treatment including
the development of improved guidance, workforce training and operational
frameworks (such as models of care) in order to bring improvement
and consistency to treatment programmes. The treatment PSA now
includes the retention and successful completion of treatment
as a measure.
AIM 6 (ASYLUM)
Figures
48. How much will the new detection technology cost
(p 94)?
The Immigration Service was allocated £9 million for
the introduction of detection technology equipment. This has funded
the introduction of gamma scanners, passive millimetric wave equipment
and heartbeat detectors.
49. At which supplementary estimate will the agreed budget
for Aim 6 be clarified (p 100)? Why was the budget not agreed
in time for the main estimates for 2003-04?
We expect the agreed Aim 6 budget to be reflected in the
Winter Supplementary estimates. Discussions with Treasury on a
costed delivery plan for immigration and asylum had not been concluded
by the time the Main Estimates were prepared.
Targets
50. When does the Home Office intend to determine and
publish the proportion of asylum applications which are to be
decided within six months (p 100)?
The six months target is the joint responsibility of the
Home Office and the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Once
agreement on the target has been reached it will be published
by the autumn.
AIM 7 (COMMUNITY
RELATIONS)
Figures
51. Why have the Machinery of Government changes made
comparisons with previous years' figures impossible (p 103)? What
is the extra resource funding being spent on?
The annual report flagged that such comparisons would not
be meaningful. Resource figures before 2001-02 includes expenditure
of 5 Units that subsequently moved to other Government Departments
under the 2001 Machinery of Government changes. Therefore, comparing
previous years' expenditure to that of 2001-02 is not comparing
like with like.
Comparing extra resource funding in 2002-03, to 2001-02:
— £10 million was spent on increased provision
to voluntary and community sector organisations,
— £5 million was set aside as provisions by
the Commission for Racial Equality for their pension scheme for
the employees of Racial Equality Councils (RECs) who hold CRE
funded posts, and for dilapidation costs at their previous London
accommodation,
— the remainder was spent on the staffing, running
costs and programme expenditure of the Coroners' Review, Regions
and Renewal Unit, Entitlement Card Unit, and the Community Cohesion
Unit.
Policy
52. According to p 110, the Government will "increase
the role of the voluntary and community sector in delivering public
services". Which services, and to what extent, would the
Government like to see the voluntary sector deliver?
The Government aims to increase the contribution of the voluntary
and community sector to the delivery of public services by 5%
by 2006. We have identified the following service areas as having
the greatest capacity for an expanded voluntary and community
sector role:
— health and social care;
— education and learning;
— crime and social cohesion;
— children, young people and families;
— regeneration and renewal.
The Home Office's Active Community Unit is currently working
with colleagues across Government to achieve the aim.
53. What responses were received to the consultation paper
on Entitlement Cards and Identity Fraud? Would any scheme envisaged
be entirely self-financing?
We have received over 4,000 individual responses to the consultation
paper and details of the responses received will be published.
The consultation paper discussed developing a scheme based on
driving licences and passports both of which are self-financing
systems. No decision has yet been taken on whether to proceed
with a scheme or whether it would be entirely self-financing.
The consultation paper suggested that cards could be made available
at a reduced fee for pensioners and those in receipt of key benefits.
54. According to an article in The Times (3.6.03) 5,029
responses to the consultation collected by the campaign group
Stand were recorded as a single vote. Is this the case?
5,031 emails have been received via the Stand website in
response to the Government's consultation exercise on entitlement
cards. They will be counted in the same way as other inspired
samples or surveys of opinion which by their nature cannot be
representative of the population as a whole. Another example is
the response to an ITV Teletext survey which showed 2:1 support
for a card scheme.
HOME OFFICE
ORGANISATION
55. In March it was reported in the press that the Home
Office was offering early retirement packages to a number of its
most senior civil servants. Why was this move felt to be necessary?
The Home Office decided that in order to be best placed to
meet its demanding delivery agenda, its senior management needed
to be refreshed with new skills and experience. In particular,
we had identified that we needed more staff who were able to manage
programmes and operational units as well as develop policy. We
examined the our staffing profile against the sorts of jobs which
were likely to arise in the future and concluded that there were
a number of staff, for whom it would become increasingly difficult
to find posts—many of these were close to retirement. 24
staff in the SCS will be leaving during the current financial
year. We have already set about replacing them using a recruitment
exercise to bring in talent from outside the Department as well
as promoting staff from within. 40 staff at grades just below
SCS are being replaced in a similar exercise.
FIGURES
56. Please explain the one-off "technical changes"
to the accounts in 2002-03 in more detail (p 115). How much of
the extra £4.7 billion enhanced the Home Office's spending
power? How much of the extra spending went to meet asylum pressures
and how much to meet street crime pressures?
The 2002-03 provisional resource outturn, at £12.9 billion,
was £3 billion higher than projected in the 2001-02 Annual
Report. The majority of this increase reflected "technical"
changes that did not increase Home Office spending power:
— £1.69 billion for Metropolitan Police civil
staff pensions (see answer to Qs 6 and 7 for more detail);
— £170 million due to a provision for old Criminal
Injuries cases (see answer to Q19 for more detail).
Changes that did enhance Home Office spending power included
£785 million from the DEL Reserve with respect to asylum
and £180 million was provided as part of the package of measures
announced in the 2002 Budget to deal with street crime, provide
extra prison places and boost our counter-terrorism efforts (see
Written Answers 1 May 2002 columns 822-3W) .
The £4.7 billion figure refers to Local Authority support
for the police, provided as part of existing funding structures.
It is additional to the funding the Home Office provided.
NEW HOME
OFFICE HEADQUARTERS
57. How much will the new building cost? Will the building
be on or off the balance sheet? What estimate has the Home Office
made of the costs of moving? When will the new building be ready?
Once the move has been completed what is the estimate that the
Home Office has made of the costs and benefits?
The cost of the new building in 2 Marsham Street is £311
million NPV at time of financial close. At contract signature
(March 2003) the NAO gave the view that the building would be
off balance sheet.
The majority of the costs of moving, mainly staff from QAG
to 2MS, are in the contract with Queen Anne's Gate Property (AGP)
and thus are included in the £311 million figure above. There
are additional costs of the Information Communication Technology
(ICT) moves and these are currently estimated at £2.2 million
The new building will be ready for occupation in early 2005.
The estimated costs of payments to AGP will be approximately
£31m per annum, assessed as being in line with market rates
for the area. The benefits that will be derived from the new Home
Office building fully support the delivery agenda within the Home
Office. These benefits include:
— flexibility within the building to allow the team
structures to change with minimum disruption;
— provision of facilities within the building (cafes,
restaurant, meeting rooms, study booths, atrium areas, knowledge
centre etc) that give the staff the choice of how they work effectively;
— the ability to help recruit retain and motivate
the staff we need to succeed; and
— a modern flexible ICT infrastructure that supports
more effective knowledge and information management.
58. Has illegal timber been used in the construction at
Marsham Street, as alleged by Greenpeace protesters who recently
demonstrated at the site? If so, how was this allowed to happen?
No timber has been supplied so far for use in the new Home
Office building. The developer (AGP) has informed us that timber
has been purchased by their sub-contractors for their use during
construction and performing their obligations under the construction
contract. This timber comprises 217m3 of which 46% are softwoods
from France, and the remainder plywood 30% from Indonesia, 23%
Brazil and 1% Finland. In addition 2,917 pieces of sawn softwood
have been sourced from forests in Austria. All this timber has
been legally imported with UK Customs clearance.
The timber from Austria and Finland had PEFC (Pan European
Forestry Certification—European Ecologic Norms). The timber
from France came from a forest with a sustainable forest management
programme. Plywood from Indonesia and Brazil was legally imported
but the developer has not yet been able to supply information
about the exact sources within these countries. The plywood from
Finland was a trial purchase of sustainable plywood sources made
by the developer's sub-contractors seeking an alternative to tropical
sources.
On 6 June the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs issued a clarification to Departments that it was policy
to monitor the sourcing of timber purchased and used by contractors
in the construction process, as well as timber purchased for use
in the new building. The contract will in future be administered
to include monitoring of the legal and sustainable sources of
such timber.
Arrangements are in place to ensure that all future timber
purchases whether for use in the construction process or for use
in the new building will be shown to be obtained from legal and
sustainable sources. The developer has informed us that it intends
that no further plywood for use in 2 Marsham Street will be sourced
from Indonesia.
TARGETS
59. How are the efficiency gains recorded at p 117 measured
and verified? What proportion of the savings were cashable and
what proportion was non-cashable? What happens to the cash saved?
POLICE EXPENDITURE: The 43 local police authorities have
individual targets to improve efficiency by 2% per year. The target
relates to their net revenue expenditure and includes, as its
basis, income derived from grants by the Home Office, the Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister and grants by local authorities.
Delivery of the target is monitored by HM Inspectorate of Constabulary
(HMIC).
The target is assessed on the basis both of improvements
in efficiency (including cash-releasing savings) and of maintained
quality of service. Actual performance against the plan, and police
performance, are verified by HMIC with support from external auditors.
Over 1999-2000 to 2001-02 the percentage of cashable gains
was 46% (non-cashable gains 54%). The estimated figures for 2002-03
(subject to performance assessment) indicates that cashable gains
are likely to be 42% (non-cashable gains 58%).
Non-cashable gains are recycled into new initiatives while
cashable gains can either be used to recycle into growth or used
to support the overall budget.
PRISON SERVICE: efficiency gains are captured through the
Efficiency Programme which comprised a wide variety of projects.
The projects reported to the Efficiency Programme Steering Group
consisting of five Directors.
In the majority of cases, the project approach ensured that
achievements were self-verifying, such as a count of the reduced
number of specialist prison officers employed and the cost of
providing the same service for less. In the remaining projects,
outcomes were verified through, for example, sampling outcomes
at a selection of establishments or using related indicators.
Of the total £49.3 million efficiency savings achieved
in 2002-03, 42% (£20.8 million) was cashable and 58% (£28.5
million) was non-cashable. Cashable savings are used to meet unfunded
pressures such as the provision of police cells, funding of the
full year costs of the first Pay Review Body recommendations and
funding local early retirements.
PROBATION SERVICE: The efficiency gains recorded by the National
Probation Service (NPS) were provided by returns made from local
probation boards. The returns identified the amount saved and
how the saving was made. The cashable element was not recorded.
Savings made in the NPS were used to meet inflation pressures
and for re-investment in improved services. The allocations to
boards, for 2002-03, were made net of the anticipated savings,
meaning that the Department could be sure that its local efficiency
targets were met.
60. What are the efficiency savings for the non-Agency
part of the Home Office?
Collated data for efficiency gains arising from better procurement
are not yet available for 2002-03; in 2001-02, improved procurement
yielded gains of £34 million in the non-Agency Home Office.
Whereas information about other VfM gains in the non-Agency Home
Office has not been collated centrally hitherto, a reporting system
is now being developed to support delivery of the new PSA target
to improve VfM and to allow performance to be reported to Parliament.
INSPECTION
61. How would a single system of inspection across the
criminal justice system operate (p 116)? What would the advantages
be of such a system?
A single system of inspection is just one of the new models
for CJS inspection that we are currently considering. We have
identified a need—following a commitment in the 2002 spending
review and White Paper `Justice for All'—for a new system
of inspection to address the identified weaknesses in the current
arrangements. Namely that the direct and indirect costs of inspection
are increasing, that there is duplication across the system and
there is insufficient machinery geared to developing a cross CJS
inspection strategy and implementing recommendations made to more
than one agency.
Following a comprehensive review of inspection from a trilateral
team of officials and inspectors, a new system of inspection is
being considered by the National Criminal Justice Board to address
these weaknesses and introduce a tough new inspection regime.
It is likely that the model for a single inspectorate will be
discounted because such a system will be large and unwieldy. The
preferred model being proposed will rationalise the five CJS inspectorates
and strengthen cross CJS inspection.
The advantages of the new model of CJS Inspection being considered
by the National Criminal Justice Board are:
— Retention of the strengths of existing agency
inspection.
— Reduction in the volume of inspection.
— Increased clarity about appropriate allocation
of resources between single, thematic and cross CJS inspection.
— A clearer distinction between the role of inspection
and that of oversight, strategic leadership and development.
— A reduction in the bureaucratic burden on front
line agencies.
ACCOUNTING MATTERS:
GENERAL TREATMENT
62. What was the justification for reclassifying £580
million Probation Service grant in 2001-02 as administration costs
(p 5, Resource Accounts 2001-02)?
The Home Office resource accounts 2001-02 include the National
Probation Service (NPS) £580m grants to fund operations.
The NPS was established 1 April 2001, it is the first year the
NPS has been consolidated into the Home Office resource accounts.
Most Prison Service expenditure scores as administration
costs.
63. How much was the ex gratia payment over £100,000
to a member of the public in 2001-02? What was it for?
An ex-gratia of £100,000 was made to a Crown Court Official
who was injured by an escaping prisoner.
64. What are the targets agreed with the National Audit
Office on the faster closing schedule for the accounts (p 160)?
The agreed HO timetable with the NAO:
— 28 July Draft annual report, statement of internal
controls, and statement of Accounting Officer's responsibilities
— 1 August Draft consolidated accounts
— 6 October Accounts to Principal Finance Officer
— 7 November Audit committee
— 30 Jan NAO final management letter.
June 2003
1
CRB start up costs for this year not shown as a separate line
in Home Office annual report. Back
2
The figure of £31,100k which appears in the Home Office annual
report includes the full cost of police set up costs which were
capitalised in the CRB accounts and are being written off over
five years. The figure shown here is the one included in the CRB's
audited accounts. Back
3
Martin, C and Player, E. (2000) Drug treatment in prison: an
evaluation of the RAPt treatment programme. Winchester: Waterside
Press. Back
4
Raynor, P. and Vanstone, M. (2001) Straight thinking on probation:
evidence-based practice and the culture of curiosity in Bernfeld,
GA, Farrington, DF and Leschied, AW (Eds) Offender Rehabilitation
in Practice: Implementing and evaluating effective programs. England:
John Wiley & Sons. Back
5
Friendship, C., Blud, L. Erikson, M. and Travers, R. (2002) An
evaluation of cognitive behavioural treatment for prisoners.
Home Office Research Findings 161. Back
6
National Audit Office Report. January 2002. Back
7
McGuire, James (2002) Integrating findings from research reviews
in McGuire, J. (Ed) Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment: Effective
programmes and policies to reduced re-offending. England: John
Wiley & Sons. Back
| 
