Previous Section Index Home Page

25 May 2004 : Column 1549W—continued

Correspondence

Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the Immigration and Nationality Directorate to reply to the letter from the hon. Member for Wrexham of 23 October 2003 in connection with Mr. Jama Ali Farah (ref. F1036752). [172199]

Mr. Browne: Officials at the Immigration and Nationality Directorate replied on 3 November 2003 to my hon. Friend's letter of 23 October 2003.

Sir Michael Spicer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the hon. Member for West Worcestershire will receive a response to his letter of 7 April 2004, reference PO4301/4. [174749]

Mr. Browne [holding answer 20 May 2004]: I wrote to the hon. Member's letter on 25 May 2004.

Criminal Justice

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions his Department has had with the Department for Transport on reform of the criminal justice system. [172844]

Paul Goggins: The Home Office is in regular contact with the Department for Transport on criminal justice issues, including sentencing, support for victims of road crash incidents and road traffic policing.

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the budget is for each local criminal justice board in 2004–05; and what the proposed budget is for 2005–06. [172957]

Paul Goggins: The amount of funding from the centre to support the activities of each Local Criminal Justice Board in 2004–05 has yet to be agreed but it is hoped that it will be at least equal to the £40,000 that was provided to each Local Criminal Justice Board in 2003–04. The final sum provided in 2004–05 will be in addition to the salary cost paid by the centre for the support provided by the Performance Officer to each Local Criminal Justice Board area. The proposed
 
25 May 2004 : Column 1550W
 
budget for 2005–06 will not be known until after the outcome of the 2004 Spending Review has been considered.

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the criminal justice boards    where representatives of Victim Support are (a) full members of the Board and (b) attend board meetings. [172958]

Paul Goggins: The four Criminal Justice Boards where representatives of Victim Support are full members of the Board are Avon and Somerset, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and London.

Attendance at Local Board meetings is a matter for each Board's discretion. However, Boards where the Victim Support representative may, on occasion, attend board meetings as a member of a Victim and Witness sub-group include Cambridgeshire, Cheshire, Cumbria, Devon and Cornwall, Durham, Dyfed Powys, Essex, Greater Manchester, Hampshire, Kent, Norfolk, North Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, South Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Suffolk, Sussex, Thames Valley, Warwickshire and West Yorkshire. In addition to this, a Victim Support representative is a member of the Merseyside Advisory Group and therefore may possibly attend some of the Board meetings.

Drugs Testing/Treatment

Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drugs testing and treatment orders were issued in (a) Greater London and (b) each London borough in each year since 1997. [163092]

Paul Goggins [holding answer 22 March 2004]: Drug Treatment and Testing Orders (DTTOs) have been available since October 2000 when they were rolled out nationally following an 18-month pilot period in three areas. The London Probation Area is required to submit monthly figures to the National Probation Directorate pertaining to the number of Orders made but is not required to break this down by boroughs. The breakdown by borough shown in Annexes A and B has been obtained from London Probation Area records.

The number of orders made in each year from October 2000 to February 2004 is as follows:
Number
October 2000 to March 2001251(not available by borough)
April 2001 to March 2002556(not available by borough)
April 2002 to March 2003715(by borough at Annex A)
April 2003 to February 2004941(by borough at Annex B)

Annex A: Drug Treatment and Testing Orders made in London between April 2002 to March 2003 by borough

Number
Bexley11
Greenwich32
Brent23
Harrow10
Ealing33
Hillingdon7
Hounslow22
Barnet16
Enfield27
Haringey38
Bromley18
Croydon44
Camden35
Islington28
Hammersmith and Fulham16
Kensington and Chelsea12
Westminster12
City0
Hackney43
Newham21
Tower Hamlets22
Lambeth39
Lewisham25
Southwark45
Barking and Dagenham15
Havering9
Redbridge21
Waltham Forrest17
Kingston7
Merton10
Richmond3
Sutton12
Wandsworth29
Total702




Note:
In addition, 13 orders were made in London on offenders of No Fixed Abode in any borough.




 
25 May 2004 : Column 1551W
 

Annex B: Drug Treatment and Testing Orders made in London between April 2003—February 2004 by borough

Number
Bexley8
Greenwich37
Brent30
Harrow14
Eating37
Hillingdon27
Hounslow24
Barnet22
Enfield31
Haringey41
Bromley23
Croydon35
Camden47
Islington35
Hammersmith and Fulham24
Kensington and Chelsea16
Westminster34
City0
Hackney34
Newham35
Tower Hamlets44
Lambeth53
Lewisham47
Southwark62
Barking and Dagenham21
Havering7
Redbridge17
Waltham Forrest30
Kingston7
Merton15
Richmond6
Sutton19
Wandsworth53
Total935




Note:
In addition, six orders were made in London on offenders of No Fixed Abode in any borough.




 
25 May 2004 : Column 1552W
 

Fines

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of fines was collected by each local criminal justice board in the last year for which figures are available. [173777]

Paul Goggins: Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) do not directly collect fines. Fine enforcement is the responsibility of local Magistrates' Courts Committees (MCCs). But, given the importance of fine enforcement to public confidence in the Criminal Justice System, LCJBs are encouraged to monitor and to work jointly to improve payment rates within their local areas.

The table shows the payment rate for April 2003 to March 2004 for each of the 42 local MCCs. This represents the total value of fines (excluding confiscation orders) collected as a percentage of the total value of fines imposed over this period. The Department for Constitutional Affairs set MCCs a target of 75 per cent. for the year ending March 2004. Note that it is possible for an area's payment rate to exceed 100 per cent. if a sufficiently high value of fines imposed prior to April 2003 are collected.
                  Payment rate (Percentage)
Magistrates' Court CommitteeQ4
(January to Mar 2004)
Year
2003–04
Avon and Somerset7783
Bedfordshire8480
Cambridgeshire110100
Cheshire7882
Cleveland11491
Cumbria9193
Derbyshire8979
Devon and Cornwall5568
Dorset6972
Durham9390
Dyfed Powys10281
Essex10994
Gloucestershire6195
Greater London8266
Greater Manchester7264
Gwent8485
Hampshire and Isle of Wight6886
Hertfordshire6368
Humberside8796
Kent7878
Lancashire9086
Leicestershire7369
Lincolnshire7575
Merseyside5159
Norfolk8579
North Wales7589
North Yorkshire13898
Northamptonshire8196
Northumbria8182
Nottinghamshire6872
South Wales7676
South Yorkshire10181
Staffordshire6778
Suffolk7180
Surrey7774
Sussex95100
Thames Valley6365
Warwickshire8094
West Mercia7479
West Midlands5453
West Yorkshire6958
Wiltshire9294
England and Wales7674


 
25 May 2004 : Column 1553W
 


Next Section Index Home Page