Northern Ireland Affairs Committee's Fourth
Report 1997-98 and First Report 2000-01: Prison Service in Northern
Ireland
THE NORTHERN IRELAND PRISON SERVICE
NIAC Recommendation First Report Paragraph 14
We welcome the admittedly modest progress
that has been made in improving both the religious and gender
balances of the Prison Service. We would nonetheless encourage
the Service to continue to give a high priority to seeking to
reduce the current imbalances significantly further.
Government Response
The opportunity to significantly change staff
composition continues to be affected by the small number of staff
being recruited. Only seven appointments were made in 2002 and
10 in 2003 (to date).
Additionally, continuing violence and threats
against staff, their homes and property together with the current
campaign for segregation and associated protests by dissident
republican prisoners may deter Roman Catholics from applying for
the limited recruitment opportunities available.
There has been little change in the number of
*Roman Catholic and female staff in the Service since last year's
report:
| Roman Catholic | Female
|
| % | % |
| 1999 | 8 | 9
|
| 2000 | 9 | 12
|
| 2001 | 10 | 16
|
| 2002 | 10 | 16
|
| 2003 | 9 | 16
|
| | |
* of those for whom a determination was known.
Contacts with the community have continued through various
events and initiatives which contribute to a greater understanding
and interest in the Service.
Job vacancies are on the Service's website and advertised
in local newspapers traditionally read by both Roman Catholic
and protestant sections of the community. Lawful positive action
advertising is used in job advertisements which specifically welcome
applications from the Roman Catholic section of the community
and from women. All applications for employment are considered
strictly on the basis of merit.
NIAC Recommendation First Report Paragraph 18
We . . . look forward to learning how the Prison Service
proposes to meet its target of a 17% reduction [in costs per prisoner]
by March 2004.
Government Response
NIPS has been tasked with reducing the difference in the
cost per prisoner place (CPPP) between Northern Ireland and England
& Wales by 17% by the year 2003-04. Interim targets of 5.7%
and 11.3% were set for years 2001-02 and 2002-03 respectively.
Both targets have been met.
With the introduction of resource accounting, the 2003-04
target has been set at £83,275 in resource terms.
Whilst the Service is currently set to meet this target the
full implications of implementing the Steele Report both in terms
of staff and financial resources have yet to be determined.
NIAC Recommendation First Report Paragraph 40
We hope that the Government will make an early announcement
on its preferred option for the structure of prison inspection
arrangements for Northern Ireland.
Government Response
A Criminal Justice inspector has been appointed. Prisons
will be inspected by HMCIP on contract to that inspector.
NIAC Recommendation First Report Paragraph 42
We welcome both the review of prisons legislation applicable
in Northern Ireland and the acceptance of the proposal to create
a Prison Ombudsman.
Government Response
NIPS is committed to introduce a Prisons Ombudsman. Plans
to appoint an ombudsman will be issued for consultation before
the end of September 2003.
Northern Ireland Affairs Committee's Second Report
2000-01:
THE PARADES COMMISSION (HC 120)
NIAC Recommendation at Paragraph 83
We view with some concern the Chairman's view that the
Commission's procedures in relation to decisions on parades may
be open to challenge on the grounds of natural justice. We recommend
that the Government and the Commission consider urgently whether
the procedures need to be improved by greater transparency and,
if so, put the necessary steps in hand.
Government Response
The application for legal aid referred to at the time of
the Committee's last review was dismissed on 5 September 2003.
The applicant now has leave to appeal.
The position of the Chairman on this issue remains unchanged
from that given to the Committee in 2000 in that he still considers
that, whilst the Commission's process may be open to challenge
in terms of natural justice, with four seasons' experience in
Northern Ireland, he is increasingly of the view that it is almost
impossible to imagine a process that is more compatible with natural
justice and also workable in the particular context of parading
issues in Northern Ireland.
This does not mean that there is not scope to increase transparency,
although a solution which respects the concerns of many on both
sides of the community that the evidence should be kept strictly
confidential does not readily present itself. Government continues
to consider with the Commission any opportunities to address this
point.
NIAC Recommendation at Paragraph 98
The Commission saw a number of practical difficulties
with the concept of linkage of parades, rather than always considering
them separately as the current legislation requires, not least
because it appeared to mean different things to different people.
It has, however, considered the matter further and concluded that
it would be helpful if it had a power enabling it to make general
policy statements in relation to individual contentious areas
only. We recommend that the Government examine this proposal carefully.
Government response
We put the Quigley report out to consultation and some important
responses are still outstanding. No decisions on how best to respond
to Sir George's recommendations will be taken until all responses
have been received and considered. This particular issue will
be considered in that context.
Northern Ireland Affairs Committee's Third Report 2001-02:
RELOCATION FOLLOWING PARAMILITARY INTIMIDATION (HC 59)
NIAC Recommendation at Paragraph 22
There needs to be a significantly more accurate definition
of the extent of the problem, and the pattern of relocation .
. . there is at present no reliable overall information on this,
although organisations providing assistance may have a good insight
into these matters within their own sphere of activity. What needs
to be done, though, is to bring these together and consolidate
them. There is also a need to seek to fill the gaps in the information
pattern, given the general agreement that there is under-reporting
in the official statistics.
NIAC Recommendation at Paragraph 39
There is a case for a more formal system of co-ordination
in Great Britain of assistance to those forced to move there from
Northern Ireland.
NIAC Recommendation at Paragraph 40
We recommend that the Government . . . take steps to ensure
that information on the support services available to those forced
from their homes is made widely available to bodies likely to
come into contact with such people, and that these bodies are
encouraged to be pro-active in passing it on.
Government Response
In 2001 the Government announced the allocation of £250,000
to the Legacy Project, an initiative of the Tim Parry Johnathan
Ball Trust. The Project aims to identify and meet the needs of
victims of the Troubles living in GB and has commissioned an independent
needs analysis which includes those exiled to GB following paramilitary
intimidation within its remit. The terms of reference for the
analysis are to make an assessment of needs, identify gaps in
provision and make recommendations for responding to those needs,
through consultation with exiles, Maranatha, the Legacy Project
and other coping agencies. The Report of that analysis will be
published in November.
Last year the Victims Liaison Unit in the NIO worked on a
special project with Maranatha which gave us a better feel for
the size and nature of the exiles problem. Following this, the
Government allocated £56,480 funding for one year to the
Haven Project. This Project, run by the Maranatha Community, provides
ongoing support to exiles, is a major contributor to the Needs
Analysis and will provide advice and assistance to the Government
on the implementation of the Report's recommendations.
A further £250,000 has been set aside for GB victims'
initiatives. Allocation of this will be informed by the Report's
recommendations.
Annex A
Memorandum submitted by HM Customs and Excise
NORTHERN IRELAND AFFAIRS COMMITTEE'S FIRST REPORT 2002-03
IMPACT IN NORTHERN IRELAND OF CROSS-BORDER FUEL PRICE
DIFFERENTIALS THREE YEARS ON
Is the Government any closer to being able to identify
separately the loss of revenue to the exchequer from legitimate
cross-border fuel purchase and illegitimate fuel consumption in
Northern Ireland?
The difficulties in trying to refine the estimates of the
revenue loss to allow the identification of the amount lost through
all kinds of frauds and that lost from legitimate cross-border
shopping set out in the Government's response remain.
At present, therefore, Customs are still unable to identify
separately the revenue loss from fraudulent activity.
What progress has been made by the OCTF Expert Group—focusing
on non-compliance in the road fuel sector—in developing
and implementing plans to maximise a joint operational response?
What additional tools and operational responses have been
put into place to assist with this and are you able to measure
their successes?
Is the new sanctions policy designed to apply maximum
pressure on those engaged in oils fraud in place yet and, if so,
what effect has it had?
Please update the Committee on the media strategy mentioned
in the Government response. How effective has it been to date?
Good progress continues to be made in putting in place a
multi-agency strategy on the ground reflecting the commitment
of the agencies involved. Customs have now either agreed or are
finalising the last details of operational protocols with four
key agencies. They are also working with two other agencies to
develop protocols. These protocols are very important tools to
maximise impact and they ensure that all the agencies involved
use every opportunity to share information, support each other
on the ground and work together in planned operations. The operational
protocols include or will include regular monitoring of successes
and these allow the agencies to build on successes and change
approaches that don't work. With this information the agencies
involved can dynamically manage their work together.
Multi-agency activity is continuing every day in Northern
Ireland and the successes it brings provides further evidence
of the value of such a multi-agency approach. Some highlights
from this extensive multi-agency effort over the last few months
include:
— a 12-day operation involving Customs, the Police
Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) and the Driver Vehicle Licensing
Agency (DVLNI) carried out across Northern Ireland resulted in
660 vehicles being stopped and tested for illegal fuel and vehicle
condition. Customs seized 104 vehicles, 59 of which were commercial
vehicles; 90 vehicles were restored for fines totalling £70,000,
while 14 were not restored. Follow up searches uncovered a total
of 20,000 litres of illegal fuel. During the same operation, PSNI
also made numerous detections, including 66 cases of drivers with
no insurance, eight drivers with no MOT, and eight drivers, driving
whilst disqualified. DVLNI clamped 547 vehicles and uplifted £80,000
in fines;
— following information provided by an officer from
one of the agencies allied to the Expert Group, while carrying
out his routine duties, Customs officers tested fuel at a retail
site and seized 45,000 litres of illegal fuel;
— over the last few months there have been ongoing
joint operations between Customs, PSNI and the Driver Vehicle
and Testing Agency (DVTA) to target illegal taxis. Recent operations
have taken place in Belfast, Newtownabbey and Banbridge. As a
result, in part, of these operations the DVTA now have a dedicated
team to work on illegal taxis who work regularly with other agencies;
— in one of many joint operations with PSNI, Customs
dismantled a laundering plant which had the capacity to produce
70,000 litres of illegal fuel. Customs also seized 9,000 litres
of illegal fuel, equipment and 500 litres of sulphuric acid which
was the key laundering product used;
— while carrying out their normal duties PSNI officers
noticed what appeared to be a site selling fuel. Customs deployed
officers and seized over 2,000 litres of illegal fuel and two
dispensing pumps.
Customs have been working to a new sanctions policy since
March 2003 and the key to it is that the most effective sanction
is applied to each fraud to impact on it in the most effective
way. Customs believe that it will provide not only the opportunity
to recover the revenue which has been evaded but also provide,
a visible and effective deterrent to those involved in fraudulent
activity. Customs are constantly reviewing its implementation
and if they believe it needs to be changed to ensure its effectiveness
they will do so.
A key part of ensuring that Customs use of sanctions provide
a real deterrent is not just to make them hard-hitting but also
to ensure that there is widespread knowledge of them. Customs
media strategy is geared towards this.
Customs, working with the Organised Crime Task Force, have
sought to maximise every opportunity to publicise operational
successes over the last nine months through press activity both
in the written media and on television. Customs are building on
this enhanced press activity in two specific ways:
— firstly, Customs will be running a high-profile
paid advertising campaign in the Northern Ireland media from the
Autumn onwards which will highlight the problem of oils fraud,
Customs activity and the multi-agency approach, their powers and
how the public can help tackle these problems;
— secondly, Customs have established a Northern
Ireland Joint Customs-Industry Oils Intelligence and Security
Forum which includes representatives from all the major industry
sectors who produce, sell or use road fuels. An integral part
of the this forum is Customs providing the Industry with regular
activity reports highlighting examples of Customs action and the
sanctions they have used which can then be given to all the members
of the Industry. This re-enforces knowledge of Customs actions
encouraging not only the sharing of information as confidence
increases in Customs activity but also provides further deterrent
to those who may be, or may be tempted to be, involved.
Customs constantly review the effectiveness of their media
activity to ensure that the key messages of action and sanctions
get the publicity needed.
In particular, as part of the Organised Crime Task Force,
Customs and the other agencies always look to publicise their
joint activity whenever they can and highlight their close co-operation.
All agencies involved in the OCTF Expert Group have agreed to
maximise every opportunity in this sector and recent press activity
reflects the commitment to highlight the multi-agency strategy.
What progress has been made since the Committee's report
in tackling fraud involving rebated fuels?
Have you been able to conduct a review of the Registered
Dealers Of Controlled Oils Scheme (RDCO) yet?
Rebated fuels fraud is a problem throughout the UK and the
UK Oils Strategy, launched by the Economic Secretary in September
2002, aims to tackle this threat throughout the UK, including
in Northern Ireland. The strategy is a comprehensive one combining
a new control regime for the sale and distribution of rebated
fuels and more effective law enforcement action, targeted by better
intelligence.
Since the committee's report, Customs have put in place all
the elements of the UK Oils Strategy, including in Northern Ireland.
In particular, the new control regime—the Registered Dealers
in Controlled Oils (RDCO) scheme—was introduced on 1 April
2003. The RDCO scheme allows us to work the reputable oils industry
to make it harder for fraudsters to get hold of rebated fuel and
to make the supply chain more transparent allowing us to target
more effectively those fraudsters who do get hold of such fuel.
We have given a commitment to undertaking a post implementation
review of the scheme, commencing between April and October 2004.
This review will focus mainly on the scheme itself and will seek
to identify areas where modifications are appropriate. In terms
of the schemes' impact on fraud, this is being monitored on an
ongoing basis.
At this stage, we can inform the Committee that we have approved
4,362 distributors across the entire UK who sought approval for
RDCO status. These comprised approximately 1,100 main/bulk distributors,
the remainder being secondary distributors such as garage forecourts,
hardware stores, plant hirers and so on. In total, we refused
24 applications on the grounds that the applicant is not a "fit
and proper" person, for example, because of previous convictions
for oils fraud, significant non-compliance with other customs
and excise regimes, and so on. Several of these refused applicants
have sought either judicial review or are appealing to the VAT
and Duties Tribunal against our decision. These are unlikely to
be concluded for some months yet. For information, in Northern
Ireland we approved 590 applicants and refused 17.
Although the scheme was introduced on 1 April 2003, because
of the difficulties that some distributors were having in developing
their IT systems in time, we agreed to defer the compulsory requirement
for returns for the months of April, May and June. The requirement
to make returns, therefore, became compulsory and took effect
for the month of July, the due date for that month's return being
21 August. The returns require details of supplies made and in
specified instances details of the customers/end-users.
Clearly, it is too early to make any substantive assessment
of the impact of the scheme in tackling fraud, particularly given
that the first compulsory returns are only now due. However, we
have received anecdotal evidence (from the legitimate trade) that
its mere introduction has resulted in a number of "cowboy"
operators exiting the rebated oils market on the ground that they
would unlikely to have obtained approval.
The first compulsory returns were due on 21 August 2003 and
we anticipate that the benefits that the scheme has thus far delivered
in its deterrent effect will now move to the next stage where
we will use the return information to target fraudulent end-users.
What further consideration has been given to the benefits
of offsetting any rebates against VAT along the lines of the Danish
scheme?
No further consideration has been given at this stage. As
stated in the Government's response to the Committee's First Report,
Customs' initial evaluation of the Danish scheme is that it is
complex to operate and the possible administrative costs of operating
such a system are a matter of concern but that they would reconsider
the position as part of their post-implementation review of the
Registered Dealers in Controlled Oil scheme. That review is due
to commence between April and October 2004.
Has the more effective licensing regime being examined
at the time of the Government's response to the Committee's Report
been put into place yet and, if so, how effective has it been?
Customs, the Northern Ireland Office and a number of agencies
in Northern Ireland have been working hard to identify the potential
for more effective licensing of retail sites. This work has made
good progress but is not yet complete. The Government is keen
to examine all options and it remains a priority for the OCTF
Expert Group.
| 
