| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1787W—continued
Pre-sentence Reports
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department where the information about convicted prisoners in pre-sentence reports originates. [8380]
Fiona Mactaggart:
Pre-sentence reports (PSR) are informed by the Crown Prosecution Service court papers and there will normally be at least one face-to-face interview with the offender. Where the offender is already known to the probation service, probation files may also be used. Those consulted during the completion of a PSR will vary according to the needs of the case but might include social services, local authorities or other criminal justice agencies.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1788W
Prisons
Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the proportion of ethnic minority staff in public prisons were at 1 July. [12041]
Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 14 July 2005]: At 30 June 2005, 5.6 per cent. of staff within public sector prisons, who have declared their ethnicity, were recorded as being from black and other minority ethnic groups.
Retina Identification
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment his Department has made of the accuracy of retina identification where a person is wearing contact lenses. [12536]
Andy Burnham: The Home Office is not proposing to use retina identification but may deploy iris identification.
We do not believe that iris identification will present difficulties for the average contact lens wearer.
Secure Training Centres
Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answers of 11 July 2005, Official Report, column 790W and 11 July 2005, Official Report, column 791W, what the reasons were for the discrepancies in figures for total hospital admissions compared with admissions to hospital for illnesses and non-accidental injuries in Rainsbrook in 2002, 2003 and 2004 and in Hassenfield in 2003 and 2004. [12130]
Fiona Mactaggart: The answer to question 1567 11 July 2005, Official Report, column 790W gave total figures for admissions to hospital. The answer to question 1568 11 July 2005, Official Report, column 791W provided details of young people admitted because of illness and those admitted for treatment of non-accidental injuries. The difference between the figures in the answer to question 1567 and the totalled figures in the answer to question 1568 is accounted for by: (a) the additional category of admissions for the treatment of accidental injuries; and (b) the fact that one of the young people from Rainsbrook who went to hospital because of illness in 2004 was admitted twice. A full breakdown of admissions by establishment is given in the following table:
(33) Up to 27 May.
(34) Includes one termination of pregnancy.
(35) Includes one termination of pregnancy.
(36) One young person was admitted twice.
(37) Oakhill opened 19 August 2004.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1789W
Sentencing
Dr. Vis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many people remanded into custody were given community penalties in each of the last five years; [1830]
(2) how many convicted but unsentenced people remanded into custody were given a custodial sentence in each of the last five years; [1831]
(3) how many people remanded into custody were given a custodial sentence in each of the last five years; [1832]
(4) how many people remanded into custody in each of the last five years were (a) acquitted and (b) had cases which were not proceeded with. [1836]
Fiona Mactaggart: The final court outcomes for persons proceeded against and remanded in custody at some stage in magistrates courts and the Crown court in each year from 1999 to 2003 is provided in the table. Information relating to the number of offenders committed for sentence to the Crown court from 1999 to 2003 is also provided.
(38) Includes those remanded for part of the time in custody and part on bail.
CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS
Court Service Computer System
Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what the total cost has been to date of the computer system Xhibit used by the Court Service in Lincoln; whether she plans to introduce the system in other courts; what estimate she has made of the total cost of rolling out such a system in England and Wales; what assessment she has made of the (a) effectiveness and (b) reliability of such a system; and if she will make a statement. [10735]
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1790W
Ms Harman: XHIBIT (eXchange Hearing Information By Internet Technology) was first used at Lincoln Crown Court on 11 April 2005. The Department is paying a fixed cost for the development and introduction of XHIBIT to all courts in England and Wales, and so is not charged on an individual court basis. XHIBIT will be in use in all 101 Crown court centres across England and Wales by April next year. The total charge to introduce and operate the system will be £20 million.
The decision to introduce nationally was based on pilots in Essex and at Snaresbrook Crown Court. These pilots, along with an assessment of the first 11 courts to receive XHIBIT, is showing that the new system is making Crown courts more effective. For example, it reduces the clerical effort required to capture and distribute hearing information, such as, results, bail orders and imprisonment orders. Previously, such information took days to reach other criminal justice agencies, now they can get it in minutes allowing them to operate better. Local assessment of XHIBIT's effectiveness in Lincoln is scheduled for September 2005. XHIBIT's reliability is currently above that which the supplier is contracted to provide. This is monitored on a daily basis by the XHIBIT National Support Centre.
Data Protection Act
Harry Cohen:
To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs if she will introduce legislation to modify the Data Protection Act 1998 so that (a) the enforcement powers of the Information Commissioner under the Data Protection Act 1998 are equivalent to those of most other European Data Protection Commissioners, (b) the definition of personal data is broadened so that it reflects that of the Directive 95/46/EC and the intent of Article 8 of the Human Rights Act, (c) the provisions in the Data Protection Act 1998 which pertain to the transfer of personal data outside the European Economic Area reflect those provisions in most data protection laws enacted by other member states of the European Union, (d) there is a guarantee of the right of access to personal data in the UK, (e) moderately structured manual records about employees are reclassified as accessible
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1791W
records so that such records qualify for the protection afforded by the Act and (f) CCTV systems which record the actions of identifiable individuals are subject to data protection; and if she will make a statement. [13163]
Bridget Prentice:
We currently have no plans to modify the Data Protection Act 1998, as the Act properly and proportionately implements Directive 95/46/EC. The Act includes the powers available to the Information Commissioner; the definition of personal data (which is already relatively broad, as the directive requires it to be); the provisions relating to transfer of personal data outside the European Economic Area; the guarantee of the right of subject access (except where the Act provides legitimate exemptions, as allowed by the directive); and the position of structured manual records (where the directive makes clear that a high degree of structure must be involved). The full provisions of the Act also apply to CCTV systems recording the actions of identifiable individuals, as such information is clearly personal data within the meaning of the legislation.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1792W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |