| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
12 Oct 2005 : Column 491W—continued
Correspondence
Mr. MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what his Department's policy is for dealing with and responding to correspondence received in (a) Welsh, (b) Scots Gaelic and (c) Irish Gaelic. [14732]
Fiona Mactaggart: The Department arranges for any item of correspondence that is written in a language other than English to be translated. If the correspondent has written exclusively in Welsh a reply in Welsh will be provided within the usual time limits, in line with the Department's and agencies' Welsh Language schemes. In all other cases the reply will be provided in English.
Criminal Justice Council
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on the work of the Criminal Justice Council; [16473]
(2) what the Criminal Justice Council's responsibilities are. [16468]
Fiona Mactaggart: The Criminal Justice Council is chaired by the President of the Queen's Bench Division, the right hon. Sir Igor Judge. A full membership list is shown in the table. It held its first meeting in May 2003. It meets quarterly, and the next meeting will be held in October 2005.
The Council discusses issues and initiatives of current interest across the Criminal Justice System. A full description of its responsibilities is contained in the terms of reference in annexe B.
A protocol of its relationship to the National Criminal Justice Board is shown in annexe C.
12 Oct 2005 : Column 492W
Annexe B: Criminal Justice Council—terms of reference
To advise the Government on the form and manner of implementation of criminal justice reforms and to make proposals to it for reform
To advise on the framing and implementation of a communication and education strategy for the criminal justice system
Annexe C: Protocol between the national criminal justice board and the criminal justice council
1. The CJC will keep the Criminal Justice System under review and will act in the capacity of an expert advisor to the NCJB, providing advice and guidance on the full range of criminal justice issues. The NCJB may seek the views of the CJC on specific issues.
2. Policy on criminal justice reform is the responsibility of the NCJB. The NCJB will take account of the experience and views of the CJC as appropriate.
4. The Council will have a flexible membership. Members need not attend meetings if they have no specific interest in the topic(s) under discussion. If items on the agenda so require, members may nominate an "expert" to attend the Council. In addition, the Council has the right to co-opt agency representation as required and to invite officials from the criminal justice departments to attend to discuss relevant issues.
5. The Council may establish project boards and/or sub-groups as it sees necessary to fulfil its terms of reference.
European Enforcement Order
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on the responsibility for costs incurred in relation to the European Enforcement Order as set out in 2005/C 150/01 of Official Journal C150, vol 48, of 21 June; [16095]
(2) if he will make a statement on the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in relation to the European Enforcement Order as set out in 2005/C 150/01 of Official Journal C150, vol 48, of 21 June, Article 7. [16109]
Fiona Mactaggart:
The draft framework decision on the European enforcement order and the transfer of sentenced persons between member states of the European Union is at the early stages of negotiation and is subject to UK parliamentary scrutiny reservation. The draft framework decision is intended to speed up and simplify the existing arrangements for the transfer of prisoners between member states of the EU. It is also intended to facilitate the return of prisoners extradited in accordance with Article 5(3) of the council framework decision of 13 June 2000 on the European Arrest
12 Oct 2005 : Column 493W
Warrant, where surrender of own nationals or residents was subject to a condition that the person would be returned in order to serve any sentence imposed.
The draft framework decision on the European enforcement order is intended to replace existing transfer arrangements between member states of the EU. Costs will be borne in the same way as now, in that the executing state will bear all costs except those incurred exclusively in the territory of the issuing state.
The draft framework decision deals exclusively with the transfer of prisoners between member states of the EU. There is no link between the draft framework decision and the International Criminal Court.
Impact Nominal Index
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Impact Nominal Index will form part of the planned national information and intelligence sharing programme, IMPACT. [16477]
Hazel Blears: The IMPACT Nominal Index is the first application that will be delivered by the IMPACT programme. It is planned to introduce the index to the 43 police forces of England and Wales in December 2005.
Independent Monitoring Boards
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many ex-prisoners are members of Independent Monitoring Boards. [16361]
Fiona Mactaggart: This information is not available. Although ex-offenders can apply to become Board members, membership data do not include conviction and custodial history.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what criteria former members of Independent Monitoring Boards (IMB) are invited to participate in the IMB Secretariat's Leaving Survey Questionnaire; and if he will make a statement. [16374]
Fiona Mactaggart: Exit questionnaires are sent to all Independent Monitoring Board members who advise the Secretariat that they are resigning from their Board, with the exception of those members who have already informed the Secretariat of the reason for their departure.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints have been made against members of Independent Monitoring Boards (IMB) by (a) prison governors, (b) prison officers, (c) fellow IMB members, (d) inmates and (e) others in each year since 1997; what the average length of time taken investigating such complaints has been; how many disciplinary actions have been taken, broken down by outcome; what the average cost of such investigations has been; and if he will make a statement. [16377]
Fiona Mactaggart:
Records of complaints against members of Independent Monitoring Boards were first collated in 1999 when procedures for handling allegations and/or complaints about conduct were introduced. Full details of complaints dealt with
12 Oct 2005 : Column 494W
between 1999 and February 2004 are no longer held and while some limited data still exists, an annual breakdown of cases is unavailable.
Of the complaints received since March 2004, most have been dealt with through correspondence and telephone calls; meeting the board; local resolution; or mediation. Only four complaints have required formal investigation. The average length of time taken to investigate these complaints is three and a half months an average cost of £8,000. As yet, disciplinary action has only been taken in one of these cases and the member in question resigned from the board.
| Complaint brought by: | 1999 to February 2004 | March 2004 to October 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| Prison Staff(10) | 18 | 13 |
| Fellow IMB members | 28 | 22 |
| Prisoners | 1 | 1 |
| Others | 4 | — |
(10) No differentiation made between prison governors, prison officers and other members of staff in the prison)
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the efficiency and effectiveness of the Independent Monitoring Board's secretariat; and if he will make a statement. [16378]
Fiona Mactaggart: The Independent Monitoring Board Secretariat, like all areas of the Home Office, is working to improve the quality and professionalism of the services it provides and the introduction of performance targets and better use of management information within the Secretariat is key to achieving this. The Secretariat is also subject to management supervision over the content of its annual business plan, including setting objectives and reporting on the achievement of those objectives within a given timeframe, and the effectiveness of its overall performance. In addition, the Secretariat is working closely with the National Council of Independent Monitoring Boards to ensure that boards receive the necessary support to enable them to carry out their monitoring role effectively.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the independence of the Independent Monitoring Board's work; and if he will make a statement. [16383]
Fiona Mactaggart: Independent Monitoring Boards have an important role to play as the watchdog of the Secretary of State. As non-departmental public bodies, Independent Monitoring Boards are independent of the Home Office, including prisons. Their individual, voluntary and lay character means that they provide an independent view on the standards of fairness and humanity with which those placed in custody by the courts are treated.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |