Previous Section Index Home Page

15 Mar 2006 : Column 2298W—continued

Voluntary Retirement

Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Army (a) officers and (b) other ranks (i) were granted and (ii) applied for premature voluntary retirement or release in each quarter since January 2004. [58305]

Mr. Touhig: The table below shows the number of Voluntary Outflow Applications and the number of Voluntary Outflow Exits for Trained Officers and Soldiers for each quarter during the period 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2005.
Number of Voluntary Outflow (VO) Applications and Exits of Trained Regular Army Officers and Soldiers from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2005

Officers
Soldiers
DateVO ApplicationsVO ExitsVO ApplicationsVO Exits
1 January 2004 to 31 March 20041901101,9801,480
1 April 2004 to 30 June 20042001401,6301,050
1 July 2004 to 30 September 20041502001,8801,010
1 October 2004 to 31 December 2004130801,9701,260
1 January 2005 to 31 March 20052401201,9001,570
1 April 2005 to 30 June 2005801701,8601,020
1 July 2005 to 30 September 20052301801,6901,180
1 October 2005 to 31 December 20051901301,6701,100




Notes:
1. The term Premature Voluntary Release has been changed to Voluntary Outflow (VO),although the methodology for calculating the totals remains the same.
2. VO is defined as all applications and exits from trained personnel which are generated by the individual before their time expiry.
3. The figures are based on all Voluntary Outflow from the Trained strength of the UK Regular Army.
4. All applications are counted according to the date received in MOD.
5. The data have been rounded to the nearest 10, number ending in '5' have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias.






 
15 Mar 2006 : Column 2299W
 

HOME DEPARTMENT

Anti-Bullying Strategies

Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what changes have been made to improve the anti-bullying strategies at (a) HM Young Offender Institution Stoke Heath and (b) HM Young Offender Institution Brinsford following defects identified by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons; and if he will make a statement. [57767]

Fiona Mactaggart: Stoke Heath young offender institution's anti-bullying strategy has been fully reviewed and now forms part of a violence reduction strategy and an action plan is reviewed monthly. Two units deliver intense intervention to the more serious bullies. Their progress is constantly reviewed. The courses are accredited and audited annually.

Daily monitoring is recorded in an antisocial behaviour booklet by all staff who have contact with trainees and reviewed every evening by the wing manager and weekly by a board. There is also a self-help group for victims of bullying. Visits to local schools are planned so as to learn from their strategies and methods. A system of rewards and sanctions is being considered to encourage integration to normal location for persistent bullies.

Brinsford young offender institution's anti-bullying strategy was revised and re-launched following the most recent chief inspector's report. A safeguarding manager has been appointed with responsibility for child protection, violence reduction, anti-bullying and public protection. An anti-bullying co-ordinator post will become full-time and deliver programmes to both perpetrators and victims of bullying. Brinsford is currently working on appointing a safeguarding team. It is planned to introduce an intensive support unit where the perpetrators of bullying will be identified, located and receive appropriate training.

Antisocial Behaviour

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what penalties have been imposed, broken down by type, in each incident that has come to court of an antisocial behaviour order being breached in each London borough; and if he will make a statement; [55953]

(2) how many antisocial behaviour orders have been breached in each of the last five years; how many breaches have come to court; and if he will make a statement. [55954]

Hazel Blears: Antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) breach data held centrally only cover breach proceedings where there has been a conviction. These data are currently available from 1 June 2000 to
 
15 Mar 2006 : Column 2300W
 
31 December 2003 for ASBOs issued since 1 June 2000. The available information on the number of orders breached in England and Wales, by period, is given in table A.

ASBO breach data are available at criminal justice system area level only. The penalties imposed as a result of convictions in Greater London courts are given in table B.
Table A: Number of antisocial behaviour orders breached, as reported to the Home Office, by period, from 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2003(4)England and Wales

PeriodTotal breached
June 2000 to December 200014
2001118
2002240
2003609
June 2000 to December 2003793


(4) Breaches are counted in this table on a persons basis, i.e. where the order has been breached on more than one occasion within the same period, a person is counted once only within that period



Table B: Sentences and penalties following ASBO breach proceedings, as notified to the Home Office, within Greater London, from 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2003


Sentence
Average length or amount
Total
Conditional dischargeLength of order—
7.5 months
2
Fine£7323
Community sentence
Community punishment order47 hours3
Curfew order3 months2
Attendance centre order13 hours3
Action plan ordern/a1
Supervision order15 months2
Community rehabilitation order2 years1
Custody1
Imprisonment (aged 18 and over)2 months63
Detention and training order (under 18)6.5 months9
Other
Referral order6 months1
Suspended sentence of imprisonment13.5days(6)2
Hospital ordern/a1
Committed to Crown court for sentence(7)2
Not separately dealt withn/a1
Total116




n/a=not applicable
(5) Some sentences will be concurrent with others given for another offence.
(6) Length of prison sentence.
(7) One person received a community rehabilitation order, length two years, the other imprisonment for 1 month.


Care in Custody

Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what assessment he has made
 
15 Mar 2006 : Column 2301W
 
of the impact of the Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork programme in each prison where it is applied; and if he will make a statement; [57764]

(2) what discussions he has had with the National Institute for Mental Health in England regarding (a) the implementation of and (b) changes to the Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork programme; and if he will make a statement; [57766]

Fiona Mactaggart: In 2002–03, Manchester University carried out an evaluation of the care-planning system in place at that time—the F2052SH. Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) was developed to address problems identified in that study as well as reflect wider developments in prisoner care. ACCT was introduced into five pilot prisons in January 2004. An internal, interim evaluation was conducted in the summer of 2004 and further improvements were made as a result. A full, independent, study of ACCT was commissioned from a consortium of researchers from Manchester and London Universities. The findings of this evaluation, alongside feedback from establishment staff, Area Safer Custody Advisers and the National Institute for Mental Health in England (NIMHE) regional leads, will be used to inform a review of ACCT and the suite of ACCT training courses that is being undertaken during 2006.

Ongoing analysis of routine monitoring data seeks to monitor the impact ACCT and other initiatives in suicide prevention are having on self-inflicted death and self-harm statistics. However there are a multitude of factors which may explain changes in self-inflicted deaths in particular establishments. Early indications are that the three year rolling average rate of self-inflicted death has fallen by 4 per cent. in the first five pilot prisons to introduce ACCT, and by 12 per cent. in the first 30 prisons to adopt the new system. There have also been encouraging results with regard to self-harm rates at these prisons. This information is provided to the steering board—on which NIMHE is represented—that oversaw the development of ACCT and continues to supervise its implementation and review.

Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will list the prisons that operate the Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork programme; [57765]

(2) which prisons have converted to Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork processes for assessing at-risk inmates; and if he will make a statement. [58229]

Fiona Mactaggart: The prisons that are already using the Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork Approach (ACCT) are (as at 13 March):


 
15 Mar 2006 : Column 2302W
 

ACCT is being introduced across the estate as part of a phased programme, designed to ensure that the necessary staff training takes place before an establishment goes live with the new system.


Next Section Index Home Page