|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what steps his Department is taking to improve the performance of the Criminal Records Bureau; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) what the average time taken was for the Criminal Records Bureau to process a criminal records check for people working with children and vulnerable adults in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. 
Joan Ryan: Data concerning the average waiting time taken to complete a disclosure are not a performance target and are not collated by the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB). The CRB operates to a set of published service standards (PSS) which include to issue 93 per cent. of standard disclosures within 10 days and 90 per cent. of enhanced disclosures within 28 days. For January 2007, the CRB issued 99.2 per cent. of standard disclosures and 90.8 per cent. of enhanced disclosures within PSS.
There are a number of other factors that can affect the timely completion of checks by the CRB, including but not restricted to the length of time it can take for an employer to deal with the initial application, the accurate completion of the application form, the clarity of the information provided, the existence of conviction or non-conviction information and the operational effectiveness of the disclosure units of the police forces involved in the enhanced disclosure process.
In order to address these, the CRB has provided more support to all counter-signatories and customers in the form of detailed guidance notes which accompany the application forms to ensure that applications are completed accurately and are accompanied by all relevant supporting documentation. The CRB has also established a rigorous compliance and assurance function to ensure that registered bodies make the best use of the disclosure service.
There have been fluctuations in the performance of some of the police disclosure units, caused by a combination of factors including a significant increase in disclosure applications and a combination of local staffing and IT problems.
However, the police and the CRB have been working closely together to identify ways of tackling these problems in forces, which have included additional resources for disclosure unit managers and a greater degree of monitoring performance and support. These initiatives have been strengthened by a new service level agreement in April 2006 between the CRB and all the 43 forces in England and Wales, which focuses on service delivery. These measures have led to a substantial improvement in the overall disclosure process in recent months.
Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many under-18 year olds are serving sentences of less than three months; and how many were given sentences of less than three months in each quarter of the last two years. 
John Reid: Following the introduction of the detention and training order nationally on 1 April 2000 under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the minimum custodial sentence length for persons under 18 has been four months.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) (i) arrests and (ii) charges were made and (b) convictions were secured under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in each London basic command unit in each of the last five years. 
Information on arrests for recorded crime offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is not separately identifiable within the arrests collection
held by the Office for Criminal justice Reform. The collection is based on persons arrested for recorded crime (notifiable offences) by main offence group (i.e. violence against the person, robbery, burglary, criminal damage etc.) and at police force area level only.
Data from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform on the number of people proceeded against at magistrates courts and convicted at all courts for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in London, 2001 to 2005 can be viewed in the following table.
|The number of people proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts in Greater London for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, for the years 2001-05( 1,2,3)|
|(1 )These data are on the principal offence basis.|
(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
(3) Prosecutions are counted by date of final outcome in the magistrates court. Guilty figures are counted by the date of sentence in both magistrates courts and Crown courts. Hence guilty figures can exceed prosecutions where they reflect cases of people being Found guilty in the magistrates court and committed for sentence to the Crown court, the two events being counted in two different years.
RDS Office for Criminal Justice Reform
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|