|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions he has held with Merseyside Police on the policing of events associated with Liverpool Capital of Culture 2008. 
Mr. McNulty: I met the chief constable of Merseyside police to discuss the policing of events associated with Liverpool's year as European Capital of Culture on 1 February. In addition, I attended a meeting on this subject in Liverpool, convened by Merseyside police, on 29 March.
Mr. McNulty: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced a review of policing on 27 March this year. Led by Sir Ronnie Flanagan the review will focus on four specific areas of policingincluding local accountability. We are not ruling any options in or out at this stagewe look forward to receiving Sir Ronnie Flanagans recommendations.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people involved in the Tasker investigation have received managed moves within HM Prison Service; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The report from Ron Tasker has not yet been received by the Commissioning Officer; it is not known how many people Mr. Tasker involved in the process of his investigation therefore it is not known how many people have changed posts as a result.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions the annual accounts of HM Prison Service have been qualified in the last 10 years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reasons were for each of the 12 payments of over £100,000 compensation paid to Prison Service staff in 2005-06 reported in the Prison Service's annual report and accounts. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: Of the payments over £100,000 reported in the 2005-06 accounts, three were the result of employment tribunals, two were as a result of injuries sustained from an assault by prisoners, one related to stress/psychological injuries, one related to injuries during control and restraint training and the other five related to miscellaneous injuries at work.
|Prison Service payments over £100,000 reported in the 2005-06 accounts|
|Special Payments||Number||Amount (£000)||Average||Number||Amount (£000)||Average|
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many staff at each prison establishment were dismissed in each of the last 12 months for (a) corruption, (b) trafficking drugs and other illegal contraband into the establishment, (c) time off due to stress-related illnesses and (d) making
improper expense claims; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The public sector Prison Service does not currently hold the information centrally in the format requested. The contracted estate has been able to provide some information on the number of staff dismissed in the last 12 months, which is contained in the table. Further information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
|Number of staff dismissed in the last 12 months for corruption, trafficking drugs etc., time off due to stress-related illnesses and making improper expense claims|
|Prison||Number of staff dismissed|
|(1) Kalyx, who manage Bronzefield, Forest Bank and Peterborough, were only able to provide a total figure for gross misconduct. It was not available broken down into the specific cause. (2) GSL have provided a collated response for all three of their contracted prisons. Note: Numbers are expressed as fewer than five in order to avoid the identification of individuals.|
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prison staff were tested for (a) drug dependency and (b) illegal drug use in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The public sector Prison Service has not tested any of its staff for drug dependency or illegal drug use in the last five years. The contracted estate has been able to provide some information, which is contained in the table. Further information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
|Number of drug tests carried out on staff in the contracted sector|
|(1) No drug testing of staff currently takes place at these establishments. (2) There have been approximately 263 random drug test carried out on staff over the last two and a half years. (3) There have been 632 random drug tests carried out on staff over the past five years. (4) Records for drug testing on staff only go back to 2004. 13 tests have been carried out. (5) No random drug testing takes place on staff, although there are plans to introduce it. (6) Information not available.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|