Previous Section Index Home Page

5 Jun 2007 : Column 376W—continued


John McDonnell: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice whether an inquiry has taken place following Serco’s deployment of staff to HM Prison Dovegate from their other establishments as a result of the disturbance on 2 February. [139707]

Mr. Sutcliffe: An incident of concerted indiscipline took place at HMP Dovegate on 29 January 2007 and not 2 February 2007 as indicated. In accordance with national arrangements for mutual aid, control and restraint teams from 10 establishments were sent to HMP Dovegate. One of these teams was from HMP Lowdham Grange, a Serco-managed establishment.

The regional offender manager for the West Midlands commissioned an investigation of the incident and this was undertaken by the contract director from HMP Kilmarnock. The investigation report was received and accepted by the regional offender manager. Recommendations arising from the report have been enacted.

John McDonnell: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice who authorised the deployment of staff from HM Prison Doncaster and HM Prison Lowdham Grange to HM Prison Dovegate on 2 February. [139708]

Mr. Sutcliffe: There is no record of an incident occurring at Dovegate prison on 2 February. There is a record of a concerted indiscipline there on 29 January. The Duty Director of Serco authorised the deployment of staff from Doncaster prison and Lowdham Grange prison during this incident. This was ratified by the Prison Service Gold Commander for the incident.

Driving Offences

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (1) how many drivers have penalty points on their licences; [139629]


5 Jun 2007 : Column 377W

(2) how many drivers have six or more penalty points on their licences. [139630]

Mr. Sutcliffe: The information is not collected by my Department.

I have been advised that the information is available only at disproportionate cost from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (1) how many drivers are banned from driving as a result of the totting-up procedure; [139631]

(2) what her estimate is of the number of drivers who will be banned from driving under the totting-up procedure in the 2007 calendar year. [139632]

Mr. Sutcliffe: Available information taken from the 2003 and 2004 (latest available) Court Proceedings Database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform shows that, as a result of ‘totting-up’ of points under section 35 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, there were 33,286 and 30,934 disqualifications respectively in England and Wales.

2005 data will be available later this year; 2006 data will be available in 2008 and 2007 data will be available in 2009.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what factors may be taken into account when assessing pleas of exceptional hardship entered by drivers seeking to avoid disqualification from driving under the totting-up procedure. [139641]

Mr. Sutcliffe: When a driver faces disqualification under the totting-up procedure, the court has very little discretion other than to disqualify, unless they are satisfied that to do so would cause ‘exceptional hardship’.

Whether exceptional hardship would be caused is a matter for the court to decide in each individual case.

The Sentencing Guidelines Council is responsible for magistrates' sentencing guidelines on this issue, and the decisions of the Court of Appeal in any relevant cases will impact on any decisions made.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice who is responsible for specifying the criteria by which magistrates are required to interpret pleas of exceptional hardship entered by drivers seeking to avoid disqualification from driving under the totting-up procedure. [139642]

Mr. Sutcliffe: The Sentencing Guidelines Council are responsible for magistrates' sentencing guidelines, along with guidance provided by Court of Appeal judgements. The Sentencing Advisory Panel recently carried out a consultation paper on magistrates sentencing guidelines and responses will be considered in determining the final guidelines.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice whether (a) changes have been made in the last five years to the criteria by which magistrates are required to interpret pleas of exceptional hardship entered by drivers seeking to avoid disqualification from driving under the totting-up procedure and (b) any such changes are proposed in the next six months. [139643]


5 Jun 2007 : Column 378W

Mr. Sutcliffe: The Sentencing Guidelines Council is responsible for magistrates' sentencing guidelines, provided by Court of Appeal judgments.

The Sentencing Guidelines Council is an independent body that was established by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. All courts are required to take the guidelines into account when sentencing all offenders, with the aim of promoting greater consistency in sentencing. In every individual case, the judge or magistrate will continue to make his own decision on the type and length of sentence, but will be required to operate within the Council's guidelines or give reasons for departing from them in a particular case.

The Sentencing Advisory Panel recently carried out a consultation exercise on magistrates’ sentencing guidelines and responses will be considered in determining the final guidelines.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what consideration magistrates are permitted to give to the cost of local public transport when considering pleas of exceptional hardship entered by drivers seeking to avoid disqualification from driving under the totting-up procedure. [139644]

Mr. Sutcliffe: The court has very little discretion other than to disqualify under the totting-up procedure, unless they are satisfied that to do so would cause 'exceptional hardship'.

Exceptional hardship is determined by the court under guidelines listed by the Sentencing Guidelines, Council. A whole range of circumstances may affect any court decision. The cost of public transport is not listed as a specific factor for consideration although an individual judge may take account of this.

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice if she will commission research on the equity of driving bans, with particular reference to the financial effect of bans given the disparate cost of public transport in different areas. [139671]

Mr. Sutcliffe: There are no plans to commission research on this issue at this time. It would be for the Sentencing Guidelines Council potentially to consider this issue at a future date.

Driving Offences: Foreigners

Mr. Paterson: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice how many (a) UK licence holders and (b) foreign licence holders were (i) prosecuted, (ii) convicted, (iii) banned from driving and (iv) imprisoned for offences relating to (A) fatal road traffic accidents, (B) serious road traffic accidents and (C) minor road traffic accidents in each year since 1997. [139563]

Mr. Sutcliffe: While the Department for Transport monitors details of road traffic accidents, this information is not linked with details of any subsequent prosecutions.

Information collected on the Court Proceedings Database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform on the number of prosecutions, convictions, custodial sentences and disqualifications for ‘accident’
5 Jun 2007 : Column 379W
offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988 section 170 (4) and (7) does not distinguish between those offences which resulted in injury from those which resulted in damage or both. Neither do the data identify UK/non-UK licence holders in breach of driving licence regulations.

Driving Under Influence: Sentencing

Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what the (a) maximum, (b) minimum and (c) average prison sentence imposed for the offence of drink driving was in each police authority in the most recent year for which figures are available. [138818]

Mr. Sutcliffe: Information taken from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform, for 2004 (latest available) is provided in the following table.

Data for 2005 will be available shortly.


5 Jun 2007 : Column 380W
Maximum, minimum and average custodial( 1) sentence given for offences of driving etc. after consuming alcohol or taking drugs( 2) , by police force area, England and Wales, 2004
Police force area Maximum custodial sentence given (months) Minimum custodial sentence given (days) Average sentence length (months)

Avon and Somerset

6

21

2.9

Bedfordshire

6

7

3.0

Cambridgeshire

6

7

3.2

Cheshire

6

7

2.9

Cleveland

6

28

3.2

Cumbria

6

7

2.7

Derbyshire

6

21

2.7

Devon and Cornwall

6

5

2.7

Dorset

6

28

2.7

Durham

6

21

3.4

Essex

6

7

2.2

Gloucestershire

5

7

3.0

Greater Manchester

6

7

3.2

Hampshire

6

5

2.9

Hertfordshire

6

7

2.6

Humberside

6

14

3.3

Kent

6

5

3.0

Lancashire

6

14

3.0

Leicestershire

6

7

3.0

Lincolnshire

6

7

3.2

London, City of

6

30

2.9

Merseyside

6

7

3.1

Metropolitan Police

6

5

2.8

Norfolk

6

5

2.5

Northamptonshire

6

30

3.4

Northumbria

6

5

3.4

North Yorkshire

6

28

2.9

Nottinghamshire

6

28

2.8

South Yorkshire

6

14

3.2

Staffordshire

6

14

3.0

Suffolk

6

7

2.6

Surrey

6

15

3.1

Sussex

6

7

2.7

Thames Valley

6

7

2.9

Warwickshire

6

7

3.0

West Mercia

6

7

3.2

West Midlands

6

10

3.2

West Yorkshire

6

7

2.9

Wiltshire

6

14

3.0

Dyfed-Powys

6

7

3.4

Gwent

6

28

2.9

North Wales

6

28

3.2

South Wales

6

14

3.3

(1) Immediate custody = detention and training order, young offender institution and unsuspended sentence of imprisonment.
(2) Offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988 ss. 4 (1) and (2); 5 (1) and (b); 6 (4) and 7 (6).
Notes:
1. Maximum sentence for offences = six months or L5 Fine (£5,000).
2. It is known that for some police force areas, the reporting of court proceedings in particular those relating to summary motoring offences, may be less than complete. Work is under way to ensure that the magistrates courts case management system being implemented by the Ministry of Justice reports all motoring offences to the Office for Criminal Justice Reform. This will enable more complete figures to be disseminated.
3. 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.

Next Section Index Home Page