|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
James Brokenshire: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice pursuant to the answer of 5 June 2007, Official Report, column 382W, on fixed penalties: prisoners, how it was possible to provide a substantive answer to question 12643, tabled on 6 March 2007, by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam on illegal immigrants: fixed penalties. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The substantive answer provided to question 12643, tabled on 6 March 2007, by the hon. Member for Sheffield, Hallam (Mr. Clegg) on illegal immigrants: fixed penalties, asked specifically for the number of fixed penalties issued to Romanian and Bulgarian nationals for working in breach of the Accession (Immigration and Worker Authorisation) Regulations 2006. The information relating to the number of fixed penalty notices issued under this scheme is collated locally but not published as a national statistic. This information has not been quality assured and should be treated as provisional management information only.
The answer of 5 June 2007, Official Report, column 382W, referred to fixed penalty notices and Penalty Notices for Disorder. The offences covered in these collections are motoring, minor public disorder and environmental offences, which do not relate to immigration matters. As a result of this, data on the nationality of recipients of these disposals are not collected centrally.
Mrs. Moon: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice how many (a) first time offenders and (b) re-offenders were arrested and subsequently charged in (i) Bridgend constituency, (ii) the South Wales police authority area, (iii) Wales and (iv) England in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The information requested is not available. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) holds an extract of data from the police national computer (PNC) which is used to provide data on proven re-offending. Because of the focus on re-offending the data held is largely for cases which resulted in a conviction or a caution, although it also includes information on cases that are still pending at the time the data is extracted from the PNC. Details of cases which on completion do not result in a caution or conviction are not held. This dataset cannot therefore be used to provide comprehensive information on arrests or charges.
The main arrests collection held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform covers persons arrested for recorded crime (notifiable offences). It does not however include information about whether or not the offenders had previously committed offences.
Mr. Sutcliffe: Offences under the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Act for the illegal poaching of fish with prohibited instruments do not specify the type of fish poached, and therefore data on convictions for poaching of salmon with prohibited instruments are not separately identifiable, and are therefore not available.
|Population in young offender institutions|
Simon Hughes: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice how many incidents of (a) self-harm, (b) prisoner-on-prisoner violence, (c) prisoner-on-officer violence and (d) officer-on-prisoner violence were recorded in each prison in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice how much and what proportion of the prison service budget was spent on drug rehabilitation programmes inside prisons in the last 12 months, broken down by treatment methods and programmes. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: Out of a total £2.83 billion allocated to run prisons during 2006-07 (excluding healthcare and education funding), £77.3 million was provided for custodial drug treatment. This equates to 2.73 per cent. of the total allocation.
|Intervention||Allocation 2006-07 (£ million)||Proportion of total prison spend (percentage)|
Around 55 per cent. of those received into custody are problem drug-users (PDUs)with some local prisons reporting up to 80 per cent. testing positive for Class A drugs on reception. This means around 70,000 PDUs enter custody each yearwith 40,000 being present at any one time.
Addressing drug-misuse is a priority for the MoJand NOMS has in place a comprehensive drug strategy, the three key elements of which focus on: (i) supply reduction, (ii) demand reduction (through effective treatment) and (iii) building effective through-care arrangements (particularly through prisons' engagement in the HO-led drug interventions programme (DIP)) so timely continuity of treatment can be maintained as PDUs move respectively between custody and the community.
Drug treatment in custody goes much wider than the 116 drug rehabilitation programmes running across the estate and includes: (i) clinical services (maintenance-prescribing and/or detoxification programmes) that are available in all local and remand prisons; and (ii) CARATs (Counselling, Assessment, Referral, Advice and Through-care services) that are provided in all prisons.
The total spending on prisons in 2006-07 was £2.83 billion. This figure is a provisional outturn and subject to audit. It includes HMPS, private prisons, and prison related-services managed in NOMS HQ. It does not include expenditure on education or health met by the DFES or DoH.
For the purpose of this PQ, the total £2.83 billion figure cited for running prisons has been based on the funding allocated to run prisons operationallyprimarily on security, safety, decency and health, maintaining their fabric and providing prison officers to deliver/oversee services for prisoners.
While it is true that the level of funding allocated to drug treatment is only a small proportion of the overall prisons budget, this needs to be seen in context. A significant proportion of the prisons budget is spent on infrastructure and staffingessential to keep prisons safe and to protect the public. It is however, better to compare expenditure on drug treatment against actual treatment need. With funding levels up 997 per cent. since 1996-97 and overall numbers engaged in prison treatment increasing year on year, prisons are doing much to close the treatment gap. The calculations are based on additional drug treatment funding allocated as a result of successive spending reviews. The figure approximates to £7 million but it is not possible to breakdown between various treatment types. The pre-CSR baseline has therefore been excluded from the calculations.
The integrated drug treatment system (IDTS) is designed to boost the quality and increase the volume of drug treatment with a particular focus on drug users during their first 28 days in custody. By March 2008 full IDTS (enhanced clinical services and psychosocial support i.e. CARATS) will be available in 17 prisons; additionally enhanced clinical services will also be available in a further 35 establishments. Collectively, NOMS/DH funding for delivery of IDTS during 2007-08 stands at £18.7 million. This is expected to see around 24,500 drug users benefiting annually from enhanced clinical services.
So far as IDTS is concerned, the Department of Health and NOMS have had to make challenging decisions in reviewing the totality of budgets in recent years. Current levels of funding are down significantly on planned expenditure.
More work is needed to identify the gaps in treatment provision. Historically, local assessment and epidemiological studies have informed treatment delivery across the prison estate. Work is already underway on a needs analysis model but, ahead of its data being available later this year, NOMS already anticipates there being a significant treatment gap. For example, to identify offenders drug needs effectively, the CARAT service would need to undertake substance-misuse triage assessments for up to 80 per cent. of the annual prison through-put; based on 136,000 offenders passing through custody, this would be around 108,000 offenders. As currently resourced,
CARAT teams only deliver around 75,000 assessmentsa potential shortfall of 33,000.
Nick Herbert: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (1) what discussions her Department has had with the Prison Service on the possibility of easing prison overcrowding by transferring prisoners serving sentences in closed prisons to (a) open prisons and (b) Ford Open Prison; 
Mr. Hanson: The Prison Service has already implemented measures designed to maximise the use of the whole prison estate. This includes the transfer of prisoners sentenced to less than 12 months in custody to an open prison (including to HMP Ford) for the final 56 days of their sentence. Each individual is subject to a streamlined risk assessment in order to determine whether they are suitable for transfer.
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Minister of State, Ministry of Justice what her most recent estimate is of the number of (a) probation officer and (b) probation service officer vacancies in each probation area in England and Wales. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: Not all Probation Areas in the National Probation Service operate a set establishment against which vacant posts can be measured. As a more representative alternative, Probation Areas are required to report regularly on the number of active vacancies they have. An active vacancy is one which a Probation Area is actively trying to fill through a recruitment process.
Figures for 31 December 2006 show that there were a total of 8343.64 full-time equivalent Probation Officers in post in England and Wales. On the same date there were 70.27 full-time equivalent vacancies that were actively being recruited to. Therefore active vacancies accounted for 0.84 per cent. of the total posts available at that time.
Additionally, the National Probation Service employs 6,502.74 full-time equivalent probation service officers, who also deliver front-line services to offenders. At this time, there were 203.00 full-time equivalent vacancies, equating to 3.03 per cent. of the total posts available.
The figures presented in the following table show active vacancies for each Area, in terms of full-time equivalent value, for the Probation Officer and Probation Service Officer grades at the close of Quarter 3 06/07 (1 October to 31 December 2006).
|Probation officer and probation service officers vacancies (as at 31 December 2006)|
|All vacancies||Probation officer vacancies||Probation services officer vacancies|
|Area||Total||Total vacancies||Vacancies (as a percentage of total vacancies)||Vacancies (as a percentage of total posts( 1) )||Total vacancies||Vacancies (as a percentage of total vacancies)||Vacancies (as a percentage of total posts( 1) )|
|(1) Total PO and PSO posts are staff in post plus the number of active vacancies.|
(2) Hampshire, Greater Manchester and West Midlands Probation Areas are unable to provide data on active vacancies.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|