|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Count of finished consultant episodes with an operation (opcs-4 codes between A01-X59 or and (operation code not known))|
|Data year||Count of FCE with operation|
Hospital Episode Statistics (HES), The Information Centre for health and social care.
Mr. Hanson: Curfew, which is normally monitored electronically, may be imposed as a condition of bail; as a sentence of the court or as a condition of release from prison. Studies suggest that curfew can be more cost effective than custody and may also help in the rehabilitation of offenders. It can also introduce regularity into what are often chaotic lifestyles and can disrupt the pattern of offending behaviour.
The Government believe that serious and dangerous offenders should be sent to prison. But where prison is not the right response to offending, a range of tough
and demanding community punishments are available to the courts, which can include curfew.
The Home Detention Curfew scheme enables short term prisoners to be released up to 135 days before the automatic/conditional release date. The scheme is highly successful: 85 per cent. of those released on the scheme have completed it successfully with only 4 per cent. having re-offended while on HDC.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) whether the Data Protection Act 1998 prevents the Parole Board from putting information into the public domain on individual prisoners which might contribute to public protection; 
Mr. Hanson: Where it is proposed to share information between public bodies, those bodies must always ensure that they have the power to share those data. Public bodies such as the Parole Board have the power under common law to divulge information for the purpose of public protection in certain circumstances. Therefore, no specific statutory power is required.
Once is it established that such a power exists, those involved in disclosure must ensure that the exercise of the power to disclose is consistent with the legal framework established by the Data Protection Act 1998 (the DPA).
The DPA does not automatically preclude the Parole Board sharing information on individual offenders with the police and probation services if that is necessary to enable those services to carry out their statutory responsibilities to protect the public. Whether disclosure for these purposes is consistent with the DPA will always depend on the individual circumstances of each case and whether the disclosure is truly necessary by reference to those facts.
Where sharing of data of the type mentioned above takes place, the police and probation services may, in turn, disclose the information to individuals under their own powers, if it is necessary for them to do so in order to manage the risks posed by offenders.
Taking all of the above into account, there are no proposals to amend legislation in respect of the disclosure of personal data as the current state of the law is sufficient to meet the requirements of public protection.
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on how many occasions prosecutions for driving without (a) insurance and (b) due care and attention were abandoned as a result of the expiration of the statutory time for bringing them forward in each of the last five years, broken down by police force area. 
Dr. Gibson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will review the adequacy of workplace rights for parents of children with cancer, with particular reference to rights to leave to care for their children. 
The Government provide extensive rights to leave for parents, including 52 weeks' maternity leave before a child is one and 13 weeks' parental leave until a child is five. In addition, parents of children under six (or under 18 in the case of a disabled child) have the right to request flexible working arrangements, which could be helpful when caring for sick children.
In 1999, the Government also introduced Time Off for Dependents, which is a right allowing employees to take a reasonable amount of time off work to deal with unexpected emergencies, e.g. to care for a sick child, and to make any necessary longer-term arrangements for dealing with them.
|Officer grade staff in public sector Prison Service and contracted prisons( 1)|
|(1) Figures include both publicly and privately managed establishments. Figures relate to prison officers, senior officers and principal officers within the public sector Prison Service and prison custody officers within contacted prisons. Officers employed within public sector Prison Service headquarters are included.|
(2) Private contractors have not been able to supply information for; Ashfield and Doncaster prior to 2002, Dovegate in 2004, 2002 and 2001, Forest Bank, Altcourse, Rye Hill and Wolds prior to 2004 and Lowdham Grange in 2005, 2004 and prior to 2002.
(3) Figures for 2007 relating to contracted establishments refer to 31 January 2007 except for Parc, Forest Bank, Bronzefield and Peterborough.
|Age breakdown for Prison establishments in England, May 2007|
Excluding prisoners held in police cells.
|Prison Population in England and Wales 1992-2007 Figures as at 30 June|
|(1 )May 2007|
i. Prison Statistics England and Wales 1993 and 1994 table 1.2
ii. Offender Management Caseload Statistics 2005, Table 8.1 for 1995-2005
iii. Monthly population in custody Statistics 2006-2007
iv. Population in prison and police cells
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|