Previous Section Index Home Page

19 July 2007 : Column 586W—continued


Prisons

Mr. Heath: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many new prison places will be opened (a) through refurbishment, (b) on existing prison sites and (c) on new sites in each of the next five years. [150142]

Mr. Hanson: NOMS undertakes a rolling programme of refurbishment on the prison estate. As schemes come back into use following refurbishment, other schemes are taken forward and the accommodation is taken out of use.

8,000 new prison places were announced by the Home Secretary in July 2006 and a further 1,500 places by the Lord Chancellor on 19 June. The programme is still in the planning stages and the number of places to be provided beyond 2007 has not been finalised.

The majority of these new places will be within existing prisons, but at least two new prisons will be built (Belmarsh West and Maghull) with a combined total of 1,200 places. In addition, a new 350 place prison (HMP Kennet) opened in June 2007.

Prisons: Crimes of Violence

Mr. Heath: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 21 June 2007, Official Report, column 1843W, to the hon. Member for North Southwark and Bermondsey (Simon Hughes), on prisons: crimes of violence, how many incidents in each category resulted in (a) disciplinary action, (b) police involvement, (c) a sanction detection and (d) a conviction. [150152]

Maria Eagle: The information requested is not held centrally. Obtaining the information would involve verifying adjudication data with each establishment, collecting data from each Police Authority and Crown Prosecution Service and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Prisons: Private Sector

Mr. Heath: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what financial penalties have been imposed on private prison contractors in respect of privately operated establishments in each of the last five financial years; what the reasons were for each penalty; and in how many cases the imposition of a penalty resulted in the withholding of the corresponding amount from the contractor concerned. [150150]


19 July 2007 : Column 587W

Mr. Hanson: The level of detail that the question asked for is not held in the required format. However, I can respond on the specific point of how monies are recovered when a financial penalty is imposed. The contractor is required to provide a credit note for the relevant amount to be deducted from the monthly payment.

I will write to the hon. Member with a more detailed response to the question before Parliament goes into recess.

Public Defenders: Liverpool

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice where the work that was being dealt with by the Public Defender Office in St. John’s street, Liverpool has been transferred to. [150635]

Maria Eagle: Wherever possible the Public Defender Service completed existing clients’ cases. In cases where it was not possible to complete work, the client was invited to nominate another Criminal Defence Service Provider and every assistance was given in aiding the smooth transfer of the case.

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people have been made redundant as a result of the closure of the Public Defender Office in St. John’s Street, Liverpool; and what their positions were. [150636]

Maria Eagle: In total 12 people were made redundant. This figure is made up of the head of office, the quality manager, a barrister, five solicitors, two accredited representatives and two administrators.

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice for what reasons the Public Defender Office in St. John’s street, Liverpool has been closed; and who was consulted on the closure of that Office. [150645]

Maria Eagle: The decisions made about the Liverpool PDS office were made in the light of the independent evaluation of the PDS pilot, the needs of clients and the wider legal aid reform programme. The Legal Services Commission consulted its recognised trade unions and every individual affected by the closure.

Public Defenders: Pilot Schemes

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the assessment process is of the Public Defence Office pilots; and when a report on the pilots is expected to be made public. [150773]

Maria Eagle: The Public Defender Service pilot ended 31 March 2005. An independent evaluation of the pilot was published on 8 January 2007 and can be found on the Legal Services Commission’s website and in the Library of the House.

Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the total annual cost is of the Public Defence Office pilots; and what the average annual cost has been of a Public Defence lawyer. [150774]


19 July 2007 : Column 588W

Maria Eagle: During 2006-07, the Legal Services Commission (LSC) spent £5 million on the public defender service (PDS).

It is not possible to provide an average cost of a public defender lawyer as it would require a manual search of employees ‘actual’ salaries and would therefore incur disproportionate cost.

Sexual Offences: Rehabilitation

Mr. Heath: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has to develop residential treatment facilities for sex offenders. [150137]

Mr. Hanson: The Review of the Protection of Children from Sex Offenders, the report of which was published on 13 June, made a number of recommendations designed to make the treatment of sex offenders more effective. One recommendation includes a commitment to explore intensive treatment options for those sex offenders who present the highest risk of serious harm. We will examine whether it would be appropriate to deliver such intensive treatment in a residential setting.

Young Offender Institutions: Death

Mr. Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many deaths occurred in young offender institutions in each of the last 10 years, broken down by (a) cause of death and (b) (i) age group and (ii) sex of deceased. [149855]

Maria Eagle: Information in respect of deaths in current young offender institutions(1)—which are exclusively male—is contained in the following table and associated notes. Establishments change and combine functions from time to time. Working out the precise make-up of the YOI estate over the 10 years and matching that to the timings of deaths could be done only at disproportionate cost.


19 July 2007 : Column 589W
Year/ Cause of death Age group Number of deaths

1997

Natural causes

21

1

Self-inflicted(2)

15-17

1

Self-inflicted

18-20

5

Self-inflicted

21

3

1998

Homicide

15-17

1

Self-inflicted

15-17

2

Self-inflicted

18-20

3

Self-inflicted

21

2

1999

Self-inflicted

18-20

9

Self-inflicted

21

2

2000

Homicide

18-20

1

Self-inflicted

15-17

3

Self-inflicted

18-20

3

Self-inflicted

21

3

2001

Self-inflicted

15-17

3

Self-inflicted

18-20

3

Self-inflicted

21

1

2002

Self-inflicted

15-17

1

Self-inflicted

18-20

4

Self-inflicted

21

1

2003

Self-inflicted

18-20

1

Self-inflicted

21

2

2004

Self-inflicted

18-20

3

2005

Other non-natural

18-20

1

Self-inflicted

15-17

2

Self-inflicted

18-20

7

2006

Self-inflicted

18-20

1

(1) The single-function young offender institutions referred to are: Aylesbury; Ashfield; Brinsford; Castington; Deerbolt; Feltham; Glen Parva; Hindley; Huntercombe; Lancaster Farms; Moorland Open (Hatfield); Northallerton; Portland; Reading; Rochester; Stoke Heath; Swinfen Hall; Thorn Cross; Warren Hill; Werrington and Wetherby.
(2) The Prison Service definition of self-inflicted deaths is broader than the legal definition of suicide and includes all deaths where it appears that a prisoner has acted specifically to take their own life. This inclusive approach is used in part because inquest verdicts are often not available for some years after a death (some 20 per cent. of these deaths will not receive a suicide or open verdict at inquest). Annual numbers may change slightly from time to time as inquest verdicts and other information become available.

Young Offenders: Custodial Treatment

Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what percentage of under 18s in custody received their custodial sentence as a result of (a) possessing or supplying drugs of class A, B or C and (b) offences in which drugs were involved. [150912]

Mr. Hanson: As at the end of May 2007 there were 74 under 18-year-olds serving sentences for drug offences in prison establishments in England and Wales; 4 per cent. of the total 1,895 under 18s serving immediate custodial sentences. It is not possible to show the number serving sentences for specific types of drug offences as the data are not robust at this level.

Information on the total number of prisoners whose offences involved drugs either as a motivating factor, or were committed under the influence of drugs, or where another offence was listed as the primary offence, is not available.

These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.


19 July 2007 : Column 590W

Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many under 18-year-olds were in custody (a) following conviction and (b) before conviction on 1 October of each year since 1997. [150913]

Mr. Hanson: Figures for all prisoners aged under 18 in all prison establishments in England and Wales 1997 to 2006 can be found in the following table.

Following conviction( 1) Before conviction( 2)

1997

2,011

468

1998

2,024

442

1999

1,989

433

2000

2,125

338

2001

2,070

302

2002

2,309

324

2003

1,934

335

2004

1,969

322

2005

2,083

408

2006

2,124

387

(1) Includes convicted unsentenced remand and sentenced prisoners.
(2) Untried remand prisoners.
Notes:
1. 1997 to 1999 figures are as at 30 June.
2. 2000 to 2006 are as at 30 September.

Next Section Index Home Page