|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
2004: 27 (61 per cent.) out of 44 persons;
2005: 17 (63 per cent.) out of 27 persons;
2006: five (50 per cent.) out of 10 persons.
These figures represent only those cases which have been concluded at court. A number of cases are still awaiting trial, or are currently passing through the courts. These cases are not included in the totals above. For example, in 2006, 36 cases were directed for prosecution, of which five have so far resulted in conviction, five have not, and the remaining 26 either await trial or are in the process of being tried.
The Government are committed to improving the rates of successful prosecution in rape cases. PSNI's CARE units deal with the investigation of serious adult sexual offences and sexual and physical abuse of children and are staffed by highly skilled and trained personnel. The PSNI CARE teams are dedicated to enhancing the service to victims of rape and sexual assault and are seeking to enhance the investigative process so that more offenders are brought before the courts.
We have made significant progress towards establishing a sexual assault referral centre in Northern Ireland and are working in partnership with colleagues in DHSSPS, PSNI, the medical profession and the voluntary sector to develop an appropriate range of services. In addition, PSNI and the Public Prosecution Service have recently begun to analyse a number of rape investigations, in order that they continue to develop models of best investigative practice. In particular, attention will focus upon case building and the significant number of cases that currently do not make the threshold for prosecution.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal notified (a) the Home Office and (b) HM High Commission, Harare of its decision in the case of Ms L.K., wife of Mr. P.H. of Aylesbury (reference AIT OA/44119/2006). 
In Entry Clearance and Family Visitor appeals the determination is served upon the BIA (formerly the Immigration and Nationality Directorate) who will arrange for the forwarding of the determination to the entry clearance post that made the original refusal.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners have been released from HMP Aylesbury under the end of custody licence scheme
since 27 June 2007; how many of those released have since been returned to (a) HMP Aylesbury and (b) other prisons; and to which other prisons such prisoners have been returned. 
Mr. Hanson: One prisoner from HMP Aylesbury was released under end of custody licence between 29 June and 5 July. 12 prisoners overall were returned to prison during this period out of a total released of 1,701. Information on the numbers of prisoners returned to each prison by individual establishment is not available.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps his Department plans to take to ensure that local authorities, magistrates courts and bailiffs (a) are aware of and (b) comply with the 2002 National Standards for Enforcement Agents, with particular reference to page 9, covering vulnerable situations. 
Maria Eagle: The leaflet Effective EnforcementNational Standards for Enforcement Agents was produced with the assistance of and endorsed by industry and Government, including local authorities. The guidance is not legally binding; rather it sets out what the Department, those in the industry and some major users including creditor groups regard as a benchmark for professional standards within enforcement.
Much of the content within the national standards leaflet will now be reflected in the underpinning regulations arising from provisions in the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Bill, which finished its parliamentary passage on 17 July. This will include training requirements for bailiffs for an enhanced and extended certification regime. Agents will be required to have a working knowledge of all the relevant areas of enforcement law and of the national standards in particular how to deal with vulnerable and potentially vulnerable debtors and others present at the premises. This will provide considerable protection for genuinely impoverished and vulnerable debtors.
As part of the development of the underpinning rules and regulations and implementation of the provisions in the Bill HMCS will now be re-engaging with all interested parties. We will use this opportunity to remind the industry including local authorities, magistrates courts and bailiffs themselves of the contents and purpose of the national standards. The outcome of this consultation process will inform the implementation timetable.
(2) how many child care cases have come to court (a) within a month, (b) between one and three months, (c) between three and six months, (d) between six and 12 months, (e) in over a year and (f) in over 18 months in the last 10 years; 
Table 1 shows the length of time from receipt of application to final order for care cases in England and
Wales grouped as requested. The data are presented separately by family proceedings courts and county courts as more complex cases are transferred to the county courts. These data are only available from 2005 for the family proceedings courts and 2003 for the county courts.
|Table 1: Completed care cases by time between date of application and final order and by court jurisdiction, 2003 to 2006, England and Wales|
| Notes: 1. Cases transferred from the family proceedings court to the county court are counted solely in the latter, but are measured from date of initial application to the family proceedings court. 2. Family proceedings court data are measured by child, county court data by case. One case may involve more than one child.|
|Table 2: Care applications, 2003 to 2006, England and Wales|
|(1) Figures for 2006 are provisional and subject to change. Note: Figures relate to the number of children who were the subject of each care application. An application relating to two children will be counted twice.|
Maria Eagle: The information is not available in the format requested. The Legal Services Commission record bills on its systems and two or more bills can relate to the same case where more than one person is assisted in that case. The average gross cost of a bill in public law child care cases between 1999-2000 and 2006-07 is set out in the following table. Prior to 1999-2000 the information is not available as bills were analysed by court venue rather than the type of assistance provided.
|Average gross cost (£)|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|