Mr.
Hanson: I shall try to answer the points that hon. Members
have raised. The prime driver behind the order and amendments are the
changes that we want to make to Ashfield young offender institution,
which I have mentioned, near Bristol, in Avon. At the moment, the
centre provides accommodation purely for under-18s, and it seems
sensible to delegate management of the contract to the Youth Justice
Board on the Secretary of State’s behalf, rather than his office
having to deal with it, as it does now. This is an administrative
matter, bringing Ashfield into line with other institutions that are
operated by the Youth Justice Board, and giving commissioning powers
accordingly. The
hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate seems to think that the board does
not perform a useful function. I remind him that before 1998, when
there was no Youth Justice Board, the provision and commissioning of
youth accommodation and the tackling of youth crime was chaotic,
disorganised and had no central function. The board’s
establishment by the Labour Government in 1998 has provided a focus for
the management of young people, not only through accommodation but
through support through the youth offending teams throughout the UK. I
know, even from the nods that I have had from my hon. Friends the
Members for Wrexham and for Dagenham, that youth offending teams
provide a useful function and are a main part of the Youth Justice
Board’s
functions.
Mr.
Burrowes: The Minister will note that throughout my
comments on the order, I made no reference to the youth offending
teams, which perform a useful role in many areas, and which have
improved. The order is concerned with custody and the board’s
role in that regard. Does the Minister agree with any of my criticisms
about the custodial regime? Where have there been improvements through
the Youth Justice
Board?
Mr.
Hanson: I was just about to come to those points. The hon.
Gentleman will know that Government policy is to try to reduce the
number of young people going into custody, and we have recommitted
ourselves to that policy through the youth crime action plan. Sadly,
however, there are many severe crimes, and there are individuals who
persistently commit crimes, so young people will still find themselves
in custody. Custody is provided for offenders who commit very serious
crimes or who are persistent offenders. When the courts deem that a
custodial sentence is necessary, as they sometimes do, it is our job to
ensure that we invest resources in education, employment and skills to
try to turn around the lives of those individuals. The Youth Justice
Board is committed to that aim, and is having some success in that
regard. When
we debated the youth provisions in the Criminal Justice and Immigration
Act 2008, at around this time last year, more than 3,000 young people
were in custody. There are now about 2,800 young people in custody, so
there has been a fall in the past 12 months, and I hope that that
downward trend will continue. The hon. Gentleman will know that we have
introduced several diversion measures for pre-custody activities,
including
the youth rehabilitation order that we passed last year, which will come
into effect soon. The youth crime action plan, which he has partially
welcomed, has looked at a range of issues such as early intervention,
early identification, giving help and support with literacy and
numeracy and giving parental support. We hope that those measures will
reduce the demands on custody and the impact on the custodial estate,
but there will, sadly, still be a custodial estate. Our work on that
will give the Youth Justice Board some serious challenges in relation
to the most serious, dangerous and persistent offenders. The hon.
Gentleman will also note that the vast majority of individuals in the
young persons custodial estate are 16 or 17. At the last count we had
844 16-year-olds and 1,477 17-year-olds. Those individuals are at the
very top end of the age range and have been through difficult times,
and a range of interventions has failed to make a difference to their
offending
behaviour. I
hope that there is a shared agenda that we should use custody as a way
of trying to prevent reoffending. We need to improve and increase
educational opportunities, and in the youth crime action plan we are
trying to secure greater support from local authorities for ownership
of the individuals who go into the system. We need a holistic approach
to those individuals, and we need to ensure that we try to improve
reoffending rates. I accept that they are high—in the low
70s—for people who go through the custodial estate, but that is
not because of a failure of the Youth Justice Board. It is because the
people in custody are serious, dangerous, persistent offenders. I am
not giving up on them because, as in the past, they will ultimately be
customers of the adult estate at a later date. We need to focus on that
matter. I
say to the hon. Gentleman that our focus today is on ensuring that the
commissioning power is in place, particularly at Ashfield. I believe
that the Youth Justice Board is doing a good and positive job, and my
right hon. Friend the Minister for Children, Young People and Families
and I are meeting regularly to ensure that that job is improved still
further.
Mr.
Burrowes: The Minister puts the order in the context of
Ashfield. As I understand it, however, it will allow powers for the
Youth Justice Board to take the lead in commissioning for any new
YOIs.
Mr.
Hanson: The Youth Justice Board’s role is to do
that for the under-18 estate on behalf of the Secretary of State. That
is its commissioning role. It currently does that by providing direct
services and by commissioning places in private sector establishments,
as it will at Ashfield in future. It is important that it does so.
Where there are mixed estates, as the hon. Gentleman will know in
relation to Parc prison in Bridgend, where there are over-18s and young
people, we have retained that role for the Secretary of State and his
nominee accordingly. However, the board has the role of commissioning
services for under-18s, and we seek to regularise that in the case of
Ashfield. I
believe that my hon. Friends will support the role of the Youth Justice
Board and recognise the difficult group of individuals with which we
are dealing, and that they will continue to support not just myself
and
my right hon. Friend, as Ministers with joint responsibility for the
matter, but the staff of the Youth Justice Board in dealing with
education, literacy, numeracy and improved skills and trying to change
offending behaviour, which I believe can be
done. The
hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green made a number of important
points. On disclosure to the board, the order just gives the governor
or director the power to disclose to the Youth Justice Board if
appropriate. That relationship is the same as disclosure to the
Secretary of State’s nominee, as is currently the case. No
change has been made to the rules about to whom the information may be
declared or disclosed otherwise, and there is no change in
relationship. The change is simply from the Secretary of State to the
board. As
I hope we have shown, the Youth Justice Board is a specialist body with
expertise in dealing with young people, not just those in custody but
the myriad young people who go through YOTs. Some go through YOTs into
youth custody and back again. That expertise is growing, and Francis
Done, the board’s chair, and the newly appointed chief
executive are committed to achieving
it. I
believe that we all have the same objective—to reduce the number
of first-time entrants, to reduce the number of people who reoffend and
to make a difference to people’s lives. Reoffending rates are
falling, and I am pleased to tell the Committee that even this very
week, new Government figures show that 10,000 fewer young people
entered the criminal justice system for the first time in the past year
than in previous years. The number of first-time entrants aged between
10 and 17 fell from 2,031 last year to 1,800 this year. There is
continued progress on the reduction of crime, reoffending and
first-time entrants. Sadly, however, while there are serious and
persistent offenders we will need custody. It is a last resort and we
are trying to reduce it. The order will give the YJB extra powers where
appropriate, and I commend it to the
Committee. Question
put:— The
Committee divided: Ayes 8, Noes
6.
Division
No.
1] Question
accordingly agreed to.
Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Youth Justice Board for England
and Wales (Amendment) Order
2008. Committee
rose at sixteen minutes past Three
o’clock.
|
