| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Dec 2007 : Column 1087W—continued
Chelmsford Crown Court: Parking
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many car parking places are reserved for (a) judges, (b) prosecution barristers, (c) defence barristers, (d) members of the public and (e) staff at Chelmsford Crown court; what the total cost is of providing such spaces; what criteria are used for allocating car parking spaces to (i) judges, (ii) prosecution barristers, (iii) defence barristers, (iv) members of the public and (v) staff; what recent representations he has received about car parking in courts; and if he will make a statement; [174068]
(2) what parking facilities are available at Chelmsford Crown court for victims of crime; what recent representations he has received about this issue; and if he will make a statement. [174069]
Maria Eagle: There are 46 car park spaces at Chelmsford Crown court. There are up to six parking spaces available for judges and four for magistrates. There are eight parking spaces for court users with disabilities who are blue badge holders. Otherwise no spaces are provided specifically for (b) prosecution barristers, (c) defence barristers, (d) members of the public. (e) There are approximately 32 members of staff from the court and other Criminal Justice Agencies for whom car parking spaces are available. There are no costs attached to providing parking spaces as they form part of the overall court complex.
The criteria used for allocating car parking spaces are that people are (i) either judges or magistrates, (v) staff who work permanently on site at Chelmsford Crown court and who drive to work; or they can be allocated, on request by Court users who are disabled blue badge holders; including barristers for the (ii) prosecution, (iii) defence and (iv) members of the public.
There have been no recorded complaints concerning car parking.
There are no car parking spaces specifically allocated to victims of crime at Chelmsford Crown Court, except for those that have a disability. Departmental guidance on car parking is to provide parking for sensitive witnesses where space is available.
No recent representations have been received on this issue.
Chelmsford Crown Court: Witnesses
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average waiting time is at Chelmsford Crown court for persons giving evidence; and what the average time taken was in (a) 1996, (b) 1998, (c) 2001, (d) 2005 and (e) 2006. [174071]
Maria Eagle: The latest and historical figures, since records have been available, from Her Majesty's Courts Service witness survey are shown as follows:
| Estimated waiting time | ||
| Survey date | Chelmsford | England and Wales |
Data for the average waiting time for persons giving evidence is obtained from the biannual witness survey which is carried out over two weeks in June and November every year. It covers all witnesses who attended the Crown court, whether or not they were actually called to give evidence. We do not currently hold figures for the time taken to give evidence centrally.
Witness waiting times are affected by several factors, for example the times that witnesses are asked to attend, how many witnesses there are in a trial and what happens in the courtroom. There could be unexpected lengthy legal argument or other delays on the day, perhaps caused by the defendant not attending. These estimates should all be used with caution as the number of witnesses surveyed was less than 100 for each survey at Chelmsford Crown court, meaning that margins of error will be wide.
Communications Act 2003
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) prosecutions have been brought and (b) convictions obtained for offences under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003 in the last three years for which figures are available. [174426]
Maria Eagle: Information on the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 are provided in the following table which covers the years 2004-2006.
It is not possible to separate offences under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003 from other offences under section 127 of the same act.
| Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for improper use of public electronic communications network under the Communications Act 2003 England and Wales 2002-2004( 1,2) | ||
| Proceeded against | Found guilty | |
| (1 )These data are provided on the principal offence basis. (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. Source: Court Proceedings Database—Office for Criminal Justice Reform | ||
Contact Orders
Mr. Kidney:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what assessment he has made of the durability of agreements on child contact reached through in-court
conciliation; and what steps he is taking to reduce the number of such cases returning to court shortly after a child contact agreement has been reached; [173787]
(2) what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the in-court conciliation pilots in diverting child contact cases from contested court proceedings; [173788]
(3) what effect agreements reached through in-court conciliation have had on the welfare of children in child contact cases. [173789]
Bridget Prentice: In March 2006 the Government published research by Dr. Liz Trinder of the university of East Anglia on in-court conciliation in three courts in England. This looked at the process and overall effectiveness of conciliation and examined the relative effectiveness of three contrasting models; 125 cases were examined immediately following the conciliation meeting and again six months later. A further study examined 117 of these cases to assess the position two years on. The Government published the findings of this further study on 21 November.
At the two-year follow-up, 79 per cent. of parents had an agreement about contact. More children were having overnight contact and the overall amount of contact per child had increased since the initial conciliation meeting. However, 60 per cent. of agreements made at the original conciliation meeting had been changed or broken down. Analysis suggests that this was due to one or more of the adults or children not supporting the agreement rather than a change in circumstances. In 40 per cent. of cases there had been further litigation; 9.4 per cent. of parents reported that their case was currently active, a reduction from 25.6 per cent. at the six-month follow-up.
To provide ongoing support to parents and help prevent a return to court, the courts can make Family Assistance Orders (FAOs). On 1 October 2007 the Government implemented section 6 of the Children and Adoption Act 2006. FAOs may now be made for 12 months rather than six, and are not restricted to exceptional cases.
The 2006 Act also contains provisions to enable the courts to direct parties to take part in contact activities during the court stage and before contact is formally agreed. These activities will provide parents with access to more therapeutic services designed to help them overcome some of the underlying issues they face, which can act as barriers to co-parenting and to making contact work. We will announce shortly the timetable for implementing these and other provisions in the Act.
The research found that 76 per cent. of parents in the study reached a full or partial agreement immediately following conciliation. In most of these cases the court will have made an order for contact with the consent of the parties, avoiding a contested final hearing. The Children and Family Court Advisory Support Service reports that in 2006-07 its dispute resolution work in these cases (focused mainly on the delivery of in-conciliation) achieved a full or partial agreement in 59.4 per cent. of cases going through the courts.
The research concludes that child wellbeing is related to the quality of the relationship between the parents. While parental relationships had improved a little for
some, this improvement was modest and the majority of parents continued to report a negative relationship that had not improved since the original conciliation meeting. Contact activities will help to equip these parents with the skills and understanding they need to be more effective co-parents.
Death: Mental Health
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many inquests have been held in each of the last five years into deaths of people detained under the Mental Health Act in NHS mental health accommodation; and in how many of those inquests there was a jury. [173874]
Bridget Prentice: The Secretary of State for Health in his answer on 11 December reported that information provided by the Mental Health Act Commission indicated that 377 unnatural deaths of in-patients in NHS mental health accommodation took place between 2002 and 2006. Information on the number of inquests held on these deaths is not held centrally.
The Ministry of Justice does not ask coroners to make statistical returns on inquests resulting from deaths of patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice for what reasons there is no requirement for a coroner to summon a jury for inquests into the deaths of people detained in NHS mental health accommodation under the Mental Health Act; and if he will make a statement. [173875]
Bridget Prentice: Section 8(3) of the Coroners Act 1988 requires the coroner to hold a jury inquest where he has jurisdiction and the person has died in prison, in police custody or in circumstances requiring an inquest under any other Act. Deaths of people detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 are not specified in the Coroners Act 1988 Section 8(3), and are not regarded as automatically requiring an inquest to be held. In the Coroners Bill, which will be brought before Parliament as soon as time allows, it is intended that the death of any person in lawful detention, including those detained under the Mental Health Act, will be investigated by a coroner.
Departmental Equality
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much has been spent by his Department (a) in total and (b) on staff costs on promoting equality and diversity in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and how many people are employed by his Department for this purpose. [173813]
Maria Eagle: The Ministry of Justice, which was created on 9 May 2007, is committed to embedding equality and diversity in all our policies and practices as we recognise and value the diversity of our staff and customers.
The information requested is not recorded centrally and to supply the information would involve contacting each division across the Department at disproportionate cost. I am, however, able to provide information on dedicated equality and diversity teams within the Ministry of Justice.
The Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Division, which covers staff in the former Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA), has a budget for 2007-08 of £2,029,256. The projected staff cost is 1,505,010. The Division, which runs six staff networks and provides advice on equality and diversity issues, has a staff complement of 36.
Three Equality and Diversity Teams, transferred from the Home Office on 9 May 2007, are responsible for staff employed in the Prison Service and for equality and diversity policy in the Prison Service and National Offender Management Service. The teams have a combined budget for 2007-08 of 3,647,000 of which 1,925,652 is for staff costs. The teams employ a total of 40 staff.
In 2006-07 the budget for the Corporate Diversity Unit of the former DCA was £2,183,116 of which 1,053,869 was spent on staff costs. For 2005-06 the respective figures were £2,239,629 and £875,806.
Departmental Manpower
Mrs. May: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) men and (b) women of each civil service grade are employed by his Department. [172739]
Maria Eagle: The latest figures for (a) men and (b) women within each civil service grade is reflected in Table A (Ministry of Justice’ Headquarters) and Table B (Ministry of Justice’ Agencies) as follows.
Table A: The table reflects the figures within the Ministry of Justice’ Headquarters as at reference date 30 September 2007.
| Ministry of Justice Headquarters | ||
| Civil Service Grade | M | F |
| Note: Unknown bands are former magistrates courts posts, which do not equate with Civil Service grades, and whose grading is yet to be finalised under the current pay and grading review. | ||
Table B: The table reflects the figures within the Ministry of Justice Agencies as at reference date 30 September 2007.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |