| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
20 Oct 2008 : Column 51W—continued
Bridget Prentice:
The Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal has been specifically allocated £20,000 to train user organisations about the new processes. We are providing training for any representative of service
users who wishes to sign up for the courses in the programme. Training will take place throughout November in Newcastle, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol and London. Over 400 individuals have signed up for the free half-day training. It will be delivered by the judiciary, parent representatives and local education authorities representative members of the special user group.
Suicide Act 1961
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the operation of section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961; and how many proceedings have been brought under this section since 1978. [227592]
Mr. Straw: As a result of public concern about possible links between suicide and the internet, and in line with recommendations from the Byron Review and the Law Commission, we have considered whether the law in this area could usefully be clarified. As the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) told Parliament in a written ministerial statement on 17 September 2008, Official Report, column 142WS, we have concluded that the scope of the current law should not be changed but that the existing statutory language of section 2 of the Suicide Act should be simplified and modernised in a way which will make it clearer for everyone to understand.
The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences relating to the Suicide Act 1961 S.2(l), 1978 to 2006 can be viewed in the following table.
These data are on the principal offence basis. The figures given in the table on court proceedings relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences, the offence selected is the one for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
Court proceedings data for 2007 will be available in November of 2008.
Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he intends to introduce regulations on charging orders under the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. [224560]
Mr. Straw: The enforcement law reforms in part 4 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, which relate to charging orders, require the development of underpinning rules and regulations.
A recently completed scoping exercise, which involved a series of meetings with relevant stakeholders, identified issues that require further public consultation.
Our proposed approach to progressing this and achieving implementation of the Act is being developed and we anticipate that this part of the work will be completed shortly.
Youth Offending Teams: Standards
Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the national performance targets for youth offending teams were in each of the last five years; and what the performance of Torbay Youth Offending Team was against those targets. [225375]
Mr. Hanson: A summary of Youth Offending Teams national performance targets for the last five years, along with information on Torbay YOT's performance against these targets is shown.
These data are not yet available.
The performance indicator for the years 2003-04,2004-05 and 2005-06 was to ensure that 80 per cent. of final warnings were supported by interventions. For the years 2006-07 and 2007-08 the target was raised to 100 per cent. but only applied to young people if their total asset score is greater than or equal to 12, there are any concerns of risk of serious harm to others or their total score is less than 12 but any sections score four. The required target was met by Torbay YOT in each of these years.
The secure remand performance indicator for years 2003-04, 2004-05,2005-06 and 2006-07 was to reduce the number of remands to the secure estate to no more than 30 per cent. of all remand episode decisions (excluding conditional and unconditional bail). In 2007-08 the new remand target was to reduce the number of remands to no more than 9 per cent. of all remand episode decisions (excluding unconditional bail). The target for custodial sentences was to reduce the number of custodial episodes to no more than 6 per cent. of all court disposals in years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, and to no more than 5 per cent. in the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Torbay YOT has achieved the target for custodial sentences in all five years whereas the target for secure remands was met in 2005-06 only.
The performance indicator for 2007-08 was to ensure that victims participate in restorative processes in 25 per cent. of relevant disposals referred to the YOT. Prior to 2007-08 the indicator was to ensure that 75 per cent. of the victims of all youth crimes referred to YOTs are offered the opportunity to participate in a restorative process. In 2003-04 the indicator was to ensure restorative processes are used in 80 per cent. of disposals. The target was exceeded by the YOT in Torbay in all years except in 2003-04.
In 2003-04 the performance indicator was to ensure that, by the end of the year, 70 per cent. of victims who have been consulted or participated in restorative processes were either satisfied or very satisfied with the outcome. In years 2004-05 to 2006-07 the indicator was to ensure that 75 per cent. of victims participating in a restorative process were satisfied. In 2007/08 the target raised to 85 per cent. The indicator has been exceeded by the Torbay YOT in all five years.
In 2007-08 the indicator was to ensure that for 20 per cent. of young people with Final Warnings with intervention, relevant community-based penalties, or DTO, their parent/carer(s) received a parenting intervention. Previously the target was 10 per cent. of young people with community-based penalties. Torbay YOT achieved the target in 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07.
In 2003-04 the performance indicator was to ensure that 70 per cent. of parents completed parenting programmes (voluntary and statutory) and that, of those, at least 70 per cent. were satisfied or very satisfied—the target was met by Torbay. In years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 the parental satisfaction indicator was to ensure that 75 per cent. of parents participating in parenting
interventions are satisfied. The indicator was exceeded by Torbay YOT in each of those years.
The performance indicator for 2007-08 was to ensure that for 20 per cent. of young people on prevention programmes, their parent/carer(s) receive a parenting intervention. The target has been successfully met by the Torbay YOT.
The performance indicator was to ensure that Asset was completed for all (100 per cent.) young people subject to final warnings, relevant community based penalties and sentences.
The required target was achieved by Torbay YOT in 2003/04,2004/05,2005/06 and has been narrowly missed in 2006-07.
The performance indicator was to ensure that 90 per cent. of pre-sentence reports (PSR) prepared for courts were produced within the time scale prescribed by National Standards. The target has been narrowly missed in 2003-04 and achieved in all of the remaining years.
The performance indicator was to ensure that all (100 per cent.) initial training plans for young people subject to DTOs were developed within the time scales prescribed by national standards. The Torbay YOT met this indicator in 2003-04,2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07.
Education, training and employment
The performance indicator was to ensure that 90 per cent. of young offenders supervised by YOTs are in suitable full-time education, training or employment (ETE). The required target level has still not been met by the YOT in Torbay.
The performance indicator was to ensure that all (100 per cent.) young people completing community interventions, or on release from the secure estate, have suitable accommodation to go to. Torbay has narrowly missed this target in each of the years.
The performance indicator was to ensure that all (100 per cent.) young people, who were assessed by Asset or the Mental Health Assessment Framework as manifesting:
acute mental health difficulties, are referred by YOTs to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service (CAMHS) for a
formal assessment commencing within five working days of the receipt of referral, with a view to their accessing a tier 3 service or other appropriate CAMHS tier service based on this assessment
non-acute mental health concerns are referred by the YOT for an assessment, and engagement by the appropriate CAMHS tier (1-3) commencing within 15 working days.
The target on Acute Mental Health was achieved by Torbay YOT in 2003-04, 2005-06 and 2006-07. On non-acute mental health the target has been met in 2003-04 and 2004-05.
The performance indicator was to ensure all young people were screened for substance misuse, that those with identified needs receive appropriate specialist assessment within five working days and following the assessment, access the early intervention and treatment services they require within 10 working days. The target on the timeliness of the assessments has been achieved by Torbay YOT in 2006-07 and 2007-08. The target for the timeliness of the interventions has been met in each year since 2005-06.
In 2006-07 the performance indicator was to reduce the reoffending rate for the 2005 cohort after 12 months, when compared to the 2002 baseline, with the respect of the following four populations:
pre-court
first-tier penalties
community penalties
custodial penalties
Torbay YOT met the target and reduced the reoffending rate by 12.4 per cent.
The performance indicator for 2006-07 and 2007-08 was to ensure that any significant difference between the ethnic composition of offenders on all pre-court and court disposals and the ethnic composition of the local community was reduced year on year. The indicator focuses on achieving a significant reduction (with a 90 per cent. confidence interval) in the disproportionally of the ethnic group most over-represented in 2005-06.
Torbay YOT has not been scored on ethnicity as the overrepresentation in 2005-06 was not statistically significant.
The following table shows performance against the targets/indicators.
| Performance indicators | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | ||
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |