House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 24 Apr 2009 (pt 0014)

24 Apr 2009 : Column 954W—continued

Students: Loans

Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what assessment he has made of the effect of the negative inflation figure for the retail prices index in March 2009 on people with outstanding student loans who took them out (a) prior to and (b) since 1998. [271029]

Mr. Lammy: The retail price index (RPI) for March is -0.4 per cent. I am considering any implications this might have for the repayment of student loans, particularly for the rate of interest to be applied, and will make an announcement in due course. Interest rates are normally adjusted annually, each September.

For borrowers repaying income contingent loans, which have been available since 1998, the rate of interest makes no difference to the level of their monthly repayments. Borrowers repay 9 per cent. of their earnings over the income threshold of £15,000.

Justice

Antisocial Behaviour: Fixed Penalties

Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people in the Lancashire police authority area have been issued with penalty notices for disorder in each of the last three years, broken down by type of offence; and how many fines associated with notices remain unpaid. [265839]

Mr. Straw: The number of Penalty Notices for Disorder (PNDs) issued to persons aged 16 and over in the Lancashire police force area, by type of offence and those which were not paid from 2004 to 2007 (latest available) can be found in tables 1 to 3.

Under the PND scheme, recipients have 21 days in which to pay the penalty or request a court hearing. 21 days is the minimum period before forces can register a fine for not responding to a notice. If no action is taken, a fine of one and half times the penalty amount is registered by the courts. Fines for non-payment of PNDs are treated by the courts in the same way as any other unpaid fine. It is not possible to separately identify the payment rate of fines arising from unpaid PNDs, but the latest enforcement rate for all fines, including those from unpaid PNDs, is 85.2 per cent. for the period April-December 2008.

PNDs were implemented in all 43 forces in England and Wales in 2004.

PND data for 2008 will be available in the autumn of 2009.
24 Apr 2009 : Column 955W

24 Apr 2009 : Column 956W

Table 1: N umber of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued to persons aged 16 and over in the Lancashire police force area, by offence, 2005 - 07^{( 1)}
	£80 ticket offences
		DA01	DA02	DA3	DA4	DA5	DA6	DA11	DA12
	Total £80 tickets issued	Wasting police time	Misuse of public telecoms system	Giving false alarm to fire and rescue authority	Causing harassment, alarm or distress	Throwing fireworks	Drunk and disorderly	Criminal damage (under £500	Theft (retail under £200)
2005	10,013	202	21	14	2,491	25	4,651	190	20
2006	12,192	255	55	12	3,038	24	4,889	1,394	2,259
2007	12,696	288	84	13	2,175	25	5,864	1,340	2,642

	DA13	DA14	DA15	DA16	DA17	DA18	DA19	DA20	DA21
	Breach of fireworks curfew	Possession of category 4 fireworks	Possession by a person under 18 of adult firework	Sale of alcohol to drunken person	Supply of alcohol to person under 18	Sale of alcohol to person under 18	Purchase alcohol for person under 18	Purchase alcohol for person under 18 for consumption on premises	Delivery of alcohol to person under 18 or allowing such delivery
2005	4	15	822	1,546	2	1	5	4	—
2006	7	—	2	4	—	206	24	3	20
2007	1	2	6	6	1	190	28	2	29
⁽¹⁾ 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 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: Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Evidence and Analysis unit.

Table 2: N umber of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued to persons aged 16 and over in the Lancashire police force area, by offence, 2005 to 2007^{( 1)}
		£50 ticket offences
		DB13	DAB04	DB5	DB7	DB8	DB12	DB13	DB14
	Total £50 tickets issued	Trespass on a railway	Throwing stones at a train/railway	Drunk in a highway	Consumption of alcohol in public place	Depositing and leaving litter	Consumption of alcohol by under 18 on relevant premises	Allowing consumption of alcohol on relevant premises	Buying or attempting to buy alcohol by person under 18
2005	209	11	—	105	21	61	5	3	3
2006	287	7	—	106	86	72	7	—	9
2007	160	4	2	34	81	33	3	1	2
⁽¹⁾ 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 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 Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Evidence and Analysis unit.

Table 3: N umber of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued to persons aged 16 and over in the Lancashire police force area, by outcome, 2005 to 2007^{( 1)}
	Of those paid
	Number issued	Total paid in full	Percentage	Paid in full within 21 days	Percentage	Paid in full outside 21 days	Percentage
2005	10,222	4,733	46	3,621	35	1,112	11
2006	12,479	5,631	45	4,296	34	1,335	11
2007	12,856	5,819	45	4,342	34	1,477	11

	Other outcomes
	Fine registered	Percentage	Court hearing requested	Percentage	PND cancelled	Percentage	Potential prosecution	Percentage	Outcome unknown	Percentage
2005	4,972	49	382	4	117	1	⁽²⁾—	⁽²⁾—	18	0
2006	6,491	52	218	2	136	1	⁽²⁾—	⁽²⁾—	3	0
2007	6,645	52	240	2	152	1	⁽²⁾—	⁽²⁾—	⁽²⁾—	⁽²⁾—
⁽¹⁾ 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 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. ^{(2 )}Nil. Source: Office for Criminal Justice Reform—Evidence and Analysis unit.

24 Apr 2009 : Column 957W

Bail Accommodation and Support Service

Mr. Vara: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 30 March 2009, Official Report, column 982W, on bail accommodation and support services, (1) how many of the 836 service users who had their residency terminated went to court; what the outcome of the hearing was in each case where legal proceedings have been concluded; and if he will make a statement; [270065]

(2) how many service users were placed in ClearSprings’ properties between the introduction of the scheme and 24 March 2009; and if he will make a statement. [270066]

Mr. Hanson: The number reported in my answer of 30 March was 832, not 836. Of the 832, 514 were defendants on bail and 318 were offenders on Home Detention Curfew.

Breaches leading to termination may occur as a result of failure to comply with the curfew conditions, failure to comply with other bail conditions, failure to comply with the rules applied by ClearSprings for living in houses, failure to attend contact sessions, misbehaviour, or offending and arrest by the police.

Those who breach bail conditions are returned to court by the police but it is then for the court to decide whether the individual must be remanded in custody or can be re-bailed to a non-ClearSprings address, perhaps with other conditions. It is only possible to establish the outcomes from court records and this could be done for the 514 defendants only at disproportionate cost.

Those who breach on Home Detention Curfew are reported to NOMS Public Protection Unit who decide whether the individual must be recalled to prison.

From 18 June 2007 up to 24 March 2009, 1,506 defendants and 1,180 offenders were received into ClearSprings’ properties.

Next Section

Index

Home Page