|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
As of 24 April 2009, 1,711 indeterminate sentenced offenders within the prison estate were recorded as having completed the minimum period imposed by the court for punishment and deterrence (the tariff). There is nothing automatic about release once the tariff has expired; an offender serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection will be released only when the independent Parole Board determines that the risk of harm which he presents may be safely managed in the community.
|Year of release||Number released|
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his most recent estimate is of the number of inaccurate records held on the (a) Delius, (b) CRAMS and (c) other Probation Service IT case management systems. 
Mr. Straw: The Ministry of Justices Offender Management and Sentencing Analytical Service has indicated that, on average, no more than 1 per cent. of the caseload, commencement and termination data they receive on a monthly basis from the 42 area systems is incomplete.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what the (a) community and (b) custody caseload of Lancashire Probation Area was on 31 March in each of the last five financial years; 
|As at 31 March each year||Community (orders and licences)||Custody (pre-release)||Total|
|Probation officers( 1)||Probation service officers|
|(1) Probation officer figures include senior probation officers, senior practitioners and probation officers.|
Figures are shown as full-time equivalents.
The probation annual offender case load went up by 32 per cent. between 2001 and 2006, while the number of probation staff increased by 35 per cent.
Between December 1997 and June 2007, the total number of staff in post in the probation service rose from 13,968 FTE to 20,869 FTE, a rise of 6,901 FTE (49.4 per cent.)
In 2008-09 the probation service under-spent by around £17 million.
Since 1997, the probation resource budget has increased by nearly 70 per cent. in real terms.
Between 2001-02 and 2006-07, total probation spending increased 54 per cent. which included a 40 per cent. increase of local area spend.
In 2008-09 probation areas' main resource grant increased (in cash terms) by an average of 8 per cent., this includes the £40 million announced earlier in the year.
The London Resettlement Pilot Projects at Wormwood Scrubs and Holloway Prisons have been reviewed in terms of operational arrangements, but neither of the evaluations specifically assessed the impact of the pilots on reoffending rates. This is because the sample sizes in the pilots were insufficient to prove a significant change in reoffending and the follow-up
period required for reoffences to occur would have delayed the findings being made available, to relevant partners.
Newly published data on local adult reoffending are broken down by probation area and upper tier local authority levels. The reoffending rate for Wandsworth (which includes Putney) between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2008 is 8.41 per cent., compared with 8.70 per cent. for London Probation over the same time period. For further details please see Local reoffending results 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2008 England and Wales available at:
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the re-conviction rate for offenders resident in (a) Crosby, (b) Sefton and (c) Merseyside was in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Hanson: The measure of reoffending used to provide National Statistics for England and Wales is not broken down by area. However, newly published data on local adult reoffending (a different measure of reoffending to the National Statistics) are broken down by probation area and upper tier local authority levels.
As the data are not broken down below the upper tier of the local authority area level there are no figures available for Crosby. The reoffending rate for Sefton metropolitan borough between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2008 is 9.89 per cent. The reoffending rate for Merseyside probation area over the same time period is 9.55 per cent.
The local measure covers the reoffending of all offenders on the probation case load, aged 18 or over, at a certain point in time (a snapshot), while the national measure covers all offenders commencing a court order under probation supervision or released from custody during the first quarter of the year. Additionally, the local measure allows a three-month period for reoffences to be committed, while the national measure allows a year.
Maria Eagle: Information collected on the Court Proceedings Database held by the Ministry of Justice on the number of findings of guilt for accident offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.170 (4) and (7) does not distinguish offences which resulted in injury from those which resulted in damage or both.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent discussions he has had on the establishment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Straw: My announcement to the House on 2 April 2009, Official Report, column 80WS, provides the latest update on the development of the United Kingdom Supreme Court. In addition public consultation on the fees payable in the court closed on 5 May 2009.
Mr. Straw: For the financial year 2009-10 the Youth Justice Board (YJB) has allocated £26 million for expenditure on education from its Ministry of Justice grant. In addition, the Department for Children, Schools and Families has allocated a further £23 million to the YJB for education expenditure.
Tessa Jowell: The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) has responsibility for staging the Olympic and Paralympic Games at existing venues. The direct costs associated with staging the events at existing venues come from LOCOGs revenues which are primarily derived from commercial sponsorship, broadcast rights, ticket sales and merchandising/licensingnot from the public purse.
There will be attributable costs to the public purse, for example in respect of the security and transport functions associated with the venue. However these costs have not yet been identified separately for individual venues, but they will form part of the overall security and transport budgets.
In respect of the white water canoe course and Eton Manor, which are being constructed by the Olympic Delivery Authority, the project budgets cannot be disclosed at the current time owing to reasons of commercial sensitivity.
Mr. Thomas: All Departments are actively involved in the cross-Government Adapting to Climate Change Programme, which aims to help society adapt to climate change. The role of the programme is to develop and provide a comprehensive evidence base including adaptation tools, to raise awareness of the need to adapt, to measure success and to work across Government at all levels to embed adaptation. Further details about the programmes work can be found at:
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what estimate he has made of his Departments potential gross (a) costs and (b) savings arising from its climate change adaptation measures in the next three years. 
Mr. Thomas: It is not currently possible to provide estimates of the potential costs and savings over the next three years. It has, however, been shown in the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change that timely and well-targeted climate adaptation measures will yield benefits in excess of their costs.
In terms of the work of the Department for International Development (DFID), climate change will impose additional costs. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change estimates the costs of adaptation in developing countries at between $28 billion and $67 billion per year by 2030.
The costs of not acting would be much more significant, however, as climate change threatens to slow and reverse progress towards poverty reduction and sustainable development in developing countries. The UK Government are working to ensure a new deal on climate change that includes sufficient new finance to support developing countries to adapt. Details of UK Government policies, expenditure and steps taken are available on the Department for International Developments website:
Anne Main: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what auditing his Department undertakes to ensure that IT security policies are being followed; and on how many occasions (a) IT security policies have been breached by employees and (b) a member of staff has been sanctioned for a breach of such policies in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Thomas: The Department for International Developments compliance arrangements comprise a system of self assessment, accreditation, assurance reporting, audit and review. There have been six IT security breaches in the last 12 months. No members of staff have been disciplined for a breach of IT security policy in the last 12 months.
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many notifications his Department made to the Information Commissioner in the year ended 30 April 2009 in respect of the loss or mishandling of personal information or data; what was
notified in each such case; and how many individuals were the subjects of personal information or data in respect of which such notifications were made. 
Information is a key asset to Government and its correct handling is vital to the delivery of public services and to the integrity of HMG. The Security Policy Framework and the data handling report produced by the Cabinet Office provide a strategic framework for protecting information that government handles and put in place a set of mandatory measures which Departments must adhere to.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many officials in his Department have been (a) disciplined and (b) dismissed for (i) breaches of data protection requirements and (ii) inappropriate use of personal or sensitive data in the last 12 months. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|