|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Operational capacity in the table does not take into account the prison estate's "operating margin". This is reflected in the useable operational capacity of the estate and is the best estimate of the total number of
prisoners that the estate can readily hold taking into account control, security and the proper operation of regimes including single cell risk assessments. It allows for the fact that prisoners are managed separately by sex, risk category and conviction status and that the population will not exactly match the distribution of places available across the country. Useable operational capacity is currently set at 2,000 places (the "operating margin") below the overall capacity of the prison estate.
Our analysis suggests we need to increase the capacity of the prison estate to around 96,000 places by 2014, and we are on course to achieve this through the current building programme. No decisions have been made on the provision of further capacity once the programme to increase the estate to 96,000 places is complete.
|Population by region of origin( 1) , September 2008 data|
|(1 )Region of origin is derived from a prisoner's home address. If this home address is not recorded centrally the prisoner's court of committal is used as a proxy for home area.|
(2 )This total excludes around 2,400 prisoners who do not have a centrally recorded home or court address.
Data are rounded to the nearest 100.
Mr. Pelling: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the cost effectiveness of the use of (a) random and (b) non-random mandatory drugs testing in prisons between 2002-03 and 2008-09; and what plans he has for the future use of mandatory drugs testing in prisons. 
Mike Penning: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many high risk (a) male and (b) female offenders in each age group there were in the Hemel Hempstead probation area in each of the last five years. 
Maria Eagle: The total number of male offenders, by age group and the total number of female offenders in Hertfordshire probation area who were categorised as Tier 4 (high risk) as at 31 March in each of the last three years is provided in the following table. Information is available at probation area level only and has not been provided for women by age group because of the small numbers of cases involved.
|(1) Data not provided because of the small numbers involved.|
Rob Marris: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much the Probation Service spent on (a) consultants, (b) monitoring of performance, (c) IT systems which were abandoned as unsuccessful, (d) IT systems which were retained as successful and (e) management in (i) 2003-04, (ii) 2004-05, (iii) 2005-06, (iv) 2006-07 and (v) 2007-08. 
Maria Eagle: It is not possible to answer the questions, except for the C-NOMIS project and the Delius case management system, without incurring disproportionate cost as it would be necessary to request information from each of the 42 local area probation boards that comprised the National Probation Service (NPS) in England and Wales up to 31 March 2008.
However, some elements of IT provision are managed centrally, within which Delius, a case management system already in use by some probation areas, has been implemented where existing NPS case management systems are in urgent need of replacement. This replacement began in 2007-08 and for that financial year, expenditure was £367,000.
The National Audit Office (in its report on the National Offender Management Information System, HC292, 2008-09) estimated that the National Offender Management Service had spent around £15 million on the probation element of C-NOMIS which is no longer required.
Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offenders from Milton Keynes were charged with each category of violent offence while under supervision by the Probation Service in each of the last five years. 
The National Offender Management Service holds information on the number of offenders charged with serious further (violent) offences while under probation supervision for the years 2006-07 and 2007-08. However, this does not include all types of violent offence and the data are collected at probation area level. The information in relation solely to Milton Keynes is not held centrally and would involve checking the local records for the Thames Valley probation area at a disproportionate cost.
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what progress has been made on his Department's review of weekend voting; and what timetable has been set for the Government's response to the consultation. 
Mr. Wills: The "Election Day: Weekend Voting" consultation attracted nearly 1,000 responses. It has taken time to analyse, in detail, the views and evidence provided. The Government's response to the consultation will be published in due course.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 17 November 2008, Official Report, column 24W, on young offender institutions: per capita costs, what the average cost of providing a place in (a) a young offender institution for 18 to 21 year olds, (b) a young offender institution for 15 to 17 year olds and (c) a secure training centre for under 15 year olds was in 2008-09. 
Mr. Straw: The average cost per year of a place at a young offender institution (YOI) for 2008-09 is not yet available. The figures will be calculated after completion of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) Annual Report and Accounts, due to be issued at the end of July, and published on the NOMS website. I will write to the hon. Member when the figures are available.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills pursuant to the answer of 14 May 2009, Official Report, column 993W, on basic skills, how many Learning and Skills Council-funded adult learners aged between 16 and 19 years old were eligible for inclusion in statistics used to measure progress against the Skills for Life Public Service Agreement target in (a) 2002-03, (b) 2003-04, (c) 2004-05, (d) 2005-06 and (e) 2006-07. 
Table 1 shows Skills for Life achievement figures for working age 16 to 19 year-olds between 2002-03 and 2007-08. The table shows only those achievements which count towards the 2010 PSA target
which is to improve the basic skill levels of 2.25 million adults between the launch of Skills for Life in 2001 and 2010. This target was achieved in 2008.
|Table 1: Skills for Life 2010 target-bearing achievements (annual discounted achievements)|
1. Volumes are rounded to the nearest hundred.
2. Achievements are "discounted" to take into account learners that may have previously contributed to the target. For example, if a learner had previously achieved a level 1 literacy qualification in 2005-06 but subsequently achieved a level 1 numeracy qualification in 2006-07, we "discount" the number of learners to ensure we do not double-count learners achieving the target.
Individualised Learner Record Student data.
|Table 1: Apprenticeship starts by a ge|
|1 August 2007 to 31 October 2007||1 November 2007 to 31 January 2008||1 February 2008 to 30 April 2008||1 May 2008 to 31 July 2008||1 August 2008 to 31 October 2008||1 November 2008 to 31 Jan uary 2009||1 February 2009 to 30 April 2009|
1. Volumes are rounded to the nearest hundred.
2. Age is calculated based on age at the start of the course.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|