| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
3 Nov 2009 : Column 900W—continued
Ministerial Policy Advisers
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 12 October 2009, Official Report, column 102W, on departmental ministerial policy advisers, whether his special advisers signed waivers under the European Working Time Directive. [296032]
Mr. Straw:
As I said in my previous answer to the hon. Gentleman, I am told that working for me is pure pleasure and stress free. It is very generous of the hon.
Gentleman to be so concerned for the welfare of my special advisers but I can inform him that given how much they enjoy working for me, they have not felt the need to sign waivers under the European Work Time Directive.
Offenders: Radicalism
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what intervention strategies his Department has developed to work with extremist offenders; [296507]
(2) what group work programmes his Department has accredited for use with convicted of offences related to terrorism (a) in prison and (b) on release in the community. [296508]
Mr. Straw: The National Offender Management Service is taking forward a wide-ranging programme of work to manage the risks of violent extremism and radicalisation among offenders. Part of this programme includes work to research, develop and evaluate potential intervention approaches.
Given the comparatively low number of terrorist offenders and the different motivations and behaviours they present in relation to their offending, it is difficult to identify with statistical significance and reliability factors associated with terrorist offending or reoffending. Therefore prison and probation staff need to use all available sources of evidence to assess the risk of serious harm or reconviction which terrorist offenders pose, and to identify appropriate intervention strategies.
For any intervention to be effective it will need to target the reasons why people offend which are different for each individual. There are currently no group work programmes specifically accredited for use with those convicted of offences related to terrorism. NOMS is working to understand the potential use of a wide range of intervention strategies which may help combat violent extremist offending and address the criminogenic factors of the individual violent extremist offender.
Offensive Weapons
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans his Department has to introduce mandatory sentences for carrying a knife in a public place. [297026]
Mr. Straw: We have no plans to introduce mandatory sentences for carrying a knife in a public place. Mandatory sentences are only considered in truly exceptional circumstances. They can have serious drawbacks in some circumstances; because of their inflexibility they cannot easily respond to the circumstances of each offence so they can lead to unjust outcomes. But we have doubled the maximum sentence for possession of an offensive weapon in a public place from two to four years, which allows the courts to impose higher penalties in appropriate cases. We also welcomed last summer's new sentencing guidelines that provide for a starting point of three months custody for possession of a knife. Since then, sentencing has become more severe for this offence: more people are going to prison, and for longer.
We will shortly be making an announcement on the outcome of the review as to whether the starting point for adults convicted of murder using a knife currently 15 years under schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 should be raised.
Prisoners Release: Terrorism
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what measures are in place to ensure adequate supervision of offenders convicted under anti-terrorism legislation who have subsequently been released under supervision; [296509]
(2) if he will use actuarial risk assessment methods to score the risk of reoffending of each person convicted under anti-terrorism legislation which has subsequently been released under supervision; [296510]
(3) what resources have been allocated to the Probation Service to supervise persons convicted under anti-terrorist legislation and subsequently released into the community under supervision; [296520]
(4) whether persons convicted under anti-terrorism legislation who are subsequently released into the community are allocated to tier 4 of his Department's Offender Management Model; and if he will make a statement. [296521]
Mr. Straw: All terrorist offenders fall to be managed in the community under the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). MAPPA are a statutory set of arrangements, in which the police, prison and probation services are required to assess and manage the risk posed by offenders posing a high risk of harm. The MAPPA Guidance, issued by the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to Section 325(8) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, now includes a chapter on the management of terrorist offenders. Under that statutory guidance, chief officers of probation are required to ensure that cases involving terrorist offenders are allocated to an experienced offender manager.
In addition, offenders released having served a sentence of 12 months or more will be subject to statutory supervision on licence by the Probation Service, with six standard conditions. Additional licence conditions can be recommended by the offender manager to manage the risks posed by a particular case. Such additional licence conditions can include restrictions on internet use and contact with named individuals.
Where appropriate, terrorist offenders will be supervised on release in approved premises. Approved premises provide for enhanced level of supervision for high risk of harm offenders on release from custody into the community.
Probation staff are required to assess offenders' risk of reoffending and risk of harm, including offenders convicted of terrorist or terrorism-related offences, using OASys (Offender Assessment System). One element of OASys is an actuarial risk of reoffending score. The predictors of the likelihood of proven reoffending relate to groups within the overall offender population. Given the comparatively low numbers of terrorist offenders, it is difficult to identify with statistical significance and reliability factors associated with terrorist reoffending. Therefore, along with the OASys assessment, offender managers need to use all available sources of evidence to assess the risk of serious harm or reconviction which terrorist offenders pose. All high-risk offenders are allocated to Tier 4 of the Offender Management model.
The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) spends significant sums of money in delivering its responsibilities of protecting the public and reducing
reoffending. In addition to the ongoing costs involved in managing terrorist offenders on licence, NOMS is taking forward a multi-disciplinary programme of work funded by the Office of Security and Counter Terrorism (OSCT). This year OSCT has provided £5.5 million to the programme and this includes money specifically to support probation areas. In addition, those cases assessed as presenting the highest levels of imminent risk of harm, including those convicted of terrorism or terrorism related offences, can be registered as Critical Public Protection Cases (CPPC). CPPC registration enables the responsible authority, normally the probation service, to apply for additional funding to strengthen local risk management plans.
Prisoners Release: Young Offender Institutions
Mr. Rob Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what percentage of young adults released from young offender institutions went to (a) housing provided by family members, (b) housing provided by local authorities, (c) housing provided by charities, (d) an unknown address and (e) another destination in the latest period for which figures are available; [295912]
(2) what proportion of young adults released from young offender institutions were provided with accommodation by his Department in the last five years for which figures are available; [295915]
(3) how many young adults left (a) Reading Young Offender Institution and (b) all young offender institutions without (i) employment or (ii) accommodation in each of the last five years. [295916]
Maria Eagle: Data on the provider of housing for offenders on discharge from prison are not recorded in the form specified in the questions. However data are held on the type of accommodation to which offenders are discharged.
The following table shows the proportion of young adults discharged from prison establishments in 2007 and 2008 by type of accommodation. Data for previous years are not available.
| Percentage | ||
| 2007 | 2008 | |
The following tables show the numbers of young adults discharged without any accommodation or employment from (a) Reading YOI and (b) all prison establishments in 2007 and 2008. Data for previous years are not available.
| Reading discharges | ||
| 2007 | 2008 | |
| All young adults | ||
| 2007 | 2008 | |
Numbers below 1,000 have been rounded to the nearest 10. Numbers over 1,000 have been rounded to the nearest 100.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Prisoners: Suicide
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people (1) on home detention curfew committed suicide between 1999 and 2009; [296767]
(2) released on an early release scheme committed suicide in (a) 2006, (b) 2007 and (c) 2008. [296768]
Claire Ward: The home detention curfew, early removal and end of custody licence schemes enable eligible prisoners to be released from prison earlier than the half-way point of their sentence. NOMS does not collect data centrally on the numbers of self-inflicted deaths of such offenders after they have been released into the community.
The National Offender Management Service has a broad, integrated and evidence-based prisoner suicide prevention and self-harm management strategy that seeks to reduce the distress of all those in prison and to ensure that released at-risk prisoners receive comparable support to that received in prison. As part of the pre-release care planning process, offender managers must be informed of any risk of harm to self or others and the management strategies which have been tried in the prison setting. Prisons have local protocols in place which seek to ensure that at-risk prisoners are linked with community based organisations providing support after release.
Prisons: Greater Manchester
Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the level of overcrowding in prisons serving the Greater Manchester area; and if he will make a statement. [296436]
Maria Eagle: For the financial year April to September 2009 the average rate of overcrowding for prisons serving the Greater Manchester area were as follows:
| Percentage | |
It remains our priority to reduce overcrowding by increasing capacity through building new prisons, expanding existing prisons and making more effective use of the estate.
Reoffenders
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many people on home detention curfew reoffended between 1999 and 2009; [296770]
(2) how many people released under an early release scheme reoffended in (a) 2006, (b) 2007 and (c) 2008. [296771]
Maria Eagle: The Ministry of Justice records the number of alleged offences while on early custody licence (ECL) and has recently released figures of offenders who reoffended while on home detention curfew (HDC).
Data on ECL releases, recalls and alleged reoffending are published every month on the following website:
During the period 29 June 2007 (the start of the scheme) to 30 September 2009 (the latest data available), 1,058 offenders have been notified to the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) as alleged to have committed a further offence while on the scheme. Table 1 gives the further breakdown by period.
The latest figures on reoffending while on home detention curfew were released by this Department in a written ministerial statement on 14 September 2009, Official Report, columns 142-44WS Table 2 gives the number of offenders who have been convicted for an offence while on HDC between 2003-04 and 2007-08.
| Table 2: Number of offenders who have been convicted for an offence while on HDC , 2003-04 to 2007-08, England and Wales | ||
| Offenders on HDC | Offenders who reoffended while on HDC | |
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |