|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The table shows the breakdown of how many previous custodial sentences adult offenders had received and covers all types of previous custodial sentences. Information about where the previous custodial sentences were served is not held in the data set used to produce the published tables. It is therefore not possible to identify how many previous custodial sentences had been served at secure training centres or young offender institutions.
These figures have been drawn from the police's administrative IT system which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the police.
Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether his Department produces prison performance tables with more precise rankings, data and detail than the Prison Quarterly Ratings published on his Departmental website. 
Maria Eagle: Formerly prisons were ranked on their performance in the prisons weighted scorecard. However, this formed only one element of the final ratings for prisons. A new prison rating system was introduced for 2009-10, but the version used to produce the ratings for Quarter 1 did not lend itself to the production of a performance table. The system has been refined and will produce for internal use by NOMS prison rankings as part of the package when Quarter 2 ratings are published.
The new system produces initial quarterly assessments based on available data. Additional factors such as escapes and recent inspection results are then taken into account in the final ratings by an independent external moderation panel which includes a non-executive representative and is chaired by the Director of Criminal Justice Group in the Department. For this reason the final quarterly ratings published by the Department may differ from the data-driven rankings produced by NOMS.
Maria Eagle: Prison Service Order 0900 (PSO 0900) sets out policy and guidance on the security categorisation and allocation of prisoners. This ensures that all prisoners are placed in a security category consistent with managing their risks in terms of security and control and that the public is properly protected.
Work to update PSO 0900 is currently under way with a view to publication next year. Revisions will consolidate into one document changes made to categorisation policy over the last few years, and will restructure the document so that the guidance contained within it is more readily accessible to operational users.
Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent estimate he has made of the number of prisoners who are suffering from substance misuse problems who have been released from prison in each of the last five years. 
Maria Eagle: The following table sets out the number of prisoners assessed at either pre-release or start of licence as having an offending-related risk factor relating to 'drug misuse'. The assessment of offending-related risk factors was made through the Offender Assessment System (OASys) which is only applied to young adult prisoners and to adult prisoners serving sentences of more than 12 months. Figures are presented for the past four years (2005-08) as the electronic OASys system was still being implemented in 2004. The number of assessments used to produce the figures increased from 28,064 in 2005 to 33,471 in 2008. The data are drawn from administrative IT systems and are subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale assessment and recording system.
|Section score indicates a 'drug misuse' problem|
|Number of assessments||Number||Percentage|
Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent estimate he has made of the number of prisoners who are suffering from serious mental health problems who have been released from prison in each of the last five years. 
Claire Ward: Information is not available in the form requested. Where a prisoner is suffering from a mental disorder which requires treatment in hospital, he/she can be transferred to hospital by the Secretary of State. Numbers of transfers of sentenced prisoners in England and Wales over the last five years for which published information is available were 296 (in 2003), 346 (in 2004), 356 (in 2005), 421 (in 2006) and 394 (in 2007). Prisoners have the same rights to treatment in prison for mental disorder, under NHS In-Reach provision, as they would have in the community. There is however no direct correlation between serious mental health problems and the need to be treated in a hospital.
Maria Eagle: One prisoner detained in England and Wales has applied for transfer to Libya under the terms of the prisoner transfer agreement between the United Kingdom and Libya. His application is under consideration.
Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what provisions have been made within the design specifications for new-build prisons to encourage the more effective management of visitors, including families and children; 
Maria Eagle: New prisons are designed, constructed and managed to promote rehabilitation and education with a view to minimising the likelihood of re-offending, prevent escapes and operated in a way which would ensure that the prison population would, within each perimeter, be held in a safe, secure environment and behave in a controlled and orderly manner.
In August 2009, NOMS ran a series of design workshops to absorb recent innovations to enhance the management, safety and security of staff, visitors and inmates. In so doing it is acknowledged that each site will differ in how the land, planning permissions and any other existing buildings will support these measures as a design level.
Output specifications have been used to support our desired outcomes of management, safety, security and rehabilitation. The new prisons design principle is to encourage the market to innovate in order to improve the operational outcomes. Publishing prescriptive design specifications may therefore constrain innovation and improvement.
Maria Eagle: The provision of closed visits facilities at each establishment is not centrally recorded. Governors may vary the conditions under which social visits take place or introduce measures to restrict the level of contact between the prisoner and their visitor during the course of the visit. Social visits will generally take place in an open environment and any decision to impose restrictions on contact must be made on an individual basis in relation to a particular prisoner or visitor and be proportionate to risk. This proportionality test is a requirement under legislation and there are no plans to change this.
Alan Duncan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many serious further offences were committed by offenders under level 1 multi-agency public protection arrangements in each of the last 10 years. 
Maria Eagle: Management information on the multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) is published in local area MAPPA annual reports. The MAPPA Annual Reports have included in each of the last five years the number of offenders managed at MAPPA levels 2 and 3 who have been charged with serious further offences. Areas have not so far been asked to report on charges of serious offending against MAPPA level 1 offenders, so the data requested is unavailable.
The purpose of the MAPPA annual reports is to show what multi-agency intervention and resources bring to local public protection arrangements. The focus of the information in the annual reports, therefore, has been upon the offenders managed at level 2 and 3 rather than at level 1, where offenders are managed through ordinary agency management.
However, in order to provide data on the whole offender population eligible for multi-agency management and resources, since April 2009 all areas have been required to record instances of offenders managed at level 1 of MAPPA who are charged with serious further offences (as well as those managed at levels 2 and 3), with a view to inclusion in next year's annual reports.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 4 November 2009, Official Report, columns 1025-6W, on secure accommodation: young offender institutions, for what reasons value added tax is not included within the figures. 
Maria Eagle: VAT is payable only on the places commissioned by the youth justice board in secure training centres and private sector young offender institutions. VAT is not payable on the places in secure children's homes or public sector young offender institutions. Therefore, VAT is excluded from these figures in order to provide a valid comparison between sectors.
Maria Eagle: Local authorities are responsible for the formation of youth offending teams and, on occasion, neighbouring local authorities will decide to provide a joint service across their areas. This is in accordance with the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Section 39(2).
David Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many children aged between (a) 10 and 14 and (b) 15 and 17 years were in custody on (i) the latest date for which figures are available and (ii) the equivalent date in each of the last five years. 
Maria Eagle: The following tables show how many children and young people aged between (a) 10 and 14 and (b) 15 and 17 years were in custody on (i) 2 October 2009, and (ii) 2 October in each of the last five years.
The data have been provided by the Youth Justice Board and are drawn from administrative computer systems. As with any large scale recording system, the data are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be subject to change over time.
|(i) Young people in custody by age group as of 2 October 2009|
|(ii) Young people in custody by age group|
|As of 2 October each year|