|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 10 March 2009, Official Report, column 241W, on fixed penalties: Richmond Park, what progress has been made on determining a timeframe for implementing regulations to establish fixed penalties for nuisance offences in Richmond Park. 
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 10 March 2009, Official Report, column 243W, by the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle). The Government have decided not to proceed with proposals to add the regulations which prohibit littering, dog-fouling and illegal cycling in the Royal Parks, to the Penalty Notice
for Disorder (PND) scheme. Given the range of other disposals available to the police and courts, we have decided not to extend the scheme to any new offences at this time. On 9 November, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Jack Straw) announced a review of the use of out of court disposals including PNDs to look at whether they were being used inappropriately by the police and Crown Prosecution Service.
There are currently 34 prisoners serving indeterminate sentences. Of these 26 have life sentences, seven have imprisonment for public protection (IPP) sentences and one has a detention for public protection (DPP) sentence.
Transfer of any prisoner to open conditions will only take place if continued detention in closed conditions is no longer necessary for the protection of the public. Open conditions allow prisoners to find work, re-establish family ties and reintegrate into the community. All these are essential components for successful resettlement and an important factor in protecting the public.
Mr. Wallace: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people convicted of murder and subsequently released on compassionate grounds since 1993 have died (a) within three months of and (b) more than three months after their date of release. 
Maria Eagle: We do not hold this information centrally. To provide this information would require a manual examination of paper records and inquiries with agencies responsible for the prisoners' health and welfare following their release at a disproportionate cost.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department and its predecessor have paid in vehicle clamping charges incurred on (a) privately-owned and (b) publicly-owned land in each of the last 10 years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Straw: The policy of the Ministry is that the vehicle user is personally responsible for any fines incurred while the vehicle is allocated to them, including associated administration charges where applicable. This includes fines incurred by other users to whom the user has authorised use of the car i.e. additional drivers. The Ministry has not therefore incurred any expenditure on vehicle clamping charges.
Mr. Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what interest rate the Legal Services Commission is allowed to charge when taking possession of houses; and if he will make a statement. 
Maria Eagle: Members of the public who receive civil legal aid for a money or property dispute, and who succeed in obtaining a financial benefit from their case, are required to repay their legal aid costs, so resources can be recycled to help others. If someone is unable to repay their legal aid costs immediately, these can be postponed as a statutory charge on their property. Where charges are postponed against property, persons are not obliged to make any repayments, or to repay the charge in full until their financial circumstances change, or the property changes hands. The Legal Services Commission will not force anyone to sell their home. However, in order to encourage clients to repay their postponed charge where they can, the charge accrues simple interest, the rate for which is set out in regulations. The current rate is 8 per cent. A written ministerial statement was made concerning this issue by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Justice (Mr. Wills) on 8 June 2009, Official Report, columns 23-24WS.
Chairman: Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury, Master of the Rolls
Ms Else Churchill, Genealogy Officer of the Society of Genealogists
Professor Harry Dickinson, Emeritus Professor of British History, University of Edinburgh
Dr. Jeevan Deol, Affiliated Research Associate, Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, University of Cambridge
Right hon. the Viscount De L'Isle MBE, DL. Owner of the De L'Isle and Sidney family papers at the Centre for Kentish Studies and Penshurst Place
Sir David Durie KCMG, Retired, formerly Governor and Commander in Chief of Gibraltar
Dr. Clive Field OBE, Honorary Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham, formerly Director of Scholarship and Collections at the British Library
Ms Christine Gifford, Information Rights expert and Founding Director of Public Partners and Gifford Owen
Dr. Jennifer Haynes, Archives and Manuscripts Manager at the Wellcome Library
Mr. Graeme Herd, Head of Information Technology at Slough Borough Council
Professor Arthur Lucas CBE, Emeritus Professor of Science Curriculum Studies at, and was formerly Principal of, Kings College London
Ms Catherine Maxwell Stuart, Owner of the private family and estate archive at Traquair House, Innerleithen, Peeblesshire
Professor Heidi Mirza, Professor of Equalities Studies in Education at the Institute of Education, University of London
Professor Michael Moss, Professor of Archival Studies at the University of Glasgow
Right hon. the Lord Roper, Formerly Chief Whip for the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords
Ms Janet Smith, County Archivist of Hampshire
Mr. Ian Soutar, Formerly British Ambassador to Bulgaria and Ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament, Geneva
Ms Stephanie Williams, Author, Journalist and user of archives
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of arrangements for co-ordination of information and technology systems available to the Probation Service. 
Maria Eagle: The assessment of Information Technology (IT) systems available to the National Probation Service (NPS) is co-ordinated by the NPS ICT Board, supported by the ICT Business team who consider the systems available.
IT system development takes place with the authority of the NPS ICT Board-once a project has been commissioned, there is a requirement to submit a monthly report, detailing progress to date, the current financial position and highlighting any significant risks or issues facing the project.
A recent example of arrangements for co-ordinated delivery of an IT system within NPS is the NOMIS Programme, which encompasses five projects, three of which will directly benefit the probation service, as follows:
Probation Case Management System (PCMS) will replace a variety of probation systems with a centralised version based on a redevelopment of the existing Delius system;
A data sharing system will be developed and implemented, enabling staff in both probation and in the prisons, to share core information required to support Offender Management; and
The two existing Offender Assessment Systems (OASys), used by prisons and probation, will be replaced by an improved, centralised system that will also have an interface with PCMS.
Maria Eagle: Training for newly recruited prison officers provides officers with an understanding of mental health disorders and how to respond effectively to all prisoners (including women) experiencing mental ill health. Further training is available to prison officers throughout their career depending on their role within their prison. Training makes specific reference to issues affecting women, where appropriate. All training provides prison officers with the knowledge to identify offenders with mental health issues and refer to appropriate health care professionals.
Prison Service Order 4800, published in April 2008 for implementation in all women's prisons in 2009, provides a set of gender specific standards for women prisoners. The standards draw from existing best practice and cover all areas of regime provision including reception into custody, day to day living in the prison environment and planning for resettlement, as well as discrete groups of women. The main thrust of the standards is about being sensitive and responsive to gender specific needs and addressing them appropriately, in particular through the positive engagement of staff. It is largely a case of good staff training and support, and the introduction of the Women's Awareness Staff Programme training has therefore been key.
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many and what proportion of cells in each prison in England and Wales were unoccupied on the most recent dates for which figures are available; and for what reasons such cells are not in use. 
Mr. Straw: The following table shows the number and proportion of places that constitute each prison's operational capacity that are not being used for the ordinary accommodation of prisoners on 30 October 2009.
|Prison name||Places that are not being used||Percentage of places that are not being used|
|(1) Identifies those prisons whose predominant function is to hold juveniles or which hold juveniles|
(2) Identifies those prisons whose predominant function is to hold female prisoners
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|