Previous Section Index Home Page

30 Mar 2010 : Column 1072W—continued


Convictions: Badgers

Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many people have received custodial sentences which have not been suspended for offences under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 in each year since 2007; what the length of each such sentence was; on what dates such sentences were handed down; and how much has been received in fine payments for offences under the Act in each year since it came into effect; [324492]

(2) how many people have been (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of offences under the provisions of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 in each year since 2007. [324634]

Claire Ward: The available information is provided in the following tables.

Data for 2009 will be available when Sentencing Statistics 2009 is published later this year.

The specific date when a sentence was passed cannot be provided as this would allow an individual to be easily identifiable which is contrary to the Ministry's data protection policy. Information has therefore been provided on the month sentence was passed. The total fine payment rate is not available for specific offences, but information has been provided on the number of fines and the total monetary value of fines imposed under the Protection of Badgers Act. The overall estimated fine payment rate for all financial penalties by financial year is shown in the following table:

Financial year Payment rate-England and Wales (percentage)

2003-04

74

2004-05

80

2005-06

83

2006-07

92

2007-08

95


Data on payment rates prior to April 2003 is not calculated in a comparable manner.


30 Mar 2010 : Column 1073W

30 Mar 2010 : Column 1074W
Number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty and sentenced to immediate custody at all courts for selected offences, England and Wales, 2007 and 2008( 1,2,3)
2007 2008( 3)
Statute Offence description Proceeded against Found guilty Immediate custody Proceeded against Found guilty Immediate custody

Badgers Act 1973 as amended by Criminal Justice Act 1991 S.26 and Badgers Act 1991 S.1

Offences of cruelty to badgers and special protection for badgers and their setts

20

6

(4)1

22

11

(5)2

Badgers (further protection) Act 1991

Failing to give up a dog for destruction or having custody of a dog while disqualified

10

5

0

14

11

0

(1) The figures given relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
(3) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July and August 2008.
(4) An immediate custodial sentence of four months passed in June.
(5) One sentence of six months passed in March, one sentence of one month passed in December.
Source:
Justice Statistics Analytical Services in the Ministry of Justice

Number of fines and monetary value of fines imposed under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, 1992 to 2008

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Number of fines issued

31

23

15

18

8

6

10

14

Value of fines imposed (£)(1)

5,500

5,425

3,760

7,250

2,000

2,100

2,215

580


2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Number of fines issued

14

31

22

13

9

9

4

4

13

Value of fines imposed (£)(1)

1,415

2,185

1,285

4,960

860

2,510

275

310

3,015

(1) Due to changes in the way these figures have been extracted they may show small differences to previously released figures.
Notes:
1. These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.
2. This data has been taken from the Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings database. This data is presented on the principal offence basis. Where an offender has been sentenced for more than one offence the principal offence is the one for which the heaviest sentence was imposed. Where the same sentence has been imposed for two or more offences the principal offence is the one for which the statutory maximum is most severe.
Source:
Justice Statistics-Analytical Services, Ministry of Justice

Crime Prevention: Females

David Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will continue funding after March 2011 for the one-stop shop women's community projects to prevent and reduce offending by women funded from the £15.6 million announced in February 2009. [325132]

Maria Eagle: Work is now well under way to sustain this approach. Directors of Offender Management (DOMs) are currently working to support the Women's Community Projects (WCPs) in their future sustainability efforts and to demonstrate their effectiveness at providing effective interventions for women offenders and women at risk of offending. DOMs, in conjunction with probation trust/boards, will have a lead role in ensuring appropriate commissioning and joint commissioning of services for women offenders to draw in the services of a range of local agencies. Every one of the DOMs new commissioning plans includes a focus on women and they now manage all of the contracts for the WCPs. New performance monitoring arrangements in place will also ensure that we continue to meet the specific needs of women in the criminal justice system.

Custodial Treatment: Females

David Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether he plans to ring fence savings from a reduction in custodial capacity for women to support women's community provision; and if he will make a statement. [325131]

Maria Eagle: In December 2009 the Government committed to reduce the women's prison estate by 400 places by March 2012 and to divert resources from custody to the community to help sustain the multi-agency Women's Community Projects (WCPs) and other community provision established through grant funding. Subject to a sustained reduction in the women's prison population and evidence of the impact of the WCPs the National Offender Management Service has agreed to release funding that will be used by the directors of Offender Management to help sustain existing provision and to continue to develop a network of community provision which meets the needs of women offenders and women at risk of offending.

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991: North West

Andrew Stunell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) prosecutions were brought and (b) convictions were secured for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in each local authority area in the North West in (i) 2008 and (ii) 2009. [325040]

Claire Ward: The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, in the North West Government office region, by police force area, in 2008 (latest available) is shown in the following table.

Court proceedings data are not available at local authority area level.

Court data for 2009 are planned for publication in autumn 2010.


30 Mar 2010 : Column 1075W
Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in the North West Government office region, by police force area, 2008( 1, 2)
Police force area Proceeded against Found guilty

Cheshire

19

14

Cumbria

16

10

Greater Manchester

46

34

Lancashire

40

28

Merseyside

51

43

Total North West region

172

129

(1) The statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences, the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
Source:
Justice Statistics Analytical Services: Ministry of Justice.

Departmental Buildings

Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department and its agencies have spent on rooms for staff leisure in each of the last five years. [324424]

Mr. Wills: The Ministry Justice does not hold a central record of leisure room facilities across its estate. Details of these can be obtained only by contacting each area of the Department and it's agencies individually which would incur a disproportionate cost.

Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether his Department provides subsidised gym facilities for its staff. [324557]

Mr. Wills: The Ministry of Justice does not provide subsidised gym facilities for its staff. A small number of workplace gyms are available to departmental staff but their running costs are met entirely by unsubsidised membership fees. Gym contracts are run either by an external provider or by a committee of staff members.

Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department and its predecessor spent on interior design in relation to office refurbishments undertaken in each of the last five years. [324687]

Mr. Wills: Interior design is included within the total office refurbishment scheme costs across the Ministry of Justice estate and could only be made available at disproportionate cost.

Departmental Energy

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what (a) voltage optimisers and (b) equivalent technologies are used within buildings occupied by his Department. [324972]

Mr. Wills: The following table shows how many voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies are used within buildings occupied by the Ministry of Justice.


30 Mar 2010 : Column 1076W

Number of voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies

Ministry of Justice HQ

1 voltage optimisation unit

National Offender Management Service

5 voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies installed

Her Majesty's Court Service

39 voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies installed in various buildings across its estate

Tribunals Service

1 unit currently installed across its estate

Her Majesty's Land Registry

22 voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies installed

National Archives

4 voltage optimisation units and equivalent technologies installed

Total

72


Next Section Index Home Page