Written Answers to Questions
Wednesday 16 February 2011
Transport
Airports: Security
Mr Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what advice his Department issues to security staff at airports on the x-raying of shoes. [40916]
Mrs Villiers [holding answer 14 February 2011]: Department for Transport sets the screening requirements and the standards that must be applied to ensure that those entering airside areas of airports are not carrying or concealing a prohibited article. Requirements include the screening of shoes, in certain circumstances.
For reasons of national security it is not possible to provide information on the detail of the guidance provided on shoe screening either in terms of how and when shoes should be selected for x-ray screening, or in terms of the screening process itself.
British Chamber of Shipping: Secondment
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many secondments to his Department from the British Chamber of Shipping there have been in each year since 1997; for what (a) periods and (b) jobs such secondments took place; what secondments of staff from his Department have been made to the British Chamber of Shipping; and for what (i) periods and (ii) jobs such secondments have been made in each year since 1997. [40815]
Mike Penning: There have been no secondments to or from the central Department for Transport to or from the Chamber of Shipping since 1997.
From June to September 2006 and April to July 2007, two Maritime and Coastguard Agency personnel were seconded to the Chamber of Shipping's Technical and Labour Departments.
Departmental Security
Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which persons not employed by Government Departments or agencies hold passes entitling them to enter his Department's premises. [39260]
Norman Baker: Passes may be issued to those who are required to make frequent visits to specific Government sites, subject to the usual security checks. For security reasons, it would not be appropriate to provide details of individuals who hold such passes.
Electric Vehicles
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the emissions arising from charging an electric vehicle through traditional power sources. [37842]
Norman Baker: Government research has estimated that, when calculated on a well to wheel basis, emissions arising from recharging an electric vehicle are up to 40% lower than those associated with a petrol equivalent; and up to 30% lower than a diesel equivalent. This calculation assumes that the recharging is based on a standard UK grid mix.
These reduction figures will automatically improve in line with improvements to the environmental performance of the national grid.
Northern Rail: Standards
Mr Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 8 February 2011, Official Report, column 146W, on Northern Rail: standards, what information his Department holds on (a) punctuality and (b) cancellation of services on the (i) Seaton Carew and (ii) Hartlepool Heworth lines; and what data his Department uses to monitor quality and timeliness of passenger rail services. [40675]
Mrs Villiers: The Department for Transport does not hold punctuality and cancellation information at the level of detail requested.
Network Rail provides a public performance measure (PPM) of train punctuality for each train operator covering all of an operator's services. Northern Rail provide PPM, cancellation and other train performance information at regional service group level to the Department for Transport. Seaton Carew and Hartlepool stations are in the Tyne, Tees and Wear service group.
Each of the five passenger transport executives (PTEs) assess the quality of delivery of stations and services within their area at least every two months. Independent auditors undertake service quality audits of Northern's stations and trains at least once per year. All results are shared between Northern Rail, the passenger transport executives and the Department.
Railway Stations: Repairs and Maintenance
Anne Marie Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many railway stations in Devon have been renovated as part of the National Station Improvement programme. [39255]
Mrs Villiers: Five stations in Devon have been identified by the industry for improvement under the National Stations Improvement programme. Improvements at Honiton station are currently underway and improvements at Newton Abbott, Exeter St David's, Exeter Central and Plymouth are planned in the future as part of the programme.
Rolling Stock: Expenditure
Mr Betts:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much the (a) East Midlands Trains, (b) Northern Rail, (c) Cross Country, (d) First TransPennine Express
and (e) East Coast rail franchises have paid to rolling stock companies since the start of each franchise; and how much of that money each rolling stock company has spent on rolling stock to be operated by each franchise. [41095]
Mrs Villiers: The rolling stock companies own the rolling stock which is then leased to the operators during the term of the franchise agreement. The details of these agreements are commercially confidential between the parties.
Shipping: Suffolk
Dr Thérèse Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the (a) causes and (b) safety implications of the recent collision between a recreational fishing vessel and a tanker off the coastline in the Sole Bay area. [41053]
Mike Penning: On 9 February the 10 million charter boat "Chloe-Paige" with two crew was struck off Lowestoft by the 200,000-tonne "Zaliv Vostok" tanker while "Chloe-Paige" was anchored.
The Maritime and Coastguard Agency and the Marine Accident Investigation Branch are aware of the collision and are in the process of gathering information from the owner/manager of "Zaliv Vostok" and "Chloe-Paige".
South Eastern Trains
Mr Gale: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish the performance data for each relevant reporting period submitted to his Department by Southeastern Trains in respect of the review of the continuation of the franchise before any decision is taken on its renewal. [41214]
Mrs Villiers: As part of the work relating to the Southeastern continuation review I am considering what information will be published. An announcement will be made on the results of the continuation review in due course.
Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority Committee
Information Officers
Bob Russell: To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, if he will request from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority the career history of those people employed as communications officers. [39159]
Mr Charles Walker: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.
Letter from Scott Woo lveridge, dated 11 February 2011 :
As acting Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking for publication of the career history of those people employed as communications officers for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Details of the career history of our Director of Communications are available on IPSA's website. I will not, however, be releasing details of the career history of the other two members of the communications team as these members of staff do not form part of IPSA's senior management and I consider this to constitute personal information which should be treated in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.
Bob Russell: To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, how many communications officers the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority employs. [39160]
Mr Charles Walker: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.
Letter from Scott Woo lveridge, dated 11 February 2011 :
As acting Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking, how many communications officers are employed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority.
Our communications team consists of three people.
Members: Allowances
Bob Russell: To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, how many apologies the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority has issued to hon. Members for wrongly rejecting claims for expenditure incurred. [39154]
Mr Charles Walker: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.
Letter from Scott Woolveridge, dated 11 February 2011:
As Acting Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking how many apologies the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority has issued to hon. Members for wrongly rejecting claims for expenditure incurred.
IPSA does not keep a record of apologies it has issued for wrongly rejecting claims. We do, of course, apologise whenever we have acted in error.
Bob Russell: To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, if the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) will take steps to ensure all communications between IPSA and hon. Members for the purposes of clarification of a submitted claim are required to take place on the telephone. [39158]
Mr Charles Walker: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.
Letter from Scott Woolveridge, dated 11 February 2011:
As Acting Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking if the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) will take steps to ensure all communication between IPSA and hon. Members for the purposes of clarification of a submitted claim is required to take place on the telephone.
We have no plans to take such steps. Whilst we do provide support and advice to MPs by telephone, we do not believe that it is appropriate or beneficial to make this the sole method of communication for the purposes suggested.
Home Department
Crime: Drugs
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what steps she is taking to reduce the manufacture of illicit synthetic drugs in the UK; and if she will make a statement; [40584]
(2) what steps she is taking to reduce the number of illicit drug factories in local communities; and if she will make a statement; [40585]
(3) what assessment she has made of the effects of spending reductions for Safer Neighbourhood Teams on steps to reduce the number of illicit drug factories; and if she will make a statement. [40586]
James Brokenshire: The Government take the issue of synthetic drugs, including new psychoactive substances (so called 'legal highs') very seriously. The manufacture and trafficking in controlled drugs of all classes need to be tackled robustly in order to reduce the harm drugs cause to communities and the organised criminality associated with their supply.
On 30 November 2010, we introduced to this House legislative proposals, in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill, to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 with provisions for temporary banning powers on new 'legal highs'. This will give the police and other law enforcement agencies the power to act, enabling them to seize these drugs and prosecute those who are selling them.
Those caught supplying or trafficking a temporary ban drug will be committing a serious offence and subject to a maximum of 14 years in prison and an unlimited fine. Where an individual is found in possession of a temporary ban drug for personal use, police will have powers to seize and destroy it.
Evidence indicates that these synthetic drugs and new psychoactive substances are manufactured outside the UK and that is why we need to concentrate the full force of the law at our borders to stop these drugs from getting into the UK. The UK Border Agency are undertaking effective enforcement action against those criminal gangs who traffic these drugs across our borders, by seizing and destroying shipments of illegal drugs and those 'legal highs' that are subject to an import ban under the Open General Import Licence.
On 1 January 2011, the Home Office launched a three-month pilot to explore improvements to the current forensic early warning system for identifying new and emerging drugs. As part of this pilot, we are introducing new forensic technology at the borders to support UK Border Agency with the identification of any new drug being imported into the UK.
Investigations into allegations of illegal synthetic drug manufacture within the UK is a matter for the police, who must prioritise resources towards tackling crime, including drug-related crime, with a focus on those
offences which cause the most harm. Where drug factories pose a threat within a community, these will become a focus of police activity.
No formal assessment has been made of the effects of spending reductions for safer neighbourhood teams in relation to drug enforcement. We have sustained the investment in neighbourhood policing funding for the next two financial years to ensure police crime commissioners (PCCs) inherit strong neighbourhood policing infrastructure.
The exception to this is in London, where the Metropolitan police authority will have full autonomy over this funding from 2011-12, in recognition of the role the Mayor of London and the Deputy Mayor already play in policing. There is no need for visible and available policing to diminish because of the spending settlement, provided that forces focus on driving out wasteful spending and increasing efficiency in the back office that they can make.
Driving Under Influence: Drugs
Mr Offord: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans her Department has to introduce equipment to test motorists suspected of driving under the influence of drugs. [41213]
James Brokenshire: Devices used for this purpose must be of a type approved by the Secretary of State. We recently issued a specification for a device that could be type approved for use at police stations and have invited manufacturers to submit devices to the type approval process by the end of February. How soon devices might gain approval will depend on the response of manufacturers and how well their devices perform in the rigorous testing regime. It will then be a matter for individual chief officers of police to decide on purchase.
Revenue and Customs: X-rays
Dr Wollaston: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what expenditure HM Revenue and Customs incurred in operating X-ray scanners in 2009-10. [41051]
Damian Green: The United Kingdom Border Force recorded an operating cost for 'Scientific Aids' of £3.4 million in the financial year 2009-10.
Scotland
Petrochemicals
Michael Connarty: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions he has had with INEOS Grangemouth and PetrocChina on their agreement for technology sharing in the field of petro-chemicals. [41116]
David Mundell: The arrangement, including the technology sharing agreement, was a commercial matter between the two companies. The Government fully support an open, market-based approach to the development of the downstream oil sector, and welcome inward investment that benefits UK companies, providing a platform for growth in the wider economy.
Justice
Children: Maintenance
Mr Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many cases at Bexley magistrates court have involved child maintenance issues in the most recent period for which figures are available. [40555]
Mr Djanogly: There were fewer than five financial applications made under schedule 1(2) of the Children's Act 1989 (financial provision for children) at Bexley Family Proceedings Court during the period January 2010 to September 2010, which is the latest period for which data are available.
Departmental Carbon Emissions
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department spent on carbon offsetting in each of the last three years; and to which companies payments for carbon offsetting were made in each such year. [40518]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) offsets carbon emissions caused by official air travel. Not only does this mitigate environmental damage caused by aeroplane exhaust emissions, it helps focus the MOJ on alternate methods of travel and communication e.g. video conferencing.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change handles the tender process for all central Government carbon offsetting schemes as part of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy. More information on this can be found at:
Phase I of the Government Carbon Offsetting Facility covers April 2006 to March 2009. The tender was won by Trading Emissions plc and its investment adviser EEA Fund Management. In those years, the MOJ spent:
| £ | |
Phase II of the Government Carbon Offsetting Facility covers April 2009 to March 2012. The tender applicable to the MOJ was won by EDF Trading for spot purchases and Essent Trading International SA for forward purchases. The MOJ has so far paid £14,248 for spot purchases and £15,574.68 for forward purchases.
Departmental Public Expenditure
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment his Department has made of its requirements for annually managed expenditure in each financial year from 2010-11 to 2014-15. [41334]
Mr Kenneth Clarke:
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has now received a spending review 2010 funding settlement with HM Treasury, covering both resource and capital departmental expenditure limits (DEL). This did not
include the annually managed expenditure (AME). Departmental AME spending is voted on through the supply estimates process.
The MoJ is currently reviewing the AME requirement and will be working with HM Treasury to agree suitable non cash funding to be voted on through the main estimate.
Drugs: Sentencing
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will assess the comparative length of sentences given to people convicted of (a) possession and (b) possession with intent to supply of (i) cocaine, (ii) heroin and (iii) ecstasy; and if he will make a statement. [40552]
Mr Blunt: The Sentencing Council is currently developing a sentencing guideline on drug offences. An important part of that work is an assessment of current sentencing practice to inform the guideline, which will be subject to public consultation before it is finalised.
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average length of a sentence given to people convicted of (a) possession and (b) possession with intent to supply of (i) cocaine, (ii) heroin and (iii) ecstasy was in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. [40553]
Mr Blunt: The number of persons found guilty, sentenced and the average custodial length of sentence at all courts for 'possession of', and 'possession with intent to supply', cocaine, heroin, and ecstasy, England and Wales 2009 (latest available) is shown in the following table.
Court proceedings data for 2010 are planned for publication in the spring, 2011.
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effects on the prison population of implementation of the provisions of the Drugs Act 2005. [41033]
Mr Blunt:
An assessment of the Drugs Act 2005 was published in September 2010. It was not possible to
measure the Act's overall impact on the prison population as part of this assessment. However, we do know that provisions in the Act have increased the number of those drug tested and referred into treatment through the Criminal Justice System.
Building on this, the Government's sentencing and rehabilitation Green Paper and its Drug Strategy both include commitments to encourage drug-misusing offenders into recovery based treatment.
In prisons we will: work with health services to reshape existing drug treatment; establish drug recovery wings focusing on recovery and abstinence; and connect offenders with community drug recovery services on release.
In the community, we want sentencing reforms to encourage offenders to engage with recovery based treatment and tough community sentences.
Employment Tribunals Service
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many employment tribunals were cancelled less than 24 hours before the scheduled sitting in the latest period for which figures are available. [40732]
Mr Djanogly: Listing of hearings in cases (including the cancellation, postponement or adjournment of cases) is a judicial matter. Once listed, 'cancellations' can occur, for example, where the claim is resolved, settled or withdrawn before the hearing is scheduled to take place; where a postponement request is made by one or both of the parties and accepted by the tribunal; or where the employment tribunal itself postpones the hearing on its own volition.
The following table shows all such cancellations over the course of the financial year 2009-10 that were effected within 24 hours of the scheduled sitting. The data provided are broken down to show cases that were cancelled (including postponed) on the actual day of the hearing, and on the previous day.
| Settlements ,withdrawals and postponements notified prior to or on day of hearing | |||||
| Settlements/ withdrawals | Postponement by tribunal | Postponement by claimant | Postponement by respondent | Total cancellations | |
| Source: Employment Tribunal Central database February 2011 | |||||
Legal Aid
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) whether he has discussed with ministerial colleagues the findings in paragraph 27 of the impact assessment of his cumulative proposals for reform of legal aid in respect of the potential effects on (a) resource costs for and (b) transfer payments to other departments of any significant reduction in fairness of dispute resolution arising from implementation of his proposals; [40632]
(2) whether he has discussed with (a) the Chancellor of the Exchequer and (b) the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills the findings in paragraph 27 of the impact assessment of his cumulative proposals for reform of legal aid in respect of the potential effects on levels of (i) economic efficiency and (ii) business efficiency of any significant reduction in fairness of dispute resolution arising from implementation of his proposals; [40633]
(3) whether he has discussed with the Secretary of State for (a) the Home Department and (b) Communities and Local Government the findings in paragraph 27 of the impact assessment of his cumulative proposals for reform of legal aid in respect of the potential effect on levels of (i) social inclusion and (ii) criminality of any significant reduction in fairness of dispute resolution arising from implementation of his proposals. [40634]
Mr Djanogly: Extensive discussions, at both ministerial and official levels, have been conducted with other Government Departments on a range of issues. These discussions will continue as we finalise proposals.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what discussions he has had with not-for-profit advice organisations on the likely effects on them of loss of funding streams from legal aid budgets; and if he will make a statement. [40670]
Mr Djanogly: I have met with a number of representatives from the not-for-profit organisations recently to discuss the proposals for the reform of legal aid in England and Wales.
Not-for-profit providers receive funding from a variety of sources including legal aid. However income from legal aid represents a minority of the funding of the not for profit advice sector.
We are working closely with colleagues in other Departments who fund not-for-profit advice providers to identify how best to take a cross-Government approach to this issue. I recently met with the Minister for Civil Society, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd) to discuss how this can best be achieved.
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of claims brought against Government Departments and other public bodies by employees under no-win, no-fee contracts with their legal representatives. [40731]
The Attorney-General: I have been asked to reply.
No estimate has been made of the cost to the public purse of such claims. Insufficient data are available to support the making of a meaningful estimate.
Most employment, and employment-related, claims against Government are taken in the Employment Tribunals. Under existing procedural rules governing claims made by employees before the Employment Tribunals, there is no requirement to notify a respondent employer that a conditional fee (no-win, no-fee) agreement (CFA) is in place, unlike in the civil Courts. Legal representatives will not divulge such an arrangement unless they are required to as, first, they have an obligation of confidentiality to their clients;, secondly, knowledge of such will give negotiating advantage to their opponents; and, thirdly, Employment Tribunals are generally a no costs jurisdiction, where awards of costs are not made unless the claim or defence has been "frivolous, vexatious or otherwise unreasonable". In the circumstances, it would not be possible to keep any sort of accurate record of the incidence of such agreements in these cases, or to make an assessment of their impact upon the outcomes of claims.
Legal Aid: Mental Health
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will discuss with the Secretary of State for Health the potential effects of the proposed removal of legal aid funding for face-to-face assistance with financial entitlement matters on the incidence of mental ill-health arising from such matters. [40672]
Mr Djanogly: We have recently had discussions with a number of ministerial colleagues regarding a range of matters affecting our respective Departments, including the potential impact of the proposals for reform of legal aid.
An impact on the incidence of mental health issues, as a result of the proposals for reform of legal aid, has not been identified at this time. However, our consultation "Proposals for the Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales" closed on 14 February 2011 and we are in the process of considering the responses. If appropriate, it will be addressed in our response paper and the associated Impact Assessments and Equality Impact Assessments, which is planned to be published in the spring.
Legal Aid: Personal Injury and Negligence
Mr Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has for future provision of legal aid to people in respect of (a) personal injury and (b) clinical negligence cases; and if he will make a statement. [41009]
Mr Djanogly: On 15 November the Secretary of State for Justice announced the publication of a consultation on a package of proposals for the reform of legal aid. The consultation proposes that legal aid ceases to be available for clinical negligence matters.
Most personal injury cases were removed from the scope of the civil legal aid scheme by the Access to Justice Act 1999. Legal aid funding is still available for claims, including personal injury claims, against public authorities alleging serious wrong-doing, abuse of position of power or significant breach of human rights. We have proposed replacing the existing "serious wrong-doing" ground for funding, and replacing it with "negligent acts or omissions falling very far below the required standard of care" as a ground for funding these claims.
Funding is currently available for any claim, including a personal injury claim, which has a significant wider public interest. The current consultation proposes to abolish the rule which brings back into the scope of civil legal aid any case which has a significant wider public interest. While the Government recognises that public interest is an important factor, which should continue to be reflected in the Funding Code merits criteria for granting civil legal aid, we do not consider that it should be either a solely determinative factor in deciding whether legal aid should be granted, or a basis for bringing back into scope otherwise excluded cases.
Funding is available for claims, including personal injury claims, arising from allegations of abuse of a child or vulnerable adult, or sexual assault.
We have proposed that these cases remain within the scope of civil legal aid. Funding is available for housing cases, as defined by the civil legal aid Funding Code, including for housing personal injury claims. We have proposed that housing personal injury claims are removed from the scope of civil legal aid.
Legal aid is also available for advice on applications to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority. We have proposed that this advice ceases to be in scope for legal aid because the application is a straight-forward one and assistance is available from the authority.
The consultation paper: "Proposals for the Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales" is available at the Ministry of Justice website at:
Legal Aid: Rochdale
Simon Danczuk: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department spent on the provision of legal aid in Rochdale constituency in each of the last five years. [40635]
Mr Djanogly: The information requested is not readily available as for example payments to criminal barristers cannot easily be broken down by the location of the barrister or client. The information therefore could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Simon Danczuk: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people in Rochdale constituency received legal aid in each of the last five years. [40636]
Mr Djanogly: The Legal Services Commission (LSC) is responsible for administering the legal aid scheme in England and Wales.
The LSC does not record the number of people who receive legal aid, but instead records the number of 'acts of assistance'. One individual may receive a number of separate acts of assistance, and one act of assistance can help more than one person.
The following table show the numbers of acts of assistance delivered by legal aid providers with postcodes falling within the Rochdale constituency.
| Rochdale constituency-legal aid acts of assistance( 1) | |||||
| Financial year | |||||
| 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | |
| (1) The figures do not include legal aid received via telephone advice, the Housing Possession Court Duty Scheme, telephone triage, or family mediation. | |||||
Legal Aid: Social Security Benefits
Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will estimate the savings that would accrue to the Exchequer from ceasing to provide legal aid for advice in relation to decisions about welfare benefits in terms of (a) total managed expenditure and (b) annually managed expenditure in respect of each department; and if he will make a statement. [40858]
Mr Djanogly: There is no intention to make such an estimate; nor would it be possible to do so to any degree of accuracy.
Legal Aid: Third Sector
Caroline Lucas:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether he has made an estimate of (a) the number of not-for-profit organisations who rely on funding from legal aid streams and (b) the number of such organisations
that would cease to operate without legal aid funding; and if he will make a statement. [40671]
Mr Djanogly: The LSC hold legal aid contracts with a number of not-for-profit organisations. However, this information is being collated and I will write to the hon. Member as soon as it is available. Many not-for-profit providers receive funding from a variety of sources including legal aid. However income from legal aid represents a minority of the funding of the not-for-profit advice sector. It is therefore not possible to determine with any certainty which organisations would cease to operate without legal aid.
We are working closely with colleagues in other Departments who fund advice providers, to identify how best to take a cross-Government approach to this issue. I recently met with the Minister for Civil Society, Cabinet Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (Mr Hurd) to discuss how this can best be achieved.
We published initial impact assessments and equality impact assessments along with our reform proposals, which considered the effect on the not for profit sector. We sought the views of not for profit organisations during the consultation which ended on 14 February. The consultation response which is due to be published in the spring will feature accompanying full impact assessments and equality impact assessments.
Legal Profession
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the number of lawyers per 10,000 head of population. [40840]
Mr Djanogly: The number of authorised persons, who are often referred to as lawyers, providing reserved legal activities in England and Wales at 1 April 2009, as collated by the Legal Services Board, totals 140,124. Of those approximately 113,000 were solicitors. The Office for National Statistics estimates that the mid-year population of England and Wales for 2009 totalled 54,809,100. This equates to approximately 26 'lawyers' per 10,000 head of population in England and Wales.
National Offender Management Service: Qualifications
Gordon Henderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what proportion of all those employed at the (a) head office and (b) regional offices of the National Offender Management Service have (i) a probation qualification, (ii) a prison service qualification, (iii) experience in probation work and (iv) experience in prison service work. [41070]
Mr Blunt: Information about the qualifications and experience of individual members of staff is not held centrally. To obtain the information requested would involve identifying and contacting sources of information in many different locations and would thus incur disproportionate cost.
Offensive Weapons: Prison Sentences
Sadiq Khan:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many people were (a) convicted, (b) cautioned and (c) given custodial sentences for possession of a
blade or an instrument in each year between 1991 and 2010; [40862]
(2) how many people were (a) convicted, (b) cautioned and (c) given custodial sentences for possession of an article with a blade or point in each year between 1991 and 2010; [40863]
(3) how many people were (a) convicted, (b) cautioned and (c) given custodial sentences for possession of a knife in each year between 1991 and 2010. [40864]
Mr Blunt: The number of persons cautioned and the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty and sentenced at all courts for offences relating to possession of an article with a blade or point, England and Wales 1991 to 2009 (latest available) are shown in the tables.
Data for 2010 are planned for publication in the spring of 2011.
| Persons cautioned, and the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty and sentenced at all courts for offences relating to possession of an article with a blade or point( 1) , England and Wales 1991 to 2009( 2,3,4,5) | ||||||||||
| 1991 | 1992 | 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996( 6) | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | |
| 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008( 7) | 2009 | |
| (1) Offences used: Criminal Justice Act 1988 S.139 as amended by Offensive Weapons Act 1996 S.3-Having an article with blade or point in public place Criminal Justice Act 1988 S.139A (1) & (5)(a) added by Offensive Weapons Act 1996 S.4(1)-Having an article with blade or point on school premises (2) The cautions statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been cautioned for two or more offences at the same time the principal offence is the more serious offence. (3) From 1 June 2000 the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 came into force nationally and removed the use of cautions for persons under 18 and replaced them with reprimands and warnings. These are included in the totals. (4) The figures given in the table on court proceedings 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. (5) 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. (6) In July 2006 this offence changed from being a summary to a triable either-way offence. (7) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July, and August 2008. (8) The sentenced column may exceed those found guilty as it may be the case that a defendant found guilty, and committed for sentence at the Crown court, may be sentenced in the following year. (9) Includes: Absolute/conditional discharge, Community Sentence, Suspended Sentence and Otherwise dealt with. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services in the Ministry of Justice | |||||||||
Offensive Weapons: Prison Sentences
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offences involving the possession of a knife or offensive weapon resulted in a (a) caution, (b) absolute or conditional discharge, (c) fine, (d) community sentence, (e) suspended sentence, (f) immediate custody and (g) other disposal in each year from 1991 to 2011. [40780]
Mr Blunt: Information collated centrally by the Ministry of Justice does not include the circumstances of each case other than where specified in a statute. It is not possible therefore to separately identify from this information those offences proceeded against which also included the possession of a knife or offensive weapon.
Prison Sentences
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many people were convicted of burglary and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40741]
(2) how many people were convicted of sexual assault and received a custodial sentence of less than
(a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40742]
(3) how many people were convicted of grievous bodily harm and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40743]
(4) how many people were convicted of rape and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40744]
(5) how many people were convicted of manslaughter and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40745]
(6) how many people were convicted of attempted murder and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40746]
(7) how many people were convicted of forgery and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40747]
(8) how many people were convicted of fraud and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40748]
(9) how many people were convicted of theft of a motor vehicle and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40749]
(10) how many people were convicted of theft from a person and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40750]
(11) how many people were convicted of robbery and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40751]
(12) how many people were convicted of sexual activity with a child under 16 and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40752]
(13) how many people were convicted of sexual activity with a child under 13 and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40753]
(14) how many people were convicted of sexual assault of a female and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years,
(d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40754]
(15) how many people were convicted of rape of a male and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40755]
(16) how many people were convicted of rape of a female and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40756]
(17) how many people were convicted of sexual assault on a male and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40757]
(18) how many people were convicted of child abduction and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40758]
(19) how many people were convicted of abandoning children aged under two years and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40759]
(20) how many people were convicted of cruelty or neglect of children and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40760]
(21) how many people were convicted of wounding or other acts endangering life and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40761]
(22) how many people were convicted of causing death by aggravated vehicle-taking and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40762]
(23) how many people were convicted of causing death by driving while unlicensed or uninsured and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40763]
(24) how many people were convicted of causing death of a child or vulnerable person and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40764]
(25) how many people were convicted of causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40765]
(26) how many people were convicted of manslaughter due to diminished responsibility and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40766]
(27) how many people were convicted of causing death by reckless driving and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40767]
(28) how many people were convicted of threat or conspiracy to murder and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40768]
(29) how many people were convicted of perverting the course of justice and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40769]
(30) how many people were convicted of violent disorder and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40770]
(31) how many people were convicted of kidnapping and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40771]
(32) how many people were convicted of blackmail and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, ( c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40772]
(33) how many people were convicted of intent to supply a controlled drug and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years,
(c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40773]
(34) how many people were convicted of possession of a controlled drug and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40774]
(35) how many people were convicted of criminal damage and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40775]
(36) how many people were convicted of arson and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40776]
(37) how many people were convicted of common assault and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40777]
(38) how many people were convicted of dangerous driving and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available; [40778]
(39) how many people were convicted of a firearms offence and received a custodial sentence of less than (a) four years, (b) three years, (c) two years, (d) one year, (e) six months and (f) four months in the latest period for which figures are available. [40779]
Mr Blunt: The number of persons found guilty at all courts for selected offences, by sentence breakdown and sentence length, England and Wales 2009 (latest available) is shown in the following table.
Data for 2010 are planned for publication in the spring of 2011.
Prison Service: ICT
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice who in his Department signed off the contract for central procurement of IT equipment in prisons. [40954]
Mr Blunt: The Quantum contract between the Secretary of State for the Home Department and Electronic Data Systems Ltd for the provision of ICT to HM Prison Services was signed by Claire Pelham, Director of Corporate Affairs of HM Prison Service on 29 February 2000.
Prisoners: Ex-servicemen
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether it is the policy of prison establishments to ask inmates at reception whether they have served in the armed forces. [41020]
Mr Blunt: Prison reception staff are not required to ask newly arrived prisoners whether they have served in the armed forces. However, prisoners have the opportunity to discuss aspects of their background with staff during the induction and assessment processes. Governors of more than 100 prison establishments have made resources available to support the Veterans in Custody Support scheme, which encourages veteran prisoners to disclose their status, if they chose to do so.
Prisons: Asbestos
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what steps he has taken to identify the presence of asbestos in the fabric of prisons; and if he will make a statement; [41195]
(2) in which prisons it is known that asbestos is present in the fabric of the buildings; and when the asbestos was detected in each case; [41196]
(3) whether asbestos was known to be present in the fabric of Ford Open Prison on 31 December 2010; and whether the asbestos was damaged or disturbed as a result of the recent disturbance; [41197]
(4) in which prisons work has taken place to remove asbestos from the fabric of the building in each of the last 10 years; what the cost of such work was in each case; what work to remove asbestos from each previously identified prison with an identified asbestos presence is planned in each of the next three years; and if he will make a statement; [41198]
(5) what recent steps have been taken at each prison establishment to (a) identify, (b) manage and (c) remove asbestos from the fabric of the buildings; and if he will make a statement. [41199]
Mr Blunt: A comprehensive survey of the estate for asbestos took place in 2002-03, and a programme to remove high risk asbestos was implemented following this review.
Prisons: Visits
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much of the money paid to friends and relatives to assist them in visiting prisoners was provided for subsistence costs in the latest period for which figures are available. [40955]
Mr Blunt:
Financial assistance has been available to families to visit prisoners since the 1950s when it was run by the National Assistance Board on an individual
needs basis. The formal Assisted Prisons Visits Scheme has been in existence since 1970 and became part of the National Offender Management Service in 2008.
Currently the scheme has two rates of subsistence; a rate where travel time is between five and 10 hours of £2.55 and a rate where travelling takes in excess often hours of £5.10.
In the financial year 2009-10 the total amount paid to friends and relatives under the scheme was £196,000.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will estimate the administrative cost of reimbursing relatives of prisoners for prison visits by girocheque in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will estimate the cost of making such payments by BACS. [40956]
Mr Blunt: The Assisted Prison Visits Unit made 59,501 girocheque payments in the year 2009-10 at an estimated inclusive cost of £98,000. It is estimated that payment by BACS could have an inclusive cost of £15,000 per year.
A proposal is actively being pursued to upgrade current APVU systems.
Culture, Media and Sport
Arts: Public Participation
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what assessment he has made of long-term trends in (a) visits to art galleries, (b) visits to museums, (c) attendance at concerts, (d) attendance at musical theatre, (e) attendance at cinema, (f) attendance at theatre and (g) television viewing. [41038]
Mr Vaizey: The Department assesses attendance trends at cultural events and television watching in the Taking Part survey. The information set out in the following tables is from the August 2010 published reports.
| Percentage | |||||
| In the last 12 months, have you been to a... | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 |
| Percentage | ||||
| How many hours a day do you watch TV for, on average? | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 |
It does not record attendance at concerts, and the data for museums and art galleries cannot be divided between the two categories.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |