Departmental Assets
Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether receipts from the sale of assets owned by regional development agencies are reflected in the spending plans of his Department for (a) 2012-13 and (b) 2013-14. [47407]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice does not fund the regional development agencies and is not financially linked with them, so receipts from any sale of regional development agency assets would not be included in the MoJ's future spending plans.
More information about the funding of the regional development agencies can be found on their website at:
http://www.englandsrdas.com/funding-and-accountability
Departmental Public Appointments
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice which public bodies sponsored by his Department (a) have been and (b) are to be closed, merged or reorganised following his appointment; and how many (i) women and (ii) men who are public appointees at each body will no longer hold such an appointment in consequence. [47101]
17 Mar 2011 : Column 543W
Mr Kenneth Clarke: The coalition Government are committed to increasing the accountability of public bodies, and this involves reducing their number and their cost to the taxpayer. The proposals for the majority of bodies across all Departments were announced and published on 14 October 2010. An updated list reflecting changes since October 2010 has been published on the Cabinet Office website this month.
Summary information on public appointments is published annually by the Cabinet Office. This includes data on gender. Copies of the most recent report can be downloaded from:
www.civilservice.gov.uk/ndpb
In relation to those bodies sponsored by the Ministry of Justice which are subject to possible closure, merger or reorganisation, the following table gives details of the proposed reforms and the gender split for any public appointees involved:
17 Mar 2011 : Column 544W
Electronic Tagging
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what estimate he has made of the average cost to his Department of administering the electronic tagging of an individual for (a) 90 and (b) 120 days in the latest period for which figures are available; [47125]
(2) what reports he has received of instances where procedures to be followed in the event of a breach of electronic tag conditions have not been adhered to in the last three years; [47126]
(3) whether any contractual penalties have been imposed on companies who hold electronic tagging contracts in England and Wales. [47127]
Mr Blunt: The average cost to the Ministry of Justice for electronic monitoring a person for 90 and 120 days is shown in the following table. The costs differ for adults and juveniles.
| Average national cost (inc VAT) – 2010-11 | ||
| £ | ||
|
|
Adults | Juveniles |
The Department does not routinely collect the information requested. Details on all breaches of electronic monitoring curfews are held by the electronic monitoring suppliers G4S and Serco. Obtaining this information would require the suppliers to check all breach cases over the last three years to identify instances where breach proceedings were not adhered to; this could be met only at a disproportionate cost.
However, all the electronic monitoring providers do have a specific service level in place about the timely reporting of electronic monitoring breaches to court, in the year 2009-10 both contractors reported 100% compliance with this service level.
Contractual penalties have been imposed on the electronic monitoring suppliers, Serco and G4S for failure to meet specific service level agreements. The suppliers repay credits to the Ministry of Justice for these failures. Details of the credits that the Department has received for the last four financial years are as follows:
|
|
Total credits (£) |
17 Mar 2011 : Column 545W
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people were sentenced to supervision by the courts in England and Wales with a condition of being electronically tagged in (a) 2009 and (b) 2010. [47153]
Mr Blunt: The number of people who received a community order with a requirement for an electronic monitoring curfew was (a) 55,189 in 2009 and (b) 62,233 in 2010.
The data provided are from the Electronic monitoring service suppliers, G4S and Serco. They show the number of electronic monitoring orders received by the suppliers and not individuals.
Family Courts
Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what steps he has taken to improve the working of family courts; [46806]
(2) what steps he has taken to minimise any adverse effect on a child arising from participation in court proceedings. [46807]
Mr Djanogly: A Family Justice Review is currently under way looking at the workings of the family justice system with a view to implementing significant reform. The review panel, comprising experts from across the field of family justice, will make recommendations for reform in two core areas: the promotion of informed settlement and agreement; and management of the family justice system overall. Recommendations will focus on ensuring that the interests of the child are paramount in any decision affecting them, unnecessary delay is avoided and conflict between individuals is minimised as far as possible. An interim report is expected shortly and a final report is due in the autumn.
Pending the outcome of the review, in public law proceedings an interim “system-wide approach” has been adopted with the aim of reducing unnecessary delay. The approach comprises efforts focussed around local solutions and initiatives, and is being taken forward by a network of newly established “local performance improvement groups”. A National Performance Partnership has also been established to collate best practice and take a strategic approach to improving performance and reducing delay. Ministry of Justice and Department for Education officials are working closely with system agencies (Her Majesty's Courts Service, CAFCASS, Legal Services Commission and local authorities) as well as with the President of the Family Division to identify and share best practice to reduce delay and improve performance in public law proceedings. To support these efforts, Her Majesty's Court Service allocated an additional 4,000 county court sitting days over the course of 2010-11 to create extra capacity in the system.
In relation to private law disputes, the President of the Family Division issued a revised Practice Direction in April 2010 setting out the principles to be followed. A key feature is the requirement to list a first hearing within four weeks, and no later than six weeks, from the issue of proceedings. At the first hearing, the court will identify the issues and make decisions about the timetabling and next stages in the case. These decisions are informed by a short report from CAFCASS setting out the result of initial safeguarding checks with the local authority and police to ensure that any decisions made at the first hearing are safe for the child and parties.
17 Mar 2011 : Column 546W
HM Inspectorate of Prisons: Political Activities
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether the role of Chief Inspector of Prisons is politically restricted under civil service guidelines. [46908]
Mr Blunt: The civil service guidelines do not apply to Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons (HMCI Prisons), since the appointment is not within the civil service. However, it is the policy of the Ministry of Justice to include in HMCI Prisons' terms of appointment a provision that restricts the political activities of the office holder. That is to say, HMCI Prisons must not engage in national political activities such as adoption as a candidate, holding office in a party political organisation, or canvassing on behalf of a parliamentary candidate or political party. Permission may be sought to take part in local political activities or to engage in matters of local political controversy. Under schedule 1 of the House of Commons Disqualification Act 1975, the serving Chief Inspector is not permitted to stand as a Member of Parliament; under the Scottish Parliament (Disqualification) Order 2010 the Chief Inspector is also prohibited from standing as a member of the Scottish Parliament.
Human Rights
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on which occasions the UK Supreme Court has declared an incompatibility between domestic legislation and the European Convention on Human Rights under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 since the Court's inception; and what the Government's response was in each such case. [46900]
Mr Djanogly: Since the Supreme Court began operating in October 2009, it has declared one piece of domestic legislation incompatible with the European convention on human rights (ECHR) in accordance with section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA).
On this occasion, the Supreme Court upheld a declaration of incompatibility issued by the Court of Appeal in relation to section 82 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, pursuant to the R (on the application of (1)F (2) Angus Aubrey Thompson) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department case. On 16 February 2011, the Home Secretary made an oral statement in the House of Commons announcing that the Government would shortly bring forward proposals to implement the Supreme Court's ruling in this case.
The courts listed under section 4(5) of the HRA other than the Supreme Court have also exercised the power to grant a declaration of incompatibility since the HRA came into force on 2 October 2000.
Offenders: Berkshire
Alok Sharma: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many people arrested and charged for drug-related offences in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading and (c) Berkshire were prosecuted in each of the last five years; and how many such cases resulted in (i) a custodial sentence, (ii) a non-custodial penalty, (iii) the case being dropped due to a lack of evidence and (iv) the defendant being cleared of all charges; [46599]
17 Mar 2011 : Column 547W
(2) how many people arrested and charged for drink- and drug-related driving offences in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading and (c) Berkshire were prosecuted in each of the last five years; and how many of those cases resulted in (i) a custodial sentence, (ii) a non-custodial penalty, (iii) the case being dropped due to a lack of evidence and (iv) the defendant being cleared of all charges; [46627]
(3) how many people arrested and charged for firearm-related offences in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading and (c) Berkshire were prosecuted in each of the last five years; how many of those cases resulted in (i) a custodial sentence, (ii) a non-custodial penalty, (iii) the case being dropped due to a lack of evidence and (iv) the defendant being cleared of all charges; [46628]
(4) how many people were prosecuted for burglary in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading and (c) Berkshire in each of the last five years; and how many cases resulted in (i) a custodial sentence, (ii) a non-custodial penalty, (iii) the case being dropped because of a lack of evidence and (iv) the defendant being cleared of all charges; [46635]
(5) how many people were prosecuted for possession of a knife in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading and (c) Berkshire in each of the last five years; and how many cases resulted in (i) a custodial sentence, (ii) a non-custodial penalty, (iii) the case being dropped because of a lack of evidence and (iv) the defendant being cleared of all charges; [46636]
17 Mar 2011 : Column 548W
Mr Blunt: From information held by the Ministry of Justice, the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for drugs, drink and drug driving, firearms, burglary or knife possession offences, and the sentence breakdown in Thames Valley police force area, 2005-09 (latest available) can be viewed in the table.
Information available centrally does not allow a breakdown below police force area or local justice area in which the cases were heard. Therefore information for Thames Valley police force area has been provided in lieu.
Court proceedings data for 2010 will be available in the spring of 2011.
Charging information is not held by the Ministry of Justice.
The Home Office are responsible for information relating to arrests. The latest published information on arrests can be found in chapter 1 of the Home Office Statistical Bulletin, “Police Powers and Procedures 2008-09”. Table 1.01 contains data on arrests for drug offences in Thames Valley police force area.
A link to the bulletin as well as previous bulletins can also be found as follows:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/police-powers.html
Arrests data reported to the Home Office are for the main offence groups only e.g. violence against the person, sexual offences, etc. It is therefore not possible to provide the specific information requested.
| Number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for selected offences and sentence breakdown in Thames Valley police force area, 2005 - 09 (1, 2) | |||||
| Offence/Outcome | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
17 Mar 2011 : Column 549W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 550W
| (1) 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. (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) The total of the ‘Terminated early', ‘Acquitted' and ‘Found guilty' columns may exceed the number proceeded against where defendants are found guilty in the year following that in which proceedings occurred. (4) Includes proceedings which are discontinued or withdrawn. (5) Includes proceedings which are discharged or dismissed. (6) 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. (7) Includes: Absolute/conditional discharge, Fine, Community Sentence, Fully Suspended Sentence, and Otherwise dealt with. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. | |||||
Playgrounds: Acklington
Sir Alan Beith: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when the estates directorate of his Department will notify Acklington Parish Council of its conclusions on the transfer of land at Acklington for a children's play area; and when he plans to respond to the letter from the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed of 10 January 2011 on this matter. [47301]
Mr Djanogly: A copy of the reply from the Secretary of State for Justice, my right hon. and learned Friend, the Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke), to the right hon. Gentleman’s letter of 10 January was emailed to his office on 3 March. A further copy of this reply was sent to his office on 15 March.
The Ministry of Justice is unable to process applications for the transfer of land until its policy on disposal of surplus property is finalised. It is expected that this will be done by the end of July and that transfer of land at Acklington to the Parish Council for recreational use could proceed this summer.
Police: Prison Accommodation
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners are being held in police cells; at what cost; and how many were so held in each police force area in England and Wales in each of the last five years. [46945]
Mr Blunt: Police cells have not been used since 22 September 2008 and no police cells have been on stand by since the end of October 2008.
The following table details usage by police force area between October 2006 and 31 October 2008 and gives the aggregated total of the number of prisoner nights in which a police cell was used.
| Aggregated total number of prisoner nights in which a police cell was used by police force area from October 2006 to 22 September 2008 | ||||
|
|
2006 | 2007 | 2008 | Total |
17 Mar 2011 : Column 551W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 552W
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was allocated to the daily cost of food for a prisoner in (a) a prison cell and (b) a police station cell in each of the last five years. [46946]
Mr Blunt: The information is as follows:
For p risoners in prison cells:
Responsibility for determining prison establishment food budgets lies with the governing Governor who will set aside a realistic sum that will meet the dietary needs of the population of the establishment. Menu requirements vary between establishments and are based on the prisoner population, local regimes and seasonal availability.
Prisons provide breakfast, lunch and dinner together with all condiments and beverages. The average daily food expenditure (ADFE) per prisoner for each of the last five years is as follows.
| Year ending 31 March: | Estimated average daily food expenditure per prisoner (£) |
Costs shown in the table exclude prisons operated and managed by the contracted sector.
The ADFE per prisoner has been calculated using available management information from the NOMS finance systems and assumes that all transactions have been allocated and recorded against the correct accounting codes.
For prisoners in police station cells:
Police cells have not been used since 22 September 2008 and no police cells have been on stand by since the end of October 2008.
However Operation Safeguard was in use between mid-October 2006 and 31 October 2008. Throughout this period NOMS was invoiced by police forces in arrears. Expenditure on meals provided for prisoners held in police cells is not readily available from invoices submitted. This information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, the agreement between NOMS and ACPO at this time placed an upper limit of £12 expenditure on meals for each prisoner over a 24 hour period.
Under the current agreement between NOMS and ACPO governing Operation Safeguard an all-inclusive rate is charged which includes the cost of meals and other ancillary items. This agreement was finalised in May 2009.
17 Mar 2011 : Column 553W
Police: Video Recordings
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the merits of using videolink equipment installed in prisons to record interviews between police officers and witnesses in prison. [46947]
Mr Blunt: The Ministry of Justice Video Services do not currently have a recording facility available on any video link equipment. There are no plans at present to upgrade the service but we will consider this issue as part of the Department’s wider plans to roll out video services.
Prison Accommodation
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offenders held in a cell designed for one inmate shared it with (a) one other inmate and (b) two other inmates in the last 12 months for which figures are available. [46828]
Mr Blunt: The number of offenders held in a cell designed for one inmate who shared with one other inmate in the 12 months from April 2009 to March 2010 is set out in the following table in the column headed “doubling”.
Trebling refers to cells designed for two which are occupied by three. Figures for trebling are available for each of the 12 months from April 2009 to March 2010 and are shown in the following table.
|
|
Doubling | Trebling |
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.
Occupancy levels at individual prisons will vary according to the amount of capacity available overall, the number of prisoners and the way in which the prison population is managed.
We will continue to keep capacity requirements under review against current headroom in the estate, expected prison population levels and the impact of wider developments such as the Government's Green Paper "Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders".
17 Mar 2011 : Column 554W
Prison Service: Training
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the budget for staff training in each prison was in (a) 2009-10 and (b) 2010-11. [46912]
Mr Blunt: The table details the budgets allocated on the National Offender Management Service’ (NOMS) central accounting system for staff training in each prison for financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11. The training budgets cover externally provided staff training courses and further education courses, and also include the purchase of associated training course materials and training equipment.
The budgets do not include training delivered to staff internally within NOMS, or that training that may occur within the normal working environment in the form of on the job learning and development. This information is not held centrally on the NOMS accounting system.
| £ | ||
| Prison | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
17 Mar 2011 : Column 555W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 556W
Prisoners' Release
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people were subject to home detention curfew in England and Wales on the latest date for which figures are available. [47154]
Mr Blunt: On 11 March 2011 there were 2,699 prisoners under Home Detention Curfew supervision. This information is published weekly on the HMPS website:
http://www.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/resourcecentre/publicationsdocuments/index.asp?cat=85
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: Finance
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department has given to prisoner support groups in each year since its inception. [46835]
Mr Blunt: Financial information for grants and contracts paid to voluntary and community sector providers since the Department's inception is not collated centrally. Individual prisons and Probation Trusts have responsibility for contracting directly with the voluntary and community sector providers, and the National Offenders Management Service has only recently commenced putting in processes to collect data at a national level.
17 Mar 2011 : Column 557W
Prisons: EU Action
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) whether the Government were consulted in advance of the adoption by the Committee of Ministers of Recommendation (87)3 on European prison rules; whether the European prison rules have effect in UK domestic law; and if he will make a statement; [46848]
(2) whether the UK was consulted in advance of the adoption by the Committee of Ministers of Recommendation (2003)23 on the management by prison administrations of life sentence and other long-term prisoners; whether the Recommendation has effect in UK domestic law; and if he will make a statement. [46849]
Mr Blunt: The Committee of Ministers is composed of representatives of Council of Europe member states, and Her Majesty's Government regularly contributes to discussions about prison rules and standards within the Council of Europe. The European prison rules are not legally binding on member states. However, our domestic rules, standards and policies are generally consistent with the principles of the European rules.
Prisons: Mobile Phones
Karl Turner:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prison officers received a (a) caution and
17 Mar 2011 : Column 558W
(b)
reprimand for providing prisoners with mobile telephones in
(a)
2007,
(b)
2008,
(c)
2009 and
(d)
2010. [47085]
Mr Blunt: The information requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only by contacting individual prison establishments and by reviewing individual employee personal files at a disproportionate cost.
Prosecutions
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prosecutions have been brought by (a) the Crown Prosecution Service and (b) local authorities for offences of (i) fly-tipping, (ii) graffiti, (iii) dog fouling, (iv) dropping of litter and (v) parking in each year since 2006. [46939]
Mr Blunt: The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts for (i) fly-tipping offences, (ii) ‘other’ criminal damage, (iii) dog fouling, (iv) littering and (v) parking offences since 2006 is given in the table from 2006 to 2009 (latest available). The offence class of ‘other’ criminal damage includes, but cannot separately identify, offences of graffiti. Information collated centrally on court proceedings does not specifically identify the prosecuting authority.
Court proceedings data for 2010 are planned for publication in spring 2011.
Rape: Victim Support Schemes
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 21 December 2010, Official Report, columns 1166-67W, on rape: victim support schemes, what funding he has allocated to rape crisis centres in each year of the comprehensive spending review period; and what proportion of such funding will come from the victim surcharge. [46931]
Mr Blunt: The Government are committed to providing existing rape support centres with stable, long-term funding and developing new centres where there are gaps in provision. Funding has been allocated as follows:
Over the next three-year period, the Ministry of Justice will provide up to £10.5 million in grant funding for existing rape support centres. This will give centres the financial certainty they need to build a sustainable presence.
Development of new rape support centres
In the first phase of a longer-term program of work to develop new centres in areas where there are gaps in provision, up to £600,000 in funding will be provided over the next 12 months to develop new rape support centres in Hereford, Devon, Trafford and Dorset.
17 Mar 2011 : Column 559W
We are currently working with the voluntary sector to finalise budgets for the four new centres for financial years 2012-13 and 2013-14 and to identify further areas where the need for such services is particularly acute.
It is intended that the commitment will be predominately funded from the proceeds of the victim surcharge. We are also in discussions with other interested departments about contributing towards its costs.
Shoplifting: Sentencing
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many incidents of shoplifting led to a (a) caution and (b) conviction resulting in (i) probation and (ii) custodial sentences in each parliamentary constituency in the East of England in each year since 1999. [47024]
17 Mar 2011 : Column 560W
Mr Blunt: Information held by the Ministry of Justice on the number of offenders cautioned, found guilty and sentenced to a Community Rehabilitation Order, Community Order, Suspended Sentence and Immediate Custody at all courts for ‘stealing from shops and stalls’ (shoplifting), in the East of England region, 1999 to 2009, are shown in the following tables 1 and 2.
The court proceedings database does not hold specific information on the offender beyond age, gender and the court where the case was heard; therefore the Ministry of Justice cannot tell if the offender was a resident of the east of England region.
Court proceedings data for 2010 are planned for publication in spring 2011.
| Table 1: Number of offenders cautioned (1, 2) for ‘shoplifting’ (3) , east of England region 1999 to 2009 (4) | |||||||||||
| Region/police force area | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
| (1) 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. (2) 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 figures have been included in the totals. (3) Stealing from ‘shops and stalls’ (shoplifting) is an offence under Theft Act 1968. section 1. (4) 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. | |||||||||||
| Table 2: Number of offenders found guilty, sentenced and given a community rehabilitation order (1) , community order (2) ,suspended sentence (3 ) or an immediate custodial sentence for ‘Shoplifting’ (4) at all courts, east of England region 1999 to 2009 (5, 6, 7) | |||||||||||
| Region/police force area | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 |
17 Mar 2011 : Column 561W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 562W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 563W
17 Mar 2011 : Column 564W
| n/a = Not applicable. (1) Formerly a probation order. (2) Under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, various types of community order previously available for adults (community punishment order, community rehabilitation order, drug treatment and testing order) were replaced by a single generic community order with a range of possible requirements. Courts are able to choose different elements to make up a bespoke community order, which is relevant to that particular offender and the crime(s) they committed. (3) Fully suspended sentence prior to April 2005, Suspended Sentence Order for offences committed from 4 April 2005 (4) Stealing from ‘shops and stalls’ (shoplifting) is an offence under Theft Act 1968, section 1. (5) These statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence 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. (6) 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. (7) 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. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services—Ministry of Justice. | |||||||||||