16 May 2011 : Column 31W
Mr Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she expects to make a decision on implementation of the recommendations of the (a) Hutton and (b) Winsor reports in respect of police services; and if she will make a statement. [53748]
Nick Herbert: The Secretary of State for the Home Department has referred those recommendations of Tom Winsor's first report that call for changes in the short-term to remuneration and conditions of service in England and Wales to the appropriate bodies to consider. She has directed the negotiating machinery for police officers to complete their consideration by 26 July 2011 and will consider their recommendations carefully, in line with her statutory obligations.
As the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced in his Budget statement of 23 March 2011, the Government accept Lord Hutton's recommendations as a basis for consultation. The Government will set out proposals in the autumn that are affordable, sustainable, and fair to both the public sector work force and the taxpayer. The Government recognise that the position of the uniformed services, including the police, will require particularly careful consideration. Any changes to police pensions would be subject to the usual consultation processes with the Police Negotiating Board.
Mr Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what arrangements are in place for the approval of police forces exchanging undercover police officers with police forces in other countries. [55494]
James Brokenshire: Authorisations under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”) may be given for the deployment of covert human intelligence sources such as police undercover officers both inside and outside the UK. Members of foreign law enforcement agencies acting as undercover officers may also be authorised under RIPA in support of domestic and international investigations. Authorisations under RIPA require that covert actions are carried out in a way that is necessary and proportionate with regard to human rights, particularly the right to privacy.
Police: Bureaucracy
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date she last met Jan Berry to discuss recommendations for reducing the burden of administration on police forces. [53757]
Nick Herbert:
Jan Berry was appointed as the Independent Reducing Bureaucracy Advocate by the
16 May 2011 : Column 32W
previous Government in October 2008 and her role concluded in October 2010. The current Home Secretary has not met Jan Berry but I have met with her on a number of occasions.
This Government set up a Reducing Bureaucracy Programme Board with key policing partners in October 2010 to take forward the reducing bureaucracy work. We have already scrapped the national requirement for the Stop and Account form and reduced the reporting requirements for Stop and Search. We are also returning certain charging decisions to the police and establishing a more proportionate approach to inspections.
Police: Manpower
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost of national police recruitment campaigns in each budgetary category was in each police force area in each of the last five years; and what resources her Department allocated to such campaigning in each such year. [53446]
Nick Herbert: Responsibility for police recruitment passed from the Home Office to the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) and individual forces in 2007 and details of the costs of recruitment campaigns to individual forces are not collected centrally.
The last national recruitment campaign took place in 2006 and was therefore funded by the Home Office from the Department's central marketing budget. The details of this are as follows:
| 2006-07 | |
|
|
Amount spent (£) |
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications to join the force each police force received in each year since 1997; and how many officers were recruited in each such year. [53513]
Nick Herbert: The requested data on applications have been collected since 2002-03 and where available are given in table 1. The data provided here are management information and as such it is important to note that they are provisional and have not been subjected to the usual quality assurance practices.
The requested data on recruits have been collected since 2002-03 and are given in table 2.
| Table 1: Number (1) of formal application forms (2) received by police forces from 2002-03 to 2009-10 | ||||||||
|
|
2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 |
16 May 2011 : Column 33W
16 May 2011 : Column 34W
| (1) Provisional management information data collected for planning purposes only. Data have not undergone usual quality assurance practices (including validation with individual police forces) and are therefore supplied for information purposes only. (2) Does not include informal expressions of interest. Some forces did not send out and receive paper application packs when they could instead receive electronic applications via the www.policecouldyou.co.uk website. Where forces have received application packs from other means it is not always possible to separately identify the number of paper application packs received, and in such cases forces have been instructed to return a zero response. (3 )Data not available (or may be zero). Force was not able to supply data at the time of collection. | ||||||||
| Table 2: Police officer recruits (1) (FTE) (2) to police forces from 2002-03 to 2009-10 | ||||||||
|
|
2002-03 | 2003-04 | 2004-05 | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 |
16 May 2011 : Column 35W
16 May 2011 : Column 36W
| (1) Recruits included those officers joining as Police Standard Direct Recruits and those who were previously Special Constables. This excludes police officers on transfers from other forces and those rejoining. (2 )Full Time Equivalent figures that have been rounded to the nearest whole number. Because of rounding, there may be an apparent discrepancy between totals and the sums of the constituent items. | ||||||||
Police: Redundancy
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers in Nottinghamshire have been made redundant in the last three months. [54114]
Nick Herbert: None, as there is no provision in legislation for making police officers redundant.
Police: Retirement
Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many detectives have left police forces under rule A19 in 2011. [54703]
Nick Herbert [holding answer 9 May 2011]: The requested information is not collected centrally.
Police: Vetting
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) which company has been awarded the contract for the proposed biometric vetting scheme for police recruits; [54774]
(2) whether she has discussed with ministerial colleagues any extension of the proposed biometric vetting scheme for police recruits to other public services or public sector employees; [54775]
(3) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken from police recruits as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme will be retained following recruitment; [54776]
(4) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken from police recruits as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme will be stored on (a) the national DNA database and (b) the police elimination database; [54777]
(5) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken from police recruits as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme will be destroyed or deleted (a) within a fixed time period and (b) on the individual’s departure from the service; [54778]
(6) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken from police recruits as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme are to be collected before or after job offers have been made; [54779]
(7) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme from potential police recruits who are unsuccessful are to be treated as volunteer samples and data for the purposes of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984; [55625]
(8) whether DNA samples, DNA profiles and fingerprints taken from police recruits as part of the proposed biometric vetting scheme are to be used for any further searches following recruitment. [55627]
James Brokenshire: No decision has been taken on any new scheme for biometric vetting for police recruits. The matter will be considered by a technical working party of the Police Advisory Board for England and Wales.
Stop and Search
Mr Ruffley:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many stops and searches were conducted in each police force area (a) in total and
16 May 2011 : Column 37W
(b)
per 1,000 population in each year since 1997; and what proportion of total stops and searches in (i) England and Wales and (ii) each police force area resulted in an arrest in each such year. [53517]
Nick Herbert: The requested data are published within the Home Office Statistical Bulletin ‘Police Powers and Procedures’. Current and previous copies of these publications are available from the Library of the House.
Stop and Search: Terrorism
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people had their vehicles stopped and searched under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 in each year since 2006; and how many of those were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted of (i) a notifiable offence and (ii) a terrorism-related offence in (A) each police force area and (B) England and Wales. [53375]
Nick Herbert: The number of vehicles stopped under section 1 of the said power is published within the Home Office Statistical Bulletin Police Powers and Procedures. Data relating to prosecutions and convictions are published by the Ministry of Justice in its Criminal Statistics publication. It is not possible to identify which prosecutions and convictions were as a result of stop and searches. Current and previous copies of these publications are available from the Library of the House.
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people had their vehicle stopped and searched under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in each year since 2005; and how many of those were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted of (i) a notifiable offence and (ii) a terrorism-related offence in (A) each police force area and (B) England and Wales. [53395]
Nick Herbert: The information requested is published in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin “Operation of Police Powers under Terrorism Act 2000 and Subsequent Legislation”. Current and previous copies of both annual and quarterly updates are available in the Library of the House.
Visas
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Tier 4 visa holders extended their leave to remain by switching in-country to a Tier 2 (General) visa category in (a) 2009 and (b) 2010. [55601]
Damian Green: Tier 4 of the points based system was introduced on 31 March 2009. Information on the number of Tier 4 visa holders who have switched to a Tier 2 General visa is as follows:
| Tier 4 visa holders switching to Tier 2 General in 2009 and 2010 | |
|
|
Number (1) |
| (1) Statistical information is provisional and subject to change. It has been derived from local management information and is not provided under National Statistics protocols. | |
16 May 2011 : Column 38W
Visas: Finance
Mr Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent representations she has received on the cost of visas. [55455]
Damian Green: During the last three months the UK Border Agency has received eight representations regarding the costs of visas. These consisted of four MP letters on behalf of their constituents, two Treat Official letters and two parliamentary questions.
Justice
Career Breaks
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff in his Department and its agencies have taken career breaks of (a) three to six months, (b) six to 12 months, (c) one to two years, (d) two to three years and (e) more than three years in each of the last three years; and how many staff were on a career break on the latest date for which figures are available. [55551]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: No central records are held by the Ministry on the number of staff on career breaks for specific periods of time. To obtain this information would require an examination of all staff personal files at a disproportionate cost. However, the Ministry does hold records of the number of staff on career breaks on specific dates. For the end of the last three financial years they were as follows:
| As at 31 March each year | Number |
| (1) The Department’s total full-time equivalent staff numbers for these three dates were 76,470; 75,010 and 74,820 respectively. | |
Charter of Fundamental Rights: EU
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether the Government was represented at the Ninth Meeting of the National Liaison Officers held by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights in April 2011. [55535]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: Yes. A Ministry of Justice official represented the UK Government at the meeting.
Civil Proceedings: Legal Costs
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he plans to introduce legislation to implement his policy proposals for reform of civil litigation. [55161]
Mr Djanogly: “Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales—Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson’s Recommendations: The Government Response” was published on 29 March 2011, setting out the way forward on the proposals following full consultation.
16 May 2011 : Column 39W
As indicated in the response, changes to the CFA regime requiring primary legislation will follow as soon as parliamentary time allows. Other changes will require amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules or other secondary legislation. Further consultation will follow in due course, as appropriate. It is envisaged that the reforms will be implemented together, once the legislation is enacted, aside from the reversal of Carver v. BAA and increases to recoverable fees for litigants in person which can be taken forward independently more swiftly.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will publish the representations made by defendant insurance companies in response to Lord Justice Jackson's review of civil litigation costs. [55162]
Mr Djanogly: Lord Justice Jackson's year-long review of civil litigation funding and costs was an independent review. Representations made to Lord Justice Jackson were referred to in his “Review of Civil Litigation Costs: Final Report”, which was published in January 2010. The annexes to his final report include lists of submissions received during his review and of meetings, seminars and conferences attended.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what representations (a) he and (b) his Department have received from defendant insurance companies since the publication of Lord Justice Jackson's review of civil litigation costs. [55163]
Mr Djanogly: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Robert Flello) on 14 March 2011, Official Report, column 139W.
I met with the Association of British Insurers (ABI) on 29 July. During the consultation period for Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales—Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson's Recommendations, I hosted three roundtable discussions with interested parties. The first, on 2 December 2010 aimed to include parties on all sides of the debate; claimant and defendant solicitors, insurers, after the event (ATE) insurers and other interested parties. I then held meetings with a group of claimant practitioners on 18 January 2011, and defendant practitioners, including insurers and the ABI on 19 January 2011.
The Secretary of State and I have regular meetings with representative bodies, covering a range of issues. The Secretary of State has not held any meetings with insurers or claimant solicitors specifically to discuss the proposed changes to civil litigation funding and costs.
The Department has received various submissions from defendant insurance companies in relation to the consultation “Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales—Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson's Recommendations”.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effects of his proposed reform of civil litigation costs on people who have sustained long-term disabilities necessitating significant on-going care. [55260]
Mr Djanogly:
“Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales—Implementation of Lord Justice Jacksons Recommendations: The Government Response” was published on 29 March 2011, setting out
16 May 2011 : Column 40W
the way forward on the proposals following full consultation. An updated impact assessment was published alongside this response.
Criminal Injuries Compensation: Public Consultation
Mr Nuttall: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has to hold a public consultation as part of the review of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme. [55941]
Mr Blunt: The Government intend to make an announcement before the summer recess.
Domestic Violence: Fixed Penalties
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many penalty notices for disorder have been issued for wasting police time in cases where the accused had previously made an allegation of domestic violence. [55831]
Mr Blunt: In 2009, there were 3,109 penalty notices for disorders issued to persons aged 16 and over for the offence of wasting police time in England and Wales. Data held centrally do not include information about the circumstances behind each case. It is therefore not possible to identify offences where the accused had previously made an allegation of domestic violence.
Court proceedings data for 2010 are planned for publication on 26 May 2011.
Human Rights Act 1988
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will instruct his legal representatives to intervene on one or more cases in respect of recent judgments in terms of the balance between articles 8 and 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights to take the case to the Supreme Court for a ruling on the interpretation of section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998. [55629]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: The Government have no plans to intervene in any cases concerning the interpretation of section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Legal Aid
Julie Elliott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people resident in (a) Sunderland and (b) the North East received legal aid in each of the last five years. [55468]
Mr Djanogly: The Legal Services Commission (LSC) is currently collating data relating to Sunderland and the North East. I will write to the hon. Member once the information has been verified and place a copy in the Library of the House.
Prison Sentences
Karl Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many serving prisoners have been in prison for longer than their tariff length; and in which prisons those prisoners are located; [55425]
16 May 2011 : Column 41W
(2) for what length of time in addition to the length of their tariff each prisoner serving a sentence in excess of their tariff length has been in custody. [55427]
Mr Blunt: The tariff is the minimum term that a life or other indeterminate sentence prisoner must serve in custody before becoming eligible for consideration for release by the Parole Board.
As at 17 November 2010, there were 6,316 offenders in custody being held beyond their tariff expiry date. Table 1 shows a breakdown of this total by prison establishment. For a small number of offenders, the current prison establishment was not recorded on the data held centrally. Additionally, some offenders are held in secure hospitals and other secure accommodation.
Table 2 shows a distribution of the time served beyond tariff expiry date as at 17 November 2010. These figures include all offenders being held in prison and for whom the prison establishment was recorded centrally; they exclude those held in other secure custody or where prison establishment was not recorded on the data held centrally.
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.
| Table 1: Lifers and IPPs in custody beyond their tariff expiry date as at 17 November 2010, by establishment | |
| Establishment | Number |
16 May 2011 : Column 42W
16 May 2011 : Column 43W
| Table 2: Lifers and IPPs in prison beyond their tariff expiry date as at 17 November 2010, by length of time served past tariff | |
|
|
Number |
Prisoners
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the provisions of Prison Service Instruction 06/2011 on Prisoner Communications—Correspondence, how many prisoners have been (a) investigated and (b) disciplined for contributing (i) directly or (ii) via a third party to (A) a social networking site or (B) a media publication in each of the last three years. [55545]
16 May 2011 : Column 44W
Mr Blunt: Any disciplinary action taken against prisoners for contributing directly or indirectly to social networking sites is dealt with and recorded locally at the prison and is not collected centrally. In order to provide these details individual prisoner's records would need to be checked and the information could be only provided at disproportionate cost.
Prisoners may write to any person or organisation, including media publications, within the rules in Prison Service Instruction 06/2011 Prisoner Communications Correspondence and Prison Service Instruction 37/2010 Prisoner's Access to the Media. A prisoner may have an article published if it conforms to guidance contained in those policies but no records are kept centrally of disciplinary action where breaches of the rules have occurred.
Prisoners’ Release
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many prisoners have been released under home detention curfew in error in each year that figures are available; [55538]
(2) how many prisoners have been released early due to the incorrect calculation of their (a) home detention curfew and (b) early removal scheme eligibility dates. [55539]
Mr Blunt: The following table shows the number of prisoners released on home detention curfew in error, by financial year. These figures cover the period between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2011. There are approximately 12,000 prisoners released on home detention curfew each year and those released in error make up a tiny proportion of these releases.
| Table 1: Prisoners released in error on home detention curfew, by financial year | |
|
|
Number |
The following table shows the number of prisoners released in error on home detention curfew and early removal scheme as the result of a calculation error. These figures cover the period between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2011.
| Table 2: Number of prisoners released early due to incorrect calculation of (a) home detention curfew and (b) early removal scheme, by financial year | ||
|
|
Home detention curfew | Early removal scheme |
16 May 2011 : Column 45W
These figures have been drawn from live administrative data systems which may be amended at any time. 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.
The number of releases in error may change should further incidents be reported.
The number of releases in error from prisons generally is very small. All incidents are subject to investigation. The majority of prisoners released in error are returned to custody quickly. They are usually unaware of the error and make no attempt to evade the police.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners he estimates will have their release dates recalculated following the issuing of Prison Service Instruction 55/2010 on Sentence Calculation and HDC/ERS Eligibility Dates - Multiple Sentences Comprising Mixtures of the 1991 Act and the 2003 Act Release Provisions; whether additional costs to the public purse will be incurred as a result of any recalculated sentences; and if he will make a statement. [55542]
Mr Blunt: Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 55/2010 gave effect to a June 2010 Supreme Court judgment that fundamentally changed how the legislation must be applied to prisoners with multiple sentences which are subject to a mixture of release provisions (i.e. under the Criminal Justice Act 1991 and Criminal Justice Act 2003). The result has been that some prisoners have been notified of earlier Home Detention Curfew (HDC) and Early Removal Scheme (ERS) eligibility dates, while the impact on others has been later sentence and licence expiry dates. Prisons have reported that the dates for 5,651 prisoners have had to be recalculated. We have estimated that an additional 80 prison places may be required in the longer term as a direct result of implementing the judgment. These can be accommodated within planned provision. There will be some additional costs in extending the supervision period of some offenders but these are expected to be minimal. These recalculations have been necessary in order for the sentences of affected prisoners to remain lawful and in line with the Supreme Court judgment.
Prisoners: Correspondence
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what the cost to the public purse was of postage on behalf of prisoners sending (a) statutory letters and (b) special letters in each of the last five years; and what the cost to the public purse was of the postage of letters sent overseas in each such year; [55543]
(2) what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of the implementation of Prison Service Instruction 06/2011 on Prisoner Communications - Correspondence in each of the next three years. [55546]
Mr Blunt: The National Offender Management Service Agency's accounting system does not distinguish details or have separate account codes for expenditure details on postage on behalf of prisoners sending statutory letters, special letters or postage letters sent overseas.
16 May 2011 : Column 46W
Prison Service Instruction 06/2011 did not change the allowances or entitlements for prisoners to send or receive letters and therefore the implementation of the new instruction is cost neutral.
Prisoners: Equality
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the number and proportion of prisoners with protected characteristics as defined by the Equality Act 2010 for each type of protected characteristic in the latest period for which figures are available. [55530]
Mr Blunt: Applying the definitions within the Equality Act 2010, every prisoner has the protected characteristics of age, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation. I am unable to estimate the number and proportion of prisoners with any of the remaining protected characteristics as this information is not collected centrally.
A breakdown of the prison population by age, race, religion or belief, and sex can be found in the Offender Management Caseload Statistics. The most recent annual bulletin can be downloaded from the Ministry of Justice website at:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/omcs-2009-complete-210710a.pdf
Prisoners: Foreign Nationals
Mr Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many foreign national prisoners (a) are held in prison and (b) were so held in May 2010; and what steps he is taking to reduce the number of such prisoners. [55782]
Mr Blunt: Prison population statistics are published quarterly. On 31 March 2010, the foreign national prisoner population stood at 11,367. That figure had declined to 10,745 on 31 March 2011.
The Ministry of Justice and Home Office are working together to reduce the number of foreign nationals who are in our prisons.
This includes progression of plans described in the Ministry of Justice Green Paper which will allow for conditional cautions to be available as an alternative to prosecution for some foreign national offenders with the condition being that the individual leaves the UK (we are already piloting this approach with simple cautions) and plans to remove indeterminately sentenced/lifer FNPs at the point of expiry of their tariff.
A considerable amount of work aimed at reducing the FNP population is already under way. For example, we continue to operate an early removal scheme under which FNPs serving a determinate sentence can be considered for deportation up to 270 days before they would otherwise be eligible for release.
In addition, we are building on existing prisoner transfer agreements, which enable some foreign national prisoners to serve their sentence in their country of origin. The EU framework decision on prisoner transfer is due to enter into force from December, which will provide for a steady increase in the number of EU nationals transferred to their own country to serve their sentences.
16 May 2011 : Column 47W
The Ministry of Justice will continue to work with the Home Office to develop work to manage down overall FNP numbers and, where possible, divert foreign national offenders from the UK and our prison system.
Prisons
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the cost to the public purse was of providing activities in prisons in each of the last 10 years; and what the cost to the public purse was of the implementation of Prison Service Instruction 38/2010 on activities in prisons. [55548]
Mr Blunt: Prisons deliver a wide and diverse range of activities. The cost of activities is primarily met through establishment baseline funding and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by examining expenditure locally in each establishment, disaggregating and then collating the costs. Prison Service Instruction 38/2010 on activities in prison provided updated instructions to governors on appropriate activities for prisoners. It did not mandate any specific activities or associated costs.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff working in prisons have been (a) investigated on suspicion of, (b) disciplined for and (c) dismissed for providing unauthorised items to prisoners in each of the last five years. [55550]
Mr Blunt: Central information covering formal staff disciplinary proceedings is recorded according to the type of misconduct. There is no specific category for ‘providing unauthorised items to prisoners' and therefore the information requested at (a) and (b) is not held centrally. It could be obtained by manually examining individual records only at a disproportionate cost.
Records, held since January 2008, show that 32 directly employed and 66 non-directly employed staff working in prisons have been dismissed for offences relating to the conveying unauthorised items in to prisons up to 31 March 2011. Available data do not cover whether such items are actually provided to prisoners. The following table provides a yearly breakdown;
| Calendar year | Dismissals of prison staff linked to the conveying unauthorised items | Exclusions of non directly employed prison staff linked to the conveying of unauthorised items |
| (1 )To 11 May | ||
These figures have been drawn from live administrative data systems held by the Corruption Prevention Unit, which may be amended at any time. 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. Non directly employed prison staff are employed to work in prisons through a third party such as a local education provider, healthcare trust or other voluntary organisations. These individuals are covered by the NOMS corruption prevention strategy.
16 May 2011 : Column 48W
Prisons: Drugs
Karl Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prison officers were reprimanded for bringing prohibited substances into prison in (a) 2006, (b) 2007, (c) 2008, (d) 2009 and (e) 2010. [55489]
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.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff working in prisons have undergone treatment for substance abuse in each of the last three years; and how many staff were undergoing treatment for substance abuse on the latest date for which figures are available. [55549]
Mr Blunt: Data on the numbers of any staff working in prisons who may have undergone treatment for substance abuse in the last three years are not available to the National Offender Management Service, in any form.
Substance abuse by staff is not compatible with working in prisons and where this is suspected or identified, appropriate action is taken. Any treatment provided to individual staff members would be through self-referral in the community (either via the employee's own GP or privately). Medical confidentiality applies to personal sensitive data relating to treatment of this sort and as such would remain confidential to the individual member of staff and their healthcare providers and would not be available to NOMS.
Prisons: Equality
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the cost is of implementing Prison Service instruction 32/2011 on ensuring equality in 2011-12. [55529]
Mr Blunt: There should be no extra costs in implementing Prison Service Instruction 32/2011 on ensuring equality. The instruction contains fewer mandatory actions and prescribes less process than the orders and instructions that it replaces. It offers prison establishments the flexibility to allocate resources to equality issues in accordance with local need.
Prisons: Security
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many security breaches occurred in each prison in each of the last five years. [55557]
Mr Blunt: NOMS collects data on security breaches which are defined as any incident involving visitors or outsiders where the security or control of the establishment has been breached, or there has been an attempt to do so. The following table provides details of breaches and attempted breaches of security reported on the incident reporting system from 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2011. Figures exclude other specific categories of security-related incident such as drug finds, disorder-related incidents, escapes, key lock incidents and finds of mobile phones.
16 May 2011 : Column 49W
16 May 2011 : Column 50W
| Table 1: Breaches and attempted breaches of security or control by visitors or outsiders, by financial year, from 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2011 | |||||
| Prison name | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
16 May 2011 : Column 51W
16 May 2011 : Column 52W