Indian Subcontinent: Sanitation
Lindsay Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what aid his Department is providing to (a) India, (b) Pakistan, (c) Bangladesh and (d) Nepal for the purposes of investment in (i) safe waters and (ii) sanitation and hygiene in 2011-12. [57277]
Mr O'Brien: Through our bilateral programmes, the Department for International Development (DFID) has allocated £23,000,000 to Bangladesh and £4,000,000 to Nepal for water and sanitation from 2011-12 to 2014-15. Among other gains, we estimate that an additional 110,000 people will benefit from safe latrines in Nepal by 2015 as a direct result of these UK funds. In Bangladesh, we estimate an additional 1.28 million people will benefit from increased access to safe drinking water; 613,000 will benefit from improved sanitation facilities and about 20 million will be reached through hygiene awareness.
24 May 2011 : Column 556W
DFID's bilateral aid programme in Pakistan does not have a specific allocation for water and sanitation, as this area is already supported by other donors. However, water and sanitation has been one of the priority areas of humanitarian support following the 2010 floods.
DFID is awaiting the International Development Select Committee's report on UK aid to India before finalising detailed sector activities in the country, including work on water and sanitation.
Overseas Aid
Mr Ellwood: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what criteria his Department uses to determine what Government expenditure overseas is reckoned within the proportion of gross national income counted as official development assistance. [56626]
Mr Duncan: The Department for International Development (DFID) uses the internationally agreed standard definition of Official Development Assistance laid down by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
Justice
Civil Proceedings
Mr Buckland: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what assessment he has made of effects of proposed limits on success fees applied to personal injury claimants on the average amount of compensation paid to personal injury claimants; [57263]
(2) what assessment he has made of the effects of proposed changes to the recoverability of success and other associated fees in civil litigation cases on lower socioeconomic groups; [57292]
(3) pursuant to the statement of 29 March 2011, Official Report, columns 173-4, on reforming civil justice, what assessment he has made of (a) savings and (b) costs to the public purse of his proposed reforms to civil litigation in each of the next five years; [57318]
(4) what assessment he has made of the potential effects of removing the recoverability of after-the-event insurance and success fees from a losing party in civil litigation on (a) the number of personal injury cases undertaken by lawyers per year and (b) the level of payments to personal injury claimants. [57403]
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. An updated impact assessment was published alongside the response.
Mr Ward: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will make an assessment of the likely effect on insurance premiums of the proposals announced in the White Paper on reform of civil litigation funding and costs. [57373]
24 May 2011 : Column 557W
Mr Djanogly: On 29 March this year the Government announced that they would be implementing the changes set out in ‘Reforming Civil Litigation Funding and Costs in England and Wales - Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson's Recommendations: the Government Response’. An impact assessment was published alongside the Government response. The Association of British Insurers confirmed that “motorists can look forward to cheaper insurance in the future”.
Courts: Fees and Charges
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what facility HM Courts and Tribunals Service has for a litigant in person who qualifies for a court fee exemption to make an urgent application for a stay of proceedings in cases where a letter from the Department for Work and Pensions confirming the exemption is not immediately available. [57045]
Mr Djanogly: If a litigant needs to make an urgent application for a stay of proceedings and they do not have the required evidence to support an application for a fee remission they can give the court a written undertaking that they will provide the evidence to support an application for fee remission or pay the appropriate fee within five working days of the urgent application being made.
If the litigant fails to comply with the undertaking it gives to the court the proceedings for which the undertaking was provided will be stopped, struck out or the order obtained revoked.
The remission system and this provision is set out in full in the court leaflet “Court Fees—Do I have to pay them” available from all court offices and as a download from the Justice website.
Departmental Charitable Donations
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps he is taking to encourage charitable giving by Ministers in his Department. [57116]
24 May 2011 : Column 558W
Mr Kenneth Clarke: The Giving White Paper published on Monday 23 May 2011 outlines the Government's proposals to encourage charitable giving. As part of this, all Ministry of Justice Ministers have pledged to undertake a “One Day Challenge”—a voluntary commitment to give one day of their time over the course of a year to a charity or community group of their choice.
Departmental Manpower
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many independent (a) domestic violence adviser and (b) sexual violence adviser posts funded by his Department there have been in each year since their inception; and where each post has been located. [56900]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice has contributed towards the funding of independent domestic violence adviser (IDVA) posts in services supporting victims through the specialist domestic violence courts (SDVCs) since 2007-08. Ministry of Justice funding is set out in table 1. Our commitment has been to provide a grant for a period of three years only, after which local areas are expected to continue to fund the service.
From 2011-12 the Ministry of Justice will also fund 44 IDVA posts from the Victim and Witness General Fund, as set out in table 2.
The Home Office has funded IDVAs for 2011-12 and a list of those who received funding can be found at:
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime/violence-against-women-girls/idva/
In addition to this, the Home Office has funded a number of independent sexual violence adviser (ISVA) posts since 2006-2007, as set out in table 3.
| Table 1: Ministry of Justice IDVA funding | ||||||
| Specialist domestic violence court area | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 |
24 May 2011 : Column 559W
24 May 2011 : Column 560W
24 May 2011 : Column 561W
24 May 2011 : Column 562W
|
North Staffs (Newcastle and Moorlands with Stoke on Trent areas) |
||||||
|
Worcs SDVC (Bromsgrove and Redditch, Worcs, S Worcs and Kidderminster) |
||||||
24 May 2011 : Column 563W
24 May 2011 : Column 564W
| Table 2: Victim and Witness General Fund 2011-12 to 2013-14 | |
| Area | Number of court based IDVA |
| Table 3: Home Office ISVA funding | ||||||
|
|
2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 to 2014-15 |
Land Registry
Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he expects to conclude his assessment of the findings of the Land Registry Feasibility Study; and what plans he has to discuss the findings of the study with representatives of the trade unions recognised by the Land Registry before any announcement of the findings to the House. [57332]
24 May 2011 : Column 565W
Mr Djanogly: Given the important role that the Land Registry plays in maintaining the public's confidence in the property marked it is right and proper that we give thorough and careful consideration to the findings of the feasibility study before making any decisions or announcements about its future direction. As part of those deliberations, we need to understand better the potential impact of the Cabinet Office's proposal to develop a PDC on the options being considered under the feasibility study.
If the preferred option is for a materially different ownership structure for the Land Registry, then a full public consultation will be conducted
The Minister of State, my noble Friend Lord McNally, has agreed to meet with staff representatives of the Land Registry once consideration of the feasibility study has concluded, and before any public announcement has been made. A date has not been set for those meetings or for any announcement about the future of the Land Registry.
Magistrates Courts
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average cost to the public purse is of preparing a (a) full pre-sentence report and (b) fast delivery report in magistrates courts, including time spent by probation staff in court whilst the report is being delivered and considered. [57029]
Mr Blunt: Full information about these costs is not yet available. The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) is currently developing systems to report expenditure on a service by service basis. This information will be made published in the autumn through the Government's Transparency Agenda.
The available information, which has been placed in the Libraries of the House, estimates the average cost of preparing a “full pre-sentence report”, known as a Standard Delivery Report, to be £277. The estimated average cost preparing a Fast Delivery Report is £46. These estimates do not cover the time spent by probation staff in court while the report is being delivered and considered in court. Information on the cost of time spent by probation staff in court will be captured in the service specification for Court Work other than Assessment and Reports, to be published by December 2011. The
24 May 2011 : Column 566W
estimates provided cover only direct running costs and do not include indirect costs.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what consideration his Department has given to the deployment of judicial resources across magistrates courts in England and Wales following the outcome of the research it commissioned on variations in the approaches of magistrates and district judges in dealing with criminal cases. [57030]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: The Ministry of Justice has commissioned Ipsos MORI to conduct research into the strengths and skills of the judiciary. This is due to be published later this year. The findings will help strengthen the evidence base to inform decisions around how best magistrates and district judges are deployed across magistrates courts in England and Wales.
Parenting Orders
Karl Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many parenting orders have been issued to (a) men and (b) women in each year since their inception. [56785]
Mr Blunt: Parenting orders were piloted between 30 September 1998 and 31 March 2000 and commenced in England and Wales in June 2000.
8,649 parenting orders attached to a child's criminal conviction were awarded between 1999 and 2009. Of these, 5,431 were awarded to men and 3,182 to women. There are no records of parenting orders being issued in 1998. The full breakdown by year is provided in table 1. Parenting orders attached to an ASBO have also been awarded since 2004 (table 2) however these data are not available broken down by gender.
The Department for Education has collected data from local authorities in England on parenting orders since September 2004. The number of parenting orders granted following successful truancy prosecutions between September 2004 and August 2010 is 2,829. One parenting order was granted in cases of exclusion or serious misbehaviour at school during this same period. We believe that usage of those orders is low as parenting orders for behaviour are a last resort measure, intended only for those few cases where parents are unwilling to engage with voluntary measures. The Department does not collect parenting orders data on a gender basis.
| Number of people issued with a parenting order following a criminal conviction, by sex, England | |||||||||||
| Number | |||||||||||
| Sex | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 (1) | 2009 |
| (1) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July and August 2008. (2) The gender of a defendant proceeded against may not have been reported. These data have been included in the persons Therefore, males and females age group totals and sub-totals may not agree with the totals given under persons. Notes: 1. The figures given in the table on court proceedings relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they have 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. Parenting orders, made available under the Crime and Disorder act 1998, were implemented nationally in 2000. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services—Ministry of Justice. | |||||||||||
24 May 2011 : Column 567W
| Parenting orders (1) made as a result of an antisocial behaviour order (ASBO) being issued to a juvenile (aged 10 to 17) on application, at all magistrates and county courts in England and Wales, as reported to the Ministry of Justice (2) , from 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2009, England and Wales | ||
| Number | ||
| Period | Parenting orders | ASBOs issued to persons aged 10 to 17 |
| (1) While parenting orders (POs), made available under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, were implemented nationally from 1 June 2000 the Anti-social Behaviour Act (November 2003) extended requirements that a court making an ASBO against a person under the age of 16 should issue a PO against the parents of that child if it is satisfied that the PO would be desirable in the interests of preventing repetition of the behaviour which led to the ASBO (if not satisfied it should be stated in open court as to why not). (2) Prior to the creation of the Ministry of Justice on 9 May 2007, numbers of ASBOs issued were reported to Home Office by the Court Service. Notes: 1. Available data for the period 1 April 1999 to 31 May 2000 are only for the total number (104) of ASBOs issued. 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. 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 within the Ministry of Justice. | ||
Prisons
Helen Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many hours on average each day offenders were held in their cell in each establishment in each year since 2007 for which figures are available. [56790]
Mr Blunt: As a measure of safety and decency in prisons, the National Offender Management Service collects data on the average hours per weekday that prisoners are unlocked. By subtracting the average hours unlocked from the 24 hours in a day it is possible to estimate hours spent locked in cell. It should be noted that the latter will include hours when prisoners are asleep.
Figures for time unlocked and time locked in cell are set out in the table for each prison establishment in England and Wales for the financial years 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10.
The figures used in the answer 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.
| Average time unlocked: hours per prisoner per day | Estimated average time locked in cell: hours per prisoner per day | |||||
| Prison | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 |
24 May 2011 : Column 568W
24 May 2011 : Column 569W
24 May 2011 : Column 570W
| Notes: 1. Blakenhurst, Brockhill and Hewell Grange merged in 2008-09 becoming Hewell. 2. Data for Peterborough for 2007-08 and 2008-09 are unavailable. 3. Hours locked in cell have been estimated from the recorded figure of average daily hours unlocked from cell. Data Sources and Quality: These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems. Care is taken when processing and analysing returns but the detail is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Although shown to one decimal place they may not be accurate to that level. | ||||||