Justice
Court Proceedings: Broadcasting
20. Andrew Bridgen: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has to permit the broadcasting of court proceedings. [86117]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 705W
Mr Kenneth Clarke: We are planning to legislate, as soon as parliamentary time allows to remove the ban on cameras in courts, subject to certain safeguards, and we are working closely with the Lord Chief Justice on achieving this. Initially, we will allow judgments in the Court of Appeal to be broadcast for the first time, and will expand this to the Crown court in due course. We will not allow filming of juries, victims and witnesses under any circumstances.
Law Centres
21. Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what future support he plans to provide to law centres. [86118]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice does not provide direct support for law centres. However, law centres are able to bid for contracts issued by the Legal Services Commission to provide legal aid services in specified areas of law and will continue to be able to do so in the future.
The Ministry of Justice is also working closely with the Cabinet Office to support the cross-government review into the funding of the Not-for Profit sector announced on 21 November.
County Courts
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with which organisations his Department had discussions on the subject matter of its consultation on solving disputes in the county courts (a) before and (b) after the consultation closed. [86155]
Mr Djanogly: I refer the hon. Member to my previous answer given on 6 December 2011, Official Report, column 190W. The Department has engaged in discussions with the following organisations during the course of this year:
Association of British Insurers
Civil Mediation Council
Forum of Insurance Lawyers
Association of Personal Injury Lawyers
Motor Accident Solicitors Society
The Law Society
The British Bankers Association
Citizens Advice
Her Majesties' Association of District Judges
R3 (Association of Business Recovery Professionals)
Civil Courts Users Association
Office of Fair Trade
Shergroup
The Land Registry
Centre for Peaceful Solutions and Brent Mediation Centre
Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution
Law Works Mediation
National Health Service Litigation Authority
Medical Protection Society
Weightmans Solicitors.
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) when he expects to publish his Department’s response to its consultation on solving disputes in the county courts; [86156]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 706W
(2) what the reasons are for the time taken to publish the Government’s response to the consultation on solving disputes in the county courts; [86157]
(3) when he expects the Government’s response to his Department’s consultation on solving disputes in the county courts to be published. [86158]
Mr Djanogly: I refer the right hon. Member to my previous answer given on 6 December 2011, Official Report, column 190W. The Government expect the consultation response to be published in the new year. The response was initially scheduled for publication in October but this was postponed due to ongoing discussions within Government.
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many submissions his Department received to its consultation on solving disputes in the county courts. [86159]
Mr Djanogly: I refer the right hon. Member to my previous answer given on 6 December 2011, Official Report, column 190W. The Department received 319 responses to the consultation.
Legal Opinion: Costs
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many times his Department has instructed 1 Brick Court in each year between 2006 and 2011; and how much his Department paid to 1 Brick Court on each such occasion. [86569]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice does not keep a central record of the number of times it instructs particular chambers. However on inquiry the Department is aware of one occasion in which 1 Brick Court chambers was instructed over this period. The cost to the Department was £8,084 (inclusive of VAT).
Crime Prevention: Training
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the cost to his Department was of providing behaviour-related courses for offenders convicted of (a) violent crimes and (b) sexual offences in each of the last five years. [86317]
Mr Blunt: The cost of providing behaviour-related courses for offenders convicted of (a) violent crimes and (b) sexual offences are not collated centrally, and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by obtaining highly complex information held on offender files or in local and national data systems, validating it, collating it in a common format and then calculating the overall costs in order to provide a response.
Crimes of Violence: Sexual Offences
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many defendants charged with (a) violent and (b) sexual offences have committed offences or been charged with committing further offences while on bail in the last three years. [86311]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 707W
Mr Blunt: Data are not held centrally on the number of offences committed during the bail period by people who have been charged.
Annual court proceedings data for 2011 are planned for publication in spring, 2012.
Consultants
Kelvin Hopkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much (a) his Department and (b) the National Offender Management Service spent on external consultants in each of the last three years. [86603]
Mr Djanogly: The Ministry of Justice (excluding the National Offender Management Service) has spent the following on external consultants in each of the last three years:
| November to October each year | Spend (net) (£) |
The National Offender Management Service has spent the following on external consultants in each of the last three years:
| November to October each year | Spend (net) (£) |
Departmental Contracts
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether the permanent secretary at his Department has met representatives of (a) Amey, (b) CCA, (c) G4S, (d) GEO, (e) Interserve, (f) MITIE, (g) MTC, (h) Reliance, (i) Serco and (j) Sodexo since May 2010; and if he will place details of any such meetings in the Library. [86290]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: My Department publishes details of meetings between the permanent secretary and external organisations on its website at:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/corporate-reports/moj/index.htm
Since May 2010, my permanent secretary has met with Serco on one occasion. Details of this meeting will be published in due course.
Electronic Tagging
John McDonnell: 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 each year since 2000. [86291]
Mr Blunt: According to data returns provided by electronic monitoring contractors the total number of orders sentenced by the courts with electronic monitoring, in England and Wales in each financial year since 1999-2000, was as follows:
13 Dec 2011 : Column 708W
| Financial year | Total number of orders sentenced by the courts with electronic monitoring |
European Court of Human Rights
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many cases against the UK were pending in the European Court of Human Rights on the most recent date for which information is available. [86324]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: According to the Court's published statistics, the number of applications pending against the UK was 6,197 at 18 July 2011. This total included applications for which a completed application form had not yet been received and on which no decision had yet been made about admissibility.
The vast majority of these applications will be declared inadmissible and will not result in a judgment. This is illustrated by the Court's statistics for 2010, which state that only 23 of applications against the UK resulted in judgments. For this year, up to October, the total number of judgments in applications against the UK was 10.
Formal Punishment
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many (a) male and (b) female prisoners were subject to formal punishment after adjudication in each prison in (i) 2009 and (ii) 2010. [86604]
Mr Blunt: Information in the form requested is not readily available. The offender management caseload statistics are available on the Ministry of Justice website at:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/statistics-and-data/prisons-and-probation/omcs-annual.htm
They show that in 2009, a total of 98,275 offences by male prisoners were punished at adjudications, and 6,471 offences by female prisoners. Statistics for 2010 have not yet been published.
HM Prison Ranby
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff at HM Prison Ranby have lodged a grievance in the last two years. [86453]
Mr Blunt: NOMS records indicate that 26 staff submitted grievances via their line managers at HM Prison Ranby between 7 December 2009 and 7 December 2011.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 709W
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many allegations of staff at HM Prison Ranby bringing in (a) drugs and (b) mobile telephones have been made in the last 12 months. [86454]
Mr Blunt: It would be inappropriate for operational reasons, including implications for order and control, the integrity of security systems and to ongoing investigations and operations in to staff misconduct, to provide the information requested.
NOMS will always seek to deal robustly with any member of prison staff engaging in any form of staff corruption, including the conveying of prohibited items in to prisons, and will look to use internal disciplinary and/or criminal proceedings depending on the circumstances of the case.
Judges
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what the total cost was of salaries for judges employed by the Tribunal Service to hear appeals to decisions made under the work capability assessment in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11 and (d) 2011-12; and what estimate he has made of the likely cost of such salaries in 2012-13; [86369]
(2) how many judges were employed by the Tribunal Service to hear appeals to decisions made under the work capability assessment in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10, (c) 2010-11 and (d) 2011-12; and what estimate he has made of the likely number of such judges in 2012-13. [86370]
Mr Djanogly: Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) hears appeals against Department for Work and Pensions decisions on entitlement to employment and support allowance (ESA) (decisions in which the work capability assessment is a key factor) rather than appeals against work capability assessment decisions themselves.
The Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) tribunal hears appeals on a range of benefits, of which ESA is one, and judges are not appointed to hear ESA appeals specifically.
Judges can hear a range of different appeal types in any given day so it is not possible to isolate the cost of salaries and fees specifically for hearing ESA appeals. The following table shows the cost of judicial salaries and fees paid to judges in the SSCS tribunal.
| Judicial salaries | |
|
|
Cost (£ million) |
Resource planning for 2012-13 has not yet been finalised.
Judges may be salaried or fee-paid. The number of sittings undertaken by fee-paid judges varies from judge to judge depending on their availability but subject to a minimum of 30 days per year. As they can hear a range of different appeal types in any given day, it is not possible to identify the number hearing ESA appeals specifically. The number of SSCS judges fluctuates during the course of the year due to appointments, retirements and resignations.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 710W
The data management system for the SSCS tribunal is a live database and it is not possible to extract retrospective figures for the numbers of judges hearing appeals. The following table shows approximate numbers of judges at specific points between February 2008 and December 2011 as recorded in locally-held management information.
| Number of tribunal judges February 2008 to December 2011 | ||
|
|
Number of salaried judges | Number of fee-paid judges |
Resource planning for 2012-13 has not yet been finalised.
Legal Opinion
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether his Department has commissioned external legal advice on which areas of legal aid could be taken out of the legal aid system without violating (a) treaty obligations and (b) European Convention rights; and if he will place a copy of any such advice in the Library. [86616]
Mr Djanogly: I can confirm that my Department has sought external legal advice on aspects of the legal aid reform programme but did not commission such advice specifically on which areas of legal aid could be taken out of the legal aid system without violating (a) treaty obligation and (b) European Convention rights.
Legal Opinion: Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice which chambers his Department has instructed to give advice on matters relating to provisions in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill; and what fees were paid to each such chamber in the latest period for which figures are available. [86617]
Mr Djanogly: External legal advice has been sought on aspects of the legal aid reform but no external legal advice has been sought directly on the provisions in the Bill itself. We have not classified advice pertaining to litigation as being matters relating to provisions in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Magistrates Courts: Wales
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 5 December 2011, Official Report, column 28W, on Magistrates Courts: Wales; which magistrates courts premises in Wales will be sold; and how much they each will be sold for. [85972]
Mr Djanogly: The following magistrates courts premises are for sale:
Aberdare magistrates and county court
Ammanford magistrates court
Barry magistrates court
13 Dec 2011 : Column 711W
Cardigan magistrates court
Denbigh magistrates court
Flint magistrates court
Llangefni magistrates court
Llwynypia magistrates court
Pwllheli magistrates court.
Negotiations with potential purchasers for these properties are ‘subject to contract’ and are regarded as commercial in confidence. It is therefore not possible to detail the sale price.
Offenders: Community Care
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 5 December 2011, Official Report, columns 27-29W, on offenders: community care, what the subsequent offences are for which discharged restricted patients have been convicted. [86306]
Mr Blunt: The information requested is not held centrally and could be obtained only by a member of staff manually sifting through up to 2,094 files for over 150 working days at a disproportionate cost.
However, work to obtain information on further offences committed by those restricted patients discharged since December 2009 is under way, and I will write to my hon. Friend with that information as soon as it is available.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 5 December 2011, Official Report, columns 27-29W, on offenders: community care, how many requests were made to him to release restricted patients into the community in each of the last five years; and how many such requests were granted. [86307]
Mr Blunt: It is not possible to provide the information requested relating to requests for discharge prior to 4 March 2009, the date on which an electronic caseworking system was introduced. To do so would require manual checks of 4,127 files for 98 days at disproportionate cost.
The number of requests to discharge restricted patients into the community received and granted from 4 March 2009 to 8 December 2011 are set out in the following table.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 712W
|
|
Request for discharge | Discharge agreed | Discharge refused |
The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr Clarke), will discharge restricted patients into the community only if he is satisfied, based on the clinical evidence presented, that the patient no longer requires treatment in hospital and that arrangements for his safe management in the community have been made.
Offenders: Convictions
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people were convicted of each offence listed in Schedule 16 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill who had previously been convicted of any of those offences in each of the last 10 years. [86585]
Mr Blunt: The following table shows the number of people who were convicted of an offence listed in schedule 16 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill, in the years 2001 to 2010, who at the time had at least one previous conviction for any one of these offences. Attempted offences and offences involving aiding, abetting, conspiracy and incitement are classified with the main offence, and have not been separately identified.
Offenders would not be eligible for a mandatory life sentence under clause 114 of the current Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill unless each conviction had merited a determinate sentence of at least 10 years. These figures show all convictions in cases where the offender had been convicted previously of a schedule 16 offence.
The figures relate to separate sentencing occasions; where an offender was sentenced on the same occasion for several offences it is the primary offence that has been counted. These figures have been drawn from the police's administrative IT system, the police national computer, which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the police.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 713W
13 Dec 2011 : Column 714W
13 Dec 2011 : Column 715W
13 Dec 2011 : Column 716W
Personal Injury
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice for what reason the round table consultation meeting on personal injury matters scheduled for 1 November 2011 was postponed; and on what date it will now take place. [86154]
Mr Djanogly:
I refer the right hon. Member to my previous answer given on 6 December 2011, Official Report, column 190W. The round table discussion was
13 Dec 2011 : Column 717W
postponed as the publication of the Government’s response to “Solving Disputes in the County Courts” has been delayed. The meeting will be rescheduled for the new year once the consultation response has been published.
Police Cautions
Mr Mark Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many conditional cautions were issued by police authorities in each of the last five years; and for which categories of offence. [85959]
The Attorney-General: I have been asked to reply.
Conditional Cautioning was established by the Criminal Justice Act 2003, and is operated under a statutory Code of Practice. The Code of Practice requires the Director of Public Prosecutions to issue supporting Guidance on Conditional Cautioning, which sets out the practical details of how the scheme operates. The range of offences that may be considered for a Conditional Caution are set out in the Guidance at Annex A. This annex can be found at the following link to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website:
http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/others/conditionalcautioning04annexa.html
A Crown Prosecutor decides whether a Conditional Caution is an appropriate disposal in a case, in consultation with the police.
CPS data recorded on its Case Management System, shows that nationally the number of Conditional Cautions issued in the last five years is 34,466. A breakdown of Conditional Cautions issued by police force area level between 2007 and October 2011 is set out in tables which have been deposited in the Library of the House.
The CPS commenced publishing details on its website of the Conditional Cautions issued by areas from March 2010. This is published on a quarterly basis. From the information currently available it is not possible to provide a breakdown of the numbers of Conditional Cautions issued for each category of offence by police force area level. The information does provide a breakdown of offence categories for which Conditional Cautions have been issued. A copy of the breakdown at national level has been placed in the Library of the House and is categorised as follows:
Common Assault
Assaulting a police officer
Section 4 and 4A Public Order Act 1986
Destroying or damaging property
Unlawful taking of a motor vehicle
Interference with vehicles
Section 5 Public Order Act 1986
Obstructing a police officer
Drunk and Disorderly
Indecent exposure
Simple drunk
Violent behaviour in a police station
Other summary only offences
Theft
Removal of articles from places open to the public
Abstracting electricity
False accounting
Handling stolen goods
13 Dec 2011 : Column 718W
Going equipped for stealing etc
Making off without payment
Making a false representation
Failing to disclose information
Fraud by abuse of position
Possession of articles for use in frauds
Making or supplying articles for use in frauds
Obtaining services dishonestly
Threats to destroy or damage property
Possessing anything with intent to destroy or damage property
Possession of any class of drug (consistent with personal use)
Other Forgery
Mr Mark Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent discussions he has had with the magistrates' service about the use of conditional cautions. [85989]
Mr Blunt: I met with the Magistrates Association on 24 May 2011 and 19 October 2011 to discuss wider sentencing issues.
The Minister for Policing and Criminal Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert), also met with the Magistrates Association on 29 September 2011 and 8 December 2011 to discuss proposals for the reform that included of out-of-court disposals.
Ministers will continue to engage with the Magistrates Association as we consider the development of conditional cautions policy as part of wider reforms.
Prisoners’ Release: Lie Detectors
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1043W, on prisoners' release: lie detectors, for what reason some sex offenders did not attend a polygraph test; and whether any prisoners were returned to prison for breaching their licence conditions. [86312]
Mr Blunt: The answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1043W, stated that 650 offenders were released with a (polygraph) licence condition and that 599 attended at least one polygraph session. The reasons for non-attendance were as follows:
43 were recalled to prison before the date of the test (testing took place eight to 12 weeks after release). The project did not collect data on the reasons for recall before testing but any recall must be on the basis of a breach of licence condition(s).
The other eight “no tests” were for one of the following reasons: an offender being unlawfully at large at the time of his scheduled test; medical reasons that interfered with the testing apparatus (e.g. Parkinson's disease, respiratory problems); legitimate cancellation but then the licence(s) having ended before the test could be rescheduled; the offender not attending but then the licence(s) having ended before rescheduling was possible (in such a case, enforcement action would have ensued).
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1043W, on prisoners' release: lie detectors, if he will estimate the (a) total cost to the public purse of the pilot and (b) average cost to the public purse of each lie detector test. [86314]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 719W
Mr Blunt: The total budget for the mandatory polygraph pilot was £1,135,000. This paid for a total of 1,290 tests, at an average cost of £880 each. The average cost per test includes an apportionment of all the costs arising from the pilot, in particular the research contract, testing and associated management costs, training costs for offender managers supervising offenders subject to the polygraph condition, and the cost of an administrator's post to support the pilot.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1043W, on prisoners' release: lie detectors, whether any offenders taking part in the pilot received any expenses in relation to their attendance or participation. [86315]
Mr Blunt: No incentives or rewards were offered to offenders in relation to their participation in the polygraph pilot. The testing was mandatory and offenders risked recall to custody if they did not attend for the polygraph test.
Some offenders may have had the cost of their travel between their home and the office, at which the test took place, reimbursed according to the rules of the probation trust responsible for their supervision. Trusts will reimburse some offenders for the cost of their travel to or from the office at which they are required to report, according to local policy and eligibility criteria.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1043W, on prisoners’ release: lie detectors, how many offenders who took part in the lie detector pilot have re-offended since their release from prison. [86313]
Mr Blunt: Testing in the mandatory polygraph pilot ended on 31 October 2011. A report on the evaluation of the pilot, to determine whether mandatory polygraph testing is an effective additional tool for managing the risk of harm presented by sexual offenders, is due for publication in the summer of 2012. This research will look at the number of offenders recalled as a result of a breach of licence. However, the research does not include a reconviction study because of the lack of a suitable follow-up period while the fieldwork is being undertaken.
Some licence breaches may be a result of a further offence (as opposed to a breach of specific licence conditions). The research aims to assess if polygraph testing leads to more clinically significant disclosures to the offender manager during statutory supervision. It is not a recidivism study and, therefore, does not examine directly if the polygraph leads to fewer or more incidents of alleged offending during the licence period.
Prisons: Energy
Luciana Berger: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the cost of heating and lighting was for the prison estate in the last year for which figures are available. [86081]
Mr Blunt: The most recent full year cost where figures are available is for financial year 2010-11.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 720W
The unit cost of gas and electric fluctuates in accordance with global marketing trading, therefore the prices given in this answer are the average for FY 2010-11 period.
During that period, the average cost per kWh paid for electricity to provide lighting was 3.9 pence per kWh, and 1.4 pence per kWh to provide gas for heating.
Prisons: Manpower
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the level of staff turnover was by grade at HM Prison (a) Acklington, (b) Castington, (c) Coldingley, (d) Durham, (e) Hatfield, (f) Lindholme, (g) Moorland, (h) Onley and (i) Wolds, in 2010-11. [86288]
Mr Blunt: Information on the turnover rate, broken down by grade, of directly employed permanent staff from the named establishments between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011 is contained in the following tables.
| Permanent staff turnover rates by grade , 2010-11 | ||||
| Public sector | ||||
| Establishment | Officer grades | Operational support grades | Other grades | All grades |
| Private sector | ||||
|
|
Operational management | Prison custody officers | Other grades | Total |
| Notes: 1. Information is on a headcount basis and relates directly employed staff who had a permanent contract of employment. 2. Turnover refers to staff leaving HM Prison Service and would not include staff leaving the establishments for other parts of the National Offender Management Service. 3. Hatfield staff are reported together with Moorland on the HR database and cannot be disaggregated. | ||||
Public Protection Arrangements
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people subject to multi-agency public protection arrangements have committed each type of offence. [86321]
Mr Blunt: Sections 325 and 327 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provide for specified categories of offender to be subject to the multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) established in each area. These are summarised in the following table.
| Categories of offender subject to MAPPA | |
|
|
Offender |
|
who has been sentenced to 12 months or more custody for an offence under Schedule 15 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003;or |
|
13 Dec 2011 : Column 721W
Table 2 of the Ministry of Justice Statistics bulletin ‘Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements Annual Report 2010-11’ which was published on 27 October 2011, provides information about the number of offenders in each of the three categories who were subject to MAPPA. Information for the past five years is reproduced in the following table.
| Offenders subject to MAPPA by Category on 31 March (1) | ||||
| Category 1 | Category 2 | Category 3 | ||
|
|
Registered sexual offenders | Violent offenders | Other dangerous offenders | Total |
| (1) Up to and including 2007-08 this figure was a yearly total; from 2008-09 this figure is taken at 31 March. Category 1 has always been taken on 31 March of the relevant year. | ||||
Information is not centrally available on the number of offenders who committed specific offences within these categories. The information could be obtained only by a manual search of the records held by all the local Probation Trusts and police forces of all the offenders made subject to MAPPA in the last five years. This could be done only at disproportionate cost.
Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what plans he has to bring forward proposals to amend the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974. [86100]
Nick Herbert: We intend to bring forward reforms of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 by way of amendments to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.
Reoffenders: Alternatives to Prosecution
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 1 December 2011, Official Report, column 1045W, on reoffenders: alternatives to prosecution, (1) how many offenders with 15 or more previous convictions received subsequent police cautions in each of the last five years; [86322]
(2) how many offenders have received more than one out-of-court disposal for offences committed in each of the last five years. [86323]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 722W
Mr Blunt: My hon. Friend’s request for further information has been answered using MOJ's published proven reoffending statistics. In this case proven reoffending is measured over a one year period from the point an offender receives their first caution.
Table 1 shows the number of cautioned adult offenders (aged 18 or over) with 15 or more previous convictions who then received a subsequent caution within a year, for the last five years for which data are available (2005 to 2009).
| Table 1 | |
|
|
Number of offenders |
Table 2 shows the number of cautioned adult offenders (aged 18 or over) who received more than one out of court disposal (caution) within a year for the last five years for which data are available (2005 to 2009).
| Table 2 | |
|
|
Number of offenders |
Sentencing
Jesse Norman: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps he is taking to increase the effectiveness of community sentences. [86112]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: We are already taking action on strengthening community sentences through the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill, including making Community Payback more immediate and intensive.
We have identified through this work that we need to go much further and will be consulting on reforms to ensure that community sentences effectively punish and rehabilitate offenders, in due course.
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many people are serving a life sentence; for what crimes they were convicted; and how many have already served their tariff. [86556]
Mr Blunt: On 21 June 2011, the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) published the following report: “Provisional figures relating to offenders serving indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPPs)”. This can be found on the MOJ’s website at the following address:
http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/statistics-and-data/mojstats/provisional-ipp-figures.pdf
Data on life sentenced prisoners are also included in the report.
Based on data at the end of March 2011, 8,100 people were serving a life sentence.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 723W
The category of offence for which they were imprisoned is shown in the following table.
|
|
Number |
Of these, 3,200 had passed their minimum tariff date.
Figures have been rounded to the nearest 50 except for the more detailed offence categories which are rounded to the nearest 10. Figures have been rounded separately and will therefore not always sum to the totals.
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.
Sexual Offences: Crime Prevention
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many sex offenders have undertaken courses whilst (a) in custody and (b) in the community for the purposes of preventing them from re-offending. [86316]
Mr Blunt: There are a range of interventions that could all potentially help reduce an offender's risk of further sexual offending and/or general offending.
In terms of interventions specifically designed to meet the treatment needs of sexual offenders figures for completions in the seven years to 2010-11 are as follows:
|
|
Custody SOTP completions | Community SOTP completions |
These figures are only for completions. The figures stated do not include those individuals who started but did not finish courses specified. Information on attrition rates are not kept centrally for the periods requested. Obtaining this information would only be possible through collating information from local sources and this only at disproportionate cost.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many offenders subject to sexual offences prevention orders have subsequently (a) reoffended and (b) committed further sexual offences in each of the last three years. [86318]
Mr Kenneth Clarke:
Table 7 of the Ministry of Justice statistics bulletin “Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements Annual Report 2010/11” which was published on 27 October 2011, provides information about offenders given sexual offences prevention orders (SOPOs) who are managed at level 2 and level 3 (that is, who are subject to active multi-agency management) under the multi-agency public protection arrangements
13 Dec 2011 : Column 724W
(MAPPA) and who are sent to custody for breaching the terms of their SOPO. This information is given in the following table.
Information about offenders managed at level 1 (ordinary agency management), and information about the type of further offence committed by offenders at all levels, could be obtained only by a manual search of the records of all the 5,812 offenders given a SOPO in the last three years. This could be done only at disproportionate cost.
| Returned to custody for breach of SOPO | |||
|
|
Level 2 | Level 3 | Total |
Tribunals Service: Work Capability Assessment
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether any part of the Tribunals Service is planning to operate a six-day week to hear appeals against work capability assessment decisions; and which Tribunals Service centres are planning to do so. [86371]
Mr Djanogly: Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) hears appeals against Department for Work and Pensions decisions on entitlement to employment and support allowance (ESA) (decisions in which the work capability assessment is a key factor) rather than appeals against work capability assessment decisions themselves.
The Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) tribunal hears appeals on a range of benefits, of which ESA is one. In response to significant and unforecast increases in appeals to the tribunal, HMCTS has taken a number of measures to increase its hearing capacity, by increasing the number of tribunal sessions held, increasing judicial and administrative productivity, and introducing more efficient processes and extended opening times. Total disposals by the SSCS tribunal in the period between April and October 2011 were 21% up on the same period in 2010, and 66% higher than in the same seven months in 2009.
All SSCS hearing venues hear appeals on the range of benefit types, including ESA. Saturday sittings have been introduced in a number of hearing venues. Appellants are asked whether they are willing to attend a hearing on a Saturday before their case is listed and the hearing will proceed exactly as it would on a weekday.
The following tribunal hearing venues are running Saturday sittings: Sutton, Bexleyheath, Fox Court (South London appeals), Cardiff, Wrexham, Langstone, Plymouth, Dundee and Hamilton.
The following tribunal hearing venues will run Saturday sittings from January 2012: Newcastle, South Shields, Leeds, and Sheffield.
The following tribunal hearing venues have run Saturday sittings and are evaluating the impact on clearance rates before deciding whether to run more: Watford, Wolverhampton, Leicester, Nottingham, Fox Court (North London appeals), and Anchorage House (London). Saturday sittings were also run in Liverpool during September, October and November 2011.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 725W
Young Offenders: Electronic Tagging
Mr Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will take steps to encourage courts to ensure juvenile offenders subject to curfew are also tagged electronically. [86171]
Mr Blunt: Any child or young person who comes before the court is subject to a rigorous assessment by the youth offending team which will include consideration of whether a curfew should be included in the sentence and whether this should be electronically monitored. For young children who are located in the family home it is not always considered necessary or appropriate to make a curfew subject to electronic monitoring. In these cases the child's parents would be expected to enforce the curfew reinforced by a police visit to confirm the child is at home.
Deputy Prime Minister
Electoral Register
Chris Ruane: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether (a) he and (b) officials in his Department have met members of the American Legislative Exchange Council to discuss voter registration since May 2010. [85262]
Mr Harper: Neither I nor the Deputy Prime Minister has met with members of the American Legislative Exchange Council to discuss voter registration since May 2010. Nor do we have any record of Cabinet Office officials meeting with the Council.
Health
Food Labelling
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether food and catering services in (a) his Department and (b) public bodies for which he is responsible plan to implement calorie labelling on menus and display boards. [85842]
Mr Simon Burns: In the Department's London buildings, calorie labelling is provided at the point of purchase and displayed on weekly menus within the Department. Choice, value and wellbeing boards located at the restaurant entrances provide customer information including a weekly menu with calorie labelling.
Eleven of our arm's length bodies (ALBs) do not use contracts for food and catering services. Four ALBs use services provided under contracts arranged by the Department of Health or the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the answer for these bodies is provided by the Departments' replies. The remaining five ALBs anticipate discussing the inclusion of cross government standards of best practice with their suppliers, where possible, when negotiating new contracts or earlier.
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the food and catering services in (a) his Department and (b) public bodies for which he is responsible are taking to ensure the country of origin of foods are labelled on its menus and display boards. [85843]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 726W
Mr Simon Burns: In the Department, the weekly menus located on the Choice Card at each restaurant entrance highlight the country of origin for all meat based meals. This information is also provided on the daily menu at point of purchase.
Eleven of the Department's arm's length bodies do not use contracts for food and catering services. Four arm's length bodies use services provided under contracts arranged by the Department or the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills and the answer for these bodies is provided by those Departments' replies. The remaining five arm's length bodies anticipate discussing the inclusion of cross government standards of best practice with their suppliers, where possible, when negotiating new contracts or earlier.
Departmental Visits Abroad
Debbie Abrahams: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what overseas visits (a) he and (b) each Minister in his Department has undertaken since 1 October 2011; and what the (i) purpose and (ii) date of each such visit was. [85824]
Mr Simon Burns: Details of all ministerial overseas travel are published quarterly in arrears on the Department’s website. Data from 1 January 2010 up to the end of June 2011 can be found at:
www.dh.gov.uk/en/Aboutus/MinistersandDepartmentLeaders/Departmentdirectors/DH_110759
Data for periods July to September and October to December will be published in the new year.
Parliamentary Written Questions
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many and what proportion of questions for ordinary written answer received a substantive response within (a) 10, (b) 20, (c) 30 and (d) more than 30 sitting days in the 2010-12 Session to date. [85931]
Mr Simon Burns: As of 6 December 2011, the Department has received 6,126 questions for ordinary written answer in this parliamentary Session. Of those, 5,889 or 96% received a substantive answer within five sitting days. The following table shows the number and proportion of questions in the format requested.
|
|
Number | Percentage |
The Government have committed to providing the Procedure Committee with information relating to written parliamentary question performance on a sessional basis and will provide full information to the Committee at the end of the Session. Statistics relating to Government Departments' performance for the 2009-10 parliamentary Session were previously provided to the committee and are available on the Parliament website.
13 Dec 2011 : Column 727W
E. Coli
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what steps the Government have taken to tackle outbreaks of E. coli 0157 which have taken place in the last 12 months; [85946]
(2) what steps the Government are taking to prevent outbreaks of E. coli 0157; [85947]
(3) what action was taken by his Department to inform the general public of the outbreak of E. coli 0157 which took place in December 2010; [85951]
(4) what steps he was recommended to take by the Food Standards Agency following the outbreak of E. coli 0157 in December 2010; and what steps he took. [85952]
Anne Milton: The Food Standards Agency (FSA) leads on food safety matters.
Between December 2010 and July 2011, the Health Protection Agency (HPA), Health Protection Scotland and Public Health Wales received reports of 250 cases of infection with a particular subtype of E. coli 0157 known as Phage Type 8 (PT8) distributed across England, Scotland and Wales.
This was first reported in February 2011, when the HPA reported an outbreak of E. coli 0157 of undetermined cause in its weekly Health Protection Report, and in subsequent monthly references to case numbers and reports to the HPA Board in March and May this year, all published on the HPA's website. From 3 February 2011, the FSA worked as part of the Outbreak Control Team, chaired by the HPA, to undertake comprehensive investigations into the possible cause(s) of the outbreak. This involved preliminary interviews with every identified case and detailed interviews with a number of cases. Statistical analysis of information was applied.
When those investigations revealed an association with handling raw vegetables, the FSA, in collaboration with the HPA, consumer groups and the food industry, alerted the general public to the outbreak of E. coli 0157 and its association with handling certain raw vegetables by publishing, in September, a reminder to consumers of the importance of washing all fruit and vegetables, including salad, before eating, unless labelled ready-to-eat, to ensure that they are clean.
The advice also stated that it is important to wash hands thoroughly as well as clean chopping boards, knives and other utensils after preparing vegetables to prevent cross-contamination. This targeted campaign formed part of FSA's Foodborne Disease Strategy which aims to increase awareness and understanding of general good domestic food hygiene as a means of reducing all types of foodborne disease and as a precursor to achieving changes in behaviour and improvements in domestic hygiene standards.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) when he was informed of the outbreak of E. coli 0157 which took place in December 2010; [85949]
(2) on what date the Health Protection Agency informed him that it had been notified of the outbreak of E. coli 0157 in December 2010; [85950]
13 Dec 2011 : Column 728W
(3) on what date the Food Standards Agency informed him that it had been notified of the outbreak of E. coli 0157 in December 2010. [85953]
Anne Milton: The Department was informed by the Health Protection Agency on 2 February 2011 that an outbreak control team was being called for 3 February to investigate increased numbers of cases of E. coli 0157 Phage Type 8 (PT8) reported across England, Wales and Scotland between December 2010 and July 2011, and the possibility that these could be due to a national foodborne outbreak.
The Food Standards Agency notified on 25 July 2011 about the ongoing incident of E. coli 0157 and the actions they proposed for advising consumers.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the Health Protection Agency or the Food Standards Agency was designated by his Department as the lead agency in responding to the outbreak of E. coli 0157 in December 2010. [85954]
Anne Milton: The Health Protection Agency (HPA) formed an Outbreak Control Team (OCT) in February 2011 when an outbreak of vero cytotoxin-producing E. coli (VTEC) 0157 phage type (PT) 8 infection was declared based on 50 human cases reported between December 2010 and July 2011.
The OCT was chaired by the HPA in accordance with the agreed procedures for management of outbreaks of foodborne illness. The remit of the OCT was to identify the cause and source of the infection. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is a member of the OCT.
Once an analytical study showed infection was associated with the handling of loose leeks and potatoes, the FSA was designated as the lead in the investigation into any possible links to food or food premises being the potential source of the outbreak.
Food Standards Agency: Publicity
Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the cost was of each public awareness campaign undertaken by the Food Standards Agency in the last 12 months. [85756]
Anne Milton: There have been three public awareness campaigns undertaken by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in the past 12 months. These have promoted awareness of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme; the food hygiene risks associated with vegetables; and good food hygiene practice at Christmas. The expenditure on each campaign over the past 12 months is shown in the following table together with a breakdown by United Kingdom country. The E. coli and vegetables and Christmas campaigns are not yet complete so the final amounts may exceed the figures shown. The funding of the FSA in the devolved countries is provided by the Welsh Government, Scottish Government and Northern Ireland Assembly.
|
|
£ |
13 Dec 2011 : Column 729W
Food: Radiation Exposure
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what additional assessment for radioactive contamination the Food Standards Agency (FSA) has carried out on foodstuffs imported from Japan since the incident at the Fukishima nuclear plant in March 2011; what additional costs have been incurred by the FSA in conducting such tests; and from which budget any such costs have been paid. [86005]
Anne Milton: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No. 961/2011 imposes special conditions governing the import of feed and food originating in or consigned from Japan following the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power station. This regulation requires the analysis for radioactive iodine and radioactive caesium from 10% of consignments from Fukushima, Gunma, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Miyagi, Yamanashi, Nagano, Saitama, Tokyo, Chiba, Kanagawa and Shizuoka Prefectures. In addition, 20% of consignments from all other Prefectures are also required to be analysed for these radionuclides. The tests are carried out on behalf of the Port Health Authorities and the costs are charged to the importers, so the Food Standards Agency has not had to pay out for these additional analyses.