11 July 2013 : Column 43WS

11 July 2013 : Column 44WS

Source: Association of Chief Police Officers

(Does not include discharges for animal destruction or during police training)

Notes for tables:

⁽¹⁾Revised figures supplied for 2008/09 to 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.

⁽²⁾Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011/12 by West Yorkshire Police.

⁽³⁾Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 by South Wales Police.

⁽⁴⁾Cheshire did not record ARV operations for 2009/10.

⁽⁵⁾Cleveland did not record ARV operations for 2011/12.

⁽⁶⁾Revised figures supplied for 2011/12 by Metropolitan Police Service.

⁽⁷⁾Revised figures supplied for 2006/7 to 2011/12 by West Yorkshire Police.

⁽⁸⁾Revised figures supplied for 2010/11 to 2011/12 by South Wales Police.

⁽⁹⁾Revised firearms discharge figure for 2010/11.

Source: Home Office Public Order Unit, based on information aggregated from figures provided by individual police forces as part of the Home Office Annual Data

11 July 2013 : Column 45WS

Requirement. This was followed by a further quality assurance process involving the Home Office asking individual forces to verify and sign off their figures.

The information provided is a regular annual update of figures previously published and available on the Home Office website here:

http://tna.europarchive.org/20100419081706/http:/www.police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operational-policing/firearms/index.html.

Home Office guidance to forces for providing these figures is contained within the booklet “Annual Data Requirement, Police Personnel and Performance Data, Notes for Guidance”. For the purpose of this statistical return AFOs are deemed to be deployed when

“they are required to conduct a specific task during which their possession of a firearm (with appropriate authorisation) is a required element” [Chapter 3, paragraph 3.1 A.CPO Manual of Guidance on Police Use of Firearms].

In addition to the total number of operations, a further sub-category is required regarding those operations where the initial or sole response is by Armed Response Vehicle (ARV).

Each incident will be classed as only one operation regardless of the number of personnel/deployments or tactics employed to deal with the incident.

Deployments also include those incidents where AFOs “self-authorise”.

The number of officers authorised to use firearms is at 31 March 2012.

Justice

Determinate and Indeterminate Sentences and Recalled Prisoners

The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Chris Grayling): I have written to Sir David Calvert-Smith, chairman of the Parole Board for England and Wales, advising him that it is our intention to withdraw the Secretary of State’s directions to the Parole Board in respect of the release of determinate sentence, indeterminate sentence and recalled prisoners. The directions in respect of Parole Board recommendations on the transfer of indeterminate sentence prisoners to open conditions will remain in force.

The Parole Board has the important responsibility of determining whether some of the most dangerous prisoners in the criminal justice system can be safely released back into the community. We have recently enacted legislation in the form of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012 which contains a clear and consistent statutory release test that the board must apply in making those decisions—that is, the board must not direct a prisoner’s release unless their detention is no longer necessary for the protection of the public. The LASPO Act applies this “public protection” test to all cases which come before the board and also provides a power for the Secretary of State to amend the test by order. In view of this, I consider that it is no longer necessary or appropriate for the directions to remain in place.

In its original incarnation, the board was an advisory body which made recommendations to the Secretary of State who was responsible for the final decisions on

11 July 2013 : Column 46WS

release. It was in this context that the power for the Secretary of State to issue directions to the board was established. Since then, however, the board has evolved into an independent decision-making body. I believe that it is more appropriate, therefore, for the board to set its own guidance in relation to the application of the statutory release test that Parliament has put in place.

We are, therefore, withdrawing the existing directions in favour of the Parole Board applying its own guidance. The board issued guidance for its members in November 2012 which sets out how the statutory release test in the LASPO Act is to be applied. In addition, the board has produced guidance which lists the factors to be taken into account by panels when considering whether to release different categories of prisoner. This list largely reflects the same factors set out in the Secretary of State’s directions, so in practical terms the withdrawal of the directions will not materially change how the board approaches its release decisions. I should like to emphasise that the protection of the public will remain at the heart of every release decision made by the board.

Copies of the Parole Board’s guidance have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Transport

Dartford/Thurrock River Crossing (Fees)

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond): On 5 November 2012 the Highways Agency published detailed proposals to introduce post-payment and enforcement measures that would support the introduction of “free-flow” charging at the crossing. To support this change simultaneously the Department published detailed proposals to provide fair and effective enforcement of free-flow road user charging in accordance with the Transport Act 2000. Both consultations ran for a period of 12 weeks, and closed on 28 January 2013.

The Dartford crossing is vital to the local and national economy and introducing a free-flow charging arrangement will reduce congestion and improve journeys for the thousands of motorists and businesses who use the crossing every day. Following careful consideration of all the points made during both consultations I am today announcing the Department’s and Highways Agency’s conclusions and the intended actions.

The majority of respondents were supportive of the proposals to enable enforcement against drivers who do not pay a road-user charge. We are now able to take forward the legislation to make sure charges will be able to be effectively enforced when free-flow charging is introduced at the crossing next year.

Subject to the completion of the necessary parliamentary processes, the Department intends to implement the road-user charging scheme regulations and the agency will implement the new Dartford/Thurrock river crossing charging scheme order.

The full response to the agency’s charging scheme order consultation can be found on the Highways Agency’s website, and the Department’s response to the enforcement regulations consultation can be found on the Department

11 July 2013 : Column 47WS

for Transport’s pages of the Gov.uk website. Both these documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Motoring Services Strategy

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond): I am pleased to announce today the next phase of the project to explore establishing a new commercial model for the Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA).

Departments have been challenged to think about how they commission and deliver services with a view to looking at innovative options. We have looked at the VCA business model and have tested a range of options that would enable the business to grow and contribute to the wider UK economy while continuing to deliver its statutory functions, providing high-quality and valued services to its customers. We set out this proposition for consultation in the motoring services strategy late last year. The new commercial model should also seek to offer new opportunities to VCA staff, who will be essential to the continued success of the business going forward.

The Department for Transport is now going to start a market engagement exercise to further test the preferred option of a joint venture with a private sector partner. We expect to make a decision in the autumn on whether to proceed with a formal procurement.

Rail Franchising

The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr Patrick McLoughlin): I am today laying before the House the Government’s response to the Brown review of the rail franchising programme.

11 July 2013 : Column 48WS

Richard Brown’s review was one of two independent reviews I commissioned following my decision in October last year to cancel the inter-city west coast (ICWC) franchise competition and put the wider franchising programme on hold. His review considered the wider implications for the rail franchising programme of the position reached on the ICWC competition, taking into account the findings and recommendations of the Laidlaw inquiry which had focused on establishing what had gone wrong with the ICWC procurement. The report of the Brown review was laid before the House on 10 January this year.

The review was a thorough examination of the issues led by a highly respected industry figure. I welcomed its publication and its conclusion that franchising is a fundamentally sound approach to securing the provision of passenger rail services on which so many people rely.

The review made a number of important detailed recommendations for improving the way franchises are specified, competed for and managed. The Government’s response broadly accepts those recommendations. It records the significant progress we have made over the last six months in implementing them—including restarting the franchise programme, publishing a full revised franchising programme and prior information notice on 26 March and a franchise competition guide on 25 June, and strengthening the capability and governance of the Department’s franchising organisation. We have set out a high-level response to each of the many specific recommendations made—indicating where relevant when and where more detailed information will be provided.

I am confident that this response and the actions we have already taken provide the industry with the clarity and confidence it needs about the way forward for rail franchising, which remains an integral part of our plans to deliver a better and more efficient railway for passengers and the taxpayer.