Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

156382

registered interest
date	18/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Knives: West Yorkshire
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of all sentences handed down for (a) knife possession and (b) aggravated knife possession at (i) Keighley Magistrates' Court and (ii) Bradford Crown Court were custodial sentences in the last year for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214963
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/11/2014 answer text <p>Knives on our streets are a social scourge. Unlawful possession of a knife or offensive weapon is already a serious criminal offence (which carries a maximum 4 year custodial sentence). We are building on that to send a clear and unequivocal message that those who use a knife or offensive weapon to threaten another person are behaving in a wholly unacceptable manner and can expect an automatic custodial sentence.</p><p> </p><p>This Government introduced the offences of threatening with a knife or offensive weapon in public or in a school. And last year, the Government made changes to the Simple Cautions Guidance issued to police to restrict the use of cautions for certain offences, including knife possession, in all but exceptional circumstances. The Ministry of Justice is also legislating on these changes within the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, to make it absolutely clear that cautions should no longer be used for serious offences such as those involving a knife or offensive weapon.</p><p> </p><p>Within the sentencing framework, it is for judges and magistrates to decide the appropriate sentence in individual cases taking account of the harm the offence caused and the culpability of the offender. Under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, there is an obligation on courts, when sentencing for offences, to follow the guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council, unless it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.</p><p> </p><p>Custodial sentences for knife possession handed down at Keighley Magistrates' Court and Bradford Crown Court, for the last available year, were as follows:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><p><strong>Offences involving the possession of a knife or offensive weapon resulting in immediate custody at selected courts.</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Number of offences and percentages</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>12 months ending June 2014</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Bradford Crown Court</strong></p></td><td><p>Offences resulting in immediate custody</p></td><td><p>23</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong> </strong></p></td><td><p>Custody rate (%)</p></td><td><p><em>55</em></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong> </strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Keighley Magistrate Courts<sup>1</sup></strong></p></td><td><p>Offences resulting in immediate custody</p></td><td><p>13</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Custody rate (%)</p></td><td><p>21</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p>Source: MoJ Police National Computer (PNC)</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><p><sup>1</sup> Includes Bradford and Keighley Local Justice Area and Keighley Divison magistrates courts.</p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>In the 12 months ending June 2014 there were two aggravated knife possession offences sentenced to immediate custody at Bradford Crown Court, and there was only a single aggravated knife possession offence sentenced to immediate custody at Keighley magistrate courts.</p><p> </p><p>The figures provided have been drawn from an extract of the Police National Computer (PNC) data held by the Department. The PNC holds details of all convictions and cautions given for recordable offences committed in England and Wales. In addition, as with any large scale recording system the PNC is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 25/11/2014 17:30:54 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

156406

registered interest
date	18/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Offences against Children
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) age and (b) sex of the (i) offender and (ii) victim was in each case where an offender was given a caution for the offence of sexual activity with a child under 13 in the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214936
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/11/2014 answer text <p>This Government has taken action to end the cautions culture and to make sure serious offenders do not receive penalties seen as soft options. The use of cautions is at its lowest point for thirty years.</p><p>We are changing the law to ban simple cautions for all of the indictable only offences - the most serious criminal offences which must be tried in the Crown Court, including rape, manslaughter and robbery. We are also banning simple cautions for possession of a knife or offensive weapon, supplying Class A drugs and a range of sexual offences against children.</p><p>Further, we have also outlined a new approach to scrap all cautions, which is being piloted in Staffordshire, West Yorkshire and Leicestershire, with a view to being extended across the country.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice issues guidance on the process to be followed by the police when they are administering simple cautions for adult offenders. The latest guidance, issued in November 2013 following the Simple Cautions Review, states that the use of a simple caution for indictable-only offences, such as rape, should only be given following authorisation by a senior police officer of at least the rank of Superintendent and the Crown Prosecution Service. These will be cases where there are exceptional circumstances which would mean that it is not in the public interest to prosecute.</p><p>Data for those offenders cautioned for sexual activity with a child under 13, in England and Wales from 2009 to 2013, is available in the public domain as part of the Criminal Justice Statistics annual publication, in the table ‘CJS outcomes by offence, 2009 to 2013.’ This is available at: <a title="blocked::https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-december-2013" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-december-2013" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-december-2013</a></p><p> </p><p>Under the list of offences please select “21 Sexual activity with child under 13”.</p><p> </p><p>The age of the victims cannot be separately identified without contacting each individual police force area involved, which would be at disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 25/11/2014 17:18:50 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

156046

registered interest
date	17/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Parole
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will bring forward proposals to make prisoners released on parole from life sentences ineligible for parole again if they reoffend.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214490
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>Prisoners serving life sentences, imprisonment for public protection, certain extended determinate sentences and some historical long determinate sentences of four years or more for a serious sexual or violent crime committed prior to 5 April 2005, and also certain offenders who have been recalled for breach of their licence conditions, are subject to discretionary release by the Parole Board. A prisoner serving a life sentence or a sentence of imprisonment for public protection must serve their minimum term in full before being eligible for consideration for release. A prisoner serving an extended determinate sentence of 10 years or more must serve at least two-thirds of their custodial term before being considered for release, and a prisoner serving an historical long determinate sentence must serve at least half of their custodial term before being eligible to come before the Parole Board.</p><p> </p><p>All prisoners are subject to the same release test and they are only released (prior to any automatic release provisions which may apply in the case of determinate sentence prisoners) if the Parole Board is satisfied that it is safe to do so. Where an offender is turned down for parole his or her case is normally considered again after a period of two years in indeterminate sentence cases and one year for those serving determinate sentences.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Where an offender is released on licence but then commits a further offence and is recalled to prison, unless the prisoner is subject to a fixed term recall, he or she may serve the rest of their sentence in custody unless the Parole Board considers it safe to re-release the prisoner. Fixed term recalls are not available for offenders serving indeterminate or extended sentences. The sentence imposed for the further offence may also affect when the offender next becomes eligible to be considered for release. The seriousness of the further offence committed, the offender’s general behaviour on licence and their level of risk will, of course, be important factors which the Parole Board will take into account when considering re-release. Where a recalled offender is serving an indeterminate sentence it is possible that they will remain in prison for the rest of their life, and other offenders serving determinate sentences may remain in prison until the end of their custodial term, but it is important to review their progress regularly to determine whether or not the offender’s continued detention is necessary to protect the public.</p><p> </p><p>The Government has no current plans to change the above arrangements.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214734 question first answered 24/11/2014 17:31:52 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

156061

registered interest
date	17/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Parole
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will bring forward proposals to restrict the right of prisoners to be eligible for parole on multiple occasions.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214734
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/11/2014 answer text <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>Prisoners serving life sentences, imprisonment for public protection, certain extended determinate sentences and some historical long determinate sentences of four years or more for a serious sexual or violent crime committed prior to 5 April 2005, and also certain offenders who have been recalled for breach of their licence conditions, are subject to discretionary release by the Parole Board. A prisoner serving a life sentence or a sentence of imprisonment for public protection must serve their minimum term in full before being eligible for consideration for release. A prisoner serving an extended determinate sentence of 10 years or more must serve at least two-thirds of their custodial term before being considered for release, and a prisoner serving an historical long determinate sentence must serve at least half of their custodial term before being eligible to come before the Parole Board.</p><p> </p><p>All prisoners are subject to the same release test and they are only released (prior to any automatic release provisions which may apply in the case of determinate sentence prisoners) if the Parole Board is satisfied that it is safe to do so. Where an offender is turned down for parole his or her case is normally considered again after a period of two years in indeterminate sentence cases and one year for those serving determinate sentences.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Where an offender is released on licence but then commits a further offence and is recalled to prison, unless the prisoner is subject to a fixed term recall, he or she may serve the rest of their sentence in custody unless the Parole Board considers it safe to re-release the prisoner. Fixed term recalls are not available for offenders serving indeterminate or extended sentences. The sentence imposed for the further offence may also affect when the offender next becomes eligible to be considered for release. The seriousness of the further offence committed, the offender’s general behaviour on licence and their level of risk will, of course, be important factors which the Parole Board will take into account when considering re-release. Where a recalled offender is serving an indeterminate sentence it is possible that they will remain in prison for the rest of their life, and other offenders serving determinate sentences may remain in prison until the end of their custodial term, but it is important to review their progress regularly to determine whether or not the offender’s continued detention is necessary to protect the public.</p><p> </p><p>The Government has no current plans to change the above arrangements.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214490 question first answered 24/11/2014 17:31:52 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155538

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of offences taken into consideration for an offender has been (a) on one sentencing occasion and (b) over that offender's whole offending history.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214184
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The court has discretion as to whether or not to take offences into consideration (TICs), but where it does so the court should pass a total sentence which reflects all offending behaviour. The sentence must be just and proportionate and must not exceed the statutory maximum for the convicted offence. The guideline also says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but, again, the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on offences taken into consideration are not available from the information provided centrally to the Ministry of Justice. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice’s extract of the Police National Computer (PNC) from which MoJ uses to publish official statistics on offenders’ criminal histories, while it holds information on those offenders who were cautioned or convicted for recordable offences in England and Wales, it does not in all (most) cases record data on’ disposal qualifiers’ the variable which allows us to identify concurrent prison sentences served.</p><p> </p><p>Data on concurrent prison sentences served is therefore incomplete and unreliable. To provide the information requested, we would be required to contact all the courts in England and Wales and asking them to search individual case files in order to establish whether they hold information on concurrent prison sentences. To collate the information you require, would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214185 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:27:00 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155539

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prison Sentences
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of concurrent prison sentences served by one offender at any one time was in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214185
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The court has discretion as to whether or not to take offences into consideration (TICs), but where it does so the court should pass a total sentence which reflects all offending behaviour. The sentence must be just and proportionate and must not exceed the statutory maximum for the convicted offence. The guideline also says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but, again, the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on offences taken into consideration are not available from the information provided centrally to the Ministry of Justice. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice’s extract of the Police National Computer (PNC) from which MoJ uses to publish official statistics on offenders’ criminal histories, while it holds information on those offenders who were cautioned or convicted for recordable offences in England and Wales, it does not in all (most) cases record data on’ disposal qualifiers’ the variable which allows us to identify concurrent prison sentences served.</p><p> </p><p>Data on concurrent prison sentences served is therefore incomplete and unreliable. To provide the information requested, we would be required to contact all the courts in England and Wales and asking them to search individual case files in order to establish whether they hold information on concurrent prison sentences. To collate the information you require, would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214184 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:26:59 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155540

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Domestic Abuse
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of cases in courts marked as domestic violence incidents related to (a) male perpetrators against female partners and (b) all other forms of domestic violence in the latest period for which figures are available.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214191
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>This government is committed to tackling domestic violence and abuse and to delivering a better response for the victims of these appalling crimes.</p><p> </p><p>We have ring-fenced £40 million for victims’ services; piloted and rolled out Clare’s Law and domestic violence protection orders; extended the definition of domestic abuse to cover controlling behaviour and teenage relationships; run two successful campaigns to challenge perceptions of abuse; placed Domestic Homicide Reviews on a statutory footing to make sure lessons are learnt from individual tragedies; criminalised forced marriage and consulted on the creation of a single criminal offence of domestic abuse.</p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice Court Proceeding Database holds information on offences provided by the statute under which proceedings are brought but not all the specific circumstances of each case. Data on those proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for offences involving domestic violence, such as threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between adults are not separately identified in the data reported centrally to the Ministry of Justice. Furthermore, it is not possible to separately identify the relationship between defendant and victim, and their gender. This detailed information is not reported to Justice Statistical Analytical Services due to their size and complexity and as such, it can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 21/11/2014 14:41:48 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155541

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of custodial sentences for a second or subsequent offence were handed down to run concurrently with another custodial sentence in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214192
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The guideline says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p> </p><p>The general approach on whether sentences should be served consecutively or concurrently as it applies to determinate custodial sentences, is that concurrent sentences will ordinarily be appropriate where the offences arise out of the same incident, or where there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind. Consecutive sentences will normally be appropriate where the offences arise out of unrelated facts or incidents, the offences are of a similar kind but the overall criminality will not be sufficiently reflected by concurrent sentences, or where one or more offences qualifies for a minimum sentence and concurrent sentences would improperly undermine that minimum. The guideline deals in more detail with various circumstances including where the offender is serving an existing custodial sentence and is being sentenced to custody for another offence.</p><p> </p><p>The information requested is complex and needs to be extracted from raw data, formatted and checked. This will take some time and I will therefore write to my honourable Friend as soon as it is available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214193 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:44:50 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

155542

registered interest
date	11/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Sentencing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of offenders being sentenced to a custodial sentence for a second or subsequent offence were given a concurrent custodial sentence in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214193
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/11/2014 answer text <p>Whilst crime is falling, sentences are getting more severe. Under this Government fewer individuals are entering the criminal justice system for the first time but those who do offend are more likely to go to prison, and for longer.</p><p> </p><p>The court has discretion as to how sentences should be served. The independent Sentencing Council issued a guideline, <em>Offences Taken Into Consideration and Totality</em>, which all courts must follow so that there is a consistency of approach. The guideline says that there is no inflexible rule governing whether sentences should be structured as concurrent or consecutive components but the overriding principle is that the overall sentence must be just and proportionate.</p><p> </p><p>The general approach on whether sentences should be served consecutively or concurrently as it applies to determinate custodial sentences, is that concurrent sentences will ordinarily be appropriate where the offences arise out of the same incident, or where there is a series of offences of the same or similar kind. Consecutive sentences will normally be appropriate where the offences arise out of unrelated facts or incidents, the offences are of a similar kind but the overall criminality will not be sufficiently reflected by concurrent sentences, or where one or more offences qualifies for a minimum sentence and concurrent sentences would improperly undermine that minimum. The guideline deals in more detail with various circumstances including where the offender is serving an existing custodial sentence and is being sentenced to custody for another offence.</p><p> </p><p>The information requested is complex and needs to be extracted from raw data, formatted and checked. This will take some time and I will therefore write to my honourable Friend as soon as it is available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 214192 question first answered 21/11/2014 14:44:51 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

147615

registered interest
date	10/11/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Confiscation Orders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cars have been confiscated by order of a court under section 143 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	214091
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/11/2014 answer text <p><strong></strong></p><p /> <p>Section 143 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 allows the courts to make an order depriving an offender of his rights to articles used, or intended to be used, for the purpose of committing an offence. In specified circumstances a court may order an offender to be deprived of a vehicle under this power. Decisions whether to impose forfeiture orders in individual cases are a matter solely for our independent courts.</p><p> </p><p>The number of cars ordered to be forfeit is not centrally recorded. In 2013 the courts ordered the forfeiture of a vehicle, ship or aircraft in respect of 164 offenders, excluding summary motoring offences. Reliable information for previous years is not available.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 20/11/2014 17:19:54 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies