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 attachment file name title
tabling member	label

Search

1423307

	registered interest
	date	18/02/2022
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Criminal Proceedings
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the (a) mean and (b) median number of days taken from offence to completion of criminal cases for (i) Crown and (ii) Magistrates Court in England and Wales, broken down by individual court and region for each of the last three years for which figures are available.
	tabling member constituency	Croydon North
	tabling member printed	Steve Reed
	uin	125187
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2022 answer text <ul><li>Please see the attached tables with the mean and median timeliness from offence to completion, as follows:</li></ul><p>o <strong>Table 1</strong> – Days from offence to completion at Crown Court, by year (the latest available data, broken down by region and Crown Court)</p><p>o <strong>Table 2</strong> – Days from offence to completion at Magistrates, by year (the latest available data, broken down by region and Local Justice Area (LJA))</p><p> </p><p>The pandemic is the primary cause of the increased caseload in our courts. The outstanding caseload reduced significantly pre-pandemic – from over 55,000 in late 2014 to c.33,000 in late 2018.</p><p> </p><ul><li>Timeliness from offence to completion is a complex picture as it involves several partners across the Criminal Justice System. The Police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have both committed to a programme of work on more efficient case progression, more information on which can be found here: <a href="https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/national-case-progression-commitment-college-policing-national-police-chiefs-council" target="_blank">National Case Progression Commitment: College of Policing, National Police Chiefs' Council and Crown Prosecution Service, March 2021 | The Crown Prosecution Service (cps.gov.uk)</a></li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>We invested a quarter of a billion pounds to support recovery in the last financial year (20/21); extended 32 Crown Nightingale courtrooms until the end of March 2022; opened two new ‘super courtrooms’ in Manchester and Loughborough; removed the limit on the number of days the Crown Court can sit in the 21/22 financial year, and our rapid roll out of video technology, which equipped over 70 per cent of all courtrooms with the video hardware to use Cloud Video Platform, enabled up to 20,000 cases to be heard virtually each week at the height of the pandemic.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>These measures are working – the backlog in the Crown Court has reduced from around 61,000 cases in June 2021 to around 58,400 cases at the end of December 2021 (Source: HMCTS Monthly MI).</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>In the magistrates’ court, the criminal caseload has fallen from 436,000 in June 2020 to 375,700 in December 2021 – a reduction of 14% (Source: HMCTS Monthly MI).</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Looking ahead, as part of the Spending Review, we will be investing £477 million in the Criminal Justice System over the next three years which will allow us to reduce Crown Court backlogs to an estimated 53,000 by March 2025.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>In the next financial year we expect to get through 20% more Crown Court cases than we did pre-Covid (117,000 in 22/23 compared to 97,000 in 19/20).</li><li>We are also extending magistrates’ court sentencing powers from 6 to 12 months for a single Triable Either Way offence to allow more cases to be heard in the magistrates' court.</li></ul> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 24/02/2022 17:59:20 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge attachment 1 file name 2022-02-23 PQ 125187 data V2.xlsx title Table
	tabling member	4268 label Biography information for Steve Reed

1582457

	registered interest
	date	31/01/2023
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Young Offenders
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on how many times an individual child was removed from association for periods (a) up to three days, (b) up to 14 days, (c) up to 21 days, (d) up to 42 days and (e) more than 42 days for each juvenile young offender institution in the 12 months to31 March 2022; and if he will break down those removals by the (i) age, (ii) sex, (iii) ethnicity of the children removed from association, (iv) number of children who were classed as disabled and (v) recorded reasons for those removals.
	tabling member constituency	Cardiff North
	tabling member printed	Anna McMorrin
	uin	136817
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/02/2023 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>Young people are only temporarily separated from their peers as a very last resort to protect others. When this happens, they receive extra support from specially trained staff. We are bolstering training for every frontline officer, backed by £5m of funding, to improve care and support for all those in custody. Children are never separated as a punishment. The information relating to the number of separations is provided below: <table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>Cookham Wood</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Feltham</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Parc</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Werrington</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Wetherby - Main</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Wetherby - Keppel Unit</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Period of Removal</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(a) up to three days</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p>86</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>7</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(b) up to 14 days</p></td><td><p>138</p></td><td><p>80</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p>68</p></td><td><p>100</p></td><td><p>16</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(c) up to 21 days</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(d) up to 42 days</p></td><td><p>20-25</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(e) more than 42 days</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Total</p></td><td><p>225</p></td><td><p>112</p></td><td><p>95</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p>177</p></td><td><p>27</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>(i) Age</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>15</p></td><td><p>14</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>6</p></td><td><p>12</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>16</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>34</p></td><td><p>29</p></td><td><p>46</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>112</p></td><td><p>65</p></td><td><p>45</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>87</p></td><td><p>19</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>18+</p></td><td><p>30</p></td><td><p>15-20</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td><td><p>7</p></td><td><p>27</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Total</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>110</p></td><td><p>91</p></td><td><p>94</p></td><td><p>172</p></td><td><p>27</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>(ii) Sex</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Male</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>110</p></td><td><p>91</p></td><td><p>94</p></td><td><p>170-180</p></td><td><p>22-27</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Female</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>(iii) Ethnicity</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Asian</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Black</p></td><td><p>115</p></td><td><p>62</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>32</p></td><td><p>47</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Mixed</p></td><td><p>22</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>12</p></td><td><p>12</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Not Stated</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Other</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>White</p></td><td><p>50</p></td><td><p>22</p></td><td><p>42</p></td><td><p>40</p></td><td><p>93</p></td><td><p>23</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Total</p></td><td><p>210</p></td><td><p>110</p></td><td><p>91</p></td><td><p>94</p></td><td><p>172</p></td><td><p>27</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>(iv) Disability</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="7"><p>For the period in question, we are not able to provide information on a child’s or young person's disability status at the point they were separated, as this is a new reporting function, which came into effect for those who entered custody after April 2021.</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>(v) Reason for Removal</strong></p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Prevent Harm to Others</p></td><td><p>122</p></td><td><p>100</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>145</p></td><td><p>14</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Prevent Harm to Self</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>5-10</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>10-15</p></td><td><p>#</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Self-Isolation</p></td><td><p>64</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>8-13</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Pending Adjudication</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>89</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Other</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>#</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Grand Total</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>225</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>112</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>95</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>99</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>177</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>27</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><em>Notes:</em><ul><li><em>Source: bespoke returns from establishments, collated monthly. </em></li><li><em>Table includes completed separations ending on or after 1 April 2021 and those starting on or before 31 March 2022. </em></li><li><em># indicates a value of 5 or fewer, which has been suppressed in order to prevent the possible identification of individuals.</em></li><li><em>Where a suppressed value could be calculated from other values, secondary suppression has been applied by providing a range that the true figure lies within.</em></li><li><em>Breakdowns (i) to (v) do not include cases where the information is not known.</em></li><li><em>This is internal management information and subject to change.</em></li></ul></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> answering member constituency East Hampshire answering member printed Damian Hinds question first answered 13/02/2023 15:09:33 answering member 3969 label Biography information for Damian Hinds
	tabling member	4632 label Biography information for Anna McMorrin

1551067

	registered interest
	date	13/12/2022
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Prisons: Drugs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the number of drug overdoses at prisons in each of the last three years.
	tabling member constituency	Croydon North
	tabling member printed	Steve Reed
	uin	109595
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/12/2022 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Number of self-harm incidents due to drug overdoses</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2019</p></td><td><p>2,295</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2020</p></td><td><p>2,158</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2021</p></td><td><p>2,273</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>We are committed to doing all we can to prevent deaths from drug overdoses in prison. We’ve outlined in both our Prisons Strategy Whitepaper and the Government’s 10-year drug strategy ‘From Harm to Hope’ (2021) how we will achieve this. We have committed to opening Drug Recovery Wings in prisons, introduced Problem Solving Courts and we supply life-saving naloxone medication to staff in prisons and in Approved Premises to help prevent unnecessary opioid deaths.</p><p>Naloxone is a medication used to reverse or reduce the effects of opioids. It is currently carried by healthcare staff in prisons to administer where opiate overdose is suspected.</p><p>We propose to implement Naloxone in all prisons and probation sites in England and Wales and to train all new entrants and 30% of existing staff to administer Naloxone and to recognise the signs of overdose. Existing staff will be asked to volunteer to administer Naloxone.</p><p>Consistent with National Statistics on these prison incidents, as published in <em>Safety in Custody</em>, figures do not include incidents in Secure Training Centres.</p><p>In prisons, as in the community, it is not possible to count self-harm incidents with absolute accuracy.</p><p>In prison custody, however, such incidents are more likely to be detected and counted. Care needs to be taken when comparing figures shown here with other sources where data may be less complete.</p><p>Incidents where self-harm was due to a drug overdose can include multiple individuals; the figures in the table count the number of incidents where an overdose occurred rather than the number of individuals that overdosed.</p><p>Includes self-harm options listed as &quot;illegal drugs&quot;, &quot;own medication&quot; and &quot;other persons medication&quot;</p><p><strong>Data Sources and Quality</strong></p><p>These figures have been drawn from the HMPPS Incident Reporting System. Care is taken when processing and analysing returns but the detail is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Although shown to the last case, the figures may not be accurate to that level.</p><p>The data only includes self-harm incidents collated centrally; identifying any wider incidents that lead to a hospitalisation and have a connection to drugs would exceed the cost threshold as it would require reading through the text of each incident.</p><p>For a breakdown of Self Inflicted Deaths by method (including overdose), please see section 1.8 in the below published data from Safety in Custody: <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1113633/Deaths_in_prison_custody_1978_to_2021.xlsx" target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1113633/Deaths_in_prison_custody_1978_to_2021.xlsx</a></p><p>Table 1.1 in the above publication gives the number of other/non-natural deaths per year.</p><p>In the case of drug related deaths where no intent to self-harm has been discovered, the death has been classified as “Other: Non-natural”, however this category also includes other accidental deaths where drugs were not present.</p><p>‘Other: Non-Natural’ deaths include accidental and other difficult to classify deaths including those for which further information is awaited. Some of the most recent two years figures are expected to be reclassified as natural causes or self-inflicted deaths.</p> answering member constituency East Hampshire answering member printed Damian Hinds question first answered 19/12/2022 16:37:24 answering member 3969 label Biography information for Damian Hinds
	tabling member	4268 label Biography information for Steve Reed

1700966

	registered interest
	date	15/04/2024
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the average time from sentence to start of community payback in each year since 2015.
	tabling member constituency	Mitcham and Morden
	tabling member printed	Dame Siobhain McDonagh
	uin	21514
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/04/2024 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Average days from sentence to start of Community Payback</p></td><td><p>Number of offenders who did not complete their first session of Community Payback</p></td><td><p>Total caseload</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2021</p></td><td><p>87</p></td><td><p>8,830</p></td><td><p>44,108</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2022</p></td><td><p>63</p></td><td><p>7,822</p></td><td><p>47,421</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2023</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>6,604</p></td><td><p>48,058</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The dataset includes all offenders starting an order with a community payback requirement between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2023. The start of the community payback requirement has been defined as either the first attended session of group work, or an individual placement, or the completion of Employment, Training and Education work.</p><p>There are a variety of reason why a person hasn't completed their first community payback session. These include receiving a custodial sentence or remanded into custody, recall to prison, a warrant for their arrest, deportation, suitability of sentence and non -compliance. For issues of suitability or non-compliance requirements are returned to court for appropriate action to be taken.</p><p>People whose first community payback session took place over a year from their order start date have been excluded from the average days calculation as additional court work would need to be completed to ensure that the first session was worked within a lawful period.</p><p>People who have not completed a first work session have also been excluded from the average day calculation, along with those where a first work session has been recorded after the community payback requirement was terminated.</p><p>The 2023 figure is subject to change as offenders sentenced in late 2023 will still have time to complete their first community payback session.</p><p>Centrally collected data are only available from 2021.</p><p>Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 23,256 offenders did not complete their first session of community payback.</p><p>This figure is subject to change as offenders sentenced in late 2023 will still have time to complete their first community payback session.</p><p>Data as at 15 April 2024. Data are sourced from nDelius and while these data have been assured as much as practical, as with any large administrative dataset, the data should not be assumed to be accurate to the last value presented.</p> answering member constituency Charnwood answering member printed Edward Argar grouped question UIN 21515 question first answered 23/04/2024 13:55:12 answering member 4362 label Biography information for Edward Argar
	tabling member	193 label Biography information for Dame Siobhain McDonagh

1700967

	registered interest
	date	15/04/2024
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people have not completed their first session of community payback.
	tabling member constituency	Mitcham and Morden
	tabling member printed	Dame Siobhain McDonagh
	uin	21515
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/04/2024 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Average days from sentence to start of Community Payback</p></td><td><p>Number of offenders who did not complete their first session of Community Payback</p></td><td><p>Total caseload</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2021</p></td><td><p>87</p></td><td><p>8,830</p></td><td><p>44,108</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2022</p></td><td><p>63</p></td><td><p>7,822</p></td><td><p>47,421</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2023</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>6,604</p></td><td><p>48,058</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>The dataset includes all offenders starting an order with a community payback requirement between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2023. The start of the community payback requirement has been defined as either the first attended session of group work, or an individual placement, or the completion of Employment, Training and Education work.</p><p>There are a variety of reason why a person hasn't completed their first community payback session. These include receiving a custodial sentence or remanded into custody, recall to prison, a warrant for their arrest, deportation, suitability of sentence and non -compliance. For issues of suitability or non-compliance requirements are returned to court for appropriate action to be taken.</p><p>People whose first community payback session took place over a year from their order start date have been excluded from the average days calculation as additional court work would need to be completed to ensure that the first session was worked within a lawful period.</p><p>People who have not completed a first work session have also been excluded from the average day calculation, along with those where a first work session has been recorded after the community payback requirement was terminated.</p><p>The 2023 figure is subject to change as offenders sentenced in late 2023 will still have time to complete their first community payback session.</p><p>Centrally collected data are only available from 2021.</p><p>Between 2021 and 2023, a total of 23,256 offenders did not complete their first session of community payback.</p><p>This figure is subject to change as offenders sentenced in late 2023 will still have time to complete their first community payback session.</p><p>Data as at 15 April 2024. Data are sourced from nDelius and while these data have been assured as much as practical, as with any large administrative dataset, the data should not be assumed to be accurate to the last value presented.</p> answering member constituency Charnwood answering member printed Edward Argar grouped question UIN 21514 question first answered 23/04/2024 13:55:12 answering member 4362 label Biography information for Edward Argar
	tabling member	193 label Biography information for Dame Siobhain McDonagh

1137713

	registered interest
	date	09/07/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Youth Offending Teams: Finance
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	Whether he plans to allocate additional funding to youth offending teams.
	tabling member constituency	Stockton North
	tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
	uin	911816
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/07/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>We value the vital work Youth Offending Teams do with children who have offended, and the work they do to prevent offending. The Youth Justice Board’s total funding this year for frontline services including Youth Offending Teams is £72.2m. This is greater than last year’s funding, which was £71.6m.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Of the £72.2m, £70.7m has been allocated to the core grant for Youth Offending Teams and £1.5m to frontline service improvement.</p> answering member constituency Charnwood answering member printed Edward Argar question first answered 09/07/2019 16:01:26 answering member 4362 label Biography information for Edward Argar
	tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1129828

	registered interest
	date	04/06/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Prisons: Education
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to improve the (a) availability and (b) quality of education for adult prisoners.
	tabling member constituency	Bexleyheath and Crayford
	tabling member printed	Sir David Evennett
	uin	259892
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/06/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>We set out our intentions to reform prison education in the Education and Employment Strategy, published in May last year. Our new education programme, designed to improve the quality of prison education and give prisoners a better chance of gaining employment on release, commenced on 1 April. Prison governors are responsible for education provision in their prisons. They control the education budget, decide the curriculum, and have helped to choose the main providers. In addition, our prison education Dynamic Purchasing System allows governors to commission specific, short-term education provision to meet specialised learning needs of individual prisoners, and to commission training to address employers’ particular requirements. This will help prisoners to take full advantage of employment opportunities on release. The new contracts, and increased local and national management of the education providers, will provide better and more immediate information on the quality of the service being delivered and provide a better mechanism for governors to manage performance. We do not hold data on re-offending outcomes in relation to education engagement in the form requested, and could not obtain it without incurring disproportionate cost.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 259893 question first answered 12/06/2019 16:47:34 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1198 label Biography information for Sir David Evennett

1129829

	registered interest
	date	04/06/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Reoffenders
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of former prisoners who (a) attended and (b) did not attend education programmes in prison reoffended after release in each of the last three years.
	tabling member constituency	Bexleyheath and Crayford
	tabling member printed	Sir David Evennett
	uin	259893
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 12/06/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>We set out our intentions to reform prison education in the Education and Employment Strategy, published in May last year. Our new education programme, designed to improve the quality of prison education and give prisoners a better chance of gaining employment on release, commenced on 1 April. Prison governors are responsible for education provision in their prisons. They control the education budget, decide the curriculum, and have helped to choose the main providers. In addition, our prison education Dynamic Purchasing System allows governors to commission specific, short-term education provision to meet specialised learning needs of individual prisoners, and to commission training to address employers’ particular requirements. This will help prisoners to take full advantage of employment opportunities on release. The new contracts, and increased local and national management of the education providers, will provide better and more immediate information on the quality of the service being delivered and provide a better mechanism for governors to manage performance. We do not hold data on re-offending outcomes in relation to education engagement in the form requested, and could not obtain it without incurring disproportionate cost.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 259892 question first answered 12/06/2019 16:47:34 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1198 label Biography information for Sir David Evennett

1130929

	registered interest
	date	10/06/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Offences against Children: Internet
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many UK nationals have been convicted of offences relating to the online sexual exploitation of children in each of the last five years.
	tabling member constituency	Gedling
	tabling member printed	Vernon Coaker
	uin	262240
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/06/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>We have interpreted ‘sexual exploitation of children’ as child sexual abuse offences, as sexual exploitation of children is not specifically defined in legislation. The Ministry of Justice has published information (<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/804510/HO-code-tool-principal-offence-2018.xlsx" target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/804510/HO-code-tool-principal-offence-2018.xlsx</a>) on the number of defendants found guilty of child sexual abuse offences and average custodial sentence lengths, however it is not possible to identify the nationality of the defendant as this information is not held in the courts proceedings database. Additionally, centrally held court and prisons data does not distinguish online child sexual abuse offences from all child sexual abuse offences. Information on offences that involve online sexual exploitation of children may be held on record, however to identify these records would be at a disproportionate cost. I have made no assessment of sentencing for offences relating to the online sexual exploitation of children. Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for the Courts, who must follow any relevant guidelines produced by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales. The Sentencing Council has a duty under section 128 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to monitor the operation and effect of its guidelines. Child sexual abuse is abhorrent and rightly carries tough sentences including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 provides a range of offences with robust sentences to tackle the scourge of child sexual exploitation in all its forms. Sentencing is a matter for the independent judiciary, who take into account the full facts of each case.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 262241 262242 question first answered 18/06/2019 14:52:50 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	360 label Biography information for Lord Coaker

1130930

	registered interest
	date	10/06/2019
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Offences against Children: Sentencing
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of sentences for people convicted of offences relating to the online sexual exploitation of children; and if he will make a statement.
	tabling member constituency	Gedling
	tabling member printed	Vernon Coaker
	uin	262241
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/06/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>We have interpreted ‘sexual exploitation of children’ as child sexual abuse offences, as sexual exploitation of children is not specifically defined in legislation. The Ministry of Justice has published information (<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/804510/HO-code-tool-principal-offence-2018.xlsx" target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/804510/HO-code-tool-principal-offence-2018.xlsx</a>) on the number of defendants found guilty of child sexual abuse offences and average custodial sentence lengths, however it is not possible to identify the nationality of the defendant as this information is not held in the courts proceedings database. Additionally, centrally held court and prisons data does not distinguish online child sexual abuse offences from all child sexual abuse offences. Information on offences that involve online sexual exploitation of children may be held on record, however to identify these records would be at a disproportionate cost. I have made no assessment of sentencing for offences relating to the online sexual exploitation of children. Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for the Courts, who must follow any relevant guidelines produced by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales. The Sentencing Council has a duty under section 128 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to monitor the operation and effect of its guidelines. Child sexual abuse is abhorrent and rightly carries tough sentences including life imprisonment for the most serious offences. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 provides a range of offences with robust sentences to tackle the scourge of child sexual exploitation in all its forms. Sentencing is a matter for the independent judiciary, who take into account the full facts of each case.</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland grouped question UIN 262240 262242 question first answered 18/06/2019 14:52:50 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	360 label Biography information for Lord Coaker