Show Search Form

Search Results

human indexable	true false
published	true false
registered interest	true false
answer date	exactly: or between: and
date	exactly: or between: and
date tabled	exactly: or between: and
ddp created	exactly: or between: and
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
ddp modified
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature
parliament number
question first answered
question text
session
session number
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
title
type
uin
version
written parliamentary question type
answer	is ministerial correction true false answer text question first answered
creator	label
publisher
tabling member	label

Search

1128446

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	04/06/2019
	date	23/05/2019
	date tabled	23/05/2019
	ddp created	24/05/2019 09:05:27
	answering body	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	90
	answering dept short name	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	answering dept sort name	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	ddp modified	24/05/2019 12:25:09 05/06/2019 10:07:01
	hansard heading	Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority: Buildings
	house id	1
	identifier	257645
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	05/06/2019 09:35:36
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, pursuant to the Answer of 20 May 2019 to Question 253493 on Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority: Location, how many staff are located in the new premises at 85 Strand; how much floor space those staff occupy; at what rate per square metre; which locations were considered outside London for new premises; and what the comparable cost would have been in locating those staff outside London.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Warley
	tabling member printed	John Spellar
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 257645
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	257645
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>I have asked IPSA to reply.</p><p>IPSA currently has 69 members of staff. It included in its office requirements space for up to 76 staff in order to provide flexibility for periods where there is a higher volume of work and therefore a need for additional temporary staff, such as General Election periods.</p><p>To disclose the size of the office or rate paid per square metre would be prejudicial to commercial interests. IPSA’s annual accounts are laid in Parliament and published each year, and will provide information about operational costs.</p><p>Before choosing its offices at 85 Strand, IPSA considered potential premises in Croydon and Milton Keynes, as well as Stratford and Canary Wharf in London, but determined that the selected location provided the prospect of better support to MPs and better value for money for the taxpayer.</p> question first answered 05/06/2019 09:35:36
	creator	318 label Biography information for John Spellar
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	318 label Biography information for John Spellar

1132886

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:28:35
	answering body	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	90
	answering dept short name	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	answering dept sort name	Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 16:45:08 25/06/2019 15:28:03
	hansard heading	Members: Internet
	house id	1
	identifier	266190
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	25/06/2019 14:56:09
	question text	To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, what estimate his Department has made on the potential cost incurred by MPs' offices in answering web-based inquiries generated by (a) 38 Degrees and (b) other websites in the last 12 months.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Southampton, Itchen
	tabling member printed	Royston Smith
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266190
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266190
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>I have asked IPSA to provide this reply.</p><p>IPSA is the statutory body responsible for regulating and paying the salaries, business costs and expenses of MPs. This includes regulating and paying the salaries of staff members who work for MPs.</p><p> </p><p>Each MP is allocated a budget from which their staffing costs are paid. The current staffing budget for MPs in London constituencies is £166,930; and for non-London MPs, the budget is £155,930.</p><p> </p><p>In the 2018-19 financial year, MPs spent £91.1 million on staffing costs, including employment costs and other staffing services.</p><p> </p><p>IPSA does not hold information on the cost attributable to staff members carrying out specific activities such as responding to web-based inquiries generated by 38 Degrees or other websites.</p><p> </p> question first answered 25/06/2019 14:56:09
	creator	4478 label Biography information for Royston Smith
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	4478 label Biography information for Royston Smith

1131079

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	12/06/2019
	date	10/06/2019
	date tabled	10/06/2019
	ddp created	10/06/2019 22:03:00
	answering body	Church Commissioners
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	9
	answering dept short name	Church Commissioners
	answering dept sort name	Church Commissioners
	ddp modified	11/06/2019 14:55:05 13/06/2019 15:41:01
	hansard heading	Church of England: Scotland
	house id	1
	identifier	262403
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	13/06/2019 15:10:01
	question text	To ask the right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, what estimate the Church of England has made of the profits from its operations in Scotland in the last 12 months for which information is available.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Edinburgh North and Leith
	tabling member printed	Deidre Brock
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 262403
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	262403
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Church Commissioners recieved a total net income of £8,858,429 from forestry and windfarms between 1st January 2018 to the 31st December 2018.</p><p>We are unable to provide a figure for profit in the equivalent period as liabilities, including for restocking, will be borne over a number of years and the cost of purchasing the asset should be taken into consideration.</p><p> </p> question first answered 13/06/2019 15:10:01
	creator	4417 label Biography information for Deidre Brock
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	4417 label Biography information for Deidre Brock

1131249

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/06/2019
	date	11/06/2019
	date tabled	11/06/2019
	ddp created	11/06/2019 17:57:03
	answering body	Church Commissioners
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	9
	answering dept short name	Church Commissioners
	answering dept sort name	Church Commissioners
	ddp modified	12/06/2019 14:15:12 13/06/2019 14:26:04
	hansard heading	Churches: Coal
	house id	1
	identifier	263116
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	13/06/2019 13:54:40
	question text	To ask the right hon. Member for Meriden, representing the Church Commissioners, what assessment she made of the economic effect on churches and vicarages of the ban on house coal.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 263116
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	263116
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The economic effect on churches and vicarages of the ban on the use of house coal has been negligible.</p><p> </p><p>Bishops’ see houses and vicarages have not used house coal for many years and the Church Commissioners are not aware of any churches that still use coal as a form of heating.</p><p>The Church of England supports the aim of the Government to improve air quality and public health; the Church has launched several initiatives to support this policy, which include planting more trees on its properties and encouraging churches to increase the biodiversity of their churchyards and green spaces.</p><p> </p> question first answered 13/06/2019 13:54:40
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1129073

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	05/06/2019
	date	03/06/2019
	date tabled	03/06/2019
	ddp created	03/06/2019 16:34:56
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	04/06/2019 15:55:17 12/06/2019 15:44:01
	hansard heading	Sexual Offences: Disclosure of Information
	house id	1
	identifier	259168
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	12/06/2019 15:12:37
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether the Sub-Group to the Criminal Justice Board and Review of the Criminal Justice Response to Rape and Serious Sexual Offences plans to make an assessment of the (a) effectiveness and (b) effect on survivors of rape of the legal guidance issued by the CPS on rape and sexual offence in relation to disclosure of medical records and counselling notes.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Brighton, Pavilion
	tabling member printed	Caroline Lucas
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 259168
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	259168
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service is working with the police, government departments and third sector stakeholders on the Government’s review into how the criminal justice system responds to rape and serious sexual offences. The Crown Prosecution Service is committed to working with all involved in the Review, including stakeholders, to identify and address any issues that are identified.</p><p>Complainants are entitled to protection from unnecessary and unjustified invasion of their private lives. CPS guidance is clear that where it is a reasonable line of enquiry in the investigation, the police should obtain complainants’ informed consent to gain access to medical records and counselling notes. Prosecutors will robustly apply the relevant statutory provisions when deciding whether such material should be disclosed to the defence.</p> question first answered 12/06/2019 15:12:37
	creator	3930 label Biography information for Caroline Lucas
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	3930 label Biography information for Caroline Lucas

1129271

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	06/06/2019
	date	03/06/2019
	date tabled	03/06/2019
	ddp created	03/06/2019 16:43:46
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	05/06/2019 14:45:10 06/06/2019 11:49:02
	hansard heading	Rape: Mental Health Services
	house id	1
	identifier	259357
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	06/06/2019 11:17:26
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, if the Government will review the CPS guidance given to victims of rape on seeking therapy.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Ealing Central and Acton
	tabling member printed	Dr Rupa Huq
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 259357
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	259357
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	NamedDay
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>It is vital that victims are confident they will be treated with the utmost fairness by the justice system. CPS committed, as part of the cross-Government Victims Strategy, to launch new guidance on pre-trial therapy to reduce the perception amongst victims, therapists and criminal justice professionals that it will damage the prosecution case. This is due to be published this summer. Additionally, a new toolkit for prosecutors on the support that an individual suffering from a mental health condition will require was launched in August 2018.</p> question first answered 06/06/2019 11:17:26
	creator	4511 label Biography information for Dr Rupa Huq
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	4511 label Biography information for Dr Rupa Huq

1130703

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	11/06/2019
	date	07/06/2019
	date tabled	07/06/2019
	ddp created	07/06/2019 14:10:56
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	10/06/2019 15:15:16 17/06/2019 15:41:01
	hansard heading	Rape: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	identifier	261500
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	17/06/2019 15:09:46
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of cases of rape reported to the CPS were administratively finalised in each year since 2010.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Ashfield
	tabling member printed	Gloria De Piero
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 261500
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	261500
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>It is important to stress that ’administrative finalisation’ is not a prosecutorial decision. It is an administrative process where cases are closed on CPS’ electronic case management system. It does not necessarily mean the proceedings are at an end. Such cases may be reopened, if at a later date, new material is provided to the prosecution enabling a charging decision to be made.</p><p> </p><p>Proceedings are administratively finalised when:</p><p> </p><ul><li>The police seek early investigative advice from the CPS and did not resubmit the case to the CPS for a charging decision. In these instances, the case enters the CPS records but was never actually referred for a charging decision.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>The police do refer a case to the police but there is insufficient evidence to bring a charge, sothe CPS ask the police to complete an action plan in order to improve the evidence. If the police are unable to respond to the action plan or decide not to pursue the matter, then the case will be ‘administratively finalised’ on the CPS system because the police cannot bring forward a case with sufficient evidence to charge.</li></ul><p>There was a 9% reduction in referrals from the police between 2016/17 and 2017/18. During this period, the percentage of cases resulting in no further action remained largely unchanged. There was, however, a significant increase in both the volume and percentage of cases administratively finalised. This is largely because of internal CPS administrative processes, reminding users to ‘administratively finalise’ cases where the police had requested early advice but had not resubmitted.</p><p>This coincided with an increase in the number of cases where the police have not responded to early investigative advice or an action plan has resulted in a rise in the number of administrative finalisations.</p><p>The table below shows the outcome of all referrals from the police for a pre charge decision, and show both the volume and the rates of these outcomes</p><p>TABLE KEY:</p><p> </p><ul><li>Decision to charge: Prosecutors must be satisfied there is enough evidence to provide a &quot;realistic prospect of conviction&quot; against each defendant and that the prosecution is in the public interest.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Take no further action: This is a prosecutorial decision based on an assessment that there is insufficient evidence to provide a “realistic prospect of conviction” or that a prosecution is not in the public interest. The case may be reopened if the police provide further evidence or the victim successfully appeals the decision under the victims right to review;</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Out of Court Disposal: Out of court disposals include a caution, conditional caution or the recommendation that the offence is taken into consideration with other charges;</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Other: the result of the charging decision is not known or has not been given for that suspect.</li></ul><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Volumes &amp; Rates as %</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Charge</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>No Further Action</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Out of Court Disposal</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Admin Finalised</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Other</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2010-2011</strong></p></td><td><p>3,387 (42%)</p></td><td><p>4,339 (53%)</p></td><td><p>65 (1%)</p></td><td><p>321 (4%)</p></td><td><p>18 (0%)</p></td><td><p>8,130</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2011-2012</strong></p></td><td><p>3,213 (47%)</p></td><td><p>3,281 (48%)</p></td><td><p>42 (1%)</p></td><td><p>275 (4%)</p></td><td><p>11 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,822</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2012-2013</strong></p></td><td><p>2,889 (53%)</p></td><td><p>2,195 (41%)</p></td><td><p>34 (1%)</p></td><td><p>281 (5%)</p></td><td><p>5 (0%)</p></td><td><p>5,404</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013-2014</strong></p></td><td><p>3,621 (62%)</p></td><td><p>1,857 (32%)</p></td><td><p>23 (0%)</p></td><td><p>341 (6%)</p></td><td><p>8 (0%)</p></td><td><p>5,850</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2014-2015</strong></p></td><td><p>3,648 (59%)</p></td><td><p>1,997 (32%)</p></td><td><p>29 (0%)</p></td><td><p>484 (8%)</p></td><td><p>1 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,159</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2015-2016</strong></p></td><td><p>3,910 (57%)</p></td><td><p>2,271 (33%)</p></td><td><p>24 (0%)</p></td><td><p>645 (9%)</p></td><td><p>5 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,855</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2016-2017</strong></p></td><td><p>3,671 (56%)</p></td><td><p>2,145 (32%)</p></td><td><p>30 (0%)</p></td><td><p>761 (12%)</p></td><td><p>4 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,611</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2017-2018</strong></p></td><td><p>2,822 (47%</p></td><td><p>1,851 (31%)</p></td><td><p>26 (0%)</p></td><td><p>1,307 (22%)</p></td><td><p>6 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,012</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p> question first answered 17/06/2019 15:09:46
	creator	3915 label Biography information for Gloria De Piero
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	3915 label Biography information for Gloria De Piero

1132159

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	17/06/2019
	date	13/06/2019
	date tabled	13/06/2019
	ddp created	13/06/2019 17:17:22
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	18/06/2019 14:55:05 20/06/2019 14:33:01
	hansard heading	Randox Testing Services
	house id	1
	identifier	264437
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	20/06/2019 14:01:35
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent estimate his Department has made of the number of cases of forensic manipulation at Randox that resulted in a conviction being overturned; and in how many of those cases had a custodial sentence already been served.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Sheffield, Heeley
	tabling member printed	Louise Haigh
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 264437
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	264437
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>There is an ongoing investigation into data manipulation at Randox Testing Services. The Crown Prosecution Service will continue to support this process to ensure that fairness and transparency in the system is maintained.</p><p> </p><p>The Crown Prosecution Service can only comment on cases that it is responsible for prosecuting. For the cases which it prosecutes, the Crown Prosecution Service does not maintain a central record of the number of cases of forensic manipulation at Randox that resulted in a conviction being overturned or a record of how many of those cases involved a custodial sentence. Such information could only be obtained through a manual search of records which would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> question first answered 20/06/2019 14:01:35
	creator	4473 label Biography information for Louise Haigh
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	4473 label Biography information for Louise Haigh

1132830

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:26:21
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 13:55:06 26/06/2019 10:56:05
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: South Yorkshire
	house id	1
	identifier	266094
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/06/2019 10:24:58
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from the date of offence to a decision to charge an individual in South Yorkshire in each year since 2010 was.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266094
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266094
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works closely with the Police to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated before charges are brought. There has been an increase in the complexity of cases investigated by the police, with investigations often involving large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This impacts on the average number of consultations and length of time taken for prosecutors to reach a charging decision.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from offence through to a decision to charge. However, data is held on the average number of days from submission of a case by the police to the CPS to the date of the CPS decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Data relating to to all cases in South Yorkshire, summary only cases in South Yorkshire, and indictable only cases in South Yorkshire is shown in Annex A.</p><p> </p><p>The data in Annex A relating to summary only cases provides figures for only a minority of summary only cases. This is because the CPS is only responsible for charging a small minority of summary only matters, with the majority charged by the police. In 2017-18 the police charged 75% of all summary only matters with only 25% charged by CPS, while for indicatable only offences the CPS charged 95% of these cases.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. Police are now more regularly encouraged to seek ‘early investigative advice’ to help determine what evidence is required for a charge. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, the CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings which impacts on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p> question first answered 26/06/2019 10:24:58
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey

1132831

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	20/06/2019
	date	18/06/2019
	date tabled	18/06/2019
	ddp created	18/06/2019 18:26:24
	answering body	Attorney General
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	ddp modified	19/06/2019 13:55:10 26/06/2019 10:56:03
	hansard heading	Prosecutions: South Yorkshire
	house id	1
	identifier	266095
	legislature	25259
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/06/2019 10:24:58
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from the date of an offence to a decision to charge and individual for summary offences in South Yorkshire in each year since 2010 was.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Wentworth and Dearne
	tabling member printed	John Healey
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 266095
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	266095
	version	2
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer is ministerial correction answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) works closely with the Police to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated before charges are brought. There has been an increase in the complexity of cases investigated by the police, with investigations often involving large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This impacts on the average number of consultations and length of time taken for prosecutors to reach a charging decision.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from offence through to a decision to charge. However, data is held on the average number of days from submission of a case by the police to the CPS to the date of the CPS decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Data relating to to all cases in South Yorkshire, summary only cases in South Yorkshire, and indictable only cases in South Yorkshire is shown in Annex A.</p><p> </p><p>The data in Annex A relating to summary only cases provides figures for only a minority of summary only cases. This is because the CPS is only responsible for charging a small minority of summary only matters, with the majority charged by the police. In 2017-18 the police charged 75% of all summary only matters with only 25% charged by CPS, while for indicatable only offences the CPS charged 95% of these cases.</p><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. Police are now more regularly encouraged to seek ‘early investigative advice’ to help determine what evidence is required for a charge. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, the CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings which impacts on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p> question first answered 26/06/2019 10:24:58
	creator	400 label Biography information for John Healey
	publisher	25259
	tabling member	400 label Biography information for John Healey