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 previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

114913

	registered interest
	date	05/11/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	hansard heading	Alternatives to Prosecution
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what offences and under what circumstances police officers of Staffordshire Police, West Yorkshire Police and Leicestershire Police will be required to seek permission of the Crown Prosecution Service before issuing the community resolutions and suspended prosecutions being piloted in those areas.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	213567
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/11/2014 answer text <p /> <p>We plan to put an end to the cautions culture and to replace the conditional caution with the suspended prosecution. Before doing so, Staffordshire Police, West Yorkshire Police and Leicestershire Police are piloting a new, two-tier framework for out of court disposals based on the conditional caution and the community resolution.</p><p> </p><p>Police officers in these areas, as in other parts of England and Wales, may in exceptional circumstances administer a conditional caution for an indictable only offence and must seek the permission of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) before doing so. There is no requirement for police officers to seek the approval of the CPS before administering a community resolution.</p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 10/11/2014 17:52:07 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

63483

	registered interest
	date	24/06/2014
	answering body	Ministry of Defence
	answering dept id	11
	answering dept short name	Defence
	answering dept sort name	Defence
	hansard heading	Armed Forces: Crimes of Violence
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, if he could place in the Library a table showing, for each branch of the Armed Forces Police, the number of cases of (a) rape, (b) sexual assault and (c) domestic violence that were (i) reported, (ii) referred to a prosecutor, (iii) directed for trial, (iv) led to a conviction, (v) led to an acquittal and (vi) led to a custodial sentence in each year between 2009 to 2013.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	201983
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/01/2015 answer text <p>All allegations of rape, sexual assault and domestic violence made by or against members of the Armed Forces are thoroughly investigated. An investigation may be conducted by either the civil or Service Police.</p><p> </p><p>The tables below show the number of alleged cases of rape and sexual assault (including assault by penetration) that were investigated by each branch of the Service police in each year from 2009 to 2013, the number referred to the Service Prosecuting Authority (SPA) and the result of those referrals. The SPA can receive formal referrals only from either Service Police or the Commanding Officer.</p><p>It should be noted that the SPA may receive referrals in one year which relate to allegations and investigations made in previous years and that such cases may be directed, disposed and/or tried in following years. There is therefore no direct correlation between investigations and referrals and the number of cases brought in any one year.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>ROYAL NAVY POLICE (RNP) INVESTIGATIONS</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong>Rape</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RNP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Sexual Assault (including assault by penetration)</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RNP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>11</p></td><td><p><strong>6</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>ROYAL MILITARY POLICE (RMP) INVESTIGATIONS</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong>Rape</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RMP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p><strong>16</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>10</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p><strong>20</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>18</p></td><td><p><strong>17</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>22</p></td><td><p><strong>18</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>23</p></td><td><p><strong>15</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>2013 – DIRECTED FOR TRIAL – 3 cases yet to go to trial</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Sexual Assault (including assault by penetration)</strong></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RMP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p><strong>24</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>64</p></td><td><p><strong>42</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>24</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>21</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>13</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>48</p></td><td><p><strong>60</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>28</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>25</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>20</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>36</p></td><td><p><strong>26*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>15</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>43</p></td><td><p><strong>34</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>17</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>6</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>2013 – DIRECTED FOR TRIAL – 3 cases yet to go to trial</p><p>* We previously advised this as being “28”, but on re-investigation realised we have included 2 other Service police referrals that were not for sexual assault.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>ROYAL AIR FORCE POLICE INVESTIGATIONS</strong></p><p> </p><p><strong>Rape</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RAFP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>2013 – DIRECTED FOR TRIAL – 2 cases yet to go to trial</p><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Sexual Assault (including assault by penetration)</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Investigated by RAFP</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total Referred to SPA</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Directed </strong></p><p><strong>For </strong></p><p><strong>Trial</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Acquitted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Convicted</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Custodial sentence</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009</p><p>(Figures in first column are from 1 Nov –figures in subsequent columns are for all of 2009)</p></td><td><p>3</p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>0</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>3</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>1</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>2013 – DIRECTED FOR TRIAL – 1 case yet to go to trial</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Domestic violence is not a crime classification, but may be recorded under the crime classification of violence, for example battery, assault or grievous bodily harm. For the Service Police to establish which offences are as a result of domestic violence would require an individual review of all cases, which could be undertaken only at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>I apologise for not replying sooner; it has taken some time to ensure the accuracy of the data.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Broxtowe answering member printed Anna Soubry question first answered 27/01/2015 17:12:32 answering member 3938 label Biography information for Anna Soubry previous answer version 7748 answering member constituency Broxtowe answering member printed Anna Soubry answering member 3938 label Biography information for Anna Soubry
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101616

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Sham Marriage: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many prosecutions the Crown Prosecution Service has brought on breaches of immigration law arising from sham marriages in each of the last five financial years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212437
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/11/2014 answer text <p>Offences of breaching immigration law may be prosecuted by way of Section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 (assisting unlawful immigration to a European Union Member State) or by way of Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act (conspiracy).</p><p>The offence created by Section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 encompasses both the offence of assisting illegal entry (whether by smuggling someone in a vehicle or by providing false documents for presentation at a port) or by assisting someone to remain by deception (for example, by entering into a sham marriage) which facilitate a breach of the immigration laws. Conspiracies to facilitate breaches of immigration law are charged by way of Section 1 of the Criminal Law Act 1977.</p><p>The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) indicate the number of offences charged, in which a prosecution commenced at magistrates’ courts for assisting unlawful immigration or conspiracy. However it is not possible to disaggregate which of these offences relate to sham marriages rather than other immigration law breaches without reviewing individual case files which would incur a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 04/11/2014 14:31:53 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101614

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, for which offences the Crown Prosecution Service routinely monitors the number and proportion of cases that fail because of victim issues.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212435
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2014 answer text <p>The CPS defendant case outcome records include an allocation of a reason for each unsuccessful outcome, including the number which did not proceed because of victim issues. These records are centrally collated under the following twelve Principal Offence Categories.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Homicide</p><p> </p><p>Offences against the person</p><p> </p><p>Sexual offences</p><p> </p><p>Burglary</p><p> </p><p>Robbery</p><p> </p><p>Theft and handling</p><p> </p><p>Fraud and forgery</p><p> </p><p>Criminal damage</p><p> </p><p>Drugs offences</p><p> </p><p>Public order offences</p><p> </p><p>Motoring offences</p><p> </p><p>All other offences</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 19/11/2014 12:38:15 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101615

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Fraud: Wales
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many fraud prosecutions the Crown Prosecution Service has brought in Crown Courts in Wales in each of the last five calendar years.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212436
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of the numbers of defendants and the outcome of prosecution proceedings, divided into twelve Principal Offence Categories, including ‘Fraud and Forgery’.</p><p> </p><p>The category of ‘Fraud and Forgery, includes offences prosecuted by way of the Fraud Act 2006, fraudulently evading income tax, VAT, excise duty or national insurance, bankruptcy offences, money laundering, forgery or using a false instrument and obtaining property, services or pecuniary advantage by deception.</p><p> </p><p>The table below shows, in each of the last five calendar years, the number of defendants prosecuted and finalised, in Crown Courts in Wales, where the Principal Offence was categorised as ‘Fraud and Forgery’.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>Total Prosecutions</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2009</strong></p></td><td><p>181</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2010</strong></p></td><td><p>163</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2011</strong></p></td><td><p>185</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2012</strong></p></td><td><p>180</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013</strong></p></td><td><p>149</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Data Source: CPS Management Information System</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Principal Offence Category is assigned at the end of a prosecution to indicate the most serious offence with which a defendant is charged at the time of finalisation. It is not possible to disaggregate the outcomes of individual offences, such as fraud, without undertaking a manual search of case records which would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>This table does not include those cases prosecuted by the DWP prosecution teams that merged with the CPS in 2012, as the DWP Cardiff team prosecutes cases in Crown Courts in England, as well as Wales. It is not possible to provide a breakdown of cases prosecuted solely in Wales without incurring a disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 05/11/2014 15:53:50 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101519

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	European Arrest Warrants
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent assessment he has made of the usefulness of the European Arrest Warrant as a prosecutorial tool.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212405
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2014 answer text <p>The Government and the DPP are in agreement that the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) offers the best way of keeping Britain safe, particularly from serious criminals and terrorists.</p><p>The introduction of the EAW has resulted in much faster processing of extradition requests, meaning that we can secure the return of fugitives wanted for serious offending in this country often in a matter of weeks, not many months or even years as was the case under previous arrangements. The Arrest Warrant is also more effective. For example, under the previous regime, the European Convention on Extradition, some Member States can refuse to surrender their own nationals, including France, Germany and Spain, which is not the position in EAW cases. Furthermore, the EAW overcomes problems of time limitation in other countries. It also means that wanted people can now be extradited to face fraud and tax charges, which was not the case before.</p><p>The Government has recently made changes in the way that the EAW is processed through our courts. These changes are designed to offer greater protection to UK citizens and other UK residents against disproportionate requests and the risk of spending unreasonable lengths of time in pre-trial detention abroad. With those changes in place, the Government is convinced that the EAW provides an effective and cost-efficient tool in the fight against trans-national crime, and it is one which prosecutors and other law enforcement professionals are keen to see preserved.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright grouped question UIN 212406 question first answered 03/11/2014 17:02:26 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101520

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	European Arrest Warrants
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent discussions he has had with the Director of Public Prosecutions on the usefulness of the European Arrest Warrant as a prosecutorial tool.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212406
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2014 answer text <p>The Government and the DPP are in agreement that the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) offers the best way of keeping Britain safe, particularly from serious criminals and terrorists.</p><p>The introduction of the EAW has resulted in much faster processing of extradition requests, meaning that we can secure the return of fugitives wanted for serious offending in this country often in a matter of weeks, not many months or even years as was the case under previous arrangements. The Arrest Warrant is also more effective. For example, under the previous regime, the European Convention on Extradition, some Member States can refuse to surrender their own nationals, including France, Germany and Spain, which is not the position in EAW cases. Furthermore, the EAW overcomes problems of time limitation in other countries. It also means that wanted people can now be extradited to face fraud and tax charges, which was not the case before.</p><p>The Government has recently made changes in the way that the EAW is processed through our courts. These changes are designed to offer greater protection to UK citizens and other UK residents against disproportionate requests and the risk of spending unreasonable lengths of time in pre-trial detention abroad. With those changes in place, the Government is convinced that the EAW provides an effective and cost-efficient tool in the fight against trans-national crime, and it is one which prosecutors and other law enforcement professionals are keen to see preserved.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright grouped question UIN 212405 question first answered 03/11/2014 17:02:26 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

106400

	registered interest
	date	04/11/2014
	answering body	HM Treasury
	answering dept id	14
	answering dept short name	Treasury
	answering dept sort name	Treasury
	hansard heading	Minimum Wage
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to the Answer of 12 September 2014 to Question 205614, what proportion of the penalties imposed in each year have been successfully enforced; and how much of the amount of penalty imposed is outstanding.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	213409
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/11/2014 answer text <p>The Government takes the enforcement of National Minimum Wage very seriously and has increased the financial penalty percentage from 50% to 100% of the unpaid wages owed to workers, and the maximum penalty from £5,000 to £20,000. These new limits are now in force where arrears are identified in pay reference periods on or after 7 March 2014. The Government will also bring in primary legislation as soon as possible so that the maximum £20,000 penalty can apply to each underpaid worker.</p><p> </p><p>The vast majority of employers pay penalties upon being issued with a Notice of Underpayment. Where they do not, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will seek to recover through debt management processes. In the period 2009/10 - 2013/14 HMRC issued over 3,500 penalties totalling nearly £3m. Of these, 2 per cent are currently being pursued through debt management processes..</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South West Hertfordshire answering member printed Mr David Gauke question first answered 11/11/2014 16:55:22 answering member 1529 label Biography information for Mr David Gauke
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

101617

	registered interest
	date	29/10/2014
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Tesco
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what reports he has received on whether the Serious Fraud Office will apply for additional funding from HM Treasury to finance its investigation into Tesco.
	tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
	tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
	uin	212438
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 05/11/2014 answer text <p>The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has a core budget to investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute the most serious and complex cases of fraud, bribery and corruption, and some exceptionally large cases will arise that require additional resources. However it is not in the public interest to specify in detail what resources the SFO intends to dedicate to each case.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 05/11/2014 15:56:51 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry