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

1122852

registered interest
date	24/04/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Homicide: Ethnic Groups
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, from which ethnic group each offender convicted of murder came from in the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	246972
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/05/2019 answer text <p>Data on convictions for murder, up to 31 December 2017, can be found in the principle offence proceedings and outcomes by offence code data tool, available at:</p><p><a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738814/HO-Code-Tool-2017.xlsx" target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738814/HO-Code-Tool-2017.xlsx</a></p><p> </p><p>In the pivot table, select ‘Ethnicity’ from the ‘Ethnicity filter and select ‘1 Murder’ from the ‘Offence’ filter: The number of murder convictions for each year can be found in the `Convicted’ row (row 30).</p><p> </p><p>Court proceedings data, including findings of guilt for the offence of murder for 2018, are planned for publication on 16 May 2019.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 01/05/2019 13:47:13 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1122861

registered interest
date	24/04/2019
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, which individuals have the power to alter a curfew that is the subject of a community order.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	246980
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/05/2019 answer text <p>Only Courts have the power to vary a curfew that has been imposed as part of a community order.</p><p> </p><p>Curfew is one of the range of community requirements which can be imposed as part of a community order, so the offender is required to be in a particular place at certain times. If the court makes a community order that includes a curfew requirement, it must also impose an electronic monitoring requirement (unless there are particular reasons for not doing so), the purpose of which is to promote and monitor compliance. A curfew can be imposed for a daily maximum of 16 hours per day and for the maximum requirement duration of 12 months.</p><p> </p><p>The National Probation Service can commence enforcement proceedings for alleged violations of a curfew. If enforcement proceedings are commenced and the court finds that the offender has breached their curfew, one of the sanctions the court can apply is to make the order more onerous which could include varying the curfew by extending the daily curfew hours or the overall length of the curfew requirement.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 01/05/2019 18:55:57 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1108665

registered interest
date	01/04/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Reoffenders: Community Orders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many offenders re-offended whilst being the subject of a community order in the last 12 months for which information is available.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	239207
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/04/2019 answer text <p>We do not hold reoffending rates based on whether offenders are the subject of a community order but instead hold data based on those who have started a community order in a given period. As such, we cannot tell whether an offender is still subject to a community order at the time of their reoffence. Please see the available data in the table provided.</p><p>There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 involved around 350,000 sentencing occasions over 4 years and used 130 different variables to construct matched groups of offenders and examine the effect of short sentences relative to community sentences. This study found a reduction of around 3 percentage points in proven reoffences if offenders receiving sentences of less than 12 months were to get a community order instead. This is statistically significant and equates to around 30,000 proven reoffences in total over a one-year period. This means fewer victims of crime.</p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 10/04/2019 15:53:34 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name PQ 239207 table 2.xlsx title Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1092107

registered interest
date	20/03/2019
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 the highest number was of previous community orders given to an offender sentenced to immediate custody for a new offence of six months in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	234712
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/03/2019 answer text <p>The highest number of previous community orders given to an offender sentenced to immediate custody for a new offence of six months in each of the last three years can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 29/03/2019 13:40:24 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name Copy of PQ 234712 table.xlsx title Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087068

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Offenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many offenders sentenced to immediate custody of up to six months who had not received a previous community order were sentenced in (a) Magistrate's Courts and (b) Crown Courts in (i) 2015; (ii) 2016 and (iii) 2017.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231411
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/03/2019 answer text <p>The number of offenders sentenced to up to six months who had not received a previous community sentence by court type can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart question first answered 20/03/2019 16:53:20 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name PQ 231411 Table..xlsx title Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087211

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Drugs: Reoffenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences relating to drugs was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231412
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/03/2019 answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart grouped question UIN 230698 230699 230700 230701 230702 230703 230704 230705 230706 230707 231413 231414 231415 231416 question first answered 19/03/2019 17:54:29 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table.xlsx title 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087212

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Vandalism: Reoffenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for criminal damage was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231413
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/03/2019 answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart grouped question UIN 230698 230699 230700 230701 230702 230703 230704 230705 230706 230707 231412 231414 231415 231416 question first answered 19/03/2019 17:54:30 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table.xlsx title 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087214

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Antisocial Behaviour: Reoffenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for breach of an anti-social behaviour order or criminal behaviour order was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231414
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/03/2019 answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart grouped question UIN 230698 230699 230700 230701 230702 230703 230704 230705 230706 230707 231412 231413 231415 231416 question first answered 19/03/2019 17:54:30 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table.xlsx title 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087215

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Fraud: Reoffenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for fraud was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231415
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/03/2019 answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart grouped question UIN 230698 230699 230700 230701 230702 230703 230704 230705 230706 230707 231412 231413 231414 231416 question first answered 19/03/2019 17:54:30 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table.xlsx title 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

1087216

registered interest
date	12/03/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Taking and Driving Away: Reoffenders
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for vehicle taking was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	231416
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/03/2019 answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p> answering member constituency Penrith and The Border answering member printed Rory Stewart grouped question UIN 230698 230699 230700 230701 230702 230703 230704 230705 230706 230707 231412 231413 231414 231415 question first answered 19/03/2019 17:54:30 answering member 4137 label Biography information for Rory Stewart attachment 1 file name 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table.xlsx title 230698 - 230707; 231412 - 231416 Response Table
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies