Show Search Form

Search Results

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

Search

386303

registered interest
date	29/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prisoners' Release
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps are taken by the National Probation Service to ensure that prison leavers can access benefits and food when they leave prison.
tabling member constituency	Birkenhead
tabling member printed	Frank Field
uin	4631
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>From 1 May 2015 Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) have been delivering a Through the Gate (TTG) resettlement service to the vast majority of offenders, so that they benefit from continuity of support from custody to the community. Resettlement services delivered to offenders include help with finding or retaining employment and accommodation, and advice on finance and debt. CRCs are delivering TTG services to both National Probation Service (NPS) and CRC managed offenders. The NPS can also commission additional rehabilitation services from CRCs above mandated TTG services where they believe it will help reduce reoffending.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous question first answered 02/07/2015 14:10:30 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	478 label Biography information for Lord Field of Birkenhead

386306

registered interest
date	29/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Community Rehabilitation Companies: Redundancy
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 9 June 2015 to Question 1763, what the total cash value was of the Modernisation Fund; and how much of that fund was taken and distributed to Community Rehabilitation Companies for enhanced redundancy schemes following the privatisation of probation services.
tabling member constituency	Blackpool South
tabling member printed	Gordon Marsden
uin	4573
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>Modernisation funding was allocated to the Ministry of Justice by HM Treasury in 2014/15 to bring about sustainable reductions in resource requirements across the Ministry. Some of this funding was made available for voluntary redundancies in Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). Of this, £16.4m was spent on voluntary exit packages in 2014/15 and the remainder was allocated to CRCs on a pro-rata basis, based on their size and estimated future staffing requirements.</p><p> </p><p>Each Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) is managed by a Contract Management Team (CMT), headed by a Senior Contract Manager and comprising staff with commercial, contract management and operational expertise to ensure a multi-disciplinary approach. The size of teams reflects the size of the contract being managed. While it is for CRC owners to implement and oversee redundancy schemes, CMTs are ensuring that CRC owners adhere to their contractual obligations in this area. CMTs are able to draw upon commercial, financial and legal expertise from within the wider Ministry in delivering this role.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4574 question first answered 02/07/2015 13:42:52 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	465 label Biography information for Gordon Marsden

386307

registered interest
date	29/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Community Rehabilitation Companies: Redundancy
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 9 June 2015 to Question 1761, how many staff of what grade are embedded in each Community Rehabilitation Company; and what training such staff have received for overseeing enhanced redundancy schemes.
tabling member constituency	Blackpool South
tabling member printed	Gordon Marsden
uin	4574
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>Modernisation funding was allocated to the Ministry of Justice by HM Treasury in 2014/15 to bring about sustainable reductions in resource requirements across the Ministry. Some of this funding was made available for voluntary redundancies in Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). Of this, £16.4m was spent on voluntary exit packages in 2014/15 and the remainder was allocated to CRCs on a pro-rata basis, based on their size and estimated future staffing requirements.</p><p> </p><p>Each Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) is managed by a Contract Management Team (CMT), headed by a Senior Contract Manager and comprising staff with commercial, contract management and operational expertise to ensure a multi-disciplinary approach. The size of teams reflects the size of the contract being managed. While it is for CRC owners to implement and oversee redundancy schemes, CMTs are ensuring that CRC owners adhere to their contractual obligations in this area. CMTs are able to draw upon commercial, financial and legal expertise from within the wider Ministry in delivering this role.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4573 question first answered 02/07/2015 13:42:52 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	465 label Biography information for Gordon Marsden

385354

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prisons
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average daily out-of-cell time was for prisoners in each prison in each of the last 10 years.
tabling member constituency	Blaydon
tabling member printed	Mr David Anderson
uin	4056
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>Time out of cell for prisoners varies across the prison estate and the information requested is not held centrally.</p><p> </p><p>The amount of time prisoners are allowed to spend outside their cells to engage in activities (other than work, education, treatment interventions, recovery focused services or religious services), or to associate together, will vary from one establishment to another, depending on the availability of constructive activities and supervisory staff. All prisons are required to have systems in place to monitor regimes and ensure that they are safe, decent, secure, resilient and sustainable.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4057 question first answered 02/07/2015 14:18:42 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1486 label Biography information for Mr David Anderson

385355

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prisons
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many out-of-cell hours offenders are provided with at each prison establishment that operates planned restricted regimes.
tabling member constituency	Blaydon
tabling member printed	Mr David Anderson
uin	4057
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>Time out of cell for prisoners varies across the prison estate and the information requested is not held centrally.</p><p> </p><p>The amount of time prisoners are allowed to spend outside their cells to engage in activities (other than work, education, treatment interventions, recovery focused services or religious services), or to associate together, will vary from one establishment to another, depending on the availability of constructive activities and supervisory staff. All prisons are required to have systems in place to monitor regimes and ensure that they are safe, decent, secure, resilient and sustainable.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4056 question first answered 02/07/2015 14:18:42 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1486 label Biography information for Mr David Anderson

385356

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prison Governors
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how long each prison governor at each prison has been in post.
tabling member constituency	Blaydon
tabling member printed	Mr David Anderson
uin	4058
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>The length of time for which the governing governor of each public sector prison establishment had been in their current post on 31 March 2015 is set out below.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="2"><p>Governor Tenure as at 31 March 2015</p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>Establishment Name</p></td><td><p>Years</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Askham Grange</p></td><td><p>2.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Aylesbury</p></td><td><p>5.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Bedford</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Belmarsh</p></td><td><p>0.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Blantyre House</p></td><td><p>0.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Brinsford</p></td><td><p>1.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Bristol</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Brixton</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Buckley Hall</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Bullingdon</p></td><td><p>0.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Bure</p></td><td><p>4.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Cardiff</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Channings Wood</p></td><td><p>0.7</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Chelmsford</p></td><td><p>1.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Coldingley</p></td><td><p>1.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Cookham Wood</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Dartmoor</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Deerbolt</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Dover</p></td><td><p>0.9</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Downview</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Drake Hall</p></td><td><p>0.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Durham</p></td><td><p>3.7</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>East Sutton Park</p></td><td><p>0.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Eastwood Park</p></td><td><p>3.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Elmley</p></td><td><p>1.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Erlestoke</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Exeter</p></td><td><p>4.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Featherstone</p></td><td><p>0.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Feltham</p></td><td><p>2.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Ford</p></td><td><p>1.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Foston Hall</p></td><td><p>1.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Frankland</p></td><td><p>0.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Full Sutton</p></td><td><p>0.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Garth</p></td><td><p>2.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Gartree</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Glen Parva</p></td><td><p>2.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grendon</p></td><td><p>3.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Guys Marsh</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Haslar</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Hatfield</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Haverigg</p></td><td><p>2.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Hewell</p></td><td><p>0.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>High Down</p></td><td><p>2.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Highpoint</p></td><td><p>1.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Hindley</p></td><td><p>0.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Hollesley Bay</p></td><td><p>7.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Holloway</p></td><td><p>4.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Holme House</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Hull</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Humber</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Huntercombe</p></td><td><p>0.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Isis</p></td><td><p>3.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Isle of Wight</p></td><td><p>2.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Kennet</p></td><td><p>2.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Kirkham</p></td><td><p>2.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Kirklevington Grange</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Lancaster Farms</p></td><td><p>2.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Leeds</p></td><td><p>1.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Leicester</p></td><td><p>1.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Lewes</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Leyhill</p></td><td><p>2.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Lincoln</p></td><td><p>2.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Lindholme</p></td><td><p>0.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Littlehey</p></td><td><p>3.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Liverpool</p></td><td><p>0.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Long Lartin</p></td><td><p>1.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Low Newton</p></td><td><p>5.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Maidstone</p></td><td><p>1.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Manchester</p></td><td><p>0.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Moorland</p></td><td><p>0.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Morton Hall</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>New Hall</p></td><td><p>2.9</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>North Sea Camp</p></td><td><p>1.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Norwich</p></td><td><p>4.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Nottingham</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Onley</p></td><td><p>0.9</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Pentonville</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Portland</p></td><td><p>1.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Preston</p></td><td><p>2.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Ranby</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Risley</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Rochester</p></td><td><p>3.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Send</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Stafford</p></td><td><p>0.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Standford Hill</p></td><td><p>1.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Stocken</p></td><td><p>2.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Stoke Heath</p></td><td><p>5.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Styal</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sudbury</p></td><td><p>0.9</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Swaleside</p></td><td><p>1.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Swansea</p></td><td><p>1.7</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Swinfen Hall</p></td><td><p>3.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>The Mount</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>The Verne</p></td><td><p>1.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Thorn Cross</p></td><td><p>1.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Usk/Prescoed</p></td><td><p>1.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wakefield</p></td><td><p>1.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wandsworth</p></td><td><p>3.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Warren Hill</p></td><td><p>4.2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wayland</p></td><td><p>2.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wealstun</p></td><td><p>3.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Werrington</p></td><td><p>0.3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wetherby</p></td><td><p>0.1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Whatton</p></td><td><p>6.8</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Whitemoor</p></td><td><p>1.6</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Winchester</p></td><td><p>2.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Woodhill</p></td><td><p>1.0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wormwood Scrubs</p></td><td><p>1.4</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wymott</p></td><td><p>0.5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>National Average</p></td><td><p>1.9</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>This information is based on individuals’ career records as recorded on NOMS’ workforce data systems. Those career records have not been verified. <strong><br></strong></p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous question first answered 02/07/2015 14:14:41 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1486 label Biography information for Mr David Anderson

385361

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Pre-sentence Reports
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average cost to the public purse is of preparing a (a) full pre-sentence report and (b) fast delivery report in magistrates' courts, including the time spent by probation staff in court whilst the report is being delivered and considered.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	4020
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>The most recently available information on the unit costs of probation relates to 2012/13 and is published on the Gov.uk website at the following web location: <a title="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213</a></p><p> </p><p>The published unit costs of pre-sentence reports are calculated by dividing the fully-apportioned cost to NOMS by the volumes of the three separate types of report: Standard Delivery Report (SDR), Fast Delivery Report (FDR) and oral report. They exclude the time spent by probation staff in court whilst the report is being delivered and considered, as this cannot be separately identified.</p><p> </p><p>The unit costs of SDRs and FDRs for 2012-13 are as follows:</p><p> </p><p>SDR: £430</p><p>FDR: £150</p><p> </p><p>The publication of probation trust unit costs was suspended whilst the probation service restructured, but work is underway to develop unit costs for the National Probation Service and we will seek to publish this information once it is sufficiently robust.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4021 question first answered 02/07/2015 14:03:44 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

385362

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Pre-sentence Reports
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will estimate the cost to the public purse of the production of pre-sentence reports for courts in each of the last three years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	4021
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p>The most recently available information on the unit costs of probation relates to 2012/13 and is published on the Gov.uk website at the following web location: <a title="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213" href="https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/prison-and-probation-trusts-performance-statistics-201213</a></p><p> </p><p>The published unit costs of pre-sentence reports are calculated by dividing the fully-apportioned cost to NOMS by the volumes of the three separate types of report: Standard Delivery Report (SDR), Fast Delivery Report (FDR) and oral report. They exclude the time spent by probation staff in court whilst the report is being delivered and considered, as this cannot be separately identified.</p><p> </p><p>The unit costs of SDRs and FDRs for 2012-13 are as follows:</p><p> </p><p>SDR: £430</p><p>FDR: £150</p><p> </p><p>The publication of probation trust unit costs was suspended whilst the probation service restructured, but work is underway to develop unit costs for the National Probation Service and we will seek to publish this information once it is sufficiently robust.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous grouped question UIN 4020 question first answered 02/07/2015 14:03:44 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

385363

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Prisons: Discipline
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, (a) how many additional days were added to prisoners' sentences and (b) in what proportion of adjudications days were added in (i) 2000, (ii) 2010 and (iii) the latest year for which information is held; and for what reasons the days were so added in each such year.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	4016
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td colspan="3"><p>Discipline procedures are central to the maintenance of a safe custodial environment.</p><p> </p><p>Since 2003 Independent Adjudicators, who are District Judges or Deputy District Judges hear those cases where a serious breach of the Prison and YOI Rules has occurred, and which might result in the prisoner receiving a punishment of additional days to their time spent in custody if found guilty.</p><p> </p><p>The tables below provide the number of adjudications where additional days were given, the percentage of those against the total adjudications and the reasons why those additional days were given, in 2000, 2010 and 2014.</p><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Tables 1</strong> <strong>– 3: Number of incidences punished by additional days awarded and number of days of additional days by incidence group, 2000, 2010 and 2014, England and Wales</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong> Table 1</strong></p></td><td colspan="7"> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>Number</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Violence</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Escape or abscond</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Disobedience or disrespect</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Wilful damage</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Unauthorised transactions or possession</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Other incidences</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Adjudications where additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(1)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>63,918</strong></p><p><strong>(</strong>36% of total adjudications)</p></td><td><p>10,620</p></td><td><p>717</p></td><td><p>21,563</p></td><td><p>2,896</p></td><td><p>22,506</p></td><td><p>5,616</p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Number of days for which additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(2)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>888,250</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>175,544</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9,832</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>288,645</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>57,148</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>281,717</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>75,364</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr><td><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p><p><strong>Table 2 </strong></p></td><td colspan="7"> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p><strong>Number</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Violence</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Escape or abscond</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Disobedience or disrespect</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Wilful damage</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Unauthorised transactions or possession</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Other incidences</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Number of awards where additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(1)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9,006</strong></p></td><td><p>913</p></td><td><p>22</p></td><td><p>1,381</p></td><td><p>440</p></td><td><p>5,809</p></td><td><p>441</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(5% of total adjudications)</p></td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Number of days for which additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(2)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>172,260</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>17,562</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>419</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>25,093</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>9,003</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>111,206</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8,977</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr><tr><td><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong> Table 3</strong></p></td><td colspan="7"> </td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Incidence</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Number</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Violence</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Escape or abscond</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Disobedience or disrespect</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Wilful damage</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Unauthorised transactions or possession</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Other incidences</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Number of awards where additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(1)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>10,119</strong></p></td><td><p>1,377</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>1,428</p></td><td><p>465</p></td><td><p>6,119</p></td><td><p>726</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>(6% of total adjudications)</p></td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Number of days for which additional days were given</strong><strong><sup>(2)</sup></strong></p></td><td><p><strong>165,185</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>22,681</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>77</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>20,145</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>8,172</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>102,570</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>11,540</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong>Notes:</strong></p><p>'-' Data is not applicable.</p><p> </p><p>1 - The number of incidents may be committed at one establishment and punished at another.</p><p>2 - Figures correspond to the sum of the number of days given for each punishment received after an incident of misbehaviour. If an offender receives 2 punishments as a result of an assault against a prison officer and each punishment attracts 20 days, then the offender will have received a total of 40 additional days.</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous question first answered 02/07/2015 14:26:03 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

385364

registered interest
date	24/06/2015
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Life Imprisonment
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of life-sentenced prisoners were (a) recommended or (b) not recommended for transfer to an open prison by their respective parole board in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	4022
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/07/2015 answer text <p /> <p>Outcomes of completed oral hearings conducted by the Parole Board are published in the latest Parole Board Annual Report available at:</p><p><a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329169/parole-board-annual-report-2013-14.pdf" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/329169/parole-board-annual-report-2013-14.pdf</a></p><p> </p><p>These figures are reproduced below.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Life sentenced prisoners</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2"><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td colspan="3"><p><strong>Oral hearing outcome</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Negative</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Open</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Release</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2009/10</p></td><td><p>455</p></td><td><p>311</p></td><td><p>129</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010/11</p></td><td><p>338</p></td><td><p>579</p></td><td><p>263</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011/12</p></td><td><p>300</p></td><td><p>463</p></td><td><p>311</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012/13</p></td><td><p>241</p></td><td><p>481</p></td><td><p>397</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013/14</p></td><td><p>313</p></td><td><p>469</p></td><td><p>379</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>This table provides outcomes only in respect of oral hearings. The Parole Board also takes decisions on the papers and without convening oral hearings. One life sentence prisoner received a recommendation for open conditions following a paper review in 2010/11.</p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to say how many were not recommended for transfer as negative outcomes include offenders who were already in open conditions and were refused release. Information on the location of a prisoner at the time of a review is not held centrally.</p><p> </p><p>These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.</p><p> </p><p>The categorisation and allocation of an offender to an open prison is never an automatic progression, with public protection the paramount consideration in the decision-making process. Only those prisoners whose risks are assessed as manageable in conditions of low security will be allocated to an open prison.</p><p> </p><p>Last year, we took decisive action to protect the public by changing the policy by which prisoners may be transferred to open conditions. As a result of a comprehensive review, we made major changes to tighten the eligibility for open prisons. Prisoners may no longer be transferred to open conditions or allowed out on temporary release if they have previously absconded, escaped, attempted to escape, or if they have failed to return or have re-offended whilst released on temporary licence, unless there are exceptional circumstances.</p> answering member constituency South West Bedfordshire answering member printed Andrew Selous question first answered 02/07/2015 13:04:03 answering member 1453 label Biography information for Andrew Selous
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies