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
tabling member	label

Search

106192

registered interest
date	04/11/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Fraud: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many successful prosecutions have been made for non-benefit-related fraud in each year since 2009; and how many such prosecutions were for offences against an individual victim.
tabling member constituency	Bolton West
tabling member printed	Julie Hilling
uin	213310
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service does not maintain a separate record of the outcome of prosecution proceedings by specific offences, such as non-benefit frauds, or where the offences prosecuted concerned one victim. To obtain this information would involve undertaking a manual search of case records which would incur a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 11/11/2014 11:35:59 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	3925 label Biography information for Julie Hilling

106349

registered interest
date	04/11/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Sexting: Children
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many cases including the sending of a nude or sexually explicit electronic image of an individual under the age of 18 where the perpetrator of the crime is under the age of 18 have been referred to the Crown Prosecution Service in the last three years; how many such cases have been taken forward for prosecution; and how many such prosecutions have been successful.
tabling member constituency	Basingstoke
tabling member printed	Maria Miller
uin	213364
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not collect specific data on suspects referred to the CPS for a charging decision where the sending of sexually explicit images of children is alleged. However, data is available to indicate the number of offences charged, in which a prosecution commenced at magistrates’ courts, for offences of involving indecent images of children.</p><p> </p><p>The two main offence provisions for the prosecution of offences relating to indecent images of children are section 1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978 (making, distributing, showing or advertising indecent images of children) and section 160 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (possession of indecent images of children).</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The table below sets out the number of offences charged by way of the above legislation, in each of the last three years, in England and Wales.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2011-2012</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2012-2013</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2013-2014</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Protection of Children Act 1978 { 1 }</p></td><td><p>15,599</p></td><td><p>14,694</p></td><td><p>15,574</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice Act 1988 { 160 }</p></td><td><p>3,885</p></td><td><p>3,849</p></td><td><p>4,265</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Data Source: CPS Management Information System</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>It is not possible to disaggregate offences which relate to indecent images sent by way of an electronic device as opposed to other indecent image offences, cases where a conviction was obtained or the age of the perpetrator without reviewing individual case files incurring disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 07/11/2014 11:21:16 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1480 label Biography information for Dame Maria Miller

106388

registered interest
date	04/11/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Cybercrime: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 30 October 2014, to Question 212020, how many successful prosecutions were made for cybercrimes in each year since 2009.
tabling member constituency	Bolton West
tabling member printed	Julie Hilling
uin	213370
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 06/11/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service does not centrally record the number of prosecutions initiated, or those which resulted in a successful outcome, relating to cyber or cyber-enabled crime. A number of offences may involve the use of a computer or a network in the commission of the offence. To obtain details of the number of cases where defendants were alleged to have been involved in cyber or cyber-enabled crimes would require a manual review of individual case files to be undertaken which would incur a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 06/11/2014 14:41:56 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	3925 label Biography information for Julie Hilling

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

93087

registered interest
date	14/10/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Crown Prosecution Service
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of local authorities in England and Wales have adopted the new information-sharing protocol between the Crown Prosecution Service, police and councils.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	210546
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/10/2014 answer text <p>Implementation of the measures in the national protocol is secured through agreement of local arrangements. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains no central records of the number of local authorities that have adopted the national 2013 Protocol. However, in a recent survey of Chief Crown Prosecutors, the CPS found that, following the publication of the national multi-agency 2013 protocol, 82 of the 174 Local Authorities responsible for children’s services have so far signed local disclosure protocols.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 21/10/2014 16:10:41 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 22626 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland answering member 4106
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry

90583

registered interest
date	04/09/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Members: Correspondence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, when he passed the letter from the hon Member for Christchurch about Mrs Kirkhope of Ferndown to the Chief Constable for Hampshire; and what steps has been taken as a result of that letter.
tabling member constituency	Christchurch
tabling member printed	Mr Christopher Chope
uin	208253
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/09/2014 answer text <p>Our records suggest that a copy of the letter should have been posted to the Chief Constable of Hampshire on the 3<sup>rd</sup> April. However, no record exists of whether it was received or not by his office. My Office has since been in contact with Hampshire Police about the matter and they have now received a copy of the letter and will be taking it forward.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/09/2014 13:26:40 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	242 label Biography information for Sir Christopher Chope

90584

registered interest
date	04/09/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Pay
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the (a) highest and (b) lowest full-time equivalent salary paid by (i) the Law Officers' Departments and (ii) its public bodies was in (A) 2010-11, (B) 2011-12, (C) 2012-13, (D) 2013-14 and (E) 2014-15; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Harrow West
tabling member printed	Mr Gareth Thomas
uin	208301
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The following tables contain details on the highest and lowest payments made to full-time equivalent civil servants in the Law Officers’ Departments between 2010-11 and 2014-15.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Treasury Solicitor’s Department (TSol) *</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>FTE salary</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010-11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011-12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2012-13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2013-14</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2014-15 (to date)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Lowest</strong></p></td><td><p>£18,000 - £18,500</p></td><td><p>£18,000 - £18,500</p></td><td><p>£20,000 - £20,500</p></td><td><p>£21,000 – £21,500</p></td><td><p>£20,500 - £21,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Highest</strong></p></td><td><p>£155,000 – £159,999</p></td><td><p>£155,000 – £159,999</p></td><td><p>£155,000 – £159,999</p></td><td><p>£160,000 – £164,999</p></td><td><p>£160,000 – £164,999</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>* TSol data also covers the Attorney General’s Office and Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Serious Fraud Office</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>FTE salary</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010-11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011-12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2012-13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2013-14</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2014-15 (to date)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Lowest</strong></p></td><td><p>£19,500- £20,000</p></td><td><p>£19,500- £20,000</p></td><td><p>£20,000- £20,500</p></td><td><p>£19,500- £20,000</p></td><td><p>£19,500- £20,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Highest</strong></p></td><td><p>£165,000 - £169,999</p></td><td><p>£165,000 - £169,999</p></td><td><p>£180,000 - £184,999</p></td><td><p>£180,000 - £184,999</p></td><td><p>£180,000 - £184,999</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Crown Prosecution Service *</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>FTE salary</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2010-11</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2011-12</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2012-13</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2013-14</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2014-15 (to date)</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Lowest</strong></p></td><td><p>£14,000 -£14,500</p></td><td><p>£14,000 -£14,500</p></td><td><p>£14,000 -£14,500</p></td><td><p>£14,000 -£15,000</p></td><td><p>£14,000 -£15,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>Highest</strong></p></td><td><p>£210,000 -£215,000</p></td><td><p>£210,000 -£215,000</p></td><td><p>£195,000 – £200,000</p></td><td><p>£195,000 – £200,000</p></td><td><p>£200,000 -£205,000</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>* The source data for this question has been extracted from the CPS ‘Trent’ database using the base data report as of 05/09/14. Consequent change to data input may mean that this data could change at some point in the future.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In line with standard reporting requirements and for protection of personal data the salary for the highest paid individual has been shown within a £5K boundary and a £500 range has been applied for lower paid staff.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/09/2014 13:33:15 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	177 label Biography information for Gareth Thomas

89418

registered interest
date	29/08/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Police: Surveillance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, what reasons the Crown Prosecution Service gave for its decision not to prosecute undercover police officers accused of starting sexual relationships with environmental activists.
tabling member constituency	Bishop Auckland
tabling member printed	Helen Goodman
uin	207455
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will review any cases referred to it by the police in accordance with the two stage test that is set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. Where there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and it is in the public interest, such cases will be prosecuted.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The CPS has been working with officers conducting the Operation Herne investigation into the conduct of a number of officers.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>On 21 August 2014 the Crown Prosecution Service issued a statement containing the reasons it gave for not prosecuting officers considered under Operation Aubusson, a subset of Operation Herne which is available at:</p><p> </p><p>http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/charging_decision_concerning_mps_special_demonstration_squad/</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 03/09/2014 13:22:20 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1484 label Biography information for Helen Goodman

78870

registered interest
date	18/07/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	EU Law
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many times the UK has lost EU infraction proceedings since May 2010 which relate to matters that fall within the Law Officers' Departments' responsibility.
tabling member constituency	Wokingham
tabling member printed	Mr John Redwood
uin	206649
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>None. The UK has not been subject to infraction proceedings, during this period, which relate directly to matters within the Law Officers’ Departments’ areas of responsibility.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:02:07 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	14 label Biography information for Sir John Redwood