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 question first answered question first ministerially corrected answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1125240

registered interest
date	08/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Joseph McCann
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when the decision was taken to release Joseph McCann.
tabling member constituency	Leeds East
tabling member printed	Richard Burgon
uin	252002
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/05/2019 answer text <p>In accordance with the sentence of the Court, Joseph McCann was released on 15 February 2019, after he had completed half (less time spent on remand) of a three-year determinate sentence for burglary imposed on 25 January 2018. On release, he was supervised by the National Probation Service (NPS)</p><p> </p><p>When charged with that offence and remanded into custody on 21 August 2017, he was being supervised on licence by the NPS as part of the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) which he received on 26 September 2008. An offender on an IPP licence is not recalled automatically when he is charged with a further offence or offences. The probation officer will consider whether the alleged further offences, prior offending and the offender’s current behaviour show that his risk has escalated to the point where he needs to be recalled to protect the public. The decision on whether to recall an offender is to be based on a robust assessment of risk and to reflect the professional judgment of a trained probation officer.</p><p> </p><p>The NPS has undertaken an urgent review to establish why Mr McCann was not recalled to custody, either when remanded into custody on 21 August 2017 or when he was sentenced on <ins class="ministerial">25 January 2018</ins> <del class="ministerial">15 February 2018</del>. Mr McCann has now been charged with a number of very serious offences committed on or after 21 April this year. This has triggered a mandatory serious further offence (SFO) review, under the Probation SFO Review Procedures. The SFO review will consider in greater depth than has thus far been possible, including by interviewing relevant members of staff, the question of whether Mr McCann should have been recalled to custody when charged with and subsequently convicted of the burglary offence. Typically, an SFO review is completed within three months of an offender being charged with an SFO.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 17/05/2019 13:45:21 question first ministerially corrected 12/06/2019 14:34:20 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 118714 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	4493 label Biography information for Richard Burgon

1125241

registered interest
date	08/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Joseph McCann
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, who took the decision not to refer the question of Joseph McCann's release to the Parole Board.
tabling member constituency	Leeds East
tabling member printed	Richard Burgon
uin	252003
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/05/2019 answer text <p>In accordance with the sentence of the Court, Joseph McCann was released on 15 February 2019, after he had completed half (less time spent on remand) of a three-year determinate sentence for burglary imposed on 25 January 2018. On release, he was supervised by the National Probation Service (NPS)</p><p> </p><p>When charged with that offence and remanded into custody on 21 August 2017, he was being supervised on licence by the NPS as part of the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) which he received on 26 September 2008. An offender on an IPP licence is not recalled automatically when he is charged with a further offence or offences. The probation officer will consider whether the alleged further offences, prior offending and the offender’s current behaviour show that his risk has escalated to the point where he needs to be recalled to protect the public. The decision on whether to recall an offender is to be based on a robust assessment of risk and to reflect the professional judgment of a trained probation officer.</p><p> </p><p>The NPS has undertaken an urgent review to establish why Mr McCann was not recalled to custody, either when remanded into custody on 21 August 2017 or when he was sentenced on <ins class="ministerial">25 January 2018</ins> <del class="ministerial">15 February 2018</del>. Mr McCann has now been charged with a number of very serious offences committed on or after 21 April this year. This has triggered a mandatory serious further offence (SFO) review, under the Probation SFO Review Procedures. The SFO review will consider in greater depth than has thus far been possible, including by interviewing relevant members of staff, the question of whether Mr McCann should have been recalled to custody when charged with and subsequently convicted of the burglary offence. Typically, an SFO review is completed within three months of an offender being charged with an SFO.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 17/05/2019 13:45:21 question first ministerially corrected 12/06/2019 14:34:30 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 118715 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	4493 label Biography information for Richard Burgon

1125243

registered interest
date	08/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Joseph McCann
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) scope, (b) timescale and (c) remit is of the urgent review into the reported mistaken release of Joseph McCann.
tabling member constituency	Leeds East
tabling member printed	Richard Burgon
uin	252005
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/05/2019 answer text <p>In accordance with the sentence of the Court, Joseph McCann was released on 15 February 2019, after he had completed half (less time spent on remand) of a three-year determinate sentence for burglary imposed on 25 January 2018. On release, he was supervised by the National Probation Service (NPS)</p><p> </p><p>When charged with that offence and remanded into custody on 21 August 2017, he was being supervised on licence by the NPS as part of the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) which he received on 26 September 2008. An offender on an IPP licence is not recalled automatically when he is charged with a further offence or offences. The probation officer will consider whether the alleged further offences, prior offending and the offender’s current behaviour show that his risk has escalated to the point where he needs to be recalled to protect the public. The decision on whether to recall an offender is to be based on a robust assessment of risk and to reflect the professional judgment of a trained probation officer.</p><p> </p><p>The NPS has undertaken an urgent review to establish why Mr McCann was not recalled to custody, either when remanded into custody on 21 August 2017 or when he was sentenced on <ins class="ministerial">25 Jarnuary 2018</ins> <del class="ministerial">15 February 2018</del>. Mr McCann has now been charged with a number of very serious offences committed on or after 21 April this year. This has triggered a mandatory serious further offence (SFO) review, under the Probation SFO Review Procedures. The SFO review will consider in greater depth than has thus far been possible, including by interviewing relevant members of staff, the question of whether Mr McCann should have been recalled to custody when charged with and subsequently convicted of the burglary offence. Typically, an SFO review is completed within three months of an offender being charged with an SFO.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 17/05/2019 13:45:21 question first ministerially corrected 12/06/2019 14:34:40 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 118716 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	4493 label Biography information for Richard Burgon

1125244

registered interest
date	08/05/2019
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Joseph McCann
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, on what date was his Department informed of the release from prison of Joseph McCann.
tabling member constituency	Leeds East
tabling member printed	Richard Burgon
uin	252006
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/05/2019 answer text <p>In accordance with the sentence of the Court, Joseph McCann was released on 15 February 2019, after he had completed half (less time spent on remand) of a three-year determinate sentence for burglary imposed on 25 January 2018. On release, he was supervised by the National Probation Service (NPS)</p><p> </p><p>When charged with that offence and remanded into custody on 21 August 2017, he was being supervised on licence by the NPS as part of the sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) which he received on 26 September 2008. An offender on an IPP licence is not recalled automatically when he is charged with a further offence or offences. The probation officer will consider whether the alleged further offences, prior offending and the offender’s current behaviour show that his risk has escalated to the point where he needs to be recalled to protect the public. The decision on whether to recall an offender is to be based on a robust assessment of risk and to reflect the professional judgment of a trained probation officer.</p><p> </p><p>The NPS has undertaken an urgent review to establish why Mr McCann was not recalled to custody, either when remanded into custody on 21 August 2017 or when he was sentenced on <ins class="ministerial">25 January 2018</ins> <del class="ministerial">15 February 2018</del>. Mr McCann has now been charged with a number of very serious offences committed on or after 21 April this year. This has triggered a mandatory serious further offence (SFO) review, under the Probation SFO Review Procedures. The SFO review will consider in greater depth than has thus far been possible, including by interviewing relevant members of staff, the question of whether Mr McCann should have been recalled to custody when charged with and subsequently convicted of the burglary offence. Typically, an SFO review is completed within three months of an offender being charged with an SFO.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 17/05/2019 13:45:21 question first ministerially corrected 12/06/2019 14:34:49 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 118711 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	4493 label Biography information for Richard Burgon

990407

registered interest
date	18/10/2018
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Money Laundering: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many (a) prosecutions and (b) convictions have been made by the Crown Prosecution Service under (i) Section 330 and (ii) Sections 327-329 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne North
tabling member printed	Catherine McKinnell
uin	181274
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/10/2018 answer text <p><ins class="ministerial">The official statistics relating to crime and policing are maintained by the Home Office. Official statistics relating to sentencing, criminal court proceedings, offenders brought to justice, the courts and the judiciary are maintained by the Ministry of Justice.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The number of prosecutions and convictions for offences under sections 327-330 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 can be found <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738814/HO-Code-Tool-2017.xlsx" target="_blank">here</a>.</ins></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="7"><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Number of prosecutions and convictions for offences under sections 327-330 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, 2013-2017</strong></ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>2013</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>2014</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>2015</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>2016</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>2017</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Prosecutions</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 327</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">981</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">880</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">1,063</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">841</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">878</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 328</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">310</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">266</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">317</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">355</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">288</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 329</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">1,050</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">944</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">921</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">797</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">737</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 330</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">3</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">3</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">5</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">1</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">1</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial"><strong>Convictions</strong></ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 327</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">520</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">447</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">550</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">601</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">537</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 328</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">213</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">150</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">188</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">257</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">225</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 329</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">527</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">541</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">594</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">567</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">581</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">Section 330</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">6</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">4</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">2</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">3</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial">1</ins></p></td><td><p><ins class="ministerial"> </ins></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">(1) The figures given in the pivot table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</ins></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><ins class="ministerial">(3) A defendant who appears before both magistrates’ court and Crown Court may not do so within the same year, meaning for a given year convictions may exceed prosecutions or sentences may not equal convictions. Defendants who appear before both courts may be convicted at the Crown Court for a different offence to that for which they were originally proceeded against at magistrates’ court.</ins></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><del class="ministerial">Data on prosecutions and convictions is published by the MoJ and can be found <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/733981/outcomes-by-offence-tool-2017-update.xlsx%20" target="_blank">here</a>.</del></p><p> </p><p><del class="ministerial">A breakdown of prosecutions and convictions for money laundering is as follows:</del></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>Table 1. Number of prosecutions and convictions for money laundering, 2007-2017 (1)(2)(3)</strong></del></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>Money Laundering</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>2013</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>2014</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>2015</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>2016</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>2017</strong></del></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>Prosecutions</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">2,349</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">2,095</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">2,307</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,998</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,906</del></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial"><strong>Convictions</strong></del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,269</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,143</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,336</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,435</del></p></td><td><p><del class="ministerial">1,347</del></p></td></tr></tbody></table><table><tbody><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial">(1) The figures given in the pivot table relate to defendants for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</del></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial">(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</del></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><del class="ministerial">(3) A defendant who appears before both magistrates’ court and Crown Court may not do so within the same year, meaning for a given year convictions may exceed prosecutions or sentences may not equal convictions. Defendants who appear before both courts may be convicted at the Crown Court for a different offence to that for which they were originally proceeded against at magistrates’ court.</del></p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 23/10/2018 10:41:57 question first ministerially corrected 24/10/2018 08:17:54 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 80104 answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	4125 label Biography information for Catherine McKinnell