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

928817

registered interest
date	21/06/2018
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, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Crown Prosecution Service in charging suspects with the appropriate offence.
tabling member constituency	Witham
tabling member printed	Priti Patel
uin	156417
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/07/2018 answer text <p>Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) inspects the work of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and reports to the Law Officers. The Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code) provides that it is the duty of prosecutors to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. Between 2016 and 2018 HMCPSI inspected 12 of the 14 CPS Areas in England and Wales and found that in a very high proportion of cases the CPS correctly applied the Code and that the charges proceeded with were the correct ones. HMCPSI reported that in over 94.5% of the cases they inspected the decision to charge complied with the Code; that measure relates to all the provisions of the Code and not only whether any offence charged was the correct one.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/07/2018 15:56:01 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 68163 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4066 label Biography information for Priti Patel

928818

registered interest
date	21/06/2018
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, if he will commission research into the extent to which charging decisions made by the Crown Prosecution Service differ from the expectation of (a) Police and (b) victims of crime.
tabling member constituency	Witham
tabling member printed	Priti Patel
uin	156418
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/07/2018 answer text <p>HMCPSI provide reports to the Law Officers and the public on the work of the CPS and that includes analysis of charging decisions made by the CPS with reference to the Code for Crown Prosecutors. HMCPSI reports and CPS performance information do not provide data on the expectations of the police or victims as to charging decisions and any difference between those expectations and the charging decision made by the CPS.</p><p> </p><p>If the police wish to query or challenge a CPS charging decision, that can be done through a formal escalation procedure. If a victim wishes to query or challenge a CPS charging decision that can be done through the Victim’s Right to Review Scheme, the Victim Communication and Liaison Scheme and the CPS Feedback and Complaints Scheme.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/07/2018 15:56:38 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 68159 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4066 label Biography information for Priti Patel

928819

registered interest
date	21/06/2018
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, what estimate he has made of the number of occasions the Crown Prosecution Service has charged suspects with offences that are deemed less serious than the offences which the police investigated in the last 12 months.
tabling member constituency	Witham
tabling member printed	Priti Patel
uin	156419
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/07/2018 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of those occasions where the Crown Prosecution Service charges suspects with offences considered less serious than the offences which the police investigated. This information could only be obtained by examining CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/07/2018 15:57:05 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 68158 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4066 label Biography information for Priti Patel

850728

registered interest
date	27/02/2018
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Sexual Offences: Newcastle upon Tyne
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, whether his Department plans to implement any of the recommendations of the report, Joint Serious Case Review Concerning Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adults with Needs for Care and Support in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, published by the Newcastle Safeguarding Children Board and Newcastle Safeguarding Adults Board.
tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne North
tabling member printed	Catherine McKinnell
uin	129969
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/03/2018 answer text <p>On 23 February 2018, Newcastle Safeguarding Children Board and Newcastle Safeguarding Adults Board published their joint serious case review (SCR) for Operation Sanctuary.</p><p> </p><p>Specifically, CPS North East is working closely with Newcastle Crown Court and other partners within the Criminal Justice System to improve the experience of victims and witnesses when attending court and to ensure that the commitments to witness care set out in the Victim’s Code and the Witness Charter are properly delivered.</p><p> </p><p>Child sexual exploitation is abhorrent and the crimes perpetrated in Newcastle have had a devastating impact on the lives of the victims. The Government acknowledges the seriousness of the issues raised in this serious case review and is committed to improving the national response to tackling sexual exploitation.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>More broadly, the Government has already taken significant action to tackle this issue. In February 2017, the Government published its Tackling Child Sexual Exploitation: Progress Report and announced a £40m package of measures to protect children and young people from sexual abuse, exploitation and trafficking, and to crack down on offenders. This included £7.5m for a new, ground-breaking Centre of Expertise that will identify, generate, and share high quality evidence of what works to prevent and tackle child sexual abuse and exploitation. The recommendations of the review cover a wide range of issues, which we will consider carefully in the context of this existing programme of work.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 08/03/2018 16:49:33 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 44759 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4125 label Biography information for Catherine McKinnell

788612

registered interest
date	13/11/2017
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Domestic Abuse: Prosecutions
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many charges the Crown Prosecution Service has brought against people under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 for alleged controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship in each year since that section of that Act came into force.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	112584
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/11/2017 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not collect data on defendants prosecuted by specific offence. However, the table below shows the number of offences recorded in the magistrates' courts for the offence of controlling or coercive behaviour since its implementation on 29 December 2015. This figure relates to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>2015-2016</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2016-2017</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>5</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>309</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 28/11/2017 17:07:57 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 25532 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

524189

registered interest
date	09/06/2016
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Gurpal Virdi
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how and why the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) joined the Metropolitan Police in announcing that retired police sergeant Gurpal Virdi was charged with misconduct in public office and with indecent assault on a person under 16 years; what publicity the CPS recorded as resulting at the time; when the memorandum of a conviction proved 1 April 1987 for offences on 7 November 1986 of a defendant born on 5 September 1970 with informant or complainant recorded as PC Markwick came to the attention of the CPS; what steps were taken to put right the effect of the wrong statement; when those steps were taken; and what the results of those steps were.
tabling member constituency	Worthing West
tabling member printed	Sir Peter Bottomley
uin	40180
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 14/06/2016 answer text <p>A press release was issued by the Metropolitan Police Service which stated that the complainant was under 16. The CPS was not a party to this release and did not issue any other release. The CPS does not retain records of publicity resulting at the time.</p><p> </p><p>When the case was reviewed in 2014 for charging, the complainant and the witness clearly stated that the complainant had been 15 when the incident took place in 1986.<del class="ministerial"> In addition Mr Virdi also said in interview that the complainant had been 15 at the time of the incident.</del> The police summary stated that the complainant was 15. However the complainant’s date of birth and the date of his arrest were known and this mistake should not have been made.</p><p> </p><p>The CPS was supplied with the memorandum of conviction referred to on 17 September 2014.<del class="ministerial">The indictment was formally amended thereafter.</del></p><p> </p><p>No steps were taken to publicise the fact that the charge was later amended in open court to remove the assertion that the complainant was under 16.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 14/06/2016 13:53:54 question first ministerially corrected 24/06/2016 09:44:08 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 3723 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	117 label Biography information for Sir Peter Bottomley

426984

registered interest
date	09/11/2015
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Attorney General: Public Expenditure
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, what estimate he has made of expenditure in (a) 2014-15 prices and (b) as a proportion of total Departmental spending on (i) temporary agency staff, (ii) consultants, (iii) non-payroll staff, (iv) administration and (v) marketing and advertising in each year since 2010-11.
tabling member constituency	Newcastle upon Tyne North
tabling member printed	Catherine McKinnell
uin	15443
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/11/2015 answer text <p>The following tables contain details of the expenditure incurred by the Law Officers’ Departments in the categories requested during the last five financial years. Expenditure has not been restated in 2014-15 prices, as to do so would incur a disproportionate cost.</p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Expenditure – Government Legal Department <sup>1</sup></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><br></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</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Temporary Agency staff <sup>2</sup></p></td><td><p>£2,921k</p></td><td><p>£3,589k</p></td><td><p>£5,248k</p></td><td><p>£9,097k</p></td><td><p>£11,935k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>2.7%</p></td><td><p>3.1%</p></td><td><p>4.5%</p></td><td><p>6.5%</p></td><td><p>6.6%</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Consultants</p></td><td><p>£9k</p></td><td><p>£43k</p></td><td><p>£11k</p></td><td><p>£4k</p></td><td><p>£24k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Recruitment advertising <sup>3</sup></p></td><td><p>£12k</p></td><td><p>£25k</p></td><td><p>£11k</p></td><td><p>£45k</p></td><td><p>£88k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Revenue expenditure <sup>4</sup></p></td><td><p>£109,102K</p></td><td><p>£116,648k</p></td><td><p>£116,128k</p></td><td><p>£139,163k</p></td><td><p>£179,816k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of outturn</p></td><td><p>100%</p></td><td><p>100%</p></td><td><p>100%</p></td><td><p>100%</p></td><td><p>100%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><em><sup>1</sup></em><em> GLD figures also cover the Attorney General’s Office and HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate. </em><em>The information is taken from the published accounts for HM Procurator General and Treasury Solicitor. All GLD revenue expenditure is classified in the accounts as administration </em></p><p><em><sup>2 </sup></em><em>GLD do not have non-payroll staff other than agency and contracted staff.</em></p><p><em><sup>3 </sup></em><em>GLD do not routinely incur expenditure on marketing or advertising our services and do not separately capture these costs except those in relation to advertising for new staff. The amounts relating to these adverts are shown above.</em></p><p><em><sup>4 </sup></em><em>All GLD revenue expenditure is classified in the accounts as administration. </em></p><p><strong><em>* </em></strong><em>Proportion of spending less than 0.1% of outturn.</em></p><br /><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Expenditure – Serious Fraud Office </strong><sup>1</sup></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><br></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</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Temporary Agency staff</p></td><td><p>£3,693k</p></td><td><p>£2,296k</p></td><td><p>£2,672k</p></td><td><p>£3,926k</p></td><td><p>£4,610k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>9%</p></td><td><p>6%</p></td><td><p>7%</p></td><td><p>8%</p></td><td><p>8%</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Consultants</p></td><td><p>£1,557k</p></td><td><p>£856k</p></td><td><p>£31k</p></td><td><p>£48k</p></td><td><p>£7k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>4%</p></td><td><p>2%</p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Marketing and advertising</p></td><td><p>£9k</p></td><td><p>£73k</p></td><td><p>£6k</p></td><td><p>£21k</p></td><td><p>£30k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Administration</p></td><td><p>Nil<sup>2</sup></p></td><td><p>£7,546k</p></td><td><p>£7,019k</p></td><td><p>£7,281k</p></td><td><p>£6,237k</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of outturn</p></td><td><p>N/A</p></td><td><p>20%</p></td><td><p>17%</p></td><td><p>14%</p></td><td><p>11%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong><em><sup>1 </sup></em></strong><em>SFO do not have non-payroll staff other than agency and contracted staff.</em></p><p><strong><em><sup>2</sup></em></strong><em> From 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2011 all operating costs for the SFO were classified as programme costs. The Comprehensive Spending Review 2010, which covered the financial years 2011/12 to 2014/15, reinstated the requirement for reporting expenditure split between programme &amp; Administration.</em></p><p><strong><em>* </em></strong><em>Proportion of spending less than 1% of outturn.</em></p><br /><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="6"><p><strong>Expenditure – Crown Prosecution Service <em><sup>1</sup></em></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><br></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</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Temporary Agency staff</p></td><td><p>£1,616,284</p></td><td><p>£257,057</p></td><td><p>£66,866</p></td><td><p>£189,624</p></td><td><p>£491,303</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>0.23%</p></td><td><p>0.04%</p></td><td><p>0.01%</p></td><td><p>0.03%</p></td><td><p>0.09%</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Consultants</p></td><td><p>£684,314</p></td><td><p>£13,347</p></td><td><p>£9,793</p></td><td><p>£960</p></td><td><p>Nil</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>0.1%</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>*</strong></p></td><td><p>Nil</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Non payroll staff</p></td><td><p>£392,968</p></td><td><p>£23,355</p></td><td><p>£2,861</p></td><td><p>£273,935</p></td><td><p>£1,350,317</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of Outturn</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>*</p></td><td><p>0.24%</p></td></tr><tr><td colspan="6"><p><br></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Administration</p></td><td><p>£21,704,994</p></td><td><p>£9,637,983</p></td><td><p>£13,627,407</p></td><td><p>£12,426,376</p></td><td><p>£11,826,562</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>% of outturn</p></td><td><p>3.11%</p></td><td><p>1.48%</p></td><td><p>2.18%</p></td><td><p>2.03%</p></td><td><p>2.07%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong><em><sup>1 </sup></em></strong>No money was spent by the CPS on marketing and advertising in the relevant period other than when recruiting for vacant posts.</p><p><strong><em>* </em></strong><em>Proportion of spending less than 0.1% of outturn.</em></p><br /> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 19/11/2015 11:57:30 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland previous answer version 29955 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4125 label Biography information for Catherine McKinnell

387884

registered interest
date	06/07/2015
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, if he will review the position of the incumbent Director of Public Prosecutions in view of the recent decision to charge Lord Janner.
tabling member constituency	Rochdale
tabling member printed	Simon Danczuk
uin	5644
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 09/07/2015 answer text <p><ins class="ministerial">Decisions on whether or not to bring criminal charges are taken by prosecutors who are independent from government and independent from Parliament. I am confident of the independence and the integrity of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Alison Saunders, in making the difficult judgements the job of a prosecutor involves.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">The Victims’ Right to Review, which Alison Saunders helped to bring in, allows any victim of crime who is dissatisfied with a decision taken by a prosecutor not to proceed with their case to ask for the decision to be reviewed. This review has operated as it was designed to in the case of Greville Janner.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">We are world leaders in offering that safeguard for victims and since Alison Saunders has been DPP, the CPS has prosecuted and convicted more child sex offenders than ever before.</ins></p><p> </p><p><del class="ministerial">In the year to 31<sup>st </sup>December 2014, the Law Officers personally considered 469 cases and referred 128 offenders to the Court of Appeal under the unduly lenient sentence scheme. Leave was granted by the Court in 95% of cases which included some of the most serious violent and sexual offences, including murder, rape and sexual assault.</del></p><p><br /><del class="ministerial">The Attorney General’s Office publishes statistics for unduly lenient sentences at the end of the calendar year. This is to ensure that the figures are released in a consistent format and are accurate and quality assured. Unduly lenient sentences statistics for 2013 and 2014 are published on the Attorney General’s Office website - <a href="http://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/attorney-generals-office" target="_blank">www.gov.uk/government/organisations/attorney-generals-office</a>. </del></p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 09/07/2015 12:58:22 question first ministerially corrected 09/07/2015 13:24:23 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 13176 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	4059 label Biography information for Simon Danczuk

179514

registered interest
date	12/02/2015
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Fraud
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 3 September 2014 to Question 207315, whether a Shawcross exercise has been conducted in relation to Serious Fraud Office investigations since the date of that Answer; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	North East Fife
tabling member printed	Sir Menzies Campbell
uin	224413
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 24/02/2015 answer text <p>It is my department’s usual policy not to comment on any live investigation. In the period referred to there have been no Shawcross exercises in respect of any concluded SFO cases.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 24/02/2015 17:02:26 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 45780 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	627 label Biography information for Lord Campbell of Pittenweem

76992

registered interest
date	10/07/2014
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, what steps he plans to take in response to the funding of HM Chief Inspectorate of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in his Annual Report 2013-14, page 4 that the background of continuing resource reductions is now having an impact on the ability of the CPS to deliver effectively across the whole range of its activity.
tabling member constituency	Islington South and Finsbury
tabling member printed	Emily Thornberry
uin	205211
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/07/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has a comprehensive cost reduction strategy to 2015-16 that is fully aligned to, and supports, CPS priorities and objectives. The strategy will ensure that the department meets the SR2013 savings targets.</p><p>In their annual report for 2013-14 the Inspectorate acknowledged that CPS had improved its performance on serious and complex cases and also highlighted CPS success in hate crime cases and those involving violence against women and girls. The report was largely based on cases completed more than a year ago and more recent data shows performance improvements across the board since then. For example, magistrates' courts are seeing more guilty pleas and fewer cases dropped while the Crown Courts are showing increasing conviction rates – now at 81% across England and Wales. The challenges mentioned in the report are being addressed but they should be seen in the context of an improving prosecution service across the country.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 16/07/2014 15:11:39 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright previous answer version 10485 answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1536 label Biography information for Emily Thornberry