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 answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1464206

registered interest
date	18/05/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Coronavirus
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which Nightingale Courtrooms have been extended to 28 March 2023.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	4573
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2022 answer text <p>On 3 March 2022, HMCTS confirmed the extension of our tenure of 13 Nightingale court venues. This equates to 30 extra courtrooms to tackle the impact of COVID-19 on the justice system and secure speedier justice for victims.</p><p> </p><p>The table below outlines each of the Nightingale court venues that were extended, all of which were extended to the end of March 2023 with the exception of two venues which are annotated within the table.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Nightingale Court</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Number of courtrooms</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Barbican - London</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Croydon Jurys Inn - London</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Grand Connaught Rooms - London</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Prospero House – London (contracted until 31/12/2022)</p></td><td><p>Three Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Cloth Hall Court – North East</p></td><td><p>Three Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Swansea Civic Centre - Wales</p></td><td><p>One Crown court room</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Former magistrates’ court Fleetwood – North West</p></td><td><p>Two civil court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Chichester - former combined court – South East</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Maidstone Mercure – South East</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Cirencester - former magistrates’ court – South West</p></td><td><p>One Crown court room, one Magistrates rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Maple House, Birmingham – Midlands (contracted until 31/12/2022)</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms and two civil and family court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Telford - former county court – Midlands</p></td><td><p>Three civil and family court rooms</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Wolverhampton Park Hall Hotel - Midlands</p></td><td><p>Two Crown court rooms</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 23/05/2022 15:09:17 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1464263

registered interest
date	18/05/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Youth Custody
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many children currently remanded in custody are awaiting trial in the (a) Youth Court and (b) Crown Court.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	4574
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2022 answer text <p>The number of children and young people on remand is available and published monthly but not split into youth and crown courts.</p><p>The Youth Custody Service are unable to centrally report the number of children and young people that are on remand on the basis of their legal status. Legal basis reporting is driven by the most serious legal basis. Children and young people in custody for multiple matters, including remand may not be picked up through central reporting. A manual review of records is required to identify all children and young people who are remanded at any one time.</p><p>The PQ can only be answered through disproportionate costs due to how details on children and young peoples legal basis and court proceedings is recorded on case management systems used across the Youth Secure Estate. Answering the question in full requires manually searching individual case records.</p> answering member constituency Louth and Horncastle answering member printed Victoria Atkins question first answered 23/05/2022 17:56:11 answering member 4399 label Biography information for Victoria Atkins
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1464264

registered interest
date	18/05/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Magistrates' Courts
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the number of magistrates now sitting in-person on the bench in courts for trials following the removal of covid-19 restrictions in courts.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	4575
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2022 answer text <p>Magistrates are legally required to sit in benches of two for trials, but more usually they would sit as benches of three. During the pandemic, trials continued to be dealt with by magistrates sitting in person, but to ensure social distancing, magistrates sat more regularly as benches of two. Even prior to the lifting of restrictions, the installation of plexi-glass in court rooms, enabled most trials courts to return to sitting as benches of three. The lifting of covid-19 restrictions means there should be no barrier to magistrates sitting in person as a bench of three. Since the lifting of covid-19 restrictions, all magistrates are sitting in person excepting for matters dealt with under the single justice procedure.</p> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 23/05/2022 16:32:54 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1464265

registered interest
date	18/05/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Courts: Remote Working
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance his Department provides to courts on who should determine whether a case should initially be listed and dealt with remotely.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	4576
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2022 answer text <p>The decision whether a case should be heard remotely is at the discretion of a judge, who will decide if it is appropriate and in the interests of justice to do so, taking into account the needs of the parties involved. The allocation of court facilities will be provided accordingly.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS provide court staff with guidance to assist in the facilitation of remote hearings where a judge determines this method appropriate for a particular case. Public guidance on the use of remote hearings is available here: <a href="https://www.gov.uk/guidance/what-to-expect-when-joining-a-telephone-or-video-hearing" target="_blank">https://www.gov.uk/guidance/what-to-expect-when-joining-a-telephone-or-video-hearing</a>.</p><p> </p><p>The Lord Chief Justice has recently issued guidance on remote attendance in the Crown Court which is available via the following link: <a href="https://www.judiciary.uk/announcements/message-from-the-lord-chief-justice-remote-attendance-by-advocates-in-the-crown-court/" target="_blank">Message from the Lord Chief Justice – Remote Attendance by Advocates in the Crown Court | Courts and Tribunals Judiciary</a>.</p> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 23/05/2022 15:40:19 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1464266

registered interest
date	18/05/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Young Offenders: Criminal Proceedings
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people who allegedly committed offences as children have been (a) tried and (b) sentenced as adults in each of the last five years.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	4577
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2022 answer text <p>We appreciate the impact that turning 18 can have on a defendant’s experience of the justice system, and that there will be occasions where a child crosses the age threshold before conviction (or acquittal) due to circumstances outside of their control. There are already safeguards in the system to prevent individuals in this position from being treated unfairly, including sentencing starting points based on age at offence and support for vulnerable defendants at adult court.</p><p> </p><p>Data in the table below shows the number of defendants aged under 18 at the point of allegedly committing an offence and aged 18 or over at the point of completion who were dealt with at the Crown Court in England and Wales from January 2020 to June 2019. Individuals in this position can also be dealt with in the magistrates’ court, however quality-assured data for the numbers of such cases, or for previous years in either court, are not currently available.</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Month</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Defendants dealt with</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2020</p></td><td><p>Jan</p></td><td><p>118</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Feb</p></td><td><p>102</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Mar</p></td><td><p>108</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Apr</p></td><td><p>48</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>May</p></td><td><p>50</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Jun</p></td><td><p>45</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Jul</p></td><td><p>101</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Aug</p></td><td><p>59</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Sep</p></td><td><p>91</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Oct</p></td><td><p>66</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Nov</p></td><td><p>111</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Dec</p></td><td><p>76</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2021</p></td><td><p>Jan</p></td><td><p>84</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Feb</p></td><td><p>111</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Mar</p></td><td><p>165</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Apr</p></td><td><p>127</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>May</p></td><td><p>113</p></td></tr><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p>Jun</p></td><td><p>121</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p><strong>Notes</strong></p><p>1) Excludes a small number of cases with identified data quality issues (e.g. no date information recorded), breaches and appeals. On average across the series present 8% of defendants do not have a recorded age at offence and as such are excluded from this analysis.</p><p>2) Includes all criminal cases which have received a verdict and concluded in the specified time period in the Crown Court.</p><p>3) Only one offence is counted for each defendant in the case. If there is more than one offence per defendant that complete on the same day, a set of validation rules applies to select one offence only and these relate to the longest duration, seriousness and the lowest sequence number of the offence.</p><p>4) Data link using probabilistic recording linking ('Splink') methodology - further information of the matching methodology is available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/joined-up-data-in-government-the-future-of-data-linking-methods/splink-mojs-open-source-library-for-probabilistic-record-linkage-at-scale</p><p>5) The number of defendants shows the number whose cases have completed and where it has been possible to match from initial appearance at magistrates’ court to completion in the Crown Court. The match rate is typically between 90-95%, as for some cases, it is not possible to match defendants through the system and these cases are excluded.</p><p>6) Estimates from Q3 2020 exclude cases which have transitioned to the Common Platform system in the early adopter sites from September 2020, this represents 1.6% of all disposals in the latest reporting period.</p><p>Source: Criminal Court Statistics, Data and Evidence as a Service - Courts and People (PQ 58392)</p> answering member constituency Louth and Horncastle answering member printed Victoria Atkins question first answered 23/05/2022 15:21:46 answering member 4399 label Biography information for Victoria Atkins
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1462970

registered interest
date	16/05/2022
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Special Educational Needs: Appeals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the Answer of 25 April 2022 to Question 155726 on Special Educational Needs: Tribunals, what assessment his Department has made of the potential effect of the introduction of compulsory mediation on the ability of families with disabled children to access the SEND Tribunal and obtain redress when necessary.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	2329
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/05/2022 answer text <p>As the SEND and AP green paper sets out, the new national system will be designed to minimise uncertainty and disagreements throughout the system and improve parental confidence. The department recognises, however, that disputes around decision-making may still occur.</p><p>The government’s proposals seek to resolve issues earlier and improve relationships locally by strengthening mediation, including consulting on making it mandatory. Appeals to the tribunal should only need to be made in cases where parents feel that their child’s needs or proposed provision arrangements are not in line with the new national SEND standards, and mediation has not resolved the dispute. Mediation helps to maintain and improve relationships between providers, local authorities and families which is important for long-term collaborative working and supports better outcomes for children and young people.</p><p>This will reduce the need for cases to escalate to tribunal. The department will make sure there is appropriate support available to parents to help them understand the mediation process and how best to engage with it. However, parents will still be able to go to tribunal if necessary.</p><p>The green paper is now out for public consultation on its proposals until 22 July.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Colchester answering member printed Will Quince question first answered 19/05/2022 16:57:42 answering member 4423 label Biography information for Will Quince
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1462971

registered interest
date	16/05/2022
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Special Educational Needs: Appeals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, with reference to the proposal in his Department's SEND review to only allow families with disabled children to pick a school from a pre-defined list, what assessment he has made of the potential impact on the mental health of parent carers from having to appeal this list in order to have their child attend a school that meets their disabled child’s needs.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	2330
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/05/2022 answer text <p>Through the proposals set out in the SEND and AP green paper, it is our aim to provide parents and carers with a clearer understanding of the support that should be available to meet their child’s needs, regardless of where they live.</p><p>Where specialist provision is required, the department is consulting on proposals for a simplified process where parents will be supported to express an informed preference for a suitable placement from a tailored list of settings that are appropriate to meet their child’s needs.</p><p>This aims to give parents and carers clarity on what is available locally which may still include mainstream, special, independent, or out of borough provision where appropriate in order to meet their child’s needs.</p><p>The expectation is that all schools on the list will be settings that can meet the child’s special educational needs as identified in their education, health and care needs assessments, therefore reducing the need to appeal and improving the choice offered to parents.</p> answering member constituency Colchester answering member printed Will Quince question first answered 19/05/2022 16:58:01 answering member 4423 label Biography information for Will Quince
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1462825

registered interest
date	13/05/2022
answering body	Department of Health and Social Care
answering dept id	17
answering dept short name	Health and Social Care
answering dept sort name	Health and Social Care
hansard heading	Tixagevimab/cilgavimab
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what plans his Department has to make Evusheld available to immunocompromised people.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	1507
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/06/2022 answer text <p>Evusheld has been granted conditional marketing approval by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) on 17 March 2022. However, the MHRA highlighted uncertainty over the appropriate dose needed for protection against the Omicron variant. Understanding the efficacy of Evusheld is necessary prior to any procurement or deployment.</p><p> </p><p>The UK Health Security Agency is currently undertaking further testing on the treatment’s effectiveness against the Omicron variant. This will inform any decisions on the potential procurement of this treatment.</p> answering member constituency Erewash answering member printed Maggie Throup question first answered 07/06/2022 09:09:15 answering member 4447 label Biography information for Maggie Throup previous answer version 1103 answering member constituency Erewash answering member printed Maggie Throup answering member 4447 label Biography information for Maggie Throup
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1459997

registered interest
date	25/04/2022
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Magistrates' Courts: Hartlepool
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent discussions he has had with stakeholders on (a) plans to re-open and (b) plans for alternative uses of Hartlepool Magistrates' Court.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	158945
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/04/2022 answer text <p>There are no plans to re-open this court. Hartlepool Magistrates’ and County Court closed in 2017 following a full public consultation and workloads were successfully transferred to Teesside Magistrates’ Court and Middlesbrough County Court.</p><p>The property is owned by the local council and HMCTS are contracted under a long lease agreement that allows the property to only be used for court operations. HMCTS are in conversation with the local council to find a suitable alternative use for the building, which will benefit the local community.</p><p>We will continue to keep our court and tribunal estate under close review to make sure it meets our operational requirements.</p> answering member constituency South Suffolk answering member printed James Cartlidge question first answered 28/04/2022 10:06:34 answering member 4519 label Biography information for James Cartlidge
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham

1460001

registered interest
date	25/04/2022
answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
answering dept id	13
answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
hansard heading	Animal Experiments
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of any increase in testing chemical and pharmaceutical products on animals as a result of different REACH regimes in the UK and EU.
tabling member constituency	Stockton North
tabling member printed	Alex Cunningham
uin	158949
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 28/04/2022 answer text <p>The UK has been at the forefront of opposing animal tests where alternative approaches could be used. This is known as the &quot;last-resort principle&quot;, which have retained and enshrined in legislation through our landmark Environment Act.</p><p> </p><p>We are determined that there should be no need for any additional animal testing for a chemical that has already been registered, unless it is subject to further evaluation that shows the registration dossier is inadequate or there are still concerns about the hazards and risks of the chemical, especially to human health.</p><p> </p><p>The Health and Safety Executive, as the UK REACH Agency, will shortly be publishing its first report under Article 117(3) on the status of implementation and use of non-animal test methods and testing strategies under REACH. This report covers the first twelve months of UK REACH operation.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Bury St Edmunds answering member printed Jo Churchill question first answered 28/04/2022 11:20:08 answering member 4380 label Biography information for Jo Churchill
tabling member	4122 label Biography information for Alex Cunningham