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

1663023

	registered interest
	date	13/10/2023
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Serious Fraud Office
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many corporate self-reports the Serious Fraud Office has received in each of the last five years.
	tabling member constituency	Hammersmith
	tabling member printed	Andy Slaughter
	uin	200877
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 18/10/2023 answer text <p>In financial year 2018/19 the SFO received <del class="ministerial">8</del><ins class="ministerial">7</ins> corporate self-reports.</p><p>In financial year 2019/20 the SFO received <del class="ministerial">17</del><ins class="ministerial">6</ins> corporate self-reports.</p><p>In financial year 2020/21 the SFO received <del class="ministerial">11</del><ins class="ministerial">3</ins> corporate self-reports.</p><p>In financial year 2021/22 the SFO received 8 corporate self-reports.</p><p>In financial year 2022/23 the SFO received 8 corporate self-reports.</p> answering member constituency Mid Dorset and North Poole answering member printed Michael Tomlinson question first answered 18/10/2023 09:37:34 question first ministerially corrected 23/10/2023 15:52:36 answering member 4497 label Biography information for Michael Tomlinson previous answer version 98035 answering member constituency Mid Dorset and North Poole answering member printed Michael Tomlinson answering member 4497 label Biography information for Michael Tomlinson
	tabling member	1516 label Biography information for Andy Slaughter

1671388

	registered interest
	date	20/11/2023
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Good Law Project: Legal Costs
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what was the total sum (a) paid to and (b) received from the Good Law Project by HM Government in respect of legal costs in each financial year since 2017-18.
	tabling member constituency	South Holland and The Deepings
	tabling member printed	Sir John Hayes
	uin	2472
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/11/2023 answer text <p><del class="ministerial">There were 52 cases against His Majesty’s Government in which the Good Law Project were involved as a party which concluded in the period since the start of the 2017-18 financial year. HM Government won 14 and lost 2 of those cases, 15 cases were settled, and 31 cases withdrawn by the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In total, the Good Law Project has paid £539,766.19 in legal costs to HM Government, while HM Government has paid £63,738.71 in legal costs to the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><br /><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2017-2018, no payments were made or received.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2018-2019, £40,000.00 was paid to, and £4,753.00 was received from, the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2019-2020, £0 was paid to, and £59,013.19 was received from, the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2020-2021, £0 was paid to, and £10,000.00 was received from, the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2021-2022, £0 was paid to, and £270,000.00 was received from, the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2022-2023, £23,738.71 was paid to, and £196,000.00 was received from, the Good Law Project.</del></p><p><del class="ministerial">In financial year 2023-2024 to date, no payments have been made or received.</del></p><p><ins class="ministerial">There were 42 case files opened in respect of actual court proceedings between His Majesty’s Government and the Good Law Project during the period since the start of the 2017-18 financial year. HM Government won 19 and lost 6, 7 cases were settled, and 9 cases were withdrawn by the Good Law Project. One has yet to deliver an outcome.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In total, in regard to these 42 cases:</ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">The Good Law Project has paid £984,098.45 in legal costs to HM Government, while HM Government has paid £160,925.71 in legal costs to the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p> </p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2017-2018, no payments were made or received.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2018-2019, £40,000 was paid to, and £4,753 was received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2019-2020, £0 was paid to, and £59,013.19 was received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2020-2021, £85,000 was paid to, and £10,000 was received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2021-2022, £0 was paid to, and £286,000 was received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2022-2023, £35,925.71 was paid to, and £544,000 was received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p><p><ins class="ministerial">In financial year 2023-2024, £0 has been paid to, and £80,332.26 has been received from, the Good Law Project.</ins></p> answering member constituency Mid Dorset and North Poole answering member printed Michael Tomlinson question first answered 27/11/2023 17:25:30 question first ministerially corrected 04/12/2023 15:24:45 answering member 4497 label Biography information for Michael Tomlinson previous answer version 3541 answering member constituency Mid Dorset and North Poole answering member printed Michael Tomlinson answering member 4497 label Biography information for Michael Tomlinson
	tabling member	350 label Biography information for Sir John Hayes

1228799

	registered interest
	date	28/08/2020
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Trespass: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what is the prosecution rate is for trespass committed in (a) Sussex and (b) England.
	tabling member constituency	Arundel and South Downs
	tabling member printed	Andrew Griffith
	uin	82648
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/09/2020 answer text <p>The CPS does not maintain a central record of prosecutions which involved trespass. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>Trespass is not of itself a criminal offence. However, there are some offences in which trespass is an essential element. The tables below set out the most common examples of such offences, where a prosecution commenced in the Sussex Police Force Area and in England, during each of the last three years.</p><p> </p><p>Offences recorded in the CPS Case Management Information System are those which reached a hearing. There is no indication of the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.</p><p> </p><p>It should be noted that the figures relate to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It may be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence.</p><p><strong>TABLE (A) SUSSEX POLICE FORCE AREA</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2017-2018</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2018-2019</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2019-2020</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 61(4) }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a police direction to leave land</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 62B }</p></td><td><p>Failure to comply with a direction under s62A to leave land: alternative site available</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 63 }</p></td><td><p>Failure to comply with a direction to leave land: attending or preparing for a rave</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 65 }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction not to proceed to a rave</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 68 }</p></td><td><p>Aggravated trespass</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 69 }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction: aggravated trespass</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 76 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing during the currency of an interim possession order (“IPO”)</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 6 }</p></td><td><p>Violence to secure entry</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>19</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 7 }</p></td><td><p>Adverse occupation of residential premises.</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 8 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing with a weapon of offence</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 9 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing on premises of a foreign mission</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Firearms Act 1968 { 20(1) of and Schedule 6 }</p></td><td><p>Trespass in a building with a firearm or imitation firearm</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Firearms Act 1968 { 20(2) of and Schedule 6 }</p></td><td><p>Trespass on land with a firearm</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Public Order Act 1986 { 14B(3) and (7) }</p></td><td><p>Inciting another knowingly to take part in a prohibited assembly</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Public Order Act 1986 { 14C(3) and (5) }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction: trespassory assembly.</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment Act 2012 { 144(1) and (5) }</p></td><td><p>Squatting in residential premises.</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong> </strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong> </strong></p><p><strong>TABLE (B) ENGLAND </strong></p><p> </p><p><strong> <strong> </strong></strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p> </p></td><td><p> </p></td><td><p><strong>2017-2018</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2018-2019</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>2019-2020</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 61(4) }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a police direction to leave land</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 62B }</p></td><td><p>Failure to comply with a direction under s62A to leave land: alternative site available</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 63 }</p></td><td><p>Failure to comply with a direction to leave land: attending or preparing for a rave</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 65 }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction not to proceed to a rave</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 68 }</p></td><td><p>Aggravated trespass</p></td><td><p>38</p></td><td><p>45</p></td><td><p>114</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 69 }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction: aggravated trespass</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>40</p></td><td><p>36</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 { 76 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing during the currency of an interim possession order (“IPO”)</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 6 }</p></td><td><p>Violence to secure entry</p></td><td><p>1,413</p></td><td><p>1,271</p></td><td><p>1,081</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 7 }</p></td><td><p>Adverse occupation of residential premises.</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 8 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing with a weapon of offence</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Criminal Law Act 1977 { 9 }</p></td><td><p>Trespassing on premises of a foreign mission</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>0</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Firearms Act 1968 { 20(1) of and Schedule 6 }</p></td><td><p>Trespass in a building with a firearm or imitation firearm</p></td><td><p>5</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>2</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Firearms Act 1968 { 20(2) of and Schedule 6 }</p></td><td><p>Trespass on land with a firearm</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>5</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Public Order Act 1986 { 14B(3) and (7) }</p></td><td><p>Inciting another knowingly to take part in a prohibited assembly</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>0</p></td><td><p>1</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Public Order Act 1986 { 14C(3) and (5) }</p></td><td><p>Failing to comply with a direction: trespassory assembly.</p></td><td><p>21</p></td><td><p>1</p></td><td><p>3</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment Act 2012 { 144(1) and (5) }</p></td><td><p>Squatting in residential premises.</p></td><td><p>30</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>25</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong> </strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p></td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 08/09/2020 09:00:32 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	4874 label Biography information for Andrew Griffith

1130703

	registered interest
	date	07/06/2019
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Rape: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, (a) how many and (b) what proportion of cases of rape reported to the CPS were administratively finalised in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Ashfield
	tabling member printed	Gloria De Piero
	uin	261500
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 17/06/2019 answer text <p>It is important to stress that ’administrative finalisation’ is not a prosecutorial decision. It is an administrative process where cases are closed on CPS’ electronic case management system. It does not necessarily mean the proceedings are at an end. Such cases may be reopened, if at a later date, new material is provided to the prosecution enabling a charging decision to be made.</p><p> </p><p>Proceedings are administratively finalised when:</p><p> </p><ul><li>The police seek early investigative advice from the CPS and did not resubmit the case to the CPS for a charging decision. In these instances, the case enters the CPS records but was never actually referred for a charging decision.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>The police do refer a case to the police but there is insufficient evidence to bring a charge, sothe CPS ask the police to complete an action plan in order to improve the evidence. If the police are unable to respond to the action plan or decide not to pursue the matter, then the case will be ‘administratively finalised’ on the CPS system because the police cannot bring forward a case with sufficient evidence to charge.</li></ul><p>There was a 9% reduction in referrals from the police between 2016/17 and 2017/18. During this period, the percentage of cases resulting in no further action remained largely unchanged. There was, however, a significant increase in both the volume and percentage of cases administratively finalised. This is largely because of internal CPS administrative processes, reminding users to ‘administratively finalise’ cases where the police had requested early advice but had not resubmitted.</p><p>This coincided with an increase in the number of cases where the police have not responded to early investigative advice or an action plan has resulted in a rise in the number of administrative finalisations.</p><p>The table below shows the outcome of all referrals from the police for a pre charge decision, and show both the volume and the rates of these outcomes</p><p>TABLE KEY:</p><p> </p><ul><li>Decision to charge: Prosecutors must be satisfied there is enough evidence to provide a &quot;realistic prospect of conviction&quot; against each defendant and that the prosecution is in the public interest.</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Take no further action: This is a prosecutorial decision based on an assessment that there is insufficient evidence to provide a “realistic prospect of conviction” or that a prosecution is not in the public interest. The case may be reopened if the police provide further evidence or the victim successfully appeals the decision under the victims right to review;</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Out of Court Disposal: Out of court disposals include a caution, conditional caution or the recommendation that the offence is taken into consideration with other charges;</li></ul><p> </p><ul><li>Other: the result of the charging decision is not known or has not been given for that suspect.</li></ul><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Volumes &amp; Rates as %</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Charge</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>No Further Action</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Out of Court Disposal</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Admin Finalised</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Other</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2010-2011</strong></p></td><td><p>3,387 (42%)</p></td><td><p>4,339 (53%)</p></td><td><p>65 (1%)</p></td><td><p>321 (4%)</p></td><td><p>18 (0%)</p></td><td><p>8,130</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2011-2012</strong></p></td><td><p>3,213 (47%)</p></td><td><p>3,281 (48%)</p></td><td><p>42 (1%)</p></td><td><p>275 (4%)</p></td><td><p>11 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,822</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2012-2013</strong></p></td><td><p>2,889 (53%)</p></td><td><p>2,195 (41%)</p></td><td><p>34 (1%)</p></td><td><p>281 (5%)</p></td><td><p>5 (0%)</p></td><td><p>5,404</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013-2014</strong></p></td><td><p>3,621 (62%)</p></td><td><p>1,857 (32%)</p></td><td><p>23 (0%)</p></td><td><p>341 (6%)</p></td><td><p>8 (0%)</p></td><td><p>5,850</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2014-2015</strong></p></td><td><p>3,648 (59%)</p></td><td><p>1,997 (32%)</p></td><td><p>29 (0%)</p></td><td><p>484 (8%)</p></td><td><p>1 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,159</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2015-2016</strong></p></td><td><p>3,910 (57%)</p></td><td><p>2,271 (33%)</p></td><td><p>24 (0%)</p></td><td><p>645 (9%)</p></td><td><p>5 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,855</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2016-2017</strong></p></td><td><p>3,671 (56%)</p></td><td><p>2,145 (32%)</p></td><td><p>30 (0%)</p></td><td><p>761 (12%)</p></td><td><p>4 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,611</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2017-2018</strong></p></td><td><p>2,822 (47%</p></td><td><p>1,851 (31%)</p></td><td><p>26 (0%)</p></td><td><p>1,307 (22%)</p></td><td><p>6 (0%)</p></td><td><p>6,012</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 17/06/2019 15:09:46 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
	tabling member	3915 label Biography information for Gloria De Piero

1130704

	registered interest
	date	07/06/2019
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Rape: Prosecutions
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what the average number of days taken from a report of rape to a decision to charge was in each year since 2010.
	tabling member constituency	Ashfield
	tabling member printed	Gloria De Piero
	uin	261501
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/06/2019 answer text <table><tbody><tr><td><p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a record of the average number of days taken from a report of rape to the police through to a decision to charge. Data is, however, held on the average number of days from submission of a rape case by the police to the CPS through to the date of the decision to charge. The CPS works closely with police colleagues to ensure that where individuals are charged, cases have been thoroughly investigated and individuals are properly charged and prosecuted so that the interests of both victims and perpetrators are protected and cases do not collapse mid-trial. The figures provided in the table below include the end to end timeliness from submission to the date of the decision to charge. This comprises of the time when the case was with both police and the CPS. <table><tbody><tr><td><p><strong>Financial Year</strong></p></td><td><p><strong> </strong> <strong>Average Number of Calendar Days </strong> <strong>Receipt to Decision to Charge</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>Average Consultations per Suspect</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2010-2011</strong></p></td><td><p>32</p></td><td><p>1.71</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2011-2012</strong></p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>1.74</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2012-2013</strong></p></td><td><p>34</p></td><td><p>1.69</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2013-2014</strong></p></td><td><p>40</p></td><td><p>1.66</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2014-2015</strong></p></td><td><p>55</p></td><td><p>1.65</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2015-2016</strong></p></td><td><p>53</p></td><td><p>1.66</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2016-2017</strong></p></td><td><p>67</p></td><td><p>1.80</p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>2017-2018</strong></p></td><td><p>78</p></td><td><p>1.97</p></td></tr></tbody></table></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>There are a number of reasons for the steady increase in the average number of days and average number of consultations per case since 2010/11. The number of consultations between CPS prosecutors and police investigators is important. Consultations allow for a close examination of the evidence thus ensuring the case is strong. Clearly, the more consultations that take place, the longer the time between receipt of the case and the decision to charge.</p><p> </p><p>Police are now encouraged to seek early investigative advice more often and in particular in rape and serious sexual offences cases. Early investigative advice helps to ensure that cases are thoroughly investigated and the evidence to be brought before the court is strong. As a result, fewer cases are dropped after the defendant has been charged. With the increase in early investigative advice, CPS is more often involved at an earlier stage in proceedings and this will invariably impact on the average number of consultations and overall timeliness.</p><p> </p><p>There has also been an increase in the complexity of rape cases investigated by the police. Investigations often involve large amounts of electronic material (social media, emails, text messages, video and photographs) which needs to be reviewed by prosecutors before a charging decision can be made. This also impacts on the average number of consultations and timeliness of the pre-charge stage of the case.</p><p> </p><p>CPS prosecutors work closely with police colleagues to build strong cases which can be brought before the courts. Increased complexity has been evidenced over time by the rise in the average number of consultations with the police. Since 2010/11, the number has increased from 1.71 to 1.98 consultations per case, a rise of 16%.</p><p> </p><p>Changes have now been made to the Casework Management System to provide for a more sophisticated level of reporting. In future, CPS will be able to report the timeliness for each individual consultation.</p> answering member constituency South East Cambridgeshire answering member printed Lucy Frazer question first answered 13/06/2019 08:28:06 answering member 4517 label Biography information for Lucy Frazer
	tabling member	3915 label Biography information for Gloria De Piero

1216028

	registered interest
	date	22/06/2020
	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 Inquiries
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, if she will publish the (a) statutory and (b) non-statutory public inquiries being undertaken by her Department.
	tabling member constituency	Ashfield
	tabling member printed	Lee Anderson
	uin	62604
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/06/2020 answer text <p>The Attorney General’s Office is not currently undertaking any statutory or non-statutory public inquiries.</p> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 30/06/2020 14:50:08 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	4743 label Biography information for Lee Anderson

1281659

	registered interest
	date	28/01/2021
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Sentencing: Appeals
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the unduly lenient sentence scheme.
	tabling member constituency	Ashfield
	tabling member printed	Lee Anderson
	uin	145155
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 02/02/2021 answer text <p>The Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme is a vital safeguard in our criminal justice system. It permits the Law Officers to intervene personally in a case where a sentencing judge has fallen into gross error and imposed a sentence which is outside the reasonable range.</p><p> </p><p>Sentencing judges get it right in the vast majority of cases. In those rare cases where they get it wrong, the scheme ensures that justice is served.</p><p> </p><p>I recently argued in person before the Court of Appeal that the dangerous and depraved serial rapists Joseph McCann and Reynhard Sinaga should have received whole life sentences. The Court of Appeal did not impose whole life sentences, but it did increase their minimum terms from 30 to 40 years to properly reflect the truly heinous nature of their offending and protect the public from them.</p> answering member constituency Northampton North answering member printed Michael Ellis question first answered 02/02/2021 09:26:54 answering member 4116 label Biography information for Sir Michael Ellis
	tabling member	4743 label Biography information for Lee Anderson

1582651

	registered interest
	date	01/02/2023
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Police: Bureaucracy
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what steps she has taken to reduce administrative requirements on the police for the submission of documents to the Crown Prosecution Service.
	tabling member constituency	Aylesbury
	tabling member printed	Rob Butler
	uin	903446
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/02/2023 answer text <p>I am working closely with colleagues across Government to identify and if possible to reduce the administrative burden on the Police and CPS. Of course, there is an important balance to strike in protecting sensitive personal information, whilst not over-burdening police officers.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Mid Dorset and North Poole answering member printed Michael Tomlinson question first answered 01/02/2023 14:33:53 answering member 4497 label Biography information for Michael Tomlinson
	tabling member	4745 label Biography information for Rob Butler

1283781

	registered interest
	date	04/02/2021
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Rule of Law
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on the importance of upholding the rule of law.
	tabling member constituency	Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock
	tabling member printed	Allan Dorans
	uin	911871
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 04/02/2021 answer text <p>The rule of law is at the heart of the UK constitution. The duty of the Law Officers is to ensure that the Government acts lawfully at all times. I take that responsibility seriously including in my role as legal adviser to the Government and when attending Cabinet, and that will not change.</p>I would like to take this opportunity to thank Government Legal Department lawyers for their heroic work in contributing to the Rule of Law during the pandemic, as the Government continues to be successful in Covid-related challenges. answering member constituency Fareham answering member printed Suella Braverman question first answered 04/02/2021 11:36:28 answering member 4475 label Biography information for Suella Braverman
	tabling member	4740 label Biography information for Allan Dorans

1027672

	registered interest
	date	18/12/2018
	answering body	Attorney General
	answering dept id	88
	answering dept short name	Attorney General
	answering dept sort name	Attorney General
	hansard heading	Business: Economic Crime
	house id	1
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	question text	To ask the Attorney General, what progress his Department has made in ensuring that the UK has adequate corporate criminal liability for economic crime.
	tabling member constituency	Barking
	tabling member printed	Dame Margaret Hodge
	uin	203212
	answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 07/01/2019 answer text <p>The Call for Evidence on Corporate Criminal Liability for Economic Crime contained a number of different options for reform, including a proposal to extend the failure to prevent offence to wider economic crimes other than bribery or tax evasion. The Government’s response is expected to be issued in 2019.</p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Robert Buckland question first answered 07/01/2019 09:00:07 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
	tabling member	140 label Biography information for Dame Margaret Hodge