Show Search Form

Search Results

human indexable	true false
published	true false
registered interest	true false
answer date	exactly: or between: and
date	exactly: or between: and
date tabled	exactly: or between: and
ddp created	exactly: or between: and
answering body
question status
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
ddp modified
hansard heading
house id
identifier
legislature	pref label
parliament number
question first answered
question text
session
session number
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
title
type
uin
version
written parliamentary question type
answer	answer text
creator	label
publisher	pref label
tabling member	label

Search

1087214

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	14/03/2019
	date	12/03/2019
	date tabled	12/03/2019
	ddp created	12/03/2019 21:31:55
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	12/03/2019 21:42:00 19/03/2019 18:26:40
	hansard heading	Antisocial Behaviour: Reoffenders
	house id	1
	identifier	231414
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:54:30
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for breach of an anti-social behaviour order or criminal behaviour order was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 231414
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	231414
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1089468

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	19/03/2019
	date	15/03/2019
	date tabled	15/03/2019
	ddp created	15/03/2019 15:25:56
	answering body	Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	13
	answering dept short name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	answering dept sort name	Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
	ddp modified	15/03/2019 15:35:46 26/03/2019 12:20:02
	hansard heading	Barbecues: Charcoal
	house id	1
	identifier	232994
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	26/03/2019 11:47:33
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how much charcoal for domestic barbecues the UK (a) produces and (b) burns in each year since 2010; and if he will make a statement.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 232994
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	232994
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The Forestry Commission collects data from the Joint Forest Sector Questionnaire on timber removals and production and trade of wood and wood products. The most recent published statistics from this source are for 2017. The statistics for 2010 to 2017 include the following information on wood charcoal.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>UK Production (tonnes)</p></td><td><p>Imports (tonnes)</p></td><td><p>Exports (tonnes)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>102,000</p></td><td><p>1,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>62,000</p></td><td><p>2,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>88,000</p></td><td><p>2,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>109,000</p></td><td><p>6,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>118,000</p></td><td><p>11,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2015</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>107,000</p></td><td><p>2,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2016</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>69,000</p></td><td><p>2,000</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2017</p></td><td><p>5,000</p></td><td><p>86,000</p></td><td><p>3,000</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Details of the end use for charcoal are not recorded.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Defra proposals to phase out the sale of traditional house coal (and restrict the sale of wet wood for domestic burning) will not affect the sale of charcoal.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1063986

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	21/02/2019
	date	19/02/2019
	date tabled	19/02/2019
	ddp created	19/02/2019 16:50:33
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	19/02/2019 17:16:43 28/02/2019 18:12:02
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	identifier	223183
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	28/02/2019 17:40:31
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average number was of previous community orders handed down to offenders sentenced to prison for (a) up to six months; (b) six to 12 months and (c) over 12 months in the last year for which information is available.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 223183
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	223183
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>The average number of previous community orders handed down to offenders sentenced to prison for (a) up to six months; (b) six to 12 months and (c) over 12 months in the last year for which information is available can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1086627

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/03/2019
	date	11/03/2019
	date tabled	11/03/2019
	ddp created	11/03/2019 23:16:45
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	11/03/2019 23:30:32 19/03/2019 18:10:02
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	identifier	230688
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:38:47
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number was of previous community orders given to an offender sentenced to immediate custody for a new offence of up to six months in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 230688
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	230688
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>The highest number of previous community orders given to an offender sentenced to immediate custody for a new offence of up to six months in each of the last three years can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p> </p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1086632

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/03/2019
	date	11/03/2019
	date tabled	11/03/2019
	ddp created	11/03/2019 23:16:57
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	11/03/2019 23:30:42 19/03/2019 17:23:23
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	identifier	230693
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 16:50:29
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number was of recorded breaches of a single community order in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 230693
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	230693
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>It is not possible to identify the maximum number of recorded breaches of a single community order, as centrally held information does not identify breaches of community orders nor the number of times an individual order was breached. It is therefore also not possible to link individuals breaching multiple orders over time.</p><p> </p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1086633

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/03/2019
	date	11/03/2019
	date tabled	11/03/2019
	ddp created	11/03/2019 23:17:00
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	11/03/2019 23:30:44 19/03/2019 17:23:21
	hansard heading	Community Orders
	house id	1
	identifier	230694
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 16:50:29
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number was of breaches of all previous community orders by an offender with a further breach of an order in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 230694
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	230694
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>It is not possible to identify the maximum number of recorded breaches of a single community order, as centrally held information does not identify breaches of community orders nor the number of times an individual order was breached. It is therefore also not possible to link individuals breaching multiple orders over time.</p><p> </p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1086644

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/03/2019
	date	11/03/2019
	date tabled	11/03/2019
	ddp created	11/03/2019 23:17:27
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	11/03/2019 23:31:08 19/03/2019 18:27:38
	hansard heading	Crimes of Violence: Sentencing
	house id	1
	identifier	230700
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:54:29
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of previous offences for assault was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 230700
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	230700
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1086646

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	13/03/2019
	date	11/03/2019
	date tabled	11/03/2019
	ddp created	11/03/2019 23:17:32
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	11/03/2019 23:31:12 19/03/2019 18:27:36
	hansard heading	Crimes of Violence: Sentencing
	house id	1
	identifier	230701
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:54:29
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of previous offences for assaulting a police officer was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 230701
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	230701
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1087211

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	14/03/2019
	date	12/03/2019
	date tabled	12/03/2019
	ddp created	12/03/2019 21:31:47
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	12/03/2019 21:41:55 19/03/2019 18:27:43
	hansard heading	Drugs: Reoffenders
	house id	1
	identifier	231412
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:54:29
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences relating to drugs was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 231412
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	231412
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies

1087215

	human indexable
	published
	registered interest
	answer date	14/03/2019
	date	12/03/2019
	date tabled	12/03/2019
	ddp created	12/03/2019 21:31:58
	answering body	Ministry of Justice
	question status	Tabled
	answering dept id	54
	answering dept short name	Justice
	answering dept sort name	Justice
	ddp modified	12/03/2019 21:42:04 19/03/2019 18:26:04
	hansard heading	Fraud: Reoffenders
	house id	1
	identifier	231415
	legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
	parliament number	57
	question first answered	19/03/2019 17:54:30
	question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the highest number of total previous offences for fraud was that a person committed before being given an immediate custodial sentence for that offence in each of the last three years.
	session	2017/19
	session number	1
	tabling member constituency	Shipley
	tabling member printed	Philip Davies
	title	House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2017/19 231415
	type	WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
	uin	231415
	version	1
	written parliamentary question type	Ordinary
	answer	answer answer text <p>Sentencing is a matter for our independent courts, who take into account all circumstances of the case, including any aggravating and mitigating factors. We are clear that sentencing must match the severity of a crime.</p><p> </p><p>However, sentences should also rehabilitate. There is persuasive evidence showing community sentences, in certain circumstances, are more effective than short custodial sentences in reducing reoffending. The MoJ study ‘The impact of short custodial sentences, community orders and suspended sentence orders on re-offending’ published in 2015 found that over a 1-year follow up period, a higher proportion of people re-offended having been sentenced to custody of under 12 months without supervision on release than other similar people given community orders.</p><p> </p><p>Unless we tackle the underlying causes of offending, we cannot protect the public from being victims of crime. Effective community orders can address offenders’ behaviour, answer their mental health and alcohol or drug misuse needs, and provide reparation for the benefit of the wider community.</p><p> </p><p>Data on the highest number of previous cautions and convictions for a selected offence type for a person who received their first immediate custodial sentence for the selected offence type, covering the period year ending September 2016 – year ending September 2018, can be viewed in the table.</p><p> </p><p>The data provided in the accompanying response table is sourced from MoJ's extract of the Police National Computer. As benefit fraud offences are not prosecuted by the police, we are unable to answer PQ230707.</p><p> </p><p>Caution should be exercised in drawing general conclusions from this data. By definition these are the very extremes of the system – the individuals with the very most convictions. Most significantly the 2015 study suggests that giving a short custodial sentence to a prolific offender is more, not less, likely to result in them committing another offence after custody, compared to giving them a community sentence.</p>
	creator	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies
	publisher	25259 pref label House of Commons
	tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Philip Davies