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 grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1307625

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Trials: Young Offenders
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people aged 17 are awaiting trial in England and Wales.
tabling member printed	Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth
uin	HL14701
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/04/2021 answer text <p>As at 31 December 2020, there were 18 outstanding cases in the Crown Court where the defendant was aged 17, had entered a not-guilty plea to one or more counts and for whom a trial date had been set. There were 38 outstanding cases in the Crown Court where the defendant was aged 17 at the time of the earliest offence on the case, and on 31 December 2020, the defendant was aged 18 or more, had entered a not-guilty plea to one or more counts and for whom a trial date had been set.<sup>1</sup> To provide this data for Magistrates Courts would require examination of individual file records and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS prioritises and regularly reviews youth cases to clear outstanding cases and reduce the number of children awaiting trial. In 2020 outstanding youth cases at the magistrates' court reached an annual peak of 12,138 in June, then consistently fell to 9,930 cases by December. In the same period, outstanding youth cases at the Crown Court remained stable, peaking at 665 in October then falling to 629 by December. HMCTS prioritises cases where there is a possibility that the defendant may turn 18 before conviction. The judiciary has re-published a note about listing in magistrates’ courts highlighting the impact on the remand status of youth defendants and the need to list cases expeditiously where a child is about to turn 18.</p><p> </p><p>1. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that the data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when data are used.</p> answering member printed Lord Wolfson of Tredegar grouped question UIN HL14702 question first answered 26/04/2021 16:17:54 answering member 4901 label Biography information for Lord Wolfson of Tredegar
tabling member	4282 label Biography information for Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

1307627

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Trials: Young Offenders
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people over the age of 18 are awaiting trial for alleged offences committed while they were 17 years old.
tabling member printed	Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth
uin	HL14702
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 26/04/2021 answer text <p>As at 31 December 2020, there were 18 outstanding cases in the Crown Court where the defendant was aged 17, had entered a not-guilty plea to one or more counts and for whom a trial date had been set. There were 38 outstanding cases in the Crown Court where the defendant was aged 17 at the time of the earliest offence on the case, and on 31 December 2020, the defendant was aged 18 or more, had entered a not-guilty plea to one or more counts and for whom a trial date had been set.<sup>1</sup> To provide this data for Magistrates Courts would require examination of individual file records and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p><p>HMCTS prioritises and regularly reviews youth cases to clear outstanding cases and reduce the number of children awaiting trial. In 2020 outstanding youth cases at the magistrates' court reached an annual peak of 12,138 in June, then consistently fell to 9,930 cases by December. In the same period, outstanding youth cases at the Crown Court remained stable, peaking at 665 in October then falling to 629 by December. HMCTS prioritises cases where there is a possibility that the defendant may turn 18 before conviction. The judiciary has re-published a note about listing in magistrates’ courts highlighting the impact on the remand status of youth defendants and the need to list cases expeditiously where a child is about to turn 18.</p><p> </p><p>1. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that the data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when data are used.</p> answering member printed Lord Wolfson of Tredegar grouped question UIN HL14701 question first answered 26/04/2021 16:17:54 answering member 4901 label Biography information for Lord Wolfson of Tredegar
tabling member	4282 label Biography information for Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth

1307661

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Young Offender Institutions: Restraint Techniques
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the recommendation of Charlie Taylor's review into the use of pain-inducing restraint in the youth secure estate, what steps his Department has taken to establish an independent restraint and behaviour panel.
tabling member constituency	South Shields
tabling member printed	Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck
uin	179142
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/04/2021 answer text <p>Following Charlie Taylor’s review into the use of pain-inducing techniques the Ministry of Justice responded to all recommendations in June 2020. It remains the case that restraint should only be used where there is no other suitable alternative. In the first instance, the approach should always be to use behaviour management techniques that focus on de-escalation and diversion. In cases where restraint is used, it must always be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with the law.</p><p>To improve the monitoring of these instances, the Youth Custody Service established the independent restraint and behaviour panel in December 2020 as a multi-sector partnership with members providing independent and expert scrutiny on the use of pain-inducing techniques in establishments. The panel who reports to Ministers on a quarterly basis, reviews the use of pain-inducing techniques at a single youth secure establishment each month (rotating the establishment monthly) and then supports the establishment with actions focussed on the reduction of use.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice committed to removing pain-inducing techniques from the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint (MMPR) syllabus in June 2020. Since then, the Youth Custody Service has been working on developing and implementing training to ensure that the revised syllabus is rolled out later this summer through the training of all staff. The use of pain-inducing techniques will be taught separately, for use as a last resort to prevent serious harm to a child or adult, in line with Recommendation 9.</p><p>Escorts transferring children to and from Secure Training Centre’s, Secure Children Homes and Young Offending Institutions have all received training in the MMPR syllabus which no longer includes training on pain-inducing techniques. The department is currently reviewing the policy in line with recommendation 14.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk grouped question UIN 179143 179144 question first answered 15/04/2021 15:33:00 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	4277 label Biography information for Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck

1307664

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Young Offender Institutions: Restraint Techniques
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the recommendation of Charlie Taylor's review into the use of pain-inducing restraint in the youth secure estate, what steps his Department has taken to remove pain-inducing techniques from the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint syllabus.
tabling member constituency	South Shields
tabling member printed	Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck
uin	179143
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/04/2021 answer text <p>Following Charlie Taylor’s review into the use of pain-inducing techniques the Ministry of Justice responded to all recommendations in June 2020. It remains the case that restraint should only be used where there is no other suitable alternative. In the first instance, the approach should always be to use behaviour management techniques that focus on de-escalation and diversion. In cases where restraint is used, it must always be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with the law.</p><p>To improve the monitoring of these instances, the Youth Custody Service established the independent restraint and behaviour panel in December 2020 as a multi-sector partnership with members providing independent and expert scrutiny on the use of pain-inducing techniques in establishments. The panel who reports to Ministers on a quarterly basis, reviews the use of pain-inducing techniques at a single youth secure establishment each month (rotating the establishment monthly) and then supports the establishment with actions focussed on the reduction of use.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice committed to removing pain-inducing techniques from the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint (MMPR) syllabus in June 2020. Since then, the Youth Custody Service has been working on developing and implementing training to ensure that the revised syllabus is rolled out later this summer through the training of all staff. The use of pain-inducing techniques will be taught separately, for use as a last resort to prevent serious harm to a child or adult, in line with Recommendation 9.</p><p>Escorts transferring children to and from Secure Training Centre’s, Secure Children Homes and Young Offending Institutions have all received training in the MMPR syllabus which no longer includes training on pain-inducing techniques. The department is currently reviewing the policy in line with recommendation 14.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk grouped question UIN 179142 179144 question first answered 15/04/2021 15:33:00 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	4277 label Biography information for Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck

1307669

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Young Offender Institutions: Restraint Techniques
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the recommendations of Charlie Taylor's review into the use of pain-inducing restraint in the youth secure estate, what steps his Department has taken to ensure that (a) the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint syllabus does not train escorts to secure training centres and secure children's homes in pain-inducing restraint techniques, (b) escort staff are not allowed to use restraint on children for good order and discipline and (c) escorts taking children to and from young offender institutions are trained in Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint.
tabling member constituency	South Shields
tabling member printed	Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck
uin	179144
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/04/2021 answer text <p>Following Charlie Taylor’s review into the use of pain-inducing techniques the Ministry of Justice responded to all recommendations in June 2020. It remains the case that restraint should only be used where there is no other suitable alternative. In the first instance, the approach should always be to use behaviour management techniques that focus on de-escalation and diversion. In cases where restraint is used, it must always be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with the law.</p><p>To improve the monitoring of these instances, the Youth Custody Service established the independent restraint and behaviour panel in December 2020 as a multi-sector partnership with members providing independent and expert scrutiny on the use of pain-inducing techniques in establishments. The panel who reports to Ministers on a quarterly basis, reviews the use of pain-inducing techniques at a single youth secure establishment each month (rotating the establishment monthly) and then supports the establishment with actions focussed on the reduction of use.</p><p>The Ministry of Justice committed to removing pain-inducing techniques from the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint (MMPR) syllabus in June 2020. Since then, the Youth Custody Service has been working on developing and implementing training to ensure that the revised syllabus is rolled out later this summer through the training of all staff. The use of pain-inducing techniques will be taught separately, for use as a last resort to prevent serious harm to a child or adult, in line with Recommendation 9.</p><p>Escorts transferring children to and from Secure Training Centre’s, Secure Children Homes and Young Offending Institutions have all received training in the MMPR syllabus which no longer includes training on pain-inducing techniques. The department is currently reviewing the policy in line with recommendation 14.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk grouped question UIN 179142 179143 question first answered 15/04/2021 15:33:00 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	4277 label Biography information for Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck

1307803

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Health and Safety: Coronavirus
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 employers that have been prosecuted for breaches of health and safety in relation to covid-19 to date.
tabling member constituency	Oxford West and Abingdon
tabling member printed	Layla Moran
uin	179466
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>National statistics on detailed offence level prosecutions including those relating to COVID-19 for the calendar year of 2020 are due for publication in May 2021.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 20/04/2021 14:15:05 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4656 label Biography information for Layla Moran

1307962

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Members: Correspondence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he plans to respond to the letter from the hon. Member for West Lancashire of 5 February 2021 on prisoners and vaccines, reference ZA55418.
tabling member constituency	West Lancashire
tabling member printed	Rosie Cooper
uin	178951
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>The Hon. Member’s letter was not received by the department on 5 February 2021. A copy was requested and has now been received. A response will be sent as soon as possible.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk question first answered 20/04/2021 15:19:57 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	1538 label Biography information for Rosie Cooper

1308042

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Cemeteries: Tottenham
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans he has to implement the recommendations of the review commissioned by his Department in 2018 into Tottenham Park Cemetery; and what recent assessment he has made of the need to regulate private cemeteries.
tabling member constituency	Lewisham East
tabling member printed	Janet Daby
uin	179542
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>We continue to work closely with all relevant stakeholders in light of the findings of the 2018 statutory inspection of Tottenham Park Cemetery.</p><p> </p><p>While private burial grounds are not covered by the same regulations and guidance that govern local authority burial grounds, MoJ anticipates that private cemeteries will adhere to those standards.</p><p> </p><p>The Law Commission’s current Programme of Law Reform includes a project to consider modernising and streamlining the law governing the disposal of human remains, with a view to putting forward a legal framework for the future. We will ensure that issues around the management of private cemeteries are brought to the Law Commission’s attention in this context.</p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk question first answered 20/04/2021 15:40:00 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	4698 label Biography information for Janet Daby

1308152

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Askham Grange Prison: Pregnancy
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many women in each ethnic group were known to be pregnant while on remand or serving a sentence in HMP Askham Grange in each quarter from 31 March 2015 to 30 September 2020.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	179249
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>From July 2016 to date there have been six women known to be pregnant whilst residing at HMP Askham Grange. There were three women who declared their ethnicity as white, and three women who declared themselves as mixed ethnicity.</p><p> </p><p>As part of our fundamental review of policy relating to pregnancy, Mother and Baby Units and maternal separation from children up to 2 in prison, we have committed to providing national pregnancy data in future. Further information on the review, including our findings and resulting reforms regarding data collection, can be found in our summary report published in July 2020: <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/905559/summary-report-of-review-of-policy-on-mbu.pdf" target="_blank">https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/905559/summary-report-of-review-of-policy-on-mbu.pdf</a></p> answering member constituency Cheltenham answering member printed Alex Chalk question first answered 20/04/2021 15:21:41 answering member 4481 label Biography information for Alex Chalk
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1308153

registered interest
date	12/04/2021
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Juries: Parents
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance his Department has issued to staff in the Jury Central Summoning Bureau in respect of deferral of jury service by (a) breastfeeding mothers and (b) people on maternity and other statutory parental leave.
tabling member constituency	Battersea
tabling member printed	Marsha De Cordova
uin	179525
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 20/04/2021 answer text <p>HM Courts and Tribunals Service recognise that sometimes it may be difficult for some people to serve on the date originally summoned. Jurors are given the opportunity when responding to their summons to apply for a deferral to a more suitable date within the next twelve months.</p><p> </p><p>Deferral and excusal applications are considered by summoning officers at the Jury Central Summoning Bureau (JCSB). Each application for deferral/excusal is considered on its own merit, in a way that is both fair to the individual and consistent with the needs of the court in providing a representative jury.</p><p> </p><p>Guidance on applications for excusal or deferral in relation to breastfeeding or maternity or parental leave states that officials should consider these applications sympathetically, with deferral considered in the first instance. Breastfeeding a child would be considered a valid reason for deferring jury service. A juror could apply for an excusal if they were still unable to serve as the new date approached.</p> answering member constituency Croydon South answering member printed Chris Philp question first answered 20/04/2021 14:17:47 answering member 4503 label Biography information for Chris Philp
tabling member	4676 label Biography information for Marsha De Cordova