Asked by: Lord Laming (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they are taking to ensure that the courts have robust and reliable non-custodial sentences available to them.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The sentencing framework already gives courts the flexibility to select community order requirements which are a robust alternative to custody, and are tailored to address the specific issues that contribute to reoffending. We are committed to ensuring that community penalties are tough, effective and command the confidence of sentencers, and are continuing to explore further improvements that could be made to probation services.
Asked by: Lord Laming (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many offenders have failed to keep appointments with probation officers employed by MTC Novo.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The table below displays the number of offenders managed by an MTC Novo Provider (London Community Rehabilitation Company and Thames Valley Community Rehabilitation Company) with an absence recorded on nDelius (the national case management system for Probation) during the period of 1 April 2017 to 30 June 2017. This data is not limited to contact with Probation Officers and includes all categories of enforceable contacts, including Unpaid Work, Accredited Programmes and other interventions.
| Thames Valley CRC | London CRC | All MTC Novo |
|
|
|
|
Acceptable Absence | 2,624 | 10,584 | 13,208 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unacceptable Absence | 1,405 | 10,680 | 12,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attendance Not Recorded | 776 | 1,785 | 2,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Offenders managed | 4,133 | 23,248 | 27,381 |
Absences are categorised as Acceptable or Unacceptable. Acceptable absences include contacts that have been cancelled for administrative reasons (for example, 15 days of Unpaid Work, which is typical for a 100 hours order, originally booked to be worked on a Thursday but later changed to a Wednesday to reflect childcare arrangements for an offender would count as 15 Acceptable Absences), as well as circumstances where an offender has provided good reasons for their failure to attend (for example, a letter from a GP to prove ill health).
Our policy is clear that offenders who fail to comply more than once with their order (without an acceptable explanation), should be subject to breach proceedings. We enforce this requirement robustly with all providers of Probation services.
Asked by: Lord Laming (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to reduce the number of children and young people in custody on the prison estate.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The principal aim of the youth justice system is to prevent offending by children and young people. Since the peak in youth proven offending in 2006/07, the average number of under-18s in youth custody has decreased by 70% from 2,915 to 869 in 2016/17.
The sentencing framework for young people provides for robust alternatives to custody in the form of community-based sentences: referral orders and youth rehabilitation orders (including youth rehabilitation orders with intensive supervision and surveillance). Custody should always be a measure of last resort and be the shortest term commensurate with the seriousness of the offence. The main custodial sentence for children and young people, the Detention and Training Order, is not available for children under 12 years old and any case that warrants one of less than four months must result in a non‑custodial sentence.
Asked by: Lord Laming (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
Her Majesty's Government what action they will take in response to the report of the Chief Inspector of Prisons on Youth Custody Centres, in the light of the Prison Reform Trust report In Care, Out of Trouble, published in May 2016.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
We are committed to improving standards within the Youth Justice System so that we can not only punish crime effectively but also intervene earlier to help divert young people away from crime. That is why we set out our plans to reform the Youth Justice System in response to Charlie Taylor’s review last December, so that it is better equipped to help young people turn their lives around and play a constructive role in their communities.
The safety and welfare of every young person in custody is our absolute priority and we are clear that more needs to be done to achieve this. We want custody to improve the life chances of children and young people in our care and to deliver improvements to education and health services within youth custody. That’s why we have created a new Youth Custody Service, with an Executive Director for the first time in the Department’s history – to make sure this vital area is given the priority and weight it deserves.
We will continue to engage with key stakeholders and consider their recommendations as this work progresses.
Asked by: Lord Laming (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
Her Majesty's Government what steps they intend to take to address the concerns raised by the joint report of HM Inspectorate of Probation and HM Inspectorate of Prisons, An Inspection of Through the Gate Resettlement Services for Prisoners Serving 12 Months or More.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
As part of our review of the probation system we have been looking at Through-the-Gate services, including the issues raised by the HMI Probations report. The review has now concluded and we will be publishing our findings in due course.