To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Prisoners: Suicide
Monday 7th March 2022

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, and if so how, their policies towards suicide prevention in prisons differ between remand and convicted prisoners.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The table below sets out the number of self-inflicted deaths of remand prisoners in the ten years to December 2021. It also shows the percentage of all such deaths that were of remand prisoners.

Our figures refer to self-inflicted deaths, rather than suicides. Self-inflicted deaths include any death of a person who has apparently taken his or her own life, irrespective of intent. This includes not only suicides but also accidental deaths as a result of the person’s own actions. We use this classification because we cannot always know whether someone intended to take their own life. Those are ultimately decisions for coroners, who investigate all deaths in custody. For similar reasons, we cannot identify “attempted suicides” separately from other forms of self-harm, as we may not know the prisoner’s intention.

HM Prison & Probation Service does not operate a different approach to the prevention of suicide and self-harm among remand prisoners. All prisoners at risk of self-harm and suicide are supported equally, regardless of their situation. We recognise that remand is a known risk factor for self-harm and support is tailored to prisoners’ needs, particularly in the early days and weeks of custody. Following the unavoidable closure of courts in response to Covid-19, we are taking positive action to ensure more cases are heard and therefore to reduce the number of remand prisoners. This includes extending 32 nightingale courtrooms this year, installing video link equipment in all courts and increasing its capacity in prisons, removing the limit on Crown Court sitting days during 2021/22, and continuing to give priority to cases involving custody time limits.

Self-inflicted deaths of remand prisoners, 2012 to 2021

year

number of self-inflicted deaths

% of all self-inflicted deaths

2012

18

30%

2013

29

38%

2014

26

29%

2015

36

40%

2016

33

27%

2017

73

21%

2018

27

29%

2019

24

28%

2020

19

28%

2021

32

37%


Written Question
Prisoners on Remand: Suicide
Monday 7th March 2022

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the (1) number, and (2) ratio, of prisoners held on remand in England who have (a) committed suicide, and (b) attempted to commit suicide, in each of the last 10 years.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The table below sets out the number of self-inflicted deaths of remand prisoners in the ten years to December 2021. It also shows the percentage of all such deaths that were of remand prisoners.

Our figures refer to self-inflicted deaths, rather than suicides. Self-inflicted deaths include any death of a person who has apparently taken his or her own life, irrespective of intent. This includes not only suicides but also accidental deaths as a result of the person’s own actions. We use this classification because we cannot always know whether someone intended to take their own life. Those are ultimately decisions for coroners, who investigate all deaths in custody. For similar reasons, we cannot identify “attempted suicides” separately from other forms of self-harm, as we may not know the prisoner’s intention.

HM Prison & Probation Service does not operate a different approach to the prevention of suicide and self-harm among remand prisoners. All prisoners at risk of self-harm and suicide are supported equally, regardless of their situation. We recognise that remand is a known risk factor for self-harm and support is tailored to prisoners’ needs, particularly in the early days and weeks of custody. Following the unavoidable closure of courts in response to Covid-19, we are taking positive action to ensure more cases are heard and therefore to reduce the number of remand prisoners. This includes extending 32 nightingale courtrooms this year, installing video link equipment in all courts and increasing its capacity in prisons, removing the limit on Crown Court sitting days during 2021/22, and continuing to give priority to cases involving custody time limits.

Self-inflicted deaths of remand prisoners, 2012 to 2021

year

number of self-inflicted deaths

% of all self-inflicted deaths

2012

18

30%

2013

29

38%

2014

26

29%

2015

36

40%

2016

33

27%

2017

73

21%

2018

27

29%

2019

24

28%

2020

19

28%

2021

32

37%


Written Question
Judges: Ethnic Groups
Wednesday 29th December 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government how many lawyers from ethnic minorities were appointed as judges in each of the years since 2015.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The most recent 2021 Judicial Diversity statistics indicate that while the proportion of Asian and mixed ethnicity individuals in the judiciary has increased since 2014, the proportion of Black judges has stayed the same. On 9 December 2021, the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) published an Ad Hoc Analysis of Candidate Progression Through Judicial Selection Tools, which reported that in legal exercises, success rates for Black, Asian and minority ethnic candidates were lower, even when other significant factors were held constant. The JAC is leading further investigation into the types of professional pools from which legally qualified candidates are drawn and how this may be playing a part in the observed disparities.

The table below reports the number of applicants who declared they came from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds that the JAC recommended for judicial appointment in each financial year from 2015/16 onwards (data is not available by calendar year) and as a percentage of the overall recommendations. The figures are for legal judicial appointments and do not include any data on non-legal judicial appointments.

Financial year

Number of recommendations for judicial appointments (per financial year) that declared as coming from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic background

Percentage of all those recommended for judicial appointment who declared as coming from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic background

2015 – 2016

19

9%

2016 – 2017

9

6%

2017 – 2018

44

9%

2018 – 2019

81

11%

2019 – 2020

101

12%

2020 – 2021

46

14%

The total number of recommendations the JAC makes varies each year depending on which exercises are run.

Actual appointments rather than recommendations for appointment have only been reported since 2020. There were 21 new Black, Asian and minority ethnic lawyers appointed as judges in 2019/20 and 42 in 2020/21. There can be a time lag between JAC recommending candidates and the appointment being made. These numbers do not include judges that have moved office or been promoted in year and do not include appointments of non-legal tribunal members.


Written Question
Judges: Ethnic Groups
Wednesday 29th December 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, if any, of the number of lawyers from ethnic minorities who go on to become judges.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The most recent 2021 Judicial Diversity statistics indicate that while the proportion of Asian and mixed ethnicity individuals in the judiciary has increased since 2014, the proportion of Black judges has stayed the same. On 9 December 2021, the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) published an Ad Hoc Analysis of Candidate Progression Through Judicial Selection Tools, which reported that in legal exercises, success rates for Black, Asian and minority ethnic candidates were lower, even when other significant factors were held constant. The JAC is leading further investigation into the types of professional pools from which legally qualified candidates are drawn and how this may be playing a part in the observed disparities.

The table below reports the number of applicants who declared they came from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds that the JAC recommended for judicial appointment in each financial year from 2015/16 onwards (data is not available by calendar year) and as a percentage of the overall recommendations. The figures are for legal judicial appointments and do not include any data on non-legal judicial appointments.

Financial year

Number of recommendations for judicial appointments (per financial year) that declared as coming from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic background

Percentage of all those recommended for judicial appointment who declared as coming from a Black, Asian and minority ethnic background

2015 – 2016

19

9%

2016 – 2017

9

6%

2017 – 2018

44

9%

2018 – 2019

81

11%

2019 – 2020

101

12%

2020 – 2021

46

14%

The total number of recommendations the JAC makes varies each year depending on which exercises are run.

Actual appointments rather than recommendations for appointment have only been reported since 2020. There were 21 new Black, Asian and minority ethnic lawyers appointed as judges in 2019/20 and 42 in 2020/21. There can be a time lag between JAC recommending candidates and the appointment being made. These numbers do not include judges that have moved office or been promoted in year and do not include appointments of non-legal tribunal members.


Speech in Lords Chamber - Fri 22 Oct 2021
Assisted Dying Bill [HL]

"My Lords, I wish to make three points. First, I am totally opposed to this Bill because of my belief in the sanctity of human life and because of its unsafe contents; I respectfully agree with the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury in what he said earlier about …..."
Lord Patten - View Speech

View all Lord Patten (Con - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Assisted Dying Bill [HL]

Written Question
Prisoners: Higher Education
Tuesday 1st June 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government why prisoners seeking higher education in prison must be within six years of their release date.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The six-year rule relates to eligibility of prisoners for student loans and is required by the Education (Student Support) Regulations 2011 (“the 2011 Regulations”). The rationale for this regulation is that prisoners studying an undergraduate degree in prison would take six years to complete on a part-time basis. Prisoners who wish to complete an undergraduate degree must self-fund if they have more than six years left on their sentence. Prisoners can also apply to the Prisoners’ Education Trust (PET) to fund Open Universityaccess to higher education’ courses.


Written Question
Prisoners: Higher Education
Tuesday 1st June 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prisoners are currently enrolled in higher education.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

We do not hold information centrally on the number of prisoners currently enrolled in higher education. However, the Open University reports that around 1295 prisoners were registered for Open University courses in England in 2020/21.


Written Question
Prisoners: Higher Education
Tuesday 1st June 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, if any, of the effect on re-offending rates of prisoners participating in higher education while serving their sentences.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The Ministry of Justice has enabled the Open University and the Prisoners’ Education Trust to use The Justice Data Lab to explore the rates of reoffending for prisoners participating in higher education. The Justice Data Lab provides group-level reoffending information to organisations who have worked with offenders and would like to understand the impact of their intervention.

The Justice Data Lab Analysis (2019) reports that 14% of people who studied for an OU degree committed a proven reoffence within one year, compared to 18% who did not.


Written Question
Prisoners: Mental Health
Thursday 8th April 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the mental health of the prisoners serving an imprisonment for public protection sentence who continue to be detained 10 years or more beyond their tariff.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

The Government recognises that those serving indeterminate sentences (life and imprisonment for public protection (IPP)) face particular challenges in maintaining their emotional wellbeing, especially during the restrictions imposed on account of the COVID pandemic. The guidance and training produced by HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) directs the attention of prison staff to the needs of indeterminate sentence prisoners. HMPPS allocates a key worker to all such prisoners and also makes available to them peer supporters such as Samaritans-trained Listeners.

The unreleased IPP prisoner population is continuing to reduce, year on year; it stood at 1,849 on 31 December 2020, down from 2,134 on 31 December 2019. The majority of IPP prisoners continue to have a high chance of a positive outcome from Parole Board hearings. In 2019/20 72% of Parole Board hearings resulted in either a recommendation for a progressive transfer to an open prison or release.

The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public; however, HMPPS remains committed to supporting prisoners serving an IPP to reduce their risk to the level where the Parole Board determines that they may be supervised effectively on licence in the community.


Written Question
Prisons: Ministers of Religion
Wednesday 10th February 2021

Asked by: Lord Patten (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the work in prisons carried out by chaplains of all faith groups.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar - Shadow Attorney General

Chaplains of all faiths and belief systems play a central role in supporting prisoners during the pandemic. They have continued to visit prisoners on a one-to-one basis providing pastoral care, spiritual support and resources for worship. Chaplains see new receptions, visit those in segregation and speak to men and women prior to release. They have also continued to provide one-to-one support including compassionate contact with families.

The hard work and dedication of chaplains was recently reflected in the Butler Trust Awards and is widely acknowledged in the annual reports of Independent Monitoring Boards from across the custodial estate and by HM Inspectorate of Prisons.