Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress he has made on setting the levels of funding for children's contact centres; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Edward Argar
The Government values the work of child contact centres and acknowledges the important role they play in providing neutral places for contact between children and their family members.
Until April this year, the Ministry of Justice provided small value grants, via Cafcass, to support the running of child contact centres. The Ministry of Justice is in the final stages of agreeing the funding arrangements for this year’s grants and information will be made publicly available once this process is complete. Decisions on allocations of grant funding to induvial centres will be determined once the new administration arrangements are in place.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the number of people affected by Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism who have received compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation scheme.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
I would like to express my profound sympathy for UK victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism, and indeed for all victims of the Troubles.
It is the case that state-funded compensation for victims of violent crime has been in place in Great Britain since 1964, with the first statutory scheme coming into force in 1996. In terms of entitlement, victims can claim compensation for physical and mental injuries they have directly suffered from a violent crime, and for other payments such as for loss of earnings where they cannot work as a result of the injuries sustained. In fatal cases, qualifying relatives (as defined in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme) may be eligible to apply for bereavement payments and continuing care payments for dependants. The rules on entitlement and eligibility apply equally to all violent crime, regardless of the nature of the incident that gave rise to the injury or caused the death of a loved one.
As to the number of people affected by Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism who have received compensation, given the time that has passed since the attacks, limited information is available. This is because, in order to ensure compliance with data protection legislation, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) which administers the Scheme, retains minimal information on historical applications to it or its predecessor, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. Further, when making an application to the GB-wide Scheme, victims are compensated for the injuries they have sustained rather than the nature of the incident (with the exception of sexual assault or abuse). To support consistent decision-making, the CICA may record the nature of the incident where it has identified the potential for multiple applications in relation to the same circumstances. However, unless an applicant clearly states that they obtained their injuries from a terrorist attack, or this is mentioned in the police report, the CICA will not have this information.
Publicly funded support has also been made available to victims of the Troubles who are eligible for the Troubles Permanent Disablement Scheme. We recognise that there is a wider issue around the suitability of arrangements to make payments to the bereaved in Northern Ireland, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has encouraged the Northern Ireland Executive to consider what more could be done to help.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, prior to Written Ministerial Statement HCWS874 of the 23 March 2021, whether his Department had assessed whether family members of the bereaved or injured would be entitled to the (a) Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme or (b) The Troubles Permanent Disablement Scheme.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
I would like to express my profound sympathy for UK victims of Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism, and indeed for all victims of the Troubles.
It is the case that state-funded compensation for victims of violent crime has been in place in Great Britain since 1964, with the first statutory scheme coming into force in 1996. In terms of entitlement, victims can claim compensation for physical and mental injuries they have directly suffered from a violent crime, and for other payments such as for loss of earnings where they cannot work as a result of the injuries sustained. In fatal cases, qualifying relatives (as defined in the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme) may be eligible to apply for bereavement payments and continuing care payments for dependants. The rules on entitlement and eligibility apply equally to all violent crime, regardless of the nature of the incident that gave rise to the injury or caused the death of a loved one.
As to the number of people affected by Libyan-sponsored IRA terrorism who have received compensation, given the time that has passed since the attacks, limited information is available. This is because, in order to ensure compliance with data protection legislation, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) which administers the Scheme, retains minimal information on historical applications to it or its predecessor, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board. Further, when making an application to the GB-wide Scheme, victims are compensated for the injuries they have sustained rather than the nature of the incident (with the exception of sexual assault or abuse). To support consistent decision-making, the CICA may record the nature of the incident where it has identified the potential for multiple applications in relation to the same circumstances. However, unless an applicant clearly states that they obtained their injuries from a terrorist attack, or this is mentioned in the police report, the CICA will not have this information.
Publicly funded support has also been made available to victims of the Troubles who are eligible for the Troubles Permanent Disablement Scheme. We recognise that there is a wider issue around the suitability of arrangements to make payments to the bereaved in Northern Ireland, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has encouraged the Northern Ireland Executive to consider what more could be done to help.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many complaints the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman has received in relation to the conduct of Judge Robin Tolson QC.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (JACO) does not consider complaints about Judicial Office Holders. The JACO cannot comment on whether a Judicial Office Holder’s actions amount to misconduct or comment on matters before the courts or tribunals.
The JACO’s judicial conduct remit is to investigate the handling of complaints by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) (and bodies with a similar remit in respect of concerns about the actions of Tribunal members and Magistrates) under the Judicial Conduct arrangements. The JCIO’s statutory remit is to deal with complaints of misconduct.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when the Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman plans to respond to complaints in relation to Judge Robin Tolson QC.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman (JACO) does not consider complaints about Judicial Office Holders. The JACO cannot comment on whether a Judicial Office Holder’s actions amount to misconduct or comment on matters before the courts or tribunals.
The JACO’s judicial conduct remit is to investigate the handling of complaints by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) (and bodies with a similar remit in respect of concerns about the actions of Tribunal members and Magistrates) under the Judicial Conduct arrangements. The JCIO’s statutory remit is to deal with complaints of misconduct.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to his oral Answer of 25 February 2020, Official Report, column 176, what the outcome was of his meeting of 26 February 2020 with the President of the Family Division.
Answered by Alex Chalk
The Lord Chancellor had a constructive discussion with the President of the Family Division about their shared desire to ensure that vulnerable parties are given the right support through the family court process.
Our expert panel on harm in the family courts is actively considering these issues. The panel is finalising its report and will publish findings and recommendations for next steps this Spring.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent discussions he has had with the President of the Family Division in relation to transparency in the family courts.
Answered by Wendy Morton - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Ministers at the Ministry of Justice hold regular discussions with the President of the Family Division on a range of issues. The Government fully recognises that family proceedings should be as transparent as possible, and welcomes the progress that has been made towards greater openness together with the review on transparency that the President of the Family Division is currently undertaking. Accredited media have been allowed access to certain hearings in the family courts since 2009, and in 2014 the previous President of the Family Division issued guidance leading to the increased publication of judgments. A pilot allowing legal bloggers to report on family proceedings has been running since 2018, and the current President of the Family Division published new guidance on anonymising judgments for publication in 2018 and reporting in the family courts in 2019.
Greater transparency must be weighed against the need to safeguard children and their family’s privacy given the extremely sensitive information about them that the family courts often need to consider. The Government will continue to work with the senior judiciary to ensure that the right balance is struck between transparency and privacy.
Asked by: Louise Haigh (Labour - Sheffield Heeley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress he has made on his Department's review of domestic abuse and the family courts.
Answered by Wendy Morton - Shadow Minister (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
On 21 May 2019 we announced a public call for evidence led by a panel of experts to gather evidence on how the family courts protect children and parents in cases of domestic abuse and other serious offences.
The panel completed the call for evidence in September 2019, and published a Progress Update in October outlining the work completed and next steps.
The panel has been meeting regularly to discuss the wealth of evidence collected from 1,200 individuals and organisations, and are in the process of drafting their report. This will be published in due course.