Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to monitor the performance of his Department’s Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres; and what recent assessment he has made of that performance.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
The Youth Custody Service (YCS) monitors performance at Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) and Secure Training Centres (STCs) very closely, working with establishments to ensure that recommendations from the independent inspectorates are acted upon promptly. The YCS captures a range of performance information for both YOIs and STCs (noting the differences across sectors). This information is discussed widely with a range of partners and stakeholders to assess performance and address issues as required, to help support and improve the delivery across our sites. In addition, a new YCS assurance framework will be developed throughout the year, designed to ensure that YCS is best able to monitor delivery and identify risks and with appropriate support from wider HM Prison and Probation Service take action to swiftly resolve as well as prevent issues from occurring.
The impact of COVID-19, and need to following physical distancing approaches, in line with national guidance, inevitably impacted regime delivery within sites throughout the last year. However, early indications from research commissioned by the YCS, in collaboration with academics, to evaluate and learn lessons from the impact and response to COVID-19, has shown that the large majority of children report feeling safe during the early period of the restrictions, with some reporting feeling safer than previous periods of time spent in custody. Furthermore, we have also observed through the research that there were positive reports of relationships between both children and children, and children and staff.
We are committed to improving the safety and life chances for the children in custody, investing in staff, education, psychology services and mental health support. This is underpinned by the Framework of Integrated Care (SECURE STAIRS) which sets out the principles for how our secure settings should work with and look after children. We continue to support and develop our brave and hardworking operational staff, with funding provided for our frontline officers to take up a degree level qualification in youth justice. As of March, there were 201 youth justice specialist officers already in post, with a further 319 staff signed up or undertaking the learning.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many children from (a) Oakhill Secure Training Centre and (b) other training Centres have been transferred into Rainsbrook Training Centre during 2021.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
The Youth Custody Service (YCS) placement team is responsible for placing children and young people under the age of 18 who have been remanded or sentenced into youth secure accommodation.
The youth estate is currently comprised of three sectors: Young Offender Institutions (YOIs), often larger establishments for boys aged 15-17; Secure Training Centre’s (STCs) –smaller establishments for boys and girls aged 12-17, with a higher staff to young person ratio for children who may require additional support; and Secure Children’s Homes (SCHs), which are operated by local authorities, and accommodate boys and girls aged 10-17. SCHs have a high ratio of staff to young people and are generally smaller facilities of 18-24 beds. The YCS contract beds for young people sentenced or remanded to custody at 8 SCHs, however, SCHs also hold children held on secure welfare orders.
A decision on the most appropriate accommodation to place a child is made following an assessment by the Youth Offending Team (YOT). The YCS will then make a decision about the most appropriate placement after consideration of each child’s individual needs and their YOT’s placement recommendation, against the available accommodation. Decisions are made with children’s best interests as the primary consideration. Other factors including (but not limited to) age and gender; risk of harm (to self and others); family and resettlement; and maturity and resilience are also taken into account.
The number of children moved from other training centres to Rainsbrook STC amounts to five or fewer individuals. Providing this information would risk identification of the individuals concerned meaning that disclosure would be in breach of our statutory obligations under the General Data Protection Regulation and/or the Data Protection Act 2018. We have commenced work to remove all children from Rainsbrook, transferring them to alternative appropriate accommodation within the youth secure estate. Separate to this, we are considering the future of the centre, with a further announcement to be made on this position in due course.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the the Urgent Notification issued by HM Inspectorate of Prisons in December 2020, if he will make an assessment of the progress made against the joint action plan between MTC and his Department.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
Following the invoking of the Urgent Notification protocol at Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre (STC) last December, we ordered the provider MTC to take the immediate action necessary to address the unacceptable failings at Rainsbrook, including a focus on ensuring no child was isolated on arrival and all children in the Reverse Cohorting Unit had suitable access to services and a greater amount of time out of their room.
The Youth Custody Service (YCS) has continuously monitored progress against the Urgent Notification plan since publication in January. There was some early progress at the start of 2021, with Ofsted noting that ‘some early signs of improvement were seen’ in their monitoring visit from 26 January (report published on 22 February). They did, however, note that many of the actions included in the plan still needed to be implemented, with other actions yet to have been embedded. The serious concerns relating to children ‘reverse cohorting’ at the centre were addressed, and the YCS had strengthened its oversight of the STC, as acknowledged by Ofsted. It is, however, clear that significant issues around staffing, safety, and on-site operational grip remain, with a second Urgent Notification invoked on 18 June following a full inspection of the centre.
We are currently transferring children from Rainsbrook to alternative appropriate accommodation within the children and young people secure estate. Separate to this, we are also considering the future of the centre, with a further announcement to be made on this position in due course.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Written Statement of 15 December 2020, HCWS652, on Unconscious bias training, what steps he has taken to phase out unconscious bias training in his Department.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
In December 2020, the Government Equalities Office commissioned the Behavioural Insights Team for a summary of the evidence on unconscious bias and diversity training. The report highlighted that ‘there is currently no evidence that this training changes behaviour in the long term or improves workplace equality in terms of representation of women, ethnic minorities or other minority groups’. It also states that there is emerging evidence of unintended negative consequences.
In light of these findings, Ministers concluded that the unconscious bias learning provision did not achieve its aims and should be phased out in the Civil Service.
The Ministry of Justice has taken the following actions to phase out Unconscious Bias training.
In December 2020, department Senior Leadership Group directors, along with HR practitioners in Learning & Development and Diversity & Inclusion, were alerted to the withdrawal of Unconscious Bias training. Guidance explained that MoJ group should also look to wind-up the use of unconscious bias stand-alone products.
The same information was also cascaded through the Diversity & Inclusion and Learning & Development networks in department business areas, staff support networks and through subject champions.
The Diversity, Inclusion & Wellbeing team is currently refreshing the strategic approach to diversity and inclusion. In the meantime, staff who are looking for diversity training are encouraged to make use of 'Inclusion in the Civil Service', a revised version of Diversity and Inclusion that has been added to the Civil Service Learning website. This includes four modules:
Unconscious Bias has also been removed from the department Learning Management System and the 'Essential Learning' learner pathway has been updated to include 'Inclusion in the Civil Service' instead.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of offenders convicted of (a) each offence in the violence against the person category; (b) burglary; (c) robbery and (d) possession of weapons were not given a sentence of immediate custody in each of the last five years.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Ministry of Justice has published information on convictions and sentencing outcomes up to December 2020, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool:
Use the ‘Offence group’ filter to select (a) ‘01: Violence against the person’, (b) ‘04: Theft Offences’, (c) ’03: Robbery’ and (d) ’07: Possession of weapons’. In order to identify the number of offenders sentenced who did not receive an immediate custodial sentence, subtract the values of Row 35 (Total immediate custody) from the respective values of Row 25 (Sentenced).
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in each of the last five years what the average immediate custodial sentence was for (a) each offence in the violence against the person category; (b) burglary; (c) robbery and (d) possession of weapons.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Ministry of Justice has published information on convictions and sentencing outcomes up to December 2020, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool:
In the PivotTable Fields, remove the ‘Values’ variable from the ‘Rows’ field and replace with ‘Offence’. Then, drag the ‘Average custodial sentence length (months)’ variable into the ‘Values’ field. Use the ‘Offence group’ filter to select (a) ‘01: Violence against the person’, (b) ‘04: Theft Offences’, (c) ‘Robbery’ and (d) ’07: Possession of weapons’.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of people convicted of assaulting an emergency worker have been given an immediate custodial sentence of longer than six months since that offence was introduced.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Ministry of Justice has published information on convictions and sentencing outcomes up to December 2020, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool:
In the ‘Offence’ filter, select ‘8.22 Assault of an emergency worker’. Number of defendants convicted will populate Row 24, and those sentenced to immediate custody will populate Row 35. The number of defendants who received sentence lengths greater than 6 months will populate Rows 60 to 77.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reason it is proposed to average over a 10-year period the raising of the judicial mandatory retirement age from 70 to 75; and how that averaging is planned to be implemented.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Impact Assessment and Equality Statement, published in 2020 as part of the Judicial Mandatory Retirement Age (MRA) consultation, outlined our assessment of the potential effects of raising the MRA. Analysis of retirement trends suggested that with an MRA of 75, the number of judges and non-legal members in post could be around 400 higher than if the MRA had remained at 70. For magistrates, this figure was 2,000. These estimates were calculated as an average over a 10-year period.
The government intends to legislate to raise the MRA to 75 through the Public Service Pensions and Judicial Offices Bill, to be introduced shortly. When the MRA is changed to 75, it will immediately apply to all judicial office holders who are in office on the date that the legislative measure is commenced. The legislation will include a transitional provision to enable retired magistrates who are younger than the new MRA to apply to return to the bench, subject to business need.
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) male and (b) female defendants were remanded in custody for their own (i) protection and (ii) welfare as an exception to bail under the Bail Act 1976 in each of the last three years.
Answered by Alex Chalk - Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
Information about the reasons for remand decisions is not centrally held within the Court Proceedings database. It is therefore not possible to identify whether defendants were remanded in custody for their own protection or welfare as an exception to bail under the Bail Act 1976 from the established remands data. This information may be obtained through a manual search of court records, but to do so would incur disproportionate costs.
The Ministry of Justice has published more general information on remand status at both magistrates’ and Crown Courts, up to December 2019, available in the following data tools:
Magistrates’ Court:
Crown Court:
Asked by: Philip Davies (Conservative - Shipley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 7 September 2020 to Question 78583 on Emergency Services: Crimes of Violence, when he plans to write to the hon. Member for Shipley to supply that information.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
Obtaining the necessary information to fully answer the question asked on 22 July 2020, involves accessing the Police National Computer (PNC). This system can only be accessed via a fixed location in our offices. Access to the PNC has been severely restricted since March 2020 due to the national restrictions and the need to minimise non-essential travel.
Work to clear the backlog of parliamentary questions, alongside data uploads and other priority work using the PNC, has commenced but there is continued reduced capacity to do this due to the need to adhere to social distancing guidelines. I will write to the Hon Member with the requested information as soon as possible.