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
Prisons: Staff
Thursday 25th April 2024

Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 18 April 2024 to Question 21066 on Prisons: Civil Disorder, how may Tornado trained officers each prison should aim to have trained.

Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Operation Tornado is a national mutual aid plan by which prisons support one another in the event of a serious incident or occurrence requiring a reinforcement of staff. Operation Tornado is employed by HMPPS for three main reasons:

  • In response to a serious incident requiring a reinforcement of staff.
  • In response to other events or crisis requiring additional staff, who may not necessarily need to be Tornado trained.
  • To aid the transfer of prisoners in the event of a serious incident or the threat of one (with the GOLD commander’s agreement).

HMPPS aims to have 2,100 volunteers trained in readiness for Operation Tornado. Since the inception of Operation Tornado in the late 1980s, HMPPS has allocated a commitment to each prison for how many Tornado staff they should have trained. HMPPS monitors the number of staff available for deployment and offer training spaces to ensure resilience to respond to serious incidents.

In the event of a serious incident, all prisons, including those who have a commitment of zero, receive the same level of support from the Operation Response and Resilience Unit and Tornado trained staff from other prisons if required.

The requested information is in the table attached.


Written Question
Lewes Prison: Health Services
Thursday 25th April 2024

Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what investigation HM Prison and Probation Service has carried out into the causes of the hospitalisation of (a) prison staff and (b) prisoners at HMP Lewes on 28 March 2024.

Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

On 28 March, following a Maundy Thursday service and meal in the prison chapel at HMP Lewes, two people who were present collapsed and were taken to hospital. After others who had attended the service also reported feeling unwell, the 32 prisoners and six staff who had attended were checked by paramedics. In total, six people required hospital treatment. The police are conducting an investigation into the incident. His Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service is continuing to engage with them and to obtain regular updates on the investigation.


Division Vote (Commons)
24 Apr 2024 - Renters (Reform) Bill - View Vote Context
Ruth Cadbury (Lab) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 136 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 158 Noes - 282
Division Vote (Commons)
24 Apr 2024 - Regulatory Reform - View Vote Context
Ruth Cadbury (Lab) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 131 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 395 Noes - 50
Division Vote (Commons)
24 Apr 2024 - Renters (Reform) Bill - View Vote Context
Ruth Cadbury (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 136 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 287 Noes - 144
Speech in Commons Chamber - Tue 23 Apr 2024
Oral Answers to Questions

Speech Link

View all Ruth Cadbury (Lab - Brentford and Isleworth) contributions to the debate on: Oral Answers to Questions

Written Question
Community Orders
Tuesday 23rd April 2024

Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for how many and what proportion of people on community sentences with a supervision element was a breach recorded in the last year for which figures are available.

Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The supervision requirement was phased out with the introduction of Offender Rehabilitation Act 2014, therefore we have used the Rehabilitation Activity Requirement as the data source in this response as the best match to Supervision.

Between 01/04/2022 and 31/03/2023, the last full year for which data is available, breaches were initiated one or more times for 39,617 individuals with a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement as part of their Community Sentence.

During this period, the typical number of persons with an active Rehabilitation Activity Requirement was 84,608. As the caseload will vary, with a vast number of sentences commencing and ending on a daily basis, it is not possible to provide a figure for the proportion of those with a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement, with a breach recorded.

It should be noted that a breach being initiated does not necessarily mean that a breach was heard at court, or resulted in a Court hearing, they may instead have been withdrawn due to renewed compliance, at the Probation Practitioner’s professional judgement. Breaches are undertaken for a number of reasons, including non-attendance, unacceptable behaviour and commission of further offences.

Data are as at 16/04/2024. Data are sourced from nDelius and while these data have been assured as much as practical, as with any large administrative dataset, the data should not be assumed to be accurate to the last value presented.


Written Question
Reoffenders
Tuesday 23rd April 2024

Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of people recalled to prison were recalled due to (a) new offences, (b) a lack of address and (c) non-compliance with appointments in the latest 12 months for which data is available.

Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Public protection is our priority. The decision to recall on offender on licensed supervision is taken on the professional advice of senior probation staff following consideration of safe alternatives to recall. Where offenders are recalled, it is because they present a risk of serious harm to the public and the controls available are no longer sufficient to keep the public safe. These individuals will remain in prison for only as long as necessary to protect the public.

Reasons for recall are recorded and published as set out in the table below. Further breakdown of recall reasons is not possible without significant manual checks.

Recall period

Oct-Dec 2022

Jan-Mar 2023*

Apr-Jun 2023

Jul-Sep 2023

% Proportion

Total Recalls

6,092

6,824

6,814

7,030

Facing further charge

1,821

1,977

1,883

1,815

28

Non-compliance

4,378

5,047

5,038

5,376

74

Failed to keep in touch

1,960

2,140

2,110

2,286

32

Failed to reside

1,613

1,792

1,810

1,920

27

Drugs/alcohol

413

437

489

577

7

Poor Behaviour - Relationships

205

214

212

224

3

HDC - Time violation

124

131

171

151

2

HDC - Inability to monitor

65

75

71

81

1

Failed home visit

89

78

73

86

1

HDC - Failed installation

37

29

30

51

1

HDC - Equipment Tamper

9

2

15

11

0

Other

1,091

1,299

1,304

1,296

19

  1. * Figures for Jan-Mar 2023 have been revised since last publication.

  1. The table includes instances of offenders recalled multiple times.

  1. Recall reasons do not sum to the total number of recalls published, as more than one reason can be recorded against each recall.

We routinely publish recall data at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.


Division Vote (Commons)
22 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Ruth Cadbury (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 172 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 237
Division Vote (Commons)
22 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Ruth Cadbury (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 169 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 305 Noes - 234