Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if his Department will investigate the risk of a legal and best advice conflict of interest arising in cases where one party to a transaction both (a) chooses and (b) funds the legal advice of the counter-party; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
Conflict of interest in the provision of legal advice is guided by professional ethics. The legal profession in England and Wales is independent of government, as is the legal regulatory structure, for which the Legal Services Board has oversight responsibility.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is the approved regulator of solicitors in England and Wales. The SRA has a detailed Code of Conduct for solicitors including conflict of interest provisions which cover situations where a conflict of interest, or a serious risk of such a conflict arises, for example when a solicitor is acting for two or more clients. The Ministry of Justice therefore has no plans to investigate this issue.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answers of 27 October 2021 to Questions 58755 and 58756, on Crimes against the Person: Members, for what reason his Department does not specifically record and track those convictions related to attacks and threats made against Members of Parliament; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
Centrally held courts and prisons data is recorded under a series of offence definitions, which align with legislation, and only includes characteristics related to the victim where it is central to the statutory offence (e.g. age of victim in some sexual offences). We do not otherwise collect details about the victim, such as their occupation or place of employment.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people are currently serving a prison sentence for attacking or threatening a Member of Parliament; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
Any form of intimidation, harassment, or violence against people in public life is completely unacceptable. The majority of incidents targeting MPs involve malicious online communications. However, we know that MPs can face physical threats and that on occasion some have been attacked, with two tragically losing their lives in the last decade. That someone should lose their life in an attack is horrendous and sickening – such incidents are an attack on democracy itself. The Government’s priority is the safety and security of the UK and those who live here.
Information on convictions and sentencing outcomes (including prisons data) for (a) attacking and (b) threatening a Member of Parliament is not recorded in a way that is easily identifiable. A wide range of criminal offences may apply, and access to individual court / prisoner records would be required to identify individual cases involving relevant offences and whether the victim was a Member of Parliament.
The Ministry of Justice has published information on convictions and immediate custodial sentences for broader offences, up to December 2020, available in the ‘Outcomes by Offence’ data tool at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987715/outcomes-by-offence-2020.xlsx
Published information on numbers of people currently serving a prison sentence for broader offences, up to 30 June 2021, is available in table A1.5i, at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1006270/Population_30June2021_Annual.ods
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people have been convicted for (a) attacking and (b) making threats against Members of Parliament in each year from 2010 to 2021; how many of those convictions resulted in a custodial sentence; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
Any form of intimidation, harassment, or violence against people in public life is completely unacceptable. The majority of incidents targeting MPs involve malicious online communications. However, we know that MPs can face physical threats and that on occasion some have been attacked, with two tragically losing their lives in the last decade. That someone should lose their life in an attack is horrendous and sickening – such incidents are an attack on democracy itself. The Government’s priority is the safety and security of the UK and those who live here.
Information on convictions and sentencing outcomes (including prisons data) for (a) attacking and (b) threatening a Member of Parliament is not recorded in a way that is easily identifiable. A wide range of criminal offences may apply, and access to individual court / prisoner records would be required to identify individual cases involving relevant offences and whether the victim was a Member of Parliament.
The Ministry of Justice has published information on convictions and immediate custodial sentences for broader offences, up to December 2020, available in the ‘Outcomes by Offence’ data tool at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/987715/outcomes-by-offence-2020.xlsx
Published information on numbers of people currently serving a prison sentence for broader offences, up to 30 June 2021, is available in table A1.5i, at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1006270/Population_30June2021_Annual.ods
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to reduce the time taken to grant probate; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
The most recently published information regarding combined waiting times for a grant of probate, on paper and digital cases, covers April 2021 to June 2021 and is published on gov.uk via Family Court Statistics Quarterly (Table 25):
Family Court Statistics Quarterly: April to June 2021 - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
The average length of time taken for a grant of probate following receipt of the documents required has been maintained at between four to six weeks, despite the unprecedented challenges faced by the Probate Service during the Covid 19 pandemic.
HMCTS continues to collaborate with service and its users to enhance the service and latest information on this can be found at: https://insidehmcts.blog.gov.uk/2021/08/06/collaborating-is-key-to-enhancing-probate-users-experience-of-using-myhmcts/
The improvement of the online probate system remains a priority for HMTCS to ensure it is accessible to all applicants and they find it simpler and easier to understand.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the merits of transferring people who remain on Imprisonment for Public Protection sentences despite their abolition in 2012; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
There are no plans to transfer those still serving IPP sentences on to other types of sentence. Where prisoners serving an IPP sentence have completed their minimum term and not yet been released, it is because the independent Parole Board has determined that their risk remains too high for them to be safely managed in the community. It would, therefore, be irresponsible to change their IPP sentence into one which guarantees their automatic (and, in many cases, immediate) release, when we know that the Parole Board has concluded that they are not safe to be released.
All IPP prisoners who have passed their tariff date have their cases regularly reviewed by the independent Parole Board. Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) have been and continue to review the cases of post tariff IPP prisoners who have failed to achieve release or progression to open prison conditions, despite two or more parole reviews, as well as those who received a tariff of 2 years or under. These reviews enable HMPPS Psychology Services to consult with those managing prisoners in order to shape pathways towards progression. As of October 2020, over 1,500 reviews have taken place, with 339 IPP prisoners from this cohort having achieved release, and a further 422 a progressive move to open conditions.
We will continue to ensure that IPP prisoners are given every opportunity to progress towards the point where the Parole Board judges that their risk may now be effectively managed in the community. Our primary responsibility is to protect the public.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the abolition of Indeterminate Sentences for Public Protection (IPP) in 2012, whether everyone given an IPP sentence has had their sentence transmuted into a determinate sentence; and if will make a statement.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
As the abolition of the IPP sentence was not applied retrospectively, those who had already been sentenced to and were serving an IPP sentence continued to serve the sentence itself either because they had not yet served the minimum term of imprisonment or, where they have served the minimum term, because the independent Parole Board had determined that their risk remained too high for them to be safely managed in the community. Therefore, no offender who received an IPP sentence has had the sentence transmuted into a determinate sentence.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate he has made of the number of fines wrongfully issued under (a) the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 and (b) Schedule 21 of the Coronavirus Act 2020.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
HMCTS are not able to assess the number of fines wrongfully issued under (a) the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) Regulations 2020 and (b) Schedule 21 of the Coronavirus Act 2020 as we do not hold this data on our Magistrates and/or Crown Court systems.
The Crown Prosecution Service have conducted and publicised a very early review of all prosecutions brought under the Act and all those brought under the regulations. Their findings have been published as follows:
March/April: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/cps-announces-review-findings-first-200-cases-under-coronavirus-laws
Number of cases finalised (March & April) | Number incorrectly charged | |
Health Protection Regulations: 187 cases | Withdrawn | 7 |
Returned to Court | 5 | |
Total | 12 | |
Coronavirus Act: 44 cases | Withdrawn | 31 |
Returned to Court | 13 | |
Total | 44 | |
May: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/cps-review-finds-improvements-coronavirus-charging-compliance
Number of cases finalised (May) | Number incorrectly charged | |
Health Protection Regulations: 84 cases | Withdrawn | 8 |
Returned to Court | 0 | |
Total | 8 | |
Coronavirus Act: 9 cases | Withdrawn | 8 |
Returned to Court | 1 | |
Total | 9 | |
June: https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/latest-findings-cps-coronavirus-review
Number of cases finalised (June) | Number incorrectly charged | |
Health Protection Regulations: 105 cases | Withdrawn | 6 |
Returned to Court | 0 | |
Total | 6 | |
Coronavirus Act: 36 cases | Withdrawn | 35 |
Returned to Court | 1 | |
Total | 36 | |
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of changing the Ogden rate on insurance premiums paid by businesses.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The Ministry of Justice has not separately assessed the effect of changing the way the personal injury discount rate is set on the insurance premiums to be paid by businesses, as opposed to the effect on consumers and other buyers of insurance policies.
Nonetheless, the department expects that at any review of the discount rate under the approach set out in the Civil Liability Bill, which was introduced in the House of Lords on 20 March, the rate will be higher than would have been set under the present law had it remained in force at that time.
The department believes the change in the law will result in reductions in insurance premiums paid by businesses. This is because of the competitive nature of the insurance industry and the recent public commitment by insurers representing about three quarters of the UK’s motor and liability insurance market to pass on cost benefits arising from Government action to reform the rate.
I have placed a copy of the commitment in the House Library.
Asked by: Charles Walker (Conservative - Broxbourne)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether her Department has assessed the merits of establishing a national register of wills; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Oliver Heald
The Secretary of State has no plans to create a national register of wills at present. Individuals who wish to entrust their will to a third party to ensure it can be found after their death can deposit a will for safekeeping with the Probate Service on payment of the relevant fee (currently £20) or use a private safeguarding or registry service.