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
Mentally Disordered Offenders
Monday 20th November 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average number of calendar days was from the case being logged to the final decision being made for the Mental Health Casework Section to progress requests for restricted patients to (a) transfer to another hospital, (b) transfer to community care, (c) discharge and (d) recall to hospital in each year since 2009-10.

Answered by Phillip Lee

Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (formerly known as the National Offender Management Service) has not recorded centrally all the funding allocated to of the Mental Health Casework Section (MHCS) in each year since 2009/10. Information on the number of full time equivalent staff within this unit over those years is also not recorded centrally. There is no legal or business requirement for the Department to hold such information on a separate basis.

For 2017/18, the full time equivalent headcount for MHCS is 58, with 11 positions currently vacant, pending completion of the recruitment processes

The numbers of requests relating to restricted patients that were made to MHCS each year from 2009/10 are set out in the table below. It is not possible retrospectively to ascertain how many requests were completed in-year for each year. The number of current outstanding requests in 2017/18 is set out in the table below. These figures include requests received up to and including 14 November 2017. “Request” has been taken to mean any application for a decision by the Secretary of State under the Mental Health Act 1983, or application to or referral to a Tribunal, which requires the Secretary of State to submit a statement to the Tribunal. The figures given include requests that were made, but may have been withdrawn at a later stage, and include requests relating to discharged restricted patients, such as request to recall or request to vary or revoke conditions of discharge, as well as those relating to detained restricted patients.

Year

Number of Requests Made

Number of Requests Completed

Number of Requests Outstanding

2009-10

8,756

2010-11

9,073

2011-12

9,056

2012-13

10,653

2013-14

10,856

2014-15

11,364

2015-16

11,336

2016-17

11,938

2017-18 (up to 14/11/2017)

6,881

5,732

1,149*

*All requests received after 1/4/2017. This figure does not take into account active “critical” work which is being processed but may not have yet been completed and/or for which MHCS may be awaiting full information.

MHCS has not had a backlog of cases in significant numbers, nor for any significant periods of time, prior to June 2017. There are therefore no figures relating to backlogs of

cases in earlier years from 2009/10, as no such backlogs then existed.

The average number of calendar days between the case being logged to the final decision being made for restricted patients to (a) transfer to another hospital, (c) discharge (d) recall to hospital in each year since 2009/10 is set out in the table below. There is no power to (b) transfer to community care – a patient is either detained in hospital or discharged to the community. Recall decisions are made immediately, hence zero calendar days is recorded as the average. It should be noted that while a case is logged, it may not be ready for immediate consideration if there is further information required to enable a decision to be made.

Year

Hospital transfers

Conditional discharge

Absolute discharge

Recall

2009-10

36

33

41

0

2010-11

28

46

20

0

2011-12

27

42

22

0

2012-13

22

38

22

0

2013-14

23

43

42

0

2014-15

30

42

31

0

2015-16

28

37

21

0

2016-17

35

45

41

0

The number of (a) backlog cases and (b) critical work cases for restricted patients that have been cleared by the MHCS in each month since June 2017 is set out below. MHCS did not develop a backlog until June 2017, therefore the backlog recovery plan was not implemented until June 2017; consequently, no such figures are held prior to June 2017.

Jun 2017

Jul 2017

Aug 2017

Sep 2017

Oct 2017

Backlog cases

249

230

151

223

240

Critical work cases

424

472

433

358

441

These figures have been derived from an administrative IT system which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

MHCS is dealing with a backlog of casework decisions and has been since June 2017. This situation is a direct result of staff vacancies which have proved difficult to fill, together with some long-term sickness absences which could not have been predicted. A recovery plan was developed in June 2017, and while MHCS has been able to continue to make critical decisions, such as prison transfers, within 24 hour targets, delays in other parts of the system are ongoing.

We take the mental health of restricted patients very seriously, and MHCS has been working closely with NHS colleagues nationally to mitigate the impact of the delays and to understand better areas where the NHS is most concerned. While opportunities are limited until the significant number of MHCS vacancies are filled and new post-holders fully trained, MHCS has managed to adjust its backlog recovery plan to expedite certain types of cases within the backlog. MHCS continues to identify ways in which it can safely reduce delays, while continuing to protect the public.


Written Question
Mentally Disordered Offenders
Monday 20th November 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much funding has been allocated to the Mental Health Casework Section in each year since 2009-10; and how many full-time equivalent staff have been employed by that section in each of those years.

Answered by Phillip Lee

Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (formerly known as the National Offender Management Service) has not recorded centrally all the funding allocated to of the Mental Health Casework Section (MHCS) in each year since 2009/10. Information on the number of full time equivalent staff within this unit over those years is also not recorded centrally. There is no legal or business requirement for the Department to hold such information on a separate basis.

For 2017/18, the full time equivalent headcount for MHCS is 58, with 11 positions currently vacant, pending completion of the recruitment processes

The numbers of requests relating to restricted patients that were made to MHCS each year from 2009/10 are set out in the table below. It is not possible retrospectively to ascertain how many requests were completed in-year for each year. The number of current outstanding requests in 2017/18 is set out in the table below. These figures include requests received up to and including 14 November 2017. “Request” has been taken to mean any application for a decision by the Secretary of State under the Mental Health Act 1983, or application to or referral to a Tribunal, which requires the Secretary of State to submit a statement to the Tribunal. The figures given include requests that were made, but may have been withdrawn at a later stage, and include requests relating to discharged restricted patients, such as request to recall or request to vary or revoke conditions of discharge, as well as those relating to detained restricted patients.

Year

Number of Requests Made

Number of Requests Completed

Number of Requests Outstanding

2009-10

8,756

2010-11

9,073

2011-12

9,056

2012-13

10,653

2013-14

10,856

2014-15

11,364

2015-16

11,336

2016-17

11,938

2017-18 (up to 14/11/2017)

6,881

5,732

1,149*

*All requests received after 1/4/2017. This figure does not take into account active “critical” work which is being processed but may not have yet been completed and/or for which MHCS may be awaiting full information.

MHCS has not had a backlog of cases in significant numbers, nor for any significant periods of time, prior to June 2017. There are therefore no figures relating to backlogs of

cases in earlier years from 2009/10, as no such backlogs then existed.

The average number of calendar days between the case being logged to the final decision being made for restricted patients to (a) transfer to another hospital, (c) discharge (d) recall to hospital in each year since 2009/10 is set out in the table below. There is no power to (b) transfer to community care – a patient is either detained in hospital or discharged to the community. Recall decisions are made immediately, hence zero calendar days is recorded as the average. It should be noted that while a case is logged, it may not be ready for immediate consideration if there is further information required to enable a decision to be made.

Year

Hospital transfers

Conditional discharge

Absolute discharge

Recall

2009-10

36

33

41

0

2010-11

28

46

20

0

2011-12

27

42

22

0

2012-13

22

38

22

0

2013-14

23

43

42

0

2014-15

30

42

31

0

2015-16

28

37

21

0

2016-17

35

45

41

0

The number of (a) backlog cases and (b) critical work cases for restricted patients that have been cleared by the MHCS in each month since June 2017 is set out below. MHCS did not develop a backlog until June 2017, therefore the backlog recovery plan was not implemented until June 2017; consequently, no such figures are held prior to June 2017.

Jun 2017

Jul 2017

Aug 2017

Sep 2017

Oct 2017

Backlog cases

249

230

151

223

240

Critical work cases

424

472

433

358

441

These figures have been derived from an administrative IT system which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

MHCS is dealing with a backlog of casework decisions and has been since June 2017. This situation is a direct result of staff vacancies which have proved difficult to fill, together with some long-term sickness absences which could not have been predicted. A recovery plan was developed in June 2017, and while MHCS has been able to continue to make critical decisions, such as prison transfers, within 24 hour targets, delays in other parts of the system are ongoing.

We take the mental health of restricted patients very seriously, and MHCS has been working closely with NHS colleagues nationally to mitigate the impact of the delays and to understand better areas where the NHS is most concerned. While opportunities are limited until the significant number of MHCS vacancies are filled and new post-holders fully trained, MHCS has managed to adjust its backlog recovery plan to expedite certain types of cases within the backlog. MHCS continues to identify ways in which it can safely reduce delays, while continuing to protect the public.


Written Question
Domestic Abuse: Convictions
Monday 20th November 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many summary convictions there have been for offences under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 for alleged controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship; and how many people subject to those convictions have been (a) fined without being imprisoned or (b) imprisoned for the maximum term of 12 months.

Answered by Dominic Raab

In 2016, there were 32 summary convictions for the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. Of these 32, seven were committed to the Crown Court for sentence.

Of the remaining 25 which were sentenced in the magistrates’ court; four were given an immediate custodial sentence and three of these cases received the maximum term available for this offence (six months) as provided under section 86 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. There were no cases where a fine was imposed.

These are cases where the coercive and controlling offence was the principal offence. Where a defendant is charged with such an offence alongside another, such as serious sexual assault, the conviction and proceeding would count as a sexual assault offence.


Written Question
Domestic Abuse: Convictions
Monday 20th November 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many convictions on indictment there have been for offences under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 for alleged controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship; and how many people subject to those convictions have been (a) fined without being imprisoned or (b) imprisoned for the maximum term of five years.

Answered by Dominic Raab

In 2016, there were 27 convictions on indictment for the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. The Crown Court handed down 24 sentences of immediate custody. None of these were for the 5-year maximum. There were no cases where a fine was imposed.

These are cases where the coercive and controlling offence was the principal offence. Where a defendant is charged with such an offence alongside another, such as serious sexual assault, the conviction and proceeding would count as a sexual assault offence.


Written Question
Mentally Disordered Offenders
Monday 20th November 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter of 31 October 2017 from the Head of the Mental Health Casework Section (MHCS) on delays in mental health casework decisions;, how many (a) backlog cases and (b) critical work cases for restricted patients have been cleared by the MHCS in each month since April 2016.

Answered by Phillip Lee

Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (formerly known as the National Offender Management Service) has not recorded centrally all the funding allocated to of the Mental Health Casework Section (MHCS) in each year since 2009/10. Information on the number of full time equivalent staff within this unit over those years is also not recorded centrally. There is no legal or business requirement for the Department to hold such information on a separate basis.

For 2017/18, the full time equivalent headcount for MHCS is 58, with 11 positions currently vacant, pending completion of the recruitment processes

The numbers of requests relating to restricted patients that were made to MHCS each year from 2009/10 are set out in the table below. It is not possible retrospectively to ascertain how many requests were completed in-year for each year. The number of current outstanding requests in 2017/18 is set out in the table below. These figures include requests received up to and including 14 November 2017. “Request” has been taken to mean any application for a decision by the Secretary of State under the Mental Health Act 1983, or application to or referral to a Tribunal, which requires the Secretary of State to submit a statement to the Tribunal. The figures given include requests that were made, but may have been withdrawn at a later stage, and include requests relating to discharged restricted patients, such as request to recall or request to vary or revoke conditions of discharge, as well as those relating to detained restricted patients.

Year

Number of Requests Made

Number of Requests Completed

Number of Requests Outstanding

2009-10

8,756

2010-11

9,073

2011-12

9,056

2012-13

10,653

2013-14

10,856

2014-15

11,364

2015-16

11,336

2016-17

11,938

2017-18 (up to 14/11/2017)

6,881

5,732

1,149*

*All requests received after 1/4/2017. This figure does not take into account active “critical” work which is being processed but may not have yet been completed and/or for which MHCS may be awaiting full information.

MHCS has not had a backlog of cases in significant numbers, nor for any significant periods of time, prior to June 2017. There are therefore no figures relating to backlogs of

cases in earlier years from 2009/10, as no such backlogs then existed.

The average number of calendar days between the case being logged to the final decision being made for restricted patients to (a) transfer to another hospital, (c) discharge (d) recall to hospital in each year since 2009/10 is set out in the table below. There is no power to (b) transfer to community care – a patient is either detained in hospital or discharged to the community. Recall decisions are made immediately, hence zero calendar days is recorded as the average. It should be noted that while a case is logged, it may not be ready for immediate consideration if there is further information required to enable a decision to be made.

Year

Hospital transfers

Conditional discharge

Absolute discharge

Recall

2009-10

36

33

41

0

2010-11

28

46

20

0

2011-12

27

42

22

0

2012-13

22

38

22

0

2013-14

23

43

42

0

2014-15

30

42

31

0

2015-16

28

37

21

0

2016-17

35

45

41

0

The number of (a) backlog cases and (b) critical work cases for restricted patients that have been cleared by the MHCS in each month since June 2017 is set out below. MHCS did not develop a backlog until June 2017, therefore the backlog recovery plan was not implemented until June 2017; consequently, no such figures are held prior to June 2017.

Jun 2017

Jul 2017

Aug 2017

Sep 2017

Oct 2017

Backlog cases

249

230

151

223

240

Critical work cases

424

472

433

358

441

These figures have been derived from an administrative IT system which, as with any large scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

MHCS is dealing with a backlog of casework decisions and has been since June 2017. This situation is a direct result of staff vacancies which have proved difficult to fill, together with some long-term sickness absences which could not have been predicted. A recovery plan was developed in June 2017, and while MHCS has been able to continue to make critical decisions, such as prison transfers, within 24 hour targets, delays in other parts of the system are ongoing.

We take the mental health of restricted patients very seriously, and MHCS has been working closely with NHS colleagues nationally to mitigate the impact of the delays and to understand better areas where the NHS is most concerned. While opportunities are limited until the significant number of MHCS vacancies are filled and new post-holders fully trained, MHCS has managed to adjust its backlog recovery plan to expedite certain types of cases within the backlog. MHCS continues to identify ways in which it can safely reduce delays, while continuing to protect the public.


Written Question
Rape: Remand in Custody
Monday 9th October 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the (a) average, (b) shortest and (c) longest length of time was between a defendant being remanded in custody and the court deciding whether to convict in cases of alleged rape under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 where the defendant was remanded in custody in each year since 2009-10; and on how many occasions the defendant was remanded in custody for longer than 182 days.

Answered by Dominic Raab

This PQ cannot be answered due to disproportionate costs as the dates of when defendants are in remand or on bail after the case has reached the Crown Court are not available within the timeliness dataset.


Written Question
Rape: Prosecutions
Wednesday 20th September 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average length of time was from (a) offence to charge, (b) listing to magistrates' court completion, (c) charge to listing, (d) listing to Crown Court hearing and (e) Crown Court hearing to completion for cases of alleged rape under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in each Crown Court in England and Wales in each year since 2009-10.

Answered by Dominic Raab

The average length of time by stage for rape offences completed in each Crown Court in England and Wales 2011-2016 is shown in the attached table. Timeliness data for 2009-10 are not available.

Table 1 - Mean number of days taken from offence to completion for rape cases completed in the Crown Court in England and Wales by Crown Court, 2011-2016.


Written Question
Rape: Trials
Wednesday 13th September 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of trials for alleged rape under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 did not go ahead on the day they were scheduled for each Crown court in England and Wales in each year since 2009-10.

Answered by Dominic Raab

Data on the proportion of trials for alleged rape offences that did not go ahead on the scheduled day in the Crown Court can be found in the attached table:

Table 1 - Effectiveness of Crown Court trials for rape offences in England and Wales, by Crown Court, 2009 - 2016.

This shows the proportion of alleged rape trials that were effective (where the trial commences on the day it is scheduled), those that are cracked (where the trial does not commence on the scheduled date and the trial is not rescheduled) and those that are ineffective (where the trial does not commence on the due date and requires rescheduling).

For England and Wales, the number of Crown Court trials for rape offences has increased by 65%, from 2,049 in 2009 to 3,388 in 2016. In the same time period, the proportion of ineffective trials for rape offences decreased from 10% to 8% of total trials, and the proportion of cracked trials for rape offences decreased from 14% to 7% of total trials. There was a corresponding increase in the proportion of effective trials for rape offences from 76% in 2009 to 85% in 2016.


Written Question
Sexual Offences: Victim Support Schemes
Tuesday 12th September 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, (a) how many Sexual Assault Referral Centres there were in each of the 42 Crown Prosecution Service areas and (b) how much was spent on those centres in each year since 2009-10.

Answered by Phillip Lee

The Ministry of Justice does not hold primary responsibility for funding Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs) and cannot provide the information requested.

The Ministry of Justice provides core grant funding of c£63m to Police and Crime Commissioners to deliver/commission support services for victims of crime (including victims of sexual violence), with an additional c£4.7m specifically to support victims of child sexual abuse. PCC funding decisions relating to allocations to SARCs are made locally.

In April 2013, NHS England took over the lead commissioning role for sexual assault referral centre commissioning. NHS England, with a range of partners in the health system (e.g. Clinical Commissioning Groups), Local Authorities and the Criminal Justice System (e.g. Police, Police and Crime Commissioners) is jointly responsible for the commissioning of a cost-effective, integrated response to sexual violence and rape in order to meet the needs of local populations.

As part of the Government’s wider strategy for tackling sexual violence, the Ministry of Justice also allocates funding for rape support provision across England and Wales. This includes funding in 2017/18 of c£7.2m to 97 Rape Support Centres which provide direct support to male and female victims of sexual violence.


Written Question
Prisoners: Gender Recognition
Tuesday 12th September 2017

Asked by: Diana Johnson (Labour - Kingston upon Hull North)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many complaints related to transgender equality issues in prisons the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman received in each year since 1997-98; and what those figures represent as a proportion of the estimated transgender prisoner population in each of those years.

Answered by Sam Gyimah

The following tables show: 1) the numbers of fatal incident investigations of transgender prisoners; 2) complaints received about racial equality issues; 3) complaints received relating to prisons; and 4) complaints received about transgender issues:

1) Fatal incident investigations of transgender prisoners started, by financial year

Year

PPO fatal incident investigations started

2012-2013

1

2013-2014

0

2014-2015

1

2015-2016

2

2016-2017

4

Total

9

2) Complaints received by the PPO about racial equality issues, by financial year

Year

Complaints Received

Eligible for investigation

2012-2013

30

5

2013-2014

23

13

2014-2015

21

7

2015-2016

29

15

2016-2017

12

7

3) Complaints received relating to prisons, by financial year

Year

Complaints Received

Eligible for investigation

2012-2013

4,894

2,704

2013-2014

4,438

2,033

2014-2015

4,582

2,310

2015-2016

4,3

2,288

2016-2017

4,657

2,505

4) Complaints received by the PPO about transgender equality issues, by financial year

Year

Complaints Received

Eligible for investigation

2012-2013

6

5

2013-2014

3

1

2014-2015

4

2

2015-2016

10

6

2016-2017

5

4

We have been able to provide a consistent time series back to 2012/13. The time required to provide data going back to 1997/98 would incur disproportionate cost.

We do not hold information on the overall proportion of the prison population that made a complaint or the proportion of the estimated transgender prisoner population for the time periods requested. There may be other similar cases where the PPO investigated a death but were not aware of the person having previously identified as transgender and therefore their death would not be included in these figures.

The Government believes that prisons should be places of safety and reform. We welcome the work that the PPO has done to prevent self-inflicted deaths in custody, promote equality and inclusion, and improve safety in prisons more generally.