Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people were (a) cautioned, (b) proceeded against and (c) convicted of an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 in each police force area in 2018.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The number of offenders cautioned, defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts for these offences, in England and Wales, by Police Force Area, from 2005 to 2017 can be viewed in the attached tables.
Where a police force area does not feature in the table, there are no cautions, or alternatively, prosecutions or convictions for that area for that offence during the period.
Offences under Section 13(7) of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 can only be separately identified from 2011 onwards.
Court proceedings and cautions data for 2018 is planned for publication on 16 May 2019
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to reduce waiting times for personal independence payment appeals to be heard in court.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
It is important that appeals are heard as quickly as possible. The Ministry of Justice recognises that there are delays in the system and is in the process of recruiting more judicial office holders in order to increase capacity and help to reduce waiting times for appellants. In the Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) jurisdiction, 225 new medical members have already been appointed and 119 disability-qualified members have recently been recruited. The SSCS jurisdiction will also benefit from the fact that 250 fee-paid judges and 100 salaried judges are being recruited across tribunals more widely. In addition, we have recently launched a new digital service with a view to enabling speedier processing of appeals and provide a better service for all parties to the proceedings. Information on the new digital service can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/appeal-benefit-decision/submit-appeal
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people were (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of an offence under Section 8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006 in each police force area in each year between 2007 and 2012.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under section 8 of the Animal Welfare Act 2006, in England and Wales, by police force area, from 2007 to 2012, can be viewed in the table below: Defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts of offences under Section 8 Animal Welfare Act 2006, by police force area, England and Wales, 2007 to 2012 (1)(2)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) The figures given in the table relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
(2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.
(3) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates' court for April, July and August 2008. Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people were (a) proceeded against under and (b) convicted of dog fighting offences in each of the last two years.
Answered by Rory Stewart
There were 11 prosecutions and 2 convictions in 2016, and 2 prosecutions and 0 convictions in 2017 in England and Wales for dog fighting offences.
This information was obtained from a manual review of court case files that centrally held data indicated may be relevant, and as such has not been through the same quality assurance processes as for routinely published data.
These figures relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences it is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Answer of 16 April 2018 to Question 134447 and the Court Outcomes by Police Force Area data tool published on 17 May 2018, how many people were (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of an offence under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 specifically in each police force area in 2017.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The number of people prosecuted and convicted for offences under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and offences under the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 for each police authority area in 2017 can be found in the tables.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Answer of 16 April 2018 to Question 134448 and the Court Outcomes by Police Force Area data tool published on 17 May 2018, how many people were (a) proceeded against and (b) convicted of an offence under the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 specifically in each police force area in 2017.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The number of people prosecuted and convicted for offences under the Protection of Badgers Act 1992 and offences under the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 for each police authority area in 2017 can be found in the tables.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 19 February 2018 to Question 128402, when the review of the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme will conclude; and what steps are being taken to ensure that that scheme is not used as a determining factor for access to family days for any prisoner regardless of their gender.
Answered by Rory Stewart
As the Secretary of State said in his speech at the Royal Society of Arts we want to reset and reinvigorate the system of incentives in our prisons so they work much more in the favour of those prisoners who play by the rules and who want to turn their lives around, whilst coming down harder on those who show no intention of doing so.
The new Incentives and Earned Privilege (IEP) Policy Framework will exclude the use of IEP as a determining factor for access to family days for any prisoner, regardless of their gender. We expect to consult stakeholders on a draft IEP Policy Framework shortly, and to conclude the review of IEP after this consultation.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if the Government will amend the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme classification for children's visits to parents in male prisons to make them consistent with guidelines for visits to parents in women's prisons.
Answered by Rory Stewart
We recognise the difficulties for families in maintaining contact when a parent is in prison, as well as the importance of avoiding, wherever possible, any detrimental impact on children.
All convicted prisoners are statutorily entitled to the same minimum number of social visits, that is two visits in every 28-day period. Some prisons also run family days where children of prisoners can spend time with their parent. We are currently reviewing the Incentives and Earned Privileges (IEP) scheme to ensure it encourages positive and responsible behaviour by prisoners whilst in custody and helps them to prepare themselves for life after prison. We will ensure that IEP is not used as a determining factor for access to family days for any prisoner, regardless of their gender.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment has she made of the implications for her Department's policies of the report of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture following that Committee's periodic visit of 30 March 2016 to 12 April 2016; and when she expects that report and the Government's response to be published.
Answered by Oliver Heald
The Government has fully considered the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture following its visit last year. The Committee published its report on 19 April, and the Government’s response will follow.
The practice of successive Governments has to been to permit the publication of the Committee’s reports of its visits, and to encourage other member States to do likewise.
Asked by: Kerry McCarthy (Labour - Bristol East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether it is the Government's policy to support automatic publication of visit reports by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture.
Answered by Oliver Heald
The Government has fully considered the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture following its visit last year. The Committee published its report on 19 April, and the Government’s response will follow.
The practice of successive Governments has to been to permit the publication of the Committee’s reports of its visits, and to encourage other member States to do likewise.