Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of (a) compliance and (b) enforcement processes for financial orders made in divorce proceedings; and whether he will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing a system of automatic (i) monitoring and (ii) enforcement of such orders.
Answered by Catherine Atkinson
The Government acknowledges that there is clear evidence of challenges faced in financial remedy proceedings on divorce, in relation both to compliance with financial orders and the effectiveness of enforcement where there is a failure to comply. Enforcement in particular is a critical issue within the wider context of domestic abuse, including economic abuse, as failure to secure compliance can perpetuate harm and undermine court orders.
The Family Court has a range of powers to enforce compliance with financial orders, including attachment of earnings orders, third party debt orders, charging orders and orders for sale, warrants of control and committal for contempt of court. The Law Commission published a report in 2016 on enforcement of financial remedy orders and made recommendations for primary and secondary legislative change. These recommendations did not include automatic monitoring or enforcement systems.
The Government launched A Fairer End to Relationships consultation on 5 June, which considers issues relating to domestic abuse and financial proceedings on divorce. The consultation closes on 14 August. Whilst this consultation does not cover the issue of enforcement, the Government continues to recognise its importance and will give further careful consideration to how it might best be addressed.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what avenues of redress are available to family members who believe there has been maladministration in the handling of a deputyship case.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Family members who believe there has been maladministration in the handling of a deputyship case have several avenues of redress.
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is responsible for supervising deputies and will investigate concerns raised about a deputy’s conduct or the way they are carrying out their duties. These investigations are undertaken to ensure that the deputy is acting in the best interests of the person lacking capacity and fulfilling their responsibilities in line with the authority set out in their court order.
Separately, the OPG’s internal complaints process allows individuals to challenge the OPG’s own administrative handling of a case. Once internal processes are complete, if a customer remains unhappy, concerns may be referred to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman via a Member of Parliament.
Where an issue relates to a judicial decision, such as the making or discharging of a deputyship order, this must be addressed through the Court of Protection. Complaints about the professional standards of a deputy may also be taken to the relevant regulatory body.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the he is taking to help ensure transparency in Court of Protection proceedings while safeguarding the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We do not hold data on the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputy orders.
The Court of Protection sets strict rules about what deputies can charge, which are governed by specific practice directions and rules. Practice Direction 19B (PRACTICE DIRECTION 19B – FIXED COSTS AND DEPUTY REMUNERATION IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION) sets out the responsibilities of deputies in ensuring costs are justified, reasonable, and in P’s best interests. The Practice Direction provides a schedule of fees (fixed costs) that deputies, either solicitors or public authority officeholders, can charge when they have been authorised to act for P.
If professional deputies choose not to take fixed costs, they can have their costs assessed by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). The Office of the Public Guardian and the Senior Courts Costs Office have produced guidance to ensure costs charged to vulnerable individuals’ estates are reasonable, proportionate, and fully justified as well as maintaining public confidence through transparency, accountability, and consistent standards: Professional Deputy Costs - GOV.UK
Court of Protection proceedings involve personal, sensitive matters and enable decisions made in the best interests of the person who lacks the mental capacity to make those decisions themselves. A transparency order in the Court of Protection restricts the publication and communication of information from proceedings. They support the principle of open justice by allowing court of protection hearings to be heard in public whilst protecting the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate has been made of the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputyship orders in the last five years.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We do not hold data on the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputy orders.
The Court of Protection sets strict rules about what deputies can charge, which are governed by specific practice directions and rules. Practice Direction 19B (PRACTICE DIRECTION 19B – FIXED COSTS AND DEPUTY REMUNERATION IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION) sets out the responsibilities of deputies in ensuring costs are justified, reasonable, and in P’s best interests. The Practice Direction provides a schedule of fees (fixed costs) that deputies, either solicitors or public authority officeholders, can charge when they have been authorised to act for P.
If professional deputies choose not to take fixed costs, they can have their costs assessed by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). The Office of the Public Guardian and the Senior Courts Costs Office have produced guidance to ensure costs charged to vulnerable individuals’ estates are reasonable, proportionate, and fully justified as well as maintaining public confidence through transparency, accountability, and consistent standards: Professional Deputy Costs - GOV.UK
Court of Protection proceedings involve personal, sensitive matters and enable decisions made in the best interests of the person who lacks the mental capacity to make those decisions themselves. A transparency order in the Court of Protection restricts the publication and communication of information from proceedings. They support the principle of open justice by allowing court of protection hearings to be heard in public whilst protecting the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to support burial authorities in carrying out memorial safety inspections that protect public safety while ensuring compliance with the Ministry of Justice guidance Managing the Safety of Burial Ground Memorials (2009).
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
While the Department is responsible for burial law and policy, the Government does not have day-to-day operational responsibility for burial grounds, which lies instead with providers.
The Government’s guidance documents Managing the safety of Burial Ground Memorials and Guide for Burial Ground Managers set out best practice for memorial safety inspections, including guidance that laying memorials flat should only occur where necessary and following a risk assessment. The documents also advise burial authorities to make every effort to contact families before taking action, where this does not compromise safety.
Burial authorities are expected to follow this guidance when carrying out inspections. Any concerns or complaints about how inspections have been conducted can be raised directly with the relevant burial authority.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to encourage burial authorities to make every effort to contact families before taking action to lay memorials flat where this can be done safely.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
While the Department is responsible for burial law and policy, the Government does not have day-to-day operational responsibility for burial grounds, which lies instead with providers.
The Government’s guidance documents Managing the safety of Burial Ground Memorials and Guide for Burial Ground Managers set out best practice for memorial safety inspections, including guidance that laying memorials flat should only occur where necessary and following a risk assessment. The documents also advise burial authorities to make every effort to contact families before taking action, where this does not compromise safety.
Burial authorities are expected to follow this guidance when carrying out inspections. Any concerns or complaints about how inspections have been conducted can be raised directly with the relevant burial authority.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of burial authorities’ adherence to the guidance that laying memorials flat should be used only where necessary following a risk assessment.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
While the Department is responsible for burial law and policy, the Government does not have day-to-day operational responsibility for burial grounds, which lies instead with providers.
The Government’s guidance documents Managing the safety of Burial Ground Memorials and Guide for Burial Ground Managers set out best practice for memorial safety inspections, including guidance that laying memorials flat should only occur where necessary and following a risk assessment. The documents also advise burial authorities to make every effort to contact families before taking action, where this does not compromise safety.
Burial authorities are expected to follow this guidance when carrying out inspections. Any concerns or complaints about how inspections have been conducted can be raised directly with the relevant burial authority.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the condition of (a) young offenders institutions and (b) education provision in these institutions.
Answered by Nicholas Dakin
We recognise that current performance in our public sector young offender institutions (YOIs) is not where we need it to be. This puts staff under pressure and affects the quality of regime, including education opportunities, that we can offer children and young people.
To drive performance improvements, we have developed roadmaps to effective practice which will focus on outcomes in areas such as safety, behaviour management support and education. Where required, action is being taken under the education contracts to require providers to improve performance, but this is a shared challenge, in which the maintenance of good order and discipline in establishments plays a key part.
The Youth Custody Service (YCS) is working closely with education providers in the community, in particular those making provision for children who have experienced school exclusion, children with special educational needs and young people who have previously experienced, or are at risk of, being unemployed without involvement in education or training. These partnerships will be crucial to developing practice in our YOIs, but also in offering some continuity with children’s education on release.
Work is under way to apply new learning frameworks to the current provision. This will create a wider range of pathways for children, and a roadmap will be used to promote these improvements.
I recently met with education providers and the YCS, including governors, to explore the barriers and plans for improvement. Effective engagement with individual children and young people will make a huge difference in improving safety and achieving more positive outcomes for them on release.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps she is taking to support survivors of domestic abuse and violence against women through the criminal justice system.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government was elected with a landmark mission to halve violence against women and girls (VAWG) in the next decade. Ministers from a wide range of relevant Government departments regularly meet to ensure we are using all available levers to achieve this, and we will publish our cross-government strategy this summer.
We are already taking action to improve the experiences of victims of domestic and sexual abuse by:
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of the non-recognition of unmarried partnerships in family law on economic abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The financial difficulties which cohabitants can face when their cohabiting relationships come to an end is a matter of concern. The Government committed in its manifesto to strengthening the rights and protections for women in cohabiting couples within its broader commitment to tackle violence against women and girls.
As part of our work on cohabitation reform, we are carefully considering issues relating to cohabitation and domestic abuse, including economic abuse. We will launch a public consultation later this year to build public consensus on what cohabitation reform should look like.