Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if his Department will release the criteria used by social security tribunals in determining whether to expedite the hearing of appeals against decisions made by the Department for Work and Pensions on benefit entitlement.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The question of expedition is at the discretion of a judge who will make a case management decision on the issue taking into account all the circumstances known about the case. Such decisions may be revised on application and are subject to appeal if an error of law is made.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people have been (a) charged and (b) convicted with (i) forcing someone to marry and (ii) the breach of a forced marriage protection order since the coming into force of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates’ courts and found guilty at all courts for offences related to forced marriage, in England and Wales from 2014 to 2016, can be viewed in the table attached at Annex A.
Court proceedings data for 2017 is planned for publication in May 2018.
Charging data is not held by the Ministry of Justice.
Annex A:
Defendants proceeded against at magistrates' courts and found guilty at all courts for offences related to forced marriage, England and Wales, 2014 to 2016 (1)(2)(3) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
Offence | Outcome | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forced marriage | Proceeded against | 2 | 1 | 3 |
Found guilty | 1 | - | - | |
Breach of forced marriage protection order | Proceeded against | 2 | 3 | 8 |
Found guilty | 2 | 1 | 5 | |
|
|
|
|
|
'-' = Nil |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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. Consequently, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. | ||||
(3) Offences under S120 (breach of protection orders) and 121 (forced marriage) Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services - Ministry of Justice. |
|
| ||
Ref: PQ 121290 |
|
|
|
|
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many British sign language court interpreters are available in each region in England.
Answered by Dominic Raab
The provision of British Sign Language interpreters to the Ministry of Justice has been provided by Clarion UK Ltd since 31st October 2016.
The current number of interpreters available for use by Clarion under this contract is 353. The table below sets out a notional spread of these interpreters across each of the HMCTS regions within England and Wales, this regional breakdown is based on the interpreter’s home postcode, and so it should be noted that these interpreters may be deployed to any location across England and Wales.
Region | Number of British Sign Language Interpreters |
South East | 75 |
South West | 15 |
London | 64 |
North East | 20 |
North West | 73 |
Wales | 24 |
Midlands | 82 |
In addition to these 353 interpreters available through Clarion, the Ministry of Justice may make use of additional, locally sources British Sign Language interpreters on an ‘off contract’ basis, where it is in the best interests of justice to do so.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many appeals against decisions on (a) personal independence payment and (b) employment and support allowance were heard at (i) Blackburn, (ii) Blackpool, (iii) Burnley, (iv) Lancaster and (v) Preston Magistrates' Court in each month between 1 January 2016 and 31 July 2017; and on how many occasions at each venue in each of these months regarding (A) personal independence payment and (B) employment and support allowance hearings were adjourned.
Answered by Dominic Raab
The table below contains the information requested up to March 2017, the latest period for which figures are available
Venue | Month | Benefit type | Number hearing clearances4 | Number of adjournments5 |
Blackburn1 | January 2016 | PIP2 | 31 | ~6 |
|
| ESA3 | 25 | ~ |
| February 2016 | PIP | 17 | 0 |
|
| ESA | 27 | ~ |
| March 2016 | PIP | 30 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 43 | ~ |
| April 2016 | PIP | 33 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 28 | 6 |
| May 2016 | PIP | 38 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 30 | ~ |
| June 2016 | PIP | 16 | 0 |
|
| ESA | 28 | ~ |
| July 2016 | PIP | 31 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 29 | ~ |
| August 2016 | PIP | 23 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 25 | ~ |
| September 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 36 | ~ |
| October 2016 | PIP | 25 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 41 | ~ |
| November 2016 | PIP | 39 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 42 | ~ |
| December 2016 | PIP | 31 | 7 |
|
| ESA | 26 | ~ |
| January 2017 | PIP | 44 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 24 | 6 |
| February 2017 | PIP | 53 | 7 |
|
| ESA | 35 | ~ |
| March 2017 | PIP | 39 | 9 |
|
| ESA | 17 | ~ |
Blackpool1 | January 2016 | PIP | 32 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 60 | ~ |
| February 2016 | PIP | 31 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 52 | ~ |
| March 2016 | PIP | 30 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 19 | ~ |
| April 2016 | PIP | 48 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 35 | ~ |
| May 2016 | PIP | 35 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 33 | ~ |
| June 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 33 | ~ |
| July 2016 | PIP | 34 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 47 | ~ |
| August 2016 | PIP | 37 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 45 | ~ |
| September 2016 | PIP | 33 | 9 |
|
| ESA | 58 | ~ |
| October 2016 | PIP | 38 | 7 |
|
| ESA | 55 | 9 |
| November 2016 | PIP | 44 | 9 |
|
| ESA | 32 | 6 |
| December 2016 | PIP | 38 | 12 |
|
| ESA | 42 | ~ |
| January 2017 | PIP | 51 | 7 |
|
| ESA | 41 | 7 |
| February 2017 | PIP | 42 | 10 |
|
| ESA | 45 | 0 |
| March 2017 | PIP | 49 | 12 |
|
| ESA | 32 | 9 |
Burnley1 | January 20166 | PIP | 23 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 24 | ~ |
| February 2016 | PIP | 18 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 43 | 8 |
| March 2016 | PIP | 26 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 34 | ~ |
| April 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 19 | ~ |
| May 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 29 | ~ |
| June 2016 | PIP | 22 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 21 | ~ |
| July 2016 | PIP | 17 | 8 |
|
| ESA | 32 | ~ |
| August 2016 | PIP | 18 | 10 |
|
| ESA | 26 | 6 |
| September 2016 | PIP | 36 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 46 | ~ |
| October 2016 | PIP | 31 | 7 |
|
| ESA | 39 | ~ |
| November 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 30 | ~ |
| December 2016 | PIP | 28 | 8 |
|
| ESA | 30 | ~ |
| January 2017 | PIP | 43 | 10 |
|
| ESA | 21 | ~ |
| February 2017 | PIP | 37 | 11 |
|
| ESA | 27 | ~ |
| March 2017 | PIP | 34 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 27 | ~ |
Lancaster 1 | January 2016 | PIP | 16 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 9 | 7 |
| February 2016 | PIP | 10 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 19 | ~ |
| March 2016 | PIP | 9 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 14 | ~ |
| April 2016 | PIP | 13 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 14 | ~ |
| May 2016 | PIP | 20 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 9 | 0 |
| June 2016 | PIP | 10 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 10 | 0 |
| July 2016 | PIP | 10 | 0 |
|
| ESA | 14 | ~ |
| August 2016 | PIP | 11 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 21 | ~ |
| September 2016 | PIP | 17 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 17 | ~ |
| October 2016 | PIP | 8 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 19 | ~ |
| November 2016 | PIP | 16 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 12 | ~ |
| December 2016 | PIP | ~ | 0 |
|
| ESA | 7 | ~ |
| January 2017 | PIP | 16 | 6 |
|
| ESA | 14 | 0 |
| February 2017 | PIP | 15 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 12 | ~ |
| March 2017 | PIP | 13 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 12 | ~ |
Preston Magistrates’ Court1 | January 2016 | PIP | 26 | 11 |
|
| ESA | 41 | ~ |
| February 2016 | PIP | 28 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 42 | ~ |
| March 2016 | PIP | 36 | 11 |
|
| ESA | 45 | 7 |
| April 2016 | PIP | 35 | 12 |
|
| ESA | 23 | ~ |
| May 2016 | PIP | 39 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 19 | ~ |
| June 2016 | PIP | 26 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 15 | ~ |
| July 2016 | PIP | 18 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 44 | ~ |
| August 2016 | PIP | 27 | 8 |
|
| ESA | 27 | ~ |
| September 2016 | PIP | 40 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 37 | 8 |
| October 2016 | PIP | 35 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 25 | ~ |
| November 2016 | PIP | 18 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 13 | ~ |
| December 2016 | PIP | 29 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 12 | ~ |
| January 2017 | PIP | 18 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 23 | ~ |
| February 2017 | PIP | 20 | ~ |
|
| ESA | 17 | ~ |
| March 2017 | PIP | 37 | 8 |
|
| ESA | 21 | 7 |
1 Social Security and Child Support data are attributed to the hearing venue nearest the appellant’s home
2. Personal Independence Payment began to replace Disability Living Allowance for people aged 16 to 64 from 8 April 2013. Data includes Disablity Living Allowance reassessment
3. Employment and Support Allowance was rolled out from October 2008 and Employment and Support Allowance (Incapacity Benefit Reassessment) was rolled out from April 2011
4. Total number of hearing clearances. Cases cleared at tribunal hearing both oral and paper
5. Number of cases adjourned at tribunal hearing
6. Number falls between one and five.
Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and are the best data available. The data are a subset of official statistics extracted from the case management system on a different date.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when she plans to answer Questions (a) 55553 on prison sentences: Lancashire, tabled on 30 November 2016, (b) 62826 on Members: correspondence, tabled on 21 February 2017 and (c) 64827 on electronic tagging, tabled on 21 February 2017 by the hon. Member for Preston; and whether she plans to respond to the letter on Questions 55553 and 64827 sent by email and post by the hon. Member for Preston on 3 March 2017.
Answered by Sam Gyimah
Question 55553 on prison sentences: Lancashire was answered on 09 March 2017. Question 62826 is not a PQ that was tabled to the Ministry of Justice. The department assumes the hon. Member for Preston was referring to 64826 on Members correspondence which was answered on 15 March 2017, question 64827 on electronic tagging was answered on 16 March 2017. The Secretary of State has responded to the letter on Questions 55553 and 64827 sent by email and post via letter on Friday 17 March 2017.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 15 February 2017 to Question 59530, if she will provide a breakdown of the £450,000 cost of procurement activity for the supplier of the new electronic monitoring tags based on satellite tracking technology.
Answered by Sam Gyimah
The £450,000 cost to the Electronic Monitoring (EM) programme represents people resources engaged in the procurement of the next generation tags. These resources have been supplied by contractors to provide expert capability and capacity to strengthen accountability and governance during the Procurement exercise. This has helped ensure that the programme remains compliant with EU regulations, meets legal obligations of fairness, transparency and openness and provides confidence and assurance in the contract award decision.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when she plans to answer Question 55553, on prison sentences: Lancashire, tabled by the hon. Member for Preston on 30 November 2016; and what the reasons are for the time taken to answer that Question.
Answered by Sam Gyimah
Question 55553 was answered on Thursday 09 March 2017.
The Ministry of Justice recognises that as a result of process and system changes we have experienced a recent reduction in performance with regard to QWA responses. The Department has assured me that they have taken steps to rectify this, including making further process improvements.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners in (a) HM Prison Preston, (b) HM Prison Garth, (c) HM Prison Kirkham, (d) HM Prison Wymott and (e) Lancaster Farms were over their tariff on 30 November 2016.
Answered by Sam Gyimah
Figures on the number of prisoners in HM Prison Preston, HM Prison Garth, HM Prison Kirkham, HM Prison Wymott and Lancaster Farms who had served more than their minimum tariff, as at 31 December 2016, are provided in the table below.
Over-tariff prisoners in selected prisons by sentence type, 31 December 2016 | ||
|
|
|
| IPP | Life |
Preston | 0 | 4 |
Garth | 57 | 34 |
Kirkham | 17 | 19 |
Wymott | 134 | 56 |
Lancaster Farms | 16 | 8 |
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
We are working hard to reduce the backlog of hearings involving IPP prisoners. We have set up a new unit to tackle this issue and are working with the Parole Board to improve the efficiency of the process.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how often each out of court disposals panel met in each constabulary area in England in 2016; how many cases were examined by each of those panels during that period; how many of those cases (a) related to a caution, (b) were dealt with by restorative justice, (c) related to a youth caution, (d) were dealt with by a fixed penalty notice and caution, (e) were dealt with by youth triage and (f) were dealt with by a conditional caution during that period; and how many of those cases related to (i) youths and (ii) adults.
Answered by Oliver Heald
The information requested is not held centrally.
Asked by: Mark Hendrick (Labour (Co-op) - Preston)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 15 February 2017 to Question 59530, what the reason for the time taken in answering that Question was.
Answered by Sam Gyimah
The Ministry of Justice recognises that as a result of process and system changes we have experienced a recent reduction in performance with regard to QWA responses. The Department has assured me that they have taken steps to rectify this, including making further process improvements.