Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much of the £47 million allocated to his Department for Brexit preparations in 2018-19 and 2019-20 has been allocated to preparing for the UK leaving the EU without a deal.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
HM Treasury has allocated over £4.2 billion of additional funding to departments and the Devolved Administrations for EU exit preparations so far. This breaks down as:
The Ministry of Justice was allocated £17.3m in 18/19 and £30m in 19/20 from HMT specifically for EU-related activities.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what data his Department collects on parental orders and surrogate births; and what assessment he has made of the potential merits of ensuring greater transparency of that data.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
In surrogacy cases, the family court can be asked to make a parental order to transfer legal parental responsibility from the birth mother, and her legally recognised partner if she has one, to the couple that the child will live with as its parents once it is born.
The Department publishes figures for the number of children involved in parental orders, which are available in Family Courts Statistic Quarterly at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/family-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2018 under Table 4.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he or his Department has made recommendations in respect of license conditions to be imposed on John Worboys upon his release; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Phillip Lee
The Secretary of State asked the National Probation Service (NPS) and the Police through the Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements for assurances that the views of victims were being taken into account and that robust licensing conditions would be sought to manage Worboys’ risk.
Officials subsequently, on 2 February, put forward a request for variation of licence conditions in the case of Worboys to the Parole Board. This comprised requests for variations to licence conditions put forward by the National Probation Service and included all representations made by victims of the offences of which Worboys was convicted.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which public body has decision-making power in (a) releasing prisoners and (b) a category review.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
Prisoners are released in accordance with the statutory provisions laid down by Parliament, either by the Secretary of State or by the independent Parole Board, depending on the type of sentence the courts have imposed. Determinate sentences – that is, those of a fixed length – have an automatic release date at which point the Secretary of State has a statutory duty to release the prisoner. In some cases, there is a discretion for the Secretary of State to release before the automatic release date, for example, under the Home Detention Curfew (HDC) scheme, where the decision to release (on a tag) is taken on behalf of the Secretary of State by prison governors.
Indeterminate sentences – that is, life imprisonment or Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) – have a minimum period (the tariff) imposed by the court that the offender must spend in custody, after which the decision on whether to release can only be taken by the Parole Board. Some forms of determinate sentence also have a period of discretionary release by the Board, for example, extended sentences for serious sexual or violent offenders where release before the end point is for the Board to decide. For prisoners subject to Parole Board release, there is a statutory release test which requires the Board to be satisfied that detention is no longer necessary for the protection of the public.
Rule 7 of the Prison Rules 1999 governs categorisation. Prisoners are categorised by Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) in accordance with the Secretary of State’s published policy. Decisions to categorise a prisoner as Category A are taken centrally by HMPPS while other categorisation decisions are taken at prison level. When assessing indeterminate sentence prisoners for open conditions, the advice of the Parole Board is sought, other than in exceptional circumstances.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the reasons were for his Department's decision not to seek a judicial review of the Parole Board’s decision to release John Worboys.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
As the Secretary of State said in his statement of 19 January, after careful consideration of expert legal advice, he decided it would not be appropriate for him, as Justice Secretary, to proceed with a judicial review against the Parole Board decision to release John Worboys.
I fully support the right of victims and others to take their own legal advice and to challenge the Parole Board’s decision. Legal aid generally remains available for advice, assistance and representation in relation to a judicial review. This would include decisions of the Parole Board.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his policy is on the publication of the reasons for Parole Board decisions.
Answered by Rory Stewart
Publication of the reasons for Parole Board decisions is currently prohibited by law.
However, My Right Honourable Friend, the Secretary of State has announced that there will be a review of transparency in the parole process. On 19 January, he further announced that the review of transparency should consider the law, policy, guidance and practice relating to challenges to Parole Board decision making.
The terms of reference for the review can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/674955/pb-review-terms-of-reference.pdf
The intention is that the review will be completed before Easter.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of male prisoners serving Indefinite Public Protection sentences were released following (a) a period in Category D open conditions, (b) a period in Category C conditions and (c) directly from a Category A or B prison in each of the last five years.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Prisoners are categorised based on an individual assessment of risk of escape or abscond, of harm to the public in such an event, and any risk to the security and safety of the prison and those within it.
Progression towards release for those serving Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences can take a number of routes. Open conditions offer a means to test prisoners in conditions closer to those in the community, and IPP prisoners will only be assessed as suitable for location in such prisons following a robust risk assessment. They can be removed back to closed conditions immediately at any time.
Our priority remains the protection of the public, and this is reflected in the work HM Prison and Probation Service undertake with IPP prisoners prior to and following their release.
No changes have been made to the IPP release test, and the independent Parole Board will continue to rigorously assess all tariff-expired IPP prisoners, in order as to determine they are safe to be released.
Asked by: Vince Cable (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what proportion of female prisoners serving Indefinite Public Protection sentences were released following (a) a period in open conditions, (b) a period in closed conditions and (c) directly from a Category A or restricted status prison in each of the last five years.
Answered by Rory Stewart
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Prisoners are categorised based on an individual assessment of risk of escape or abscond, of harm to the public in such an event, and any risk to the security and safety of the prison and those within it.
Progression towards release for those serving Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences can take a number of routes. Open conditions offer a means to test prisoners in conditions closer to those in the community, and IPP prisoners will only be assessed as suitable for location in such prisons following a robust risk assessment. They can be removed back to closed conditions immediately at any time.
Our priority remains the protection of the public, and this is reflected in the work HM Prison and Probation Service undertake with IPP prisoners prior to and following their release.
No changes have been made to the IPP release test, and the independent Parole Board will continue to rigorously assess all tariff-expired IPP prisoners, in order as to determine they are safe to be released.