Speeches

Andy Slaughter – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andy Slaughter on 2015-12-08.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on the number of occasions when due to the loss or theft of keys, a prison has had to be relocked between (a) May 2010 and May 2011, (b) May 2011 and May 2012, (c) May 2012 and May 2013, (d) May 2013 and May 2014, (e) May 2014 and May 2015 and (f) after May 2015 to date; and what the cost to the public purse was of each such incident.

Andrew Selous

Security is paramount within prisons and it is important that the risk of any potential key compromise is addressed as quickly as possible to protect the public. When a key/lock incident is reported an immediate investigation is undertaken to assess the risk and unless it is clear that security has not been compromised, locking mechanisms and keys will be replaced and/or other necessary remedial action will be taken.

Between 2005 and May 2010 there were 16 relocks which resulted in costs of £1,280,234. Since May 2010 there have been 8 relocks, at a cost of £529,973.

The table below shows the number of incidents and cost to the public purse of re-lock within prisons in England and Wales due to loss or theft of keys and for the time periods requested.

Time Period

No of Incidents

Total Cost (excluding VAT)

1 May 2010 – 1 May 2011

3

£337,553

2 May 2011 – 1 May 2012

1

Nil cost

2 May 2012 – 1 May 2013

0

0

2 May 2013 – 1 May 2014

1

£28,812

2 May 2014 – 1 May 2015

2

£46,396

2 May 2015 – 9 Dec 2015

1

£117,212

Notes:

  1. Figures exclude VAT.
  2. The 2011/12 incident involved a privately operated prison and the cost of re-lock was met by the private contractor in full at nil cost to the public purse.
  3. Prisons are also responsible for re-locks of crown court cells. Figures exclude re-lock of cells in two crown courts during the period.
  4. The figures quoted have been drawn from live administrative databases and may subsequently be amended. Due care is taken during processing and analysis, but the detail is subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.