Blog

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the outcome was of the National Offender Management Service Authority Audit of South Yorkshire Community Rehabilitation Company in September 2015 on that company’s risk management.

    Andrew Selous

    Major transitions are always challenging, but figures show the performance of Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and National Probation Service, is continually improving. Thanks to these reforms, offenders in prison for less than 12 months are now receiving support from probation providers for the very first time.

    Operational assurance audits were completed by the Ministry of Justice on all Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) during the first year of operation. The reports of these audits are commercially sensitive and, as such, will not be released. It is normal Government practice not to release commercially sensitive information.

    We hold providers rigorously to account for their performance and take action wherever they are falling short. We are continuing to monitor the performance of CRCs closely.

    Following an audit by the Ministry of Justice last year, South Yorkshire CRC developed an action plan.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether community rehabilitation companies (CRCs) have current information sharing agreements in place with their local police forces; and which CRCs do not have such an agreement in place.

    Andrew Selous

    All Community Rehabilitation Companies have information sharing agreements in place with local police forces.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which community rehabilitation companies have been the subject of an authority audit by his Department since February 2015; and if he will publish such reports.

    Andrew Selous

    Major transitions are always challenging, but figures show the performance of Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) and National Probation Service, is continually improving. Thanks to these reforms, offenders in prison for less than 12 months are now receiving support from probation providers for the very first time.

    Operational assurance audits were completed by the Ministry of Justice on all Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) during the first year of operation. The reports of these audits are commercially sensitive and, as such, will not be released. It is normal Government practice not to release commercially sensitive information.

    We hold providers rigorously to account for their performance and take action wherever they are falling short. We are continuing to monitor the performance of CRCs closely.

    Following an audit by the Ministry of Justice last year, South Yorkshire CRC developed an action plan.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, against which community rehabilitation companies the Authority Step-in action provided for by section 27 of the Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRC) Amended and Restated Services Agreement has been used since 1 February 2015; and in response to which issues such an action has been taken.

    Andrew Selous

    Thanks to these reforms, offenders in prison for less than 12 months are now receiving support from the probation providers for the very first time.

    Since new owners began running Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) on 1 February 2015, the Secretary of State has not exercised his powers of written consent against any Boards of any CRC. The Secretary of State has also not used section 27 of the Amended and Restated Services Agreement against any CRC.

    We closely monitor and robustly manage providers to make sure they fulfil their contractual commitments to maintain service delivery, reduce reoffending, protect the public and provide value for money to the taxpayer.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, against the Boards of which community rehabilitation companies he has exercised his powers of written consent since 1 February 2015; and against what proposals such powers have been used.

    Andrew Selous

    Thanks to these reforms, offenders in prison for less than 12 months are now receiving support from the probation providers for the very first time.

    Since new owners began running Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) on 1 February 2015, the Secretary of State has not exercised his powers of written consent against any Boards of any CRC. The Secretary of State has also not used section 27 of the Amended and Restated Services Agreement against any CRC.

    We closely monitor and robustly manage providers to make sure they fulfil their contractual commitments to maintain service delivery, reduce reoffending, protect the public and provide value for money to the taxpayer.

  • Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Jo Stevens – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jo Stevens on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 18 April 2016 to Question 33485, in what capacity those polygraph examinations have been conducted; and for what reasons polygraph examinations have been so used to examine sex offender behaviour.

    Andrew Selous

    The legal basis for the polygraph scheme is in the Offender Management Act 2007. Sections 28 to 30 enable a polygraph licence condition to be added to the release licence of certain sex offenders. In January 2014, following a successful pilot, the condition was introduced nationally.

    Polygraph testing has proven to be a valuable additional tool for National Probation Service offender managers in the management of certain sex offenders in the community. It increases the chance that those sexual offenders will make critically significant disclosures relevant to their management, supervision, or risk assessment. Furthermore, it has increased the likelihood of preventative actions being taken by offender managers to protect the public from harm, such as warnings and recall to custody.

  • Helen Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Helen Jones – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect on (a) access to justice and (b) early settlement of claims of changes made in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Shailesh Vara

    The last government implemented reforms to the justice system through provisions contained in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012. Part 1 of the Act reformed the legal aid system and Part 2 reformed costs and funding arrangements for civil litigation.

    There will be post-implementation reviews of Parts 1 and 2 of the Act between three to five years after implementation (that is, between 2016 and 2018), although the government has indicated that it will carry out the review of Part 2 towards the end of that period.

  • Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Louise Ellman – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Louise Ellman on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 7 March 2016 to Question 29547, what assessment she has made of the efficacy of steps taken to reach vulnerable Yazidis now located in Turkish camps to enable them to be resettled in the UK under the Syrian Vulnerable Person Resettlement Programme; and if she will make a statement.

    Richard Harrington

    UNHCR identifies Syrian refugees for resettlement using their established vulnerability criteria. Membership of a minority religion is not in itself one of the vulnerability criteria but members of minority religious groups, such as Syrian Yazidis, may qualify under one of the criteria.

    The seven vulnerability criteria used by the UNHCR are Legal and or Physical Protection Needs; Survivors of Torture and/or Violence; Medical Needs; Women and Girls at Risk; Family Reunification; Children and Adolescents at Risk and Lack of Foreseeable Alternative Durable Solutions.

    We are providing support to UNHCR to strengthen their resettlement work with Syrian refugees and specifically to intensify their outreach to groups that might be reluctant to register for fear of stigma/discrimination, or who might be unaware of the safe space that UNHCR can provide and the options available to them. This includes all religious minorities, people with disabilities, and survivors of torture and sexual violence.

    On 21 April my Rt Hon. Friend James Brokenshire laid a Written Ministerial Statement launching a new resettlement scheme for ‘Children at Risk’ from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. The scheme will not target unaccompanied children alone, but will be extended to all ‘Children at Risk’ as defined by the UNHCR. Through this category we will resettle the most vulnerable children accompanied by their families where the UNHCR deems resettlement is in the best interests of the child.

  • Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Julie Cooper – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Julie Cooper on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, how many times she has attended public meetings of the International Development Committee since her appointment.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    Ministerial attendance at public meetings of the International Development Committee is a matter of public record. Details can be found online at http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/international-development-committee/formal-minutes/

    “

  • Andrew Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    Andrew Smith – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for International Development

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Smith on 2016-04-19.

    To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what representations the Government has made to the Israeli government on the confiscation near Qalqillhya on 7 May 2015 of 3,000 metres of water pipes funded by her Department as part of a project with the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation and the Palestinian Ministry of Ariculture.

    Mr Desmond Swayne

    The confiscated pipes have all been returned.