Tag: Philip Davies

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-31.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners who are in open prisons are serving (a) a life sentence and (b) an indeterminate sentence for public protection.

Jeremy Wright

Depending on the length of tariff and the risk they pose, indeterminate sentenced prisoners (ISPs – both those serving life and Imprisonment for Public Protection sentences) move through their sentence via a series of progressive transfers into lower security establishments in the closed estate and then usually into open conditions. The purpose of any placement in open conditions is for such prisoners’ risks to be tested in less stringent conditions in order to inform the Parole Board’s consideration as to whether it is safe to release them into the community. It is also is an important part of the offender’s rehabilitation. The decision to transfer ISPs to open conditions is a categorisation decision which is a matter for the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State may take this decision after seeking advice from the Parole Board or executively where the prisoners may demonstrate exceptional progress.

However, there is nothing automatic about progress from open conditions to eventual release. Rather, the period in open prison will serve as an important time to test the prisoner and will help inform the Parole Board’s decision whether the offenders risk is such that it may be safely managed in the community.

For many prisoners, in particular those such as ISPs who have spent a considerable amount of time in custody; these are essential components for successful reintegration in the community and therefore an important factor in protecting the public. To release these prisoners directly from a closed prison without the resettlement benefits of the open estate would undoubtedly lead to higher levels of post-release re-offending.

The main purpose of open conditions is to test prisoners in conditions more similar to those that they will face in the community. It also enables them to develop their plans for eventual release. Time spent in open prisons affords prisoners the opportunity to find work, re-establish family ties, reintegrate into the community and ensure housing needs are met. Open prisons are the most effective means of ensuring that prisoners are subject to testing, with appropriate risk assessment to ensure the protection of the public, before they are released into the community. Once tariff has expired, an ISP’s continued detention is justified only so long as it is necessary for the protection of the public.

Public protection is the priority and the Board will take into account a range of factors when assessing whether an offender’s risk is reduced sufficiently, in order that they can be managed in open conditions or on licence in the community. These might include the completion of offence related courses, a sustained period of good custodial behaviour, access to appropriate and stable accommodation, access to education, training and employment, and support from professionals as well as family and friends. The Parole Board would not recommend a prisoner’s transfer to open conditions unless they considered it safe to do so. Prisoners located in open prison conditions have been rigorously risk assessed and categorised as being of a low enough risk to the public to warrant their placement in an open prison.

The requested information is provided in the table attached.

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.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-11.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what data his Department collects on the number of men and women in prison who have previously been in local authority care.

Jeremy Wright

Prisoners are assessed on entry to prison for addiction problems and there is a package of support available to them. The MoJ’s Transforming Rehabilitation programme will provide individual support to all released prisoners. This will include identifying risks and needs for individual ex-prisoners, and providing services to address them.

The Ministry of Justice does not collect these data centrally on a regular basis. However, a survey of 1,435 adult prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in 2005 and 2006 (Surveying Prisoner Crime Reduction – SPCR) provides self-reported estimates for each question.

The full reports can be accessed on the gov.uk website: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/surveying-prisoner-crime-reduction-spcr

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-04-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average custodial sentence was for people of each gender sentenced in the West Yorkshire Police Force area to immediate custody for (a) summary only offences, (b) either way offences and (c) indictable only offences; and for which offences such people were sentenced.

Jeremy Wright

The sentencing framework and sentencing guidelines apply equally to all offenders. Sentencing is entirely a matter for the courts, taking account of all the circumstances of each case. This will include all aggravating and mitigating factors, the criminal history of the offender and a guilty plea.

Defendants are now more likely to be convicted for committing crime and sent to prison for longer than they were a decade ago. In addition criminals convicted since 2010 are more likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence, both overall and for a first time offence.

Offenders sentenced at all courts, by gender, class type, offence type in West Yorkshire police force area from 2008 to 2012 (latest available) can be viewed in the table. In many cases the numbers are too small for the average custodial sentence length to be meaningful.

Court proceedings data for 2013 are planned for publication in May 2014.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-31.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what offences were committed by prisoners serving their sentences in open prisons.

Jeremy Wright

Open prisons have been used since 1936, because they are the most effective means of ensuring that prisoners are suitably risk-assessed before they are released into the community under appropriate licence conditions. These prisons also provide effective supervision for prisoners who do not require the security conditions of the closed estate, because they have been assessed as having a low risk of harm to the public and a low risk of absconding by the independent Parole Board and/or NOMS.

Indeterminate sentence prisoners located in open conditions have been rigorously risk assessed and categorised as being of a low enough risk to the public to warrant their placement in an open prison. They will have previously spent time in prisons with higher levels of security, before being transferred to open conditions if recommended by the Parole Board – or directed through NOMS.

The main purpose of open conditions is to test prisoners in conditions more similar to those that they will face in the community. Time spent in open prisons affords prisoners the opportunity to find work, re-establish family ties, reintegrate into the community and ensure housing needs are met. For many prisoners, in particular those, such as ISPs who have spent a considerable amount of time in custody; these are essential components for successful reintegration in the community and therefore an important factor in protecting the public. To release these prisoners directly from a closed prison without the resettlement benefits of the open estate would undoubtedly lead to higher levels of post-release re-offending. The reoffending rates for those released from open prisons are low when compared to all prisoners released from custody in England & Wales.

The requested information is provided in the table below.

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.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-03-11.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many offenders received a driving ban alongside a prison sentence of a longer length in each of the last five years.

Jeremy Wright

When the courts impose a driving ban and a custodial sentence at the same time, they already make some allowance for the length of time that the offender would normally serve in prison before becoming eligible for release, in order to ensure that disqualification has the desired impact. There are provisions in the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 which will give this statutory force. These will be commenced in due course.

We want to make sure that road traffic offenders face the full consequences of the punishment for their offence. When an offender commits a serious road traffic offence that attracts both a custodial sentence and disqualification from driving, it is essential for public confidence in the criminal justice system that the driving ban has full effect on the offender; he should not benefit from, in effect, a reduction in the length of the ban whilst he serves time in prison. These provisions will ensure that, as now, the court will determine the appropriate length of the ban for the purposes of the offence but it will then be required to extend the ban to take account of time to be spent in prison. This will ensure that there is consistency of action in every case and that driving bans bear equally on all offenders.

The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. This database holds information on offences provided by the statutes under which proceedings are brought but not the specific circumstances of each case. This centrally held information records the period of disqualification into one of thirteen bands. As the exact length of driving ban is not available, it is not possibly to identify how many offenders received a driving ban alongside a prison sentence of a longer length. This detailed information may be held on the court record but due to the size and complexity is not reported centrally to the MoJ. As such, the information requested can only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Philip Davies on 2014-04-01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people of each gender were sentenced in the West Yorkshire Police Force area to immediate custody for a first offence in each year since 2008; and for which offences such people were sentenced.

Jeremy Wright

The sentencing framework and sentencing guidelines apply equally to all offenders. Sentencing is entirely a matter for the courts, taking account of all the circumstances of each case. This will include the seriousness of the offence, including all aggravating and mitigating factors, and a guilty plea.

Defendants are now more likely to be convicted for committing crime and sent to prison for longer than they were a decade ago. In addition criminals convicted since 2010 are more likely to receive an immediate custodial sentence, both overall and for a first time offence.

Table 1 shows the number of offenders given an immediate custodial sentence in the West Yorkshire Police Force Area for their first offence, by offence class and gender 2008 -2013.