Asked by: Nia Griffith (Labour - Llanelli)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much funding her Department (a) allocated for (b) spent on magazine subscriptions in each of the last three financial years.
Answered by Robert Courts
The Attorney General’s Office’s (AGO) paid subscriptions to magazines provide AGO officials with a valuable resource of public discourse on topics relevant to the Department.
The AGO’s allocated budget and spend on magazine subscriptions in each of the last three financial years is set out in the table below.
Please note that figures for the allocated budget include magazine and other subscriptions (e.g., newspapers and online journals), whereas spend is for magazine subscriptions only.
| 2021/22 | 2022/23 | 2023/24 |
Allocated budget | £8,000.00 | £8,000.00 | £8,000.00 |
Spend on magazine subscriptions | £152.50 | £145.00 | £145.00 |
Please note that I am responding on behalf of the AGO only, and not the departments superintended by the Attorney General and I (the Crown Prosecution Service, HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, Government Legal Department, and Serious Fraud Office).
Asked by: Seema Malhotra (Labour (Co-op) - Feltham and Heston)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much her Department (a) paid in apprenticeship levy fees and (b) spent from its apprenticeship levy funds between September 2021 and August 2023.
Answered by Robert Courts
The apprenticeship levy for the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) is managed by the Government Legal Department (GLD). The GLD also manages the apprenticeship levy for HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI). These apprenticeship levies are combined into one pot and it is not possible to isolate them by department. However, it is possible to isolate the levy fees spent by the AGO to support its apprentices.
Between 01 September 2021 and 31 August 2023, the apprenticeship levy fees paid for the AGO, GLD, and HMCPSI were £1,380,581. This includes the 10% government top up.
During the same period, the AGO spent £30,173 to support AGO apprentices.
Please note that, except for the references to the GLD and HMCPSI above, I am responding on behalf of the AGO only, and not the departments superintended by the Attorney General and I (the Crown Prosecution Service, HMCPSI, GLD, and Serious Fraud Office).
Asked by: Nia Griffith (Labour - Llanelli)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of digital posts in her Department are vacant.
Answered by Robert Courts
The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) does not have any Digital and Data (DDaT) posts.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is the AGO’s shared IT service provider. The total number of vacant DDaT posts in the CPS is 32, 10.5% of DDaT posts in the CPS.
As part of the 2022 to 2025 roadmap for digital and data, all government departments made a commitment to reduce their digital and data vacancies to under 10% of total Government Digital and Data headcount by 2025. Overall good progress has been made, with total vacancies now at 15%.
Asked by: Nia Griffith (Labour - Llanelli)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how much funding her Department has (a) budgeted for and (b) spent on software updates to legacy computer systems in each of the last three financial years.
Answered by Robert Courts
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is responsible for the provision and management of up-to-date IT infrastructure and applications for the Attorney General’s Office (AGO).
The CPS does not currently maintain any legacy IT infrastructure on behalf of the AGO.
Asked by: Kim Johnson (Labour - Liverpool Riverside)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of (a) children and (b) adults prosecuted for (i) homicide, (ii) attempted homicide and (iii) other offences had been assessed under the modern slavery national referral mechanism in each of the last 10 years.
Answered by Robert Courts
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not hold data on the number of defendants assessed under the modern slavery National Referral Mechanism (NRM). This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
The NRM is the UK framework for identifying and referring potential victims of modern slavery and ensuring they receive the appropriate support. Certain public authorities, including the police, have a statutory duty to refer potential victims to the NRM. Adults must agree to this. The CPS cannot make referrals; it is not a first responder.
Section 45 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 provides for a statutory defence for adult and child victims of modern slavery who are accused of committing criminal offences. The defence does not apply to the most serious crimes such as murder or manslaughter.
Asked by: Kim Johnson (Labour - Liverpool Riverside)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of charges that used the threshold test subsequently recorded an application of the full code test in each of the last 10 years.
Answered by Robert Courts
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not hold data from which it is possible to cross-reference Threshold Test charging decisions about a defendant with subsequent Full Code Test decisions. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
The Code for Crown Prosecutors is clear that the Threshold Test may only be applied after a rigorous examination of its five conditions. This ensures that it is only applied when necessary and that cases are not charged prematurely. Any decision to charge under the Threshold Test must be kept under review and the Full Code Test must be applied as soon as practicable.
Asked by: Kim Johnson (Labour - Liverpool Riverside)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of (a) homicide and (b) attempted homicide cases was the threshold test applied in each of the last 10 years.
Answered by Robert Courts
Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Management Information is available showing the number of pre-charge legal decisions when the Principal Offence Category allocated at the first consultation was homicide and whether the final consultation completed against the suspect involved application of the Threshold Test.
Data can be provided from April 2019 to the end of September 2023 and the tables below show this information for each year and the financial year 2023/24 to date.
Table 1 - Legal Decisions | 2019-2020 | 2020-2021 | 2021-2022 | 2022-2023 | April - September 2023 |
Threshold Test | 840 | 850 | 971 | 1030 | 524 |
% Threshold Test of Legal Decisions | 47.5% | 49.0% | 53.0% | 54.2% | 54.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 2 - Decisions to Charge | 2019-2020 | 2020-2021 | 2021-2022 | 2022-2023 | April - September 2023 |
Threshold Test | 836 | 848 | 968 | 1026 | 523 |
% Threshold Test of Legal Decisions | 59.8% | 58.8% | 62.1% | 64.3% | 65.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table 3 - Decisions to NFA/OoCD | 2019-2020 | 2020-2021 | 2021-2022 | 2022-2023 | April - September 2023 |
Threshold Test | 4 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 |
% Threshold Test of Legal Decisions | 1.1% | 0.7% | 1.1% | 1.3% | 0.6% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System | |||||
Principal Offence Categories comprise a range of offences. These cannot be separated to report suspect outcomes by specific offence.
Legal decisions are to charge, take no further action (NFA), or recommend an out of court disposal (OoCD).
Following the receipt of a file from the police requesting a CPS charging decision, several consultations may take place before the final decision whether to charge or not is taken by the reviewing lawyer. The first consultation may result in a legal decision outcome or in an action plan that needs to be sent to the police for further investigation or additional evidentiary material to allow a charging decision to take place.
Asked by: Kim Johnson (Labour - Liverpool Riverside)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, how many and what proportion of (a) children and (b) adults prosecuted under joint enterprise provisions in the Crown Prosecution Service Joint Enterprise Pilot 2023 for (i) homicide, (ii) attempted homicide and (iii) other offences were assessed under the modern slavery National Referral Mechanism.
Answered by Robert Courts
The methodology of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Joint Enterprise Pilot 2023 is set out on their website at: www.cps.gov.uk/publication/crown-prosecution-service-joint-enterprise-pilot-2023-data-analysis.
This involved the application of a local ‘flag’ to joint enterprise homicide and attempted homicide cases which were then manually reviewed and certain case features were counted. The number of cases in which the defendant was assessed under the modern slavery National Referral Mechanism was not counted during the pilot and it is not possible to extract further management information from the local ‘flag’ centrally.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith and Chiswick)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, what steps she is taking to support external stakeholders to contribute to the next annual review of disclosure.
Answered by Robert Courts
In conducting any review, it is essential we involve operational partners and stakeholders affected by the changes.
The 2023 update to the Attorney General’s Guidelines has been focused on digital evidence and a working group was established with representatives including the Crown Prosecution Service, Serious Fraud Office, HM Revenue and Customs, National Crime Agency, police, Ministry of Justice, and Home Office. In addition, specific sessions were held with the legal defence community.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith and Chiswick)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Attorney General, with reference to her Department's publication entitled Annual Review of Disclosure, published on 26 May 2022, when the next annual review of disclosure will be carried out.
Answered by Robert Courts
Publication of the next Annual Review is due shortly. Given the 2022 review of disclosure was extensive, the current review has focused on the disclosure of digital evidence. I will write to the honourable member with the updated guidance as soon as the revisions are published.