Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of reports that community resolution orders are being used for more serious offences than originally intended; and what plans they have to prevent such orders being used for anything other than low-level crimes.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
Out of Court Disposals (OOCDs) allow police to deal quickly and proportionately with low-level offending without recourse to the courts. One type of OOCD is community resolution. This is a non-statutory disposal that can be administered by police forces when the offender accepts responsibility for the offence, and in most cases, where the victim has agreed that they do not want more formal action taken.
‘Community resolution’ is a nationally recognised term for a disposal which has been in use by police for some years, and prior to 2014. In 2014, following consultation, the Ministry of Justice identified support for community resolution as part of a simplified framework for OOCDs in which all disposals had conditions attached.
The College of Policing hold guidance on the use of community resolutions:
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/Community-Resolutions-Incorporating-RJ-Final-Aug-2012-2.pdf (this was also summarised as part of a quick reference guide published by Ministry of Justice in 2013: https://www.yjlc.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/MoJ-Quick-reference-guides-out-of-court-disposals-2013.pdf).
Individual decisions around the appropriateness of issuing an OOCD are an operational matter for police.
Typically, a Constable, Police Community Support Officer or Police Staff Investigator can decide to issue a community resolution, in accordance with Authorised Professional Practice, gravity matrices and local force policies which inform decision making.
Police and partners have a range of measures in place to ensure appropriate use of Out of Court Disposals. Supervisors are expected to check decision-making of their staff regularly. Out of Court Disposal scrutiny panels are also in place with external representation - these review in detail a selection of cases to determine whether the method of disposal is considered appropriate, based on a review of the information/evidence available to the decision maker at the time.
Government works closely with the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) whose Charging and Out of Court Disposals strategy (2017-2021) sets out their position and support for forces around OOCDs. We publish data and pay attention to trends in the use of Out of Court Disposals on an ongoing basis.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what guidance they provide to police forces in England and Wales on the criteria for determining whether a person should be subject to a community resolution order rather than an alternative punishment; and who determines whether or not to use a community resolution order.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
Out of Court Disposals (OOCDs) allow police to deal quickly and proportionately with low-level offending without recourse to the courts. One type of OOCD is community resolution. This is a non-statutory disposal that can be administered by police forces when the offender accepts responsibility for the offence, and in most cases, where the victim has agreed that they do not want more formal action taken.
‘Community resolution’ is a nationally recognised term for a disposal which has been in use by police for some years, and prior to 2014. In 2014, following consultation, the Ministry of Justice identified support for community resolution as part of a simplified framework for OOCDs in which all disposals had conditions attached.
The College of Policing hold guidance on the use of community resolutions:
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/Community-Resolutions-Incorporating-RJ-Final-Aug-2012-2.pdf (this was also summarised as part of a quick reference guide published by Ministry of Justice in 2013: https://www.yjlc.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/MoJ-Quick-reference-guides-out-of-court-disposals-2013.pdf).
Individual decisions around the appropriateness of issuing an OOCD are an operational matter for police.
Typically, a Constable, Police Community Support Officer or Police Staff Investigator can decide to issue a community resolution, in accordance with Authorised Professional Practice, gravity matrices and local force policies which inform decision making.
Police and partners have a range of measures in place to ensure appropriate use of Out of Court Disposals. Supervisors are expected to check decision-making of their staff regularly. Out of Court Disposal scrutiny panels are also in place with external representation - these review in detail a selection of cases to determine whether the method of disposal is considered appropriate, based on a review of the information/evidence available to the decision maker at the time.
Government works closely with the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) whose Charging and Out of Court Disposals strategy (2017-2021) sets out their position and support for forces around OOCDs. We publish data and pay attention to trends in the use of Out of Court Disposals on an ongoing basis.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government why they introduced community resolution orders as informal punishments for low-level offences in 2014; who was responsible for their introduction; and whether their use was approved by the Home Secretary.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
Out of Court Disposals (OOCDs) allow police to deal quickly and proportionately with low-level offending without recourse to the courts. One type of OOCD is community resolution. This is a non-statutory disposal that can be administered by police forces when the offender accepts responsibility for the offence, and in most cases, where the victim has agreed that they do not want more formal action taken.
‘Community resolution’ is a nationally recognised term for a disposal which has been in use by police for some years, and prior to 2014. In 2014, following consultation, the Ministry of Justice identified support for community resolution as part of a simplified framework for OOCDs in which all disposals had conditions attached.
The College of Policing hold guidance on the use of community resolutions:
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/Community-Resolutions-Incorporating-RJ-Final-Aug-2012-2.pdf (this was also summarised as part of a quick reference guide published by Ministry of Justice in 2013: https://www.yjlc.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/MoJ-Quick-reference-guides-out-of-court-disposals-2013.pdf).
Individual decisions around the appropriateness of issuing an OOCD are an operational matter for police.
Typically, a Constable, Police Community Support Officer or Police Staff Investigator can decide to issue a community resolution, in accordance with Authorised Professional Practice, gravity matrices and local force policies which inform decision making.
Police and partners have a range of measures in place to ensure appropriate use of Out of Court Disposals. Supervisors are expected to check decision-making of their staff regularly. Out of Court Disposal scrutiny panels are also in place with external representation - these review in detail a selection of cases to determine whether the method of disposal is considered appropriate, based on a review of the information/evidence available to the decision maker at the time.
Government works closely with the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) whose Charging and Out of Court Disposals strategy (2017-2021) sets out their position and support for forces around OOCDs. We publish data and pay attention to trends in the use of Out of Court Disposals on an ongoing basis.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they are taking to meet the needs of women with HIV as identified in the report Women and HIV: Invisible no longer published in April by the Sofia Forum and the Terence Higgins Trust.
Answered by Lord O'Shaughnessy
NHS England welcomes the Sofia Forum report into the needs of women with HIV. The report provides a summary of the findings of two studies aimed at understanding the needs of women living with or affected by HIV in the United Kingdom and a number of recommendations.
In order to meet the needs of women with HIV as identified in the report, NHS England is currently considering how they can address stigma, implementation of peer support and mental health in their HIV services and will take these recommendations for women into account. The report will be considered as part of the evidence base in any future reviews of the HIV Prevention and Sexual Health Promotion programme.
In addition to routine data collection, detailed gender breakdowns will be routinely included as part of Public Health England’s HIV Official Statistics. Public Health England is piloting enhanced surveillance to better understand the circumstances associated with men and women acquiring HIV and the reasons for delays in testing for HIV among them.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether issues affecting (1) people living with HIV, and (2) key populations affected by HIV, will be considered at the Commonwealth Heads of Government conference in April, in order to ensure that there are adequate protections against discrimination across all Commonwealth countries.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We are in discussion with other member states and the Commonwealth Secretariat to finalise the agenda for the forthcoming Heads of Government meeting. We anticipate that discussion at the summit, in the four Commonwealth Forums and in the Ministerial meetings, will range widely and cover the most pressing global health challenges facing Commonwealth member states, including issues affecting people living with HIV and populations affected by HIV.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they propose to include HIV in UK disability laws, in line with the view of UN AIDs that the inclusion of HIV has been an effective means of addressing discrimination based on HIV status and AIDs.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Under the Equality Act 2010, HIV infection is already a qualifying condition for disability from the point of diagnosis. People diagnosed with HIV are, therefore, eligible for the protections in the Act available to those with disabilities.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how the Department for International Development (DfID) ensures that inclusion is taken into account in its development and humanitarian projects and programmes; and what is DfID's definition of "inclusion" in this context.
Answered by Lord Bates
The UK pledged to Leave No-one Behind as part of delivering the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This means ensuring the inclusion of the poorest and most marginalised people for example girls and women and people with disabilities.
The International Development Act (Gender Equality 2014) requires due regard to the impact on gender inequality before providing development and humanitarian assistance. In May 2016 the UK signed up to the Charter on Inclusion of Persons with Disabilities in Humanitarian Action to ensure people with disabilities will benefit from development and humanitarian assistance.
DFID also works with implementing partners to improve disaggregation of beneficiary data by sex, age, disability status and geography wherever possible and relevant, including use of Washington Group questions on disability. Disaggregation helps DFID understand who is included and benefits from our development and humanitarian assistance.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Global Disability Summit to be held in July will address actual or perceived HIV status as part of its deliberations on stigma and discrimination.
Answered by Lord Bates
The systematic inclusion of people with disabilities in development and humanitarian action is a top priority for the Department for International Development. On 24 July, the UK will co-host the Global Disability Summit to increase action and investment, lock-in progress and share best practice. The summit aims to drive forward a step change in global efforts to eliminate stigma and discrimination against all persons with disabilities. This includes realising the rights of persons with disabilities that are often among the most excluded in society and those that experience “double discrimination”, including those living with HIV and members of the LGBT community. In line with the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the active participation of all people with disabilities will be at the very heart of the summit.
The UK’s global HIV response prioritises those left behind by the huge progress made in recent years. For example, we are proud to be a founding supporter of the Robert Carr Civil Society Networks Fund, which supports the grassroots response for inadequately served groups including men who have sex with men and sex-workers.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Global Disability Summit to be held in July will consider discrimination by association of people living with HIV infection, such as members of the LGBT community and sex workers, as part of its deliberations on stigma and discrimination.
Answered by Lord Bates
The systematic inclusion of people with disabilities in development and humanitarian action is a top priority for the Department for International Development. On 24 July, the UK will co-host the Global Disability Summit to increase action and investment, lock-in progress and share best practice. The summit aims to drive forward a step change in global efforts to eliminate stigma and discrimination against all persons with disabilities. This includes realising the rights of persons with disabilities that are often among the most excluded in society and those that experience “double discrimination”, including those living with HIV and members of the LGBT community. In line with the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the active participation of all people with disabilities will be at the very heart of the summit.
The UK’s global HIV response prioritises those left behind by the huge progress made in recent years. For example, we are proud to be a founding supporter of the Robert Carr Civil Society Networks Fund, which supports the grassroots response for inadequately served groups including men who have sex with men and sex-workers.
Asked by: Baroness Gould of Potternewton (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their decision to extend the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme to give the public the right to ask for tougher sentences for nine further terror-related offences, whether they intend to extend that scheme to cases of other serious crime.
Answered by Lord Keen of Elie
The Government extended the scope of the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme to a range of terrorism offences in response to the review of counter-terrorism powers that followed the London and Manchester attacks. This was the first step in meeting the commitment to consider the extension of the scope of the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme The Ministry of Justice and the Attorney General are currently considering how the scheme could be extended more generally.