Oral Answers to Questions

Lord Herbert of South Downs Excerpts

Tuesday 15th June 2010 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Nick Herbert)]

May I congratulate my hon. Friend on his election as deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats?

The Government believe that more can be done to cut reoffending by overhauling the system of rehabilitation. We are exploring how sentencing and treatment for drug use can help offenders to come off drugs once and for all. We are also exploring how we can do more with independent providers, including the voluntary sector, to reduce reoffending.

[Simon Hughes]

I welcome the Minister and all his colleagues to the Front Bench to consider such an important subject. May I encourage them, as they work out the plans to deal with reoffending—as has been said, it is a serious issue, which the previous Government did not address adequately—to take the advice of people such as the previous governor of Brixton prison, who were clear that, if secure housing and continuing support to deal with addictions are provided when people are released, the chance of immediate reoffending, which often starts in days, is hugely reduced?

[Nick Herbert]

I could not agree more with my hon. Friend. We must improve the multi-agency approach to tackling reoffending. That means bringing together the police, probation, prisons and local authorities, and ensuring that they work together more effectively. The key is to get offenders off drugs and into work, and, in particular, as he says, into housing. If we can do that, we have a chance of reducing the unacceptably high reoffending rates that we currently experience.

[Fiona Mactaggart (Slough) (Lab)]

But how will the cuts that have just been announced to the future jobs fund, which provides employment for ex-offenders in my constituency—a third of a million pounds comes from Connexions and an equal sum from Positive Activities for Young People—contribute to reducing reoffending in Slough?

[Nick Herbert]

Clearly, the Opposition still have not grasped the scale of the fiscal deficit that the country faces or their responsibility for creating it. Reoffending costs the criminal justice system and wider society billions of pounds a year. If we can succeed in reducing reoffending and capture some of that money to invest in rehabilitation services through a payment-by-results model, which we proposed in our rehabilitation revolution, we have a chance of producing the rehabilitation services that the previous Government lamentably failed to provide.

[Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD)]

12. What assessment he has made of the balance of expenditure between (a) prison building and (b) community sentences and restorative justice schemes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Esther McVey (Wirral West) (Con)]

19. What steps he is taking to ensure that the interests of victims of crime are effectively represented in the criminal justice system; and if he will make a statement.

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Nick Herbert)]

The coalition Government’s aim is to establish a criminal justice system that rebuilds public confidence in the system and ensures that our streets are safe. The rights and welfare of the victim are vital to this. The Government are dedicated to ensuring support for victims and witnesses. We want to involve voluntary sector victims groups more and harness their ideas and innovation to help us to improve support.

[Esther McVey]

A constituent of mine, Jean Taylor, set up the charity, Families Fighting for Justice, after the murder of her son and daughter. Can the Minister assure her, and many others in similar situations, that these charities, which are filling the gaps in the justice system to provide support for victims of crime, will have sufficient transparency and lines of communication open to his Department in order to carry out their work?

[Nick Herbert]

I am happy to assure my hon. Friend of that. Charities and voluntary groups set up to promote the interests of victims are immensely important, and I would be delighted to meet the group concerned. Consistent with the proposals for a big society that we have been setting out for some time, we want to find ways to ensure that such groups have a voice, and give victims a voice, in the criminal justice system.

[Mr Jack Straw (Blackburn) (Lab)]

What are the Minister’s plans for the future of the National Victims Service?

[Nick Herbert]

We are reviewing all these arrangements to promote the interests of victims. I welcome the appointment of the Victims Commissioner and the work she will embark upon. We are aware of the important work that the National Victims Service is planning to do.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Nick Herbert)]

I am aware of the operation of the community court up in Liverpool, which I have visited, and the community court in Red Hook in New York, which pioneered this system of community justice. They are indeed interesting, and we should look at their success carefully. I am afraid that I cannot give the hon. Gentleman any commitment on Nottingham, but we are interested in and aware of the importance of community courts.

[Miss Anne McIntosh (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)]

T6. May I congratulate the Justice Secretary on his new position? Can he explain what the coalition Government’s position is on self-defence in the event of burglaries in one’s own home and the level to which we can defend our properties? I understand that we have undertaken a review of the position, and people would like clarification, following a number of Back-Bench Bills from Government Members.

[Nick Herbert]

I can tell my hon. Friend that we are reviewing the law and its interpretation carefully, and we will explore all the options before bringing forward proposals. We must ensure that the responsible citizen acting in self-defence or for the prevention of crime has the appropriate level of legal protection.

[Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab)]

T4. Will the Lib Dem-Tory Government be legislating to give prisoners the vote?

Stop-and-Search Authorisation

Lord Herbert of South Downs Excerpts

Thursday 10th June 2010 Written Statements

[The Minister for Police (Nick Herbert)]

My hon. Friend the Minister of State for Security, Baroness Neville-Jones, has today made the following written ministerial statement:

I wish to inform the House of errors relating to those periods in the past which have recently been identified following an internal review of the authorisation process for the stop-and-search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has undertaken work in relation to a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act concerning authorisations for the section 44 stop-and-search powers. In the course of reviewing their section 44 records, the MPS identified an authorisation from April 2004 which had not been confirmed by a Home Office Minister within the statutory 48 hour deadline for confirmation. Subsequent investigations revealed that approximately 840 were stopped and searched in the relevant area during the period of the invalid authorisation. The MPS are urgently considering what steps can reasonably be taken to contact those individuals involved.

As a result of this discovery, the Office for Security and Counter Terrorism (OSCT) in the Home Office undertook a review in May 2010 of all section 44 authorisations since the Terrorism Act came into force on 19 February 2001, in the course of which a number of other errors came to light. I have to inform the House that it appears that stop-and-search powers have been used unlawfully by a number of police forces on a number of occasions. The Home Office has written to each of the police forces concerned to alert them to these errors and those forces are now in the process of assessing how many individuals were stopped and searched in the periods of invalid authorisations. They will do their best to contact those involved. To summarise these errors, on 33 occasions authorisations were specified to be for 29 days, and two occasions when the authorisations were specified to be for 30 days, whereas the statutory maximum period is 28 days. In addition, there was one further case (as well as the MPS incident in April 2004) where ministerial confirmation for the authorisation was not provided within the statutory 48 hour deadline. All of these cases appear to have been as a result of administrative errors which were not identified at the time by either the police or the Home Office. A full breakdown is included in the attached table.

Lord Carlile, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has been informed.

Three episodes of errors taking place in the section 44 authorisation process have previously been brought to the attention of the House. For completeness, these are also included in the attached table bringing the total number of such cases to 40. Home Office officials are working closely with the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) with the aim of ensuring there are no incidents in future. Officials will keep Lord Carlile and me informed and I will report back to the House as necessary.

I am aware that there is considerable concern about the operation of section 44 stop-and-search powers going beyond these authorisation errors. The Government are committed to a wider review of counter-terrorism legislation, including the operation of the section 44 stop-and-search provisions. While I take some re-assurance from the fact that no errors have occurred since December 2008 when the authorisation process was tightened, I want to assure the House that there will be utmost vigilance in future. It is with the need for this in mind that I have instructed Home Office officials unconnected with the administrative process to conduct the internal review of procedures.

Table of Erroneous Authorisations

Police Authorities (Revised Grant Allocations)

Lord Herbert of South Downs Excerpts

Thursday 10th June 2010 Written Statements

[The Minister for Police (Nick Herbert)]

As indicated by my statement of 27 May I have today laid before the House our proposals for the revised allocation of core police funding for England and Wales in 2010-11 in the form of the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) Amending Report 2010-11. I intend to implement the proposals subject to consideration of any representations and the approval of the House.

The Government’s priority is to cut the budget deficit and get the economy moving again. That means the police will have to bear a fair share of the burden, helped by £100 million of savings already identified for this year on areas including procurement and IT. I am quite clear that this saving can be achieved by driving out wasteful spending, reducing bureaucracy and increasing efficiency in key functions, while leaving the front line of policing strong and secure.

Total Home Office cuts will be £367 million and in order to minimise the impact on the police service the Home Office will cut a greater than proportionate share of its central budget. In summary, the Government intend to reduce police funding by a total of £135 million this year. This will be achieved by a proposed £115 million reduction in rule 2 grant, a £10 million reduction in capital grant and a £10 million reduction in counter-terrorism specific grants. Even after these reductions Government funding to the police service will remain at £9.61 billion in 2010-11. This is still £124 million more than last year.

Police Authorities (Funding Allocations)

Lord Herbert of South Downs Excerpts

Thursday 27th May 2010 Written Statements

[The Minister for Police (Nick Herbert)]

As part of the Government’s plan to cut the budget deficit and get the economy moving again, I am today confirming my intention to require the police to make a fair share of the savings needed. I welcome the responsible and constructive way in which policing partners have already responded to the Chancellor’s announcement of his plans to reduce the national budget deficit.

Total Home Office cuts will be £367 million and in order to minimise the impact on the police service the Home Office will cut a greater than proportionate share of its central budget by bearing down on overheads and reducing waste, including significant cuts to consultancy services, marketing costs and travel. However, the police need to contribute towards the overall reduction and I will therefore ask every police authority to make a fair share of savings.

As a result, I intend to reduce this year’s core Government funding to the police by a total of £125 million. I intend to implement this by reducing the Home Office core police settlement and the capital grant. I will, in due course, formally lay before Parliament an amended police grant report for 2010-11 which will be subject to the usual debate and approval process.

Even after this reduction, Government funding to the police will still increase by £124 million this year to around £9.61 billion. Set out below are updated force allocations for the individual grants which I intend to revise. These have been calculated so that each force will face a cut equivalent to the same percentage of their core Government funding.

I am confident that savings of less than 1% of expected spending in 2010-11 by Police Authorities can be made while maintaining a frontline policing service. It is for chief constables to use their expertise and decide what makes most sense for their force, but I am quite clear that this saving can be achieved by driving out wasteful spending on support functions, reducing bureaucracy and increasing efficiency in key functions—leaving the frontline of policing strong and secure. I expect forces to be held to this by both police authorities and Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary.

For my part, I am clear that the police should be focused on police work, not paperwork. This is why I am committed to cutting the centrally imposed red tape and bureaucracy that slows police officers down and keeps them off the streets and away from protecting the public.

The Government have shown their commitment to the police service by undertaking to honour the third year of the current pay settlement for police officers. Our programme for Government has set out measures to ensure a sustainable frontline police service, including a full review of the remuneration and conditions of service for police officers and staff. We also commit in our programme for Government to establishing an independent commission to review the long-term affordability of public sector pensions, while protecting accrued rights. The Government are determined to ensure that we can provide affordable pensions to public servants into the future.

The spending review reporting in the autumn of this year will set funding levels beyond 2010-11.