Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton and Crispin Blunt

Monday 22nd October 2018 Commons Chamber

[Crispin Blunt (Reigate) (Con)]

The private sector has had enormous success in delivering huge efficiency savings to the Ministry of Defence over decades now, but on this particular contract, there seems to be an element of risk aversion in the management of it, not least on the medical side from the people making health assessments. Is there a case for getting more military back engaged in the delivery of this contract to make the right risk assessments about recruiting?

[Mark Lancaster]

My hon. Friend makes a very important point. He will be aware of recent work being carried out by the Ministry of Defence through a medical symposium to try to tackle these very issues. Sometimes, some of the medical reasons for not joining are frankly quite archaic. To give a brief example, if someone has had childhood asthma, they cannot join even if they no longer have it, even though the chances are that it will not return until that person is probably in their 50s, when, of course, 99% of service personnel will have left.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton and Crispin Blunt

Tuesday 29th March 2011 Commons Chamber

[Mr Blunt]

What we want to do is to begin to transfer responsibility to local authority areas, so that they begin to appreciate the cost of custody. At the moment, youth custody is extremely expensive, but it comes as a free good to local authorities. We want to incentivise them to deliver earlier intervention to divert people away from custody and, indeed, from youth crime in the first place.

[Mark Lancaster (Milton Keynes North) (Con)]

17. How many prisoners serving indeterminate sentences of imprisonment for public protection have been released to date.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Crispin Blunt)]

As at 17 November 2010, 187 prisoners had been released into the community from indeterminate sentences of imprisonment for public protection or detention for public protection, including offenders who have subsequently been recalled to custody.

[Mark Lancaster]

I am grateful for the answer, but it highlights the logjam that IPP prisoners are causing in our prison system, so how does the Minister intend to address that problem?

[Mr Blunt]

When those sentences were introduced in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and implemented in 2005, the then Government estimated that there would be 900 such prisoners; there are now more than 6,000, and more than 3,000 of them are beyond tariff. [Interruption.] I can understand why the shadow Justice Secretary is ashamed of the record in that area. That is why there has been an increase in the size of the Parole Board; and that is why we are consulting on proposals to raise the tariff to a 10-year determinate sentence before an IPP can be enforced, and to examine the Parole Board test. Those are the proposals in the Green Paper on which we are consulting.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton and Crispin Blunt

Tuesday 15th June 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Blunt]

Of course public protection is an absolute priority. We inherited good MAPPA—multi-agency public protection arrangements—from the previous Administration to deal with the sort of offenders who are released from Wakefield. It is right that probation services and all other agencies that are involved in MAPPA are closely engaged in delivering public protection with regard to such offenders.

[Mark Lancaster (Milton Keynes North) (Con)]

I have visited the probation service in Milton Keynes and pay tribute to its tremendous work. Under the previous Government, however, the number of staff at headquarters ballooned, while front-line staff numbers remained static or even reduced. Might this Government reverse that trend?

[Mr Blunt]

Yes.