To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Children in Care: Mental Capacity
Monday 29th November 2021

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government how many Deprivation of Liberty orders were issued each month since July to individuals in care who were under 16 years old.

Answered by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar

The Ministry of Justice does not collect data on the number of deprivation of liberty orders in relation to individuals in care who were under 16 years old.

Applications for deprivation of liberty orders can be made by local authorities when they need to accommodate a child in a non-secure placement. Cafcass – the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service – collect the data on these applications from local authorities and 164 deprivation of liberty applications were made in the period 1 July – 31 October 2021.


Written Question
Prosecutions: Coronavirus
Tuesday 22nd December 2020

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what safeguards they have put in place to ensure equitable outcomes for prosecutions using the single justice procedure introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Answered by Baroness Scott of Bybrook - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)

No additional safeguards have been put in place for Single Justice Procedure cases due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A case dealt with under the Single Justice Procedure is dealt with in the same way as any other case, except that a single magistrate can deal with it (rather than two) and the hearing need not be in public. Therefore, the magistrate must comply with the same legislative safeguards as all other proceedings, and the Sentencing Council Sentencing Guidelines apply in the same way.

In addition, the Single Justice Procedure has a number of further safeguards in place. All defendants can veto the procedure and insist on a hearing in open court. In addition, the magistrate can decide to refer the case to open court if they deem the case is not appropriately dealt with using the Procedure. As with any conviction and sentence by a magistrates’ court, the defendant has the right of appeal against conviction and sentence to the Crown Court.

If a defendant was unaware of the proceedings they are entitled to make a statutory declaration which revokes the conviction and recommences the proceedings.


Written Question
Department of Health and Social Care: Written Questions
Monday 13th July 2020

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Leader of the House why the question for Topical Written Answer (1) HL3844, tabled on 5 May and due for answer on 13 May, and (2) HL4440, tabled on 13 May and due for answer on 20 May, have not been answered. [T]

Answered by Baroness Evans of Bowes Park

The Department of Health and Social Care has received unprecedented levels of written parliamentary questions this year, numbering over 6,000 of which 4,496 have been answered. The department has had to re-allocate staff to deal with this pandemic and are working extremely hard to manage the Covid-19 crisis and to provide updates, advice and guidance to parliament and the public. In addition, my office and I are in regular contact with the Department of Health and Social Care with regards to written questions.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Wednesday 19th February 2020

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what information they hold centrally on Personal Independent Payment appeal waiting times.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

HM Courts and Tribunals Service records, and publishes, information about clearance times for appeals to the Tribunal. Clearance times are calculated from receipt of the appeal to the final disposal decision. The final outcome of any appeal is not necessarily achieved at its first hearing (i.e. waiting time for a Tribunal). The final disposal decision may be reached after an earlier hearing had been adjourned (which may be directed by the judge for a variety of reasons, such as to seek further evidence), or after an earlier hearing date had been postponed (again, for a variety of reasons, often at the request of the appellant). An appeal may also have been decided at an earlier date by the First-tier Tribunal, only for the case to have gone on to the Upper Tribunal, to be returned once again to the First-tier, for its final disposal.

Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) appeals are listed into the hearing venue nearest to the appellant’s home address and statistics are collated according to the venue where the case is heard. Clearance times for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) appeals by SSCS venue are held centrally, as are overall waiting times. For the period June to September 2019, the latest period for which data are available, the average overall clearance time for a PIP appeal was 30 weeks.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Wednesday 5th February 2020

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the longest wait in days for each Job Centre Plus District for people waiting for an appeal hearing for Personal Independence Payment.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

The information requested is not held centrally.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: West Yorkshire
Friday 2nd August 2019

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of reports that people in West Yorkshire have waited over 100 weeks for their Personal Independence Payment appeal hearings; and, if there is such a backlog, why.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

For the period 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019 (the latest period for which data are available) there were a total of 571 appeals where people in West Yorkshire2 waited more than 100 weeks for their Personal Independence Payment (PIP)3 appeal hearing. This represents 1.5% of the total number of cases cleared at hearing.

1Data includes cases cleared at a Tribunal hearing. A Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) appeal may be captured more than once as a hearing should the original decision be overturned, set aside or an Upper Tribunal re-hearing is granted. The data are based on the time from receipt in HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) to the last decision within the period.

2SSCS data are recorded by the office that dealt with the case, and if the case went to oral hearing, the location of the tribunal hearing, normally the hearing venue nearest to the appellant’s home address. Cases relating to the West Yorkshire region are attributed to the following SSCS venues: Bradford, Leeds, Huddersfield and Wakefield

3 PIP (New Claim Appeals), which replaced Disability Living Allowance was introduced on 8 April 2013, also includes Disability Living Allowance Reassessed cases.

4Percentage exceeding 100 wks. is based on the number of cases cleared in over 100 weeks as a percentage of those cleared.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and are the best data that are available. These data may differ slightly from those in the published statistics as these data were run on a different date.

It is important that appeals are heard as quickly as possible. HMCTS recognises there are delays in the system and it is in the process of recruiting more judicial office holders in order to increase capacity and help to reduce waiting times for appellants. This includes 250 judges across the First-tier Tribunal, 125 disability qualified members and up to 230 medical members.

In addition, HMCTS has recently launched a new digital service with a view to enabling speedier processing of appeals. Information on the new digital service can be found at: www.gov.uk/appeal-benefit-decision/submit-appeal.

HMCTS is also working with the Department for Work and Pensions to understand what could be done to reduce the number of appeals being submitted to the Tribunal, through their focus on improving decision-making and the mandatory reconsideration process.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: West Yorkshire
Friday 2nd August 2019

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government (1) how many, and (2) what percentage of, Personal Independence Payment Appeals have been successful in West Yorkshire in the last 24 months.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

The information requested is set out in the table below.

Number and percentage of Personal Independence Payment (PIP)1 appeals decided in favour of the appellant in West Yorkshire2 in the last 24 months for which data are available.

No of Decisions in Favour3

% Decision in Favour4

April 2017 to March 2019

4878

65%

1PIP (New Claim Appeals), which replaced Disability Living Allowance was introduced on 8 April 2013, also includes Disability Living Allowance Reassessed cases.

2Social Security and Child Support (SSCS) data are recorded by the office that dealt with the case, and if the case went to oral hearing, the location of the tribunal hearing, normally the hearing venue nearest to the appellant’s home address. Cases relating to West Yorkshire are attributed to the following SSCS venues: Bradford, Leeds, Huddersfield and Wakefield.

3Decisions in favour - those cases where the original decision is revised in favour of the appellant.

4Percentage in favour calculated as the number in favour as a percentage of those cleared at a tribunal hearing. Cases cleared at hearing include some withdrawals.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and are the best data that are available. These data may differ slightly from those in the published statistics as these data were run on a different date.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Thursday 20th June 2019

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the current mean waiting time for Personal Independence Payment appeals; how that differs from the mean waiting time for the previous year; and, if the mean waiting time has risen compared to the previous year, what are the reasons for that rise.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

The information requested is set out in the table below:

Current and comparative mean waiting times1 for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) appeals

October – December 182

31 weeks

October – December 17

25 weeks

1. Waiting time is interpreted as average clearance time - time taken from appeal receipt to outcome.

2. The latest period for which data are available

The volume of appeals against decisions on PIP has built up since it was introduced as a new benefit, incrementally over time, from 2013. As the number of appeals has increased, so has the average waiting time for an appeal outcome.

Waiting times are calculated from receipt of an appeal to its final disposal. An appeal is not necessarily disposed of at its first hearing. The final disposal decision on the appeal may be reached after an earlier hearing had been adjourned (which may be directed by the judge for a variety of reasons, such as to seek further evidence), or after an earlier hearing date had been postponed (again, for a variety of reasons, often at the request of the appellant). An appeal may also have been decided at an earlier date by the First-tier Tribunal, only for the case to have gone on to the Upper Tribunal, to be returned once again to the First-tier, for its final disposal.

Waiting times can fluctuate temporarily and geographically, owing to a number of variable factors, including volumes of benefit decisions made locally, availability of medical/disability members, venue capacity and the complexity of the issue in dispute. Any disparity in waiting times is monitored and investigated locally.


Written Question
Personal Independence Payment: Appeals
Friday 31st May 2019

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Keen of Elie on 10 May (HL15362), if such data on the waiting times for appeal hearings on Personal Independence Payment claims are not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost, how they determine whether (1) claims are being dealt with in a timely manner, and (2) the resources allocated to deal with appeals are adequate to meet the backlog of appeal claims.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) closely monitors waiting times. However, HMCTS does not keep data on waiting times within the specific and localised timeframes cited in the earlier question, answered on 10 May (HL15362), to which this question refers – namely, (1) up to six months, (2) six to 12 months, (3) 12 to 24 months, and (4) over 24 months. Information about volumes and waiting times for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) appeals is published by the Ministry of Justice in the Tribunals and Gender Recognition Certificate Statistics Quarterly. HMCTS receives a bi-annual forecast of expected appeals from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and that informs our resourcing plans as well as informing judicial recruitment. Additional fee-paid judicial office holders have been recruited: 250 judges across the First-tier Tribunal, 118 disability qualified members and up to 232 medical members. In addition, more PIP appeals are being listed per session and case-management “triage” sessions have been introduced, with the aim of reducing the time taken for appeals to reach final determination. All these measures will increase the capacity of the tribunal, with the aim of reducing waiting times for appellants.


Written Question
Prisons: Bahrain
Thursday 16th May 2019

Asked by: Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to reports that a delegation headed by the director of Bahrain’s Jau Prison, Brigadier General Abdul Salam al-Araifi, visited correctional facilities in the UK before Easter, by whom the visit was funded; and if it was funded by the Government, from which funding stream this came.

Answered by Lord Keen of Elie

In April 2019, a delegation of officials from Bahrain’s Ministry of Interior visited HMP Berwyn and HMP Whitemoor. This delegation included Brigadier Abdulsalam al-Arifi, the Director General of Reformation and Rehabilitation in Bahrain’s Ministry of Interior. HMP Berwyn and Whitemoor provided complimentary refreshments for the delegation during their visits, at a cost of approximately £69.00 total. All other costs associated with the visit were borne by the delegation.