Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by (i) Birmingham County Court, (ii) Birmingham High Court and (iii) Birmingham Family Court for contempt of court since November 2014.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
In order to answer 223311 Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) would have to manually check every court log from 1 May 2013 to the present at Birmingham County Court, Birmingham Family Court and the High Court at Birmingham. Birmingham County Court and Birmingham Family Court between them heard in excess of 24,000 cases, each of which would have to be manually checked for any hearings for contempt of court.
HMCTS have been able to check records of cases heard since November 2014, and identified those where committal orders were made for imprisonment for contempt of court. The contemnors weren’t all present at court and did not necessarily begin their term of imprisonment straight away. There were none at Birmingham Family Court. Details of committal orders made for imprisonment for contempt of court at Birmingham County Court and High Court since 1 November 2014 can be found in the table below. This data has been collated specifically to answer this question and has not been checked to the standard of Official Statistics.
Court | Judge | Date | Period |
Birmingham High Court | HHJ Purle QC | 13-2-15 | 6 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Rich TD | 7-11-14 | 8 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 19-11-14 | 16 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 15-1-15 | 18 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | HHJ McKenna | 15-1-15 | 25 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Ingram | 30-1-15 | 24 weeks |
Birmingham County Court | DJ Shorthose | 13-2-15 | 26 weeks |
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by the High Court to the Prison Service for contempt of court since November 2014.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
Details of contempt of court hearings are not held on Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) case management systems, and HMCTS do not centrally collate data on contempt of court cases. Contempt of court can cover a wide variety of circumstances and can be committed by a party in a case or by someone unconnected with specific proceedings such as a juror or a member of the press. Those relating to a specific case will be noted on the court log or daily list and the warrant retained on file. Those not relating to specific cases will be recorded on daily lists and warrants stored along with other orders.
The High Court in London has been able to check its records since November 2014 and have imprisoned two people for contempt of court, both of which were heard in open court. The details are provided in the table below:
Division | Judge | Date | Period |
Queens Bench | HHJ Seymour | 20-11-14 | 3 Months |
Chancery | Justice Asplin | 2-2-15 | 3 Months |
However, in order to identify any cases where a contempt of court occurred in the courts in Birmingham HMCTS would have to manually check every court file at each court for the relevant period. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Whilst prisons log the offence for which prisoners are sent to prison, they do not record the details that have been requested. In order to obtain the requested information, the individual records of all prisoners currently held in prisons, together with those that have been discharged during the period requested, would need to be located and individually checked. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the letter sent on 2 February 2015 to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley by HM Courts and Tribunals Service's Performance, Analysis and Reporting Team, what the (a) name of the judge, (b) date and (c) period of committal was of each court order issued by (i) Birmingham County Court, (ii) Birmingham High Court and (iii) Birmingham Family Court for contempt of court since May 2013.
Answered by Shailesh Vara
Details of contempt of court hearings are not held on Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) case management systems, and HMCTS do not centrally collate data on contempt of court cases. Contempt of court can cover a wide variety of circumstances and can be committed by a party in a case or by someone unconnected with specific proceedings such as a juror or a member of the press. Those relating to a specific case will be noted on the court log or daily list and the warrant retained on file. Those not relating to specific cases will be recorded on daily lists and warrants stored along with other orders.
The High Court in London has been able to check its records since November 2014 and have imprisoned two people for contempt of court, both of which were heard in open court. The details are provided in the table below:
Division | Judge | Date | Period |
Queens Bench | HHJ Seymour | 20-11-14 | 3 Months |
Chancery | Justice Asplin | 2-2-15 | 3 Months |
However, in order to identify any cases where a contempt of court occurred in the courts in Birmingham HMCTS would have to manually check every court file at each court for the relevant period. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Whilst prisons log the offence for which prisoners are sent to prison, they do not record the details that have been requested. In order to obtain the requested information, the individual records of all prisoners currently held in prisons, together with those that have been discharged during the period requested, would need to be located and individually checked. This would incur disproportionate costs.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many explosions of manhole covers there have been since 2000; in how many such cases people were injured; how many explosions have occurred twice in the same location; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Mark Harper - Secretary of State for Transport
HSE collect statistics on injuries through the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations but not on explosions of manhole covers. Since 2000 there was one injury reported where the incident involved an explosion lifting a manhole cover.
HSE are working with utility providers to understand how and why incidents like this occur.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the contribution by the hon. Member for North West Cambridgeshire of 18 March 2014, Official Report, column 625, what progress has been made by his Department's investigation into reasons for increases in the number of non-molestation orders issued by the English courts.
Answered by Mike Penning
Non-molestation orders are an important form of protection for those suffering or at risk of domestic violence. Legal aid funds applications, regardless of the applicant’s means. We accept current orders, or those made in the previous 24 months as the evidence required to access legal aid in private family law matters.
The MoJ keeps the impacts of legal aid reforms under review. While it is true that the number of non-molestation orders applied for through the courts has increased since implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, published data does not support the position that this is due to such orders being a form of acceptable evidence of domestic violence required to access legal aid funding in private family law child or finance arrangement matters. We are confident that the court procedures for making non-molestation orders are sufficiently robust.
The Ministry of Justice has commissioned an extensive research programme to investigate individual behavioural responses following the legal aid reforms. This will provide robust findings on the prevalence of social and civil justice problems and the ways in which people resolve these problems both within and outside of the justice system. Findings from this programme are expected in Autumn 2015.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what the (a) UK total managed expenditure in nominal sterling, (b) gross domestic product in nominal sterling and (c) percentage total managed expenditure is expressed as a percentage of the gross domestic product; and what the reasons are for the variances from the Public Expenditure Statistical analysis published by his Department in 2014.
Answered by Danny Alexander
All these data are available from the Office for Budget Responsibility’s databank, including the Office for National Statistics outturn data (published 22nd November 2014) and the Office for Budget Responsibility’s independent forecast (consistent with the Economic and Fiscal Outlook December 2014 and the Autumn Statement 2014).
UK Total Managed Expenditure in nominal sterling.
2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | ||
TME outturn (£bn) | 680.6 | 700.9 | 701.2 | 717.9 | 719.9 | |
2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | |
TME forecast (£bn) | 737.1 | 746.2 | 746.7 | 751.3 | 765.3 | 779.9 |
Gross Domestic Product in nominal sterling.
2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | ||
Nominal GDP outturn (£bn) | 1501.7 | 1,576.2 | 1,628.5 | 1,663.2 | 1,733.0 | |
2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | |
Nominal GDP forecast (£bn) | 1,822.0 | 1,888.0 | 1,956.0 | 2,038.0 | 2,124.0 | 2,215.0 |
Total Managed Expenditure expressed as a percentage of the gross domestic product.
2009-10 | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | ||
TME outturn (%GDP) | 45.3 | 44.5 | 43.1 | 43.2 | 41.5 | |
2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 | 2017-18 | 2018-19 | 2019-20 | |
TME forecast (%GDP) | 40.5 | 39.5 | 38.2 | 36.9 | 36.0 | 35.2 |
Variances when comparing the most up to date figures set out above against the Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis (command paper) are due to these figures including the latest outturn data, incorporating the latest forecast judgement by the Office for Budget Responsibility and the latest classification changes made by the Office for National Statistics.
Since the Public Expenditure Statistical Analysis was published in July 2014 the Office for Budget Responsibility has published their latest forecast in their December 2014 Economic and Fiscal Outlook. The Office for National Statistics regularly update outturn, at a various points in the year, for total managed expenditure and gross domestic product.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities:
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, when and by what process a decision will be made on whether to reduce the number of elections held for Birmingham City Council.
Answered by Kris Hopkins
I refer the hon. Member to the Written Ministerial Statement of 9 December, Official Report, Column 27-29WS. We intend to change the electoral cycle of Birmingham City Council to all out elections. We intend to do this by making the appropriate Order under the Local Government Act 2000.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 5 December 2014 to Question 216865, what estimate he has made of the cost of obtaining the information requested; and on what basis that estimate was arrived at.
Answered by David Lidington
The guide to Parliamentary work (available on the Cabinet Office website at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/guide-to-parliamentary-work and already in the Library of the House) sets out that Government departments can refuse to answer a question where the cost of responding to that question would be above the disproportionate cost threshold, which is currently set at £850. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office calculated that collating a response to the hon. Member’s question would exceed this threshold.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Department for International Development:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to the Answer of 1 December 2014 to Question 215721, if she will place in the Library the calculation which found that the cost of providing the information requested in that Question was disproportionate.
Answered by Desmond Swayne
A sizeable number of files would need to be reviewed to answer this question. DFID’s database shows over 500 files for the department which dealt with the Overseas Territories for file period 1995/97 alone. It costs £1.50 to access each file. The costs associated with archive research covering the period 1994 to 2004 would therefore be considerable. In addition to financial costs there would also be substantial associated staff costs with carrying out this archive research.
On the basis of the disproportionate cost threshold for written questions, it was assessed that this information could not be collated without incurring disproportionate cost.
Asked by: John Hemming (Liberal Democrat - Birmingham, Yardley)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when responsibility for secure institutions for children, including approved schools, transferred away from the Home Office to other Government departments; and to which other departments and bodies that responsibility was transferred.
Answered by Baroness Featherstone
On 29 March 2007 in a Written Ministerial Statement the Prime Minister announced a Machinery of Government Change whereby the transfer of a number of policy areas would take place from the Home Office to a new Ministry of Justice. This included the transfer of the National Offender Management Service, including the Prison and Probation Services, on 9th May 2007. Incorporated in this change was the policy relating to the secure estate for young offenders.
Section 46 of the Children and Young Persons act 1969 contains provision for the cessation of approved schools as a consequence of the establishment of community homes. The responsibility for approved schools was transferred to the Department of Health and Social Security in 1971 and, in 1973, under a number of orders made under powers in section 46 above approved schools ceased to operate in 1973.