Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if she will take steps to introduce guidance for courts on providing both parents with 50-50 access to their children on divorce as a default unless specific circumstances demonstrate otherwise; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Oliver Heald
The Government’s view is that when there is a dispute about child arrangements and a parent asks a court to determine those arrangements, the existing law provides a framework which best serves the interests of both children and parents. If the court determines that a shared residence arrangement is necessary to meet the child’s welfare needs it can make an order to that effect.
While the welfare of the child is the courts paramount consideration, the court must by law presume that the involvement of a parent in the life of the child concerned will further that child’s welfare, unless the contrary can be shown. The nature and extent of that involvement will then be determined by the court based on the facts in each case.
In determining the child’s welfare needs the court will apply the factors set out in the ‘welfare checklist’ in the Children Act 1989. These include the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned, the impact on the child of any change in circumstances, and how capable each parent is of meeting the child’s needs. The court will also consider any harm the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering, which could include any harm from witnessing domestic violence.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if she will make an assessment of the adequacy of the opportunities to present evidence in child custody cases; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Phillip Lee
The law requires the welfare of the child to be the court’s paramount concern when making any decision about a child’s upbringing, including with whom the child is to live or spend time.
Any person who is a party to such proceedings will provide initial evidence and information to the court in their original application or in any response to an application. A party may make representations to the court about any further evidence they wish to put before the court. Rules of court indicate that it is for the court to determine how and when parties may submit evidence. The rules provide for different ways in which this can be done, including a party giving evidence in writing, orally or via video link facilities, where available.
In child arrangements proceedings, the court may also ask the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) to provide independent analysis and recommendations.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment she has made of the equality between mothers and fathers of court judgments on child custody and access to children; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Phillip Lee
The law requires the welfare of the child to be the court’s paramount concern when making any decision about a child’s upbringing, including with whom the child is to live or spend time. The courts must consider the individual facts of each case when making a decision.
Decisions in these cases are a matter for the independent judiciary.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the fine levels for offences related to section 168 of the Equality Act 2010.
Answered by Andrew Selous - Second Church Estates Commissioner
The figures do not suggest that courts are finding their sentencing powers inadequate.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to powers under section 87 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, if he will raise the fines for refusal to carry an assistance dog in a taxi to level 4.
Answered by Andrew Selous - Second Church Estates Commissioner
Changing the maximum fine from one level to another would need to be effected through changes to the legislation governing the offence (The Equalities Act 2010).
Figures from the courts database do not indicate that courts are finding their sentencing powers inadequate, or that there is a need to raise the maximum level of fine available.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of trends in the length of sentences handed down to people who have been convicted of causing death by (a) careless and (b) dangerous driving; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Andrew Selous - Second Church Estates Commissioner
There has been a long term decrease in the number of cases of causing death by careless and dangerous driving and, generally, an increase in the average custodial sentence lengths.
Information on the length of custodial sentences imposed for offenders convicted of causing death by careless and dangerous driving can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/428943/cjs-outcomes-by-offence-data-tool.xls.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether it is his policy to publish the names of people in England and Wales where the Royal Prerogative of Mercy has been used.
Answered by Simon Hughes
There are no statutory requirements relating to the publication of pardons granted under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy. However, by convention, the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery places a notice of free pardons granted in England and Wales in the London Gazette.
In the past 20 years, only two free pardons were granted by Her Majesty the Queen in England in 2009 and 2014 respectively. I am not aware of any other pardons (by use of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy) that have been granted in the UK.
However, with regard to Remission Pardons for England & Wales no records are held for the period prior to 1 February 2013; since that time the Royal Prerogative of Mercy has not been exercised.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times the Royal Prerogative of Mercy has been used in England and Wales in the last 20 years for which information is available.
Answered by Simon Hughes
There are no statutory requirements relating to the publication of pardons granted under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy. However, by convention, the Clerk of the Crown in Chancery places a notice of free pardons granted in England and Wales in the London Gazette.
In the past 20 years, only two free pardons were granted by Her Majesty the Queen in England in 2009 and 2014 respectively. I am not aware of any other pardons (by use of the Royal Prerogative of Mercy) that have been granted in the UK.
However, with regard to Remission Pardons for England & Wales no records are held for the period prior to 1 February 2013; since that time the Royal Prerogative of Mercy has not been exercised.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he last intervened in a decision taken by a parole board; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Andrew Selous - Second Church Estates Commissioner
The Parole Board is an independent body with the statutory power to direct the release of recalled prisoners, indeterminate sentence prisoners whose tariff has expired and those determinate sentence prisoners who are subject to discretionary release arrangements.
Once the Parole Board has directed release, the Secretary of State must give effect to the direction. Exceptionally, the Secretary of State can apply to the High Court to have a Parole Board release direction quashed if he considered it to be irrational although to date he has not sought to do so.
Asked by: Laurence Robertson (Conservative - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many cases of child abduction where no attempt has been made to take the child out of the UK have reached court in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Simon Hughes
The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. Centrally held data does not indicate which defendants proceeded against under Section 2 of the Child Abduction Act 1984 were not taking the child out of the UK. This information may be held by the individual courts in England and Wales but as such it could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.