Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will consult domestic abuse and sexual violence specialist lawyers and academics during his Review of the Presumption of Parental Involvement.
Answered by Alex Chalk
The Review of the Presumption of Parental Involvement builds directly on the work of the Harm Panel. Independent researchers will draw from the evidence gathered during the public call for evidence from that review and will conduct additional research which will include detailed case file analysis to assess the application of the presumption of parental involvement.
The Advisory Group has been assembled from a range of voices from across the family court system, and beyond. Their collective experience will be drawn upon to provide advice and inform the commissioned researchers.
A core element of the work of the independent researchers undertaking the evidence gathering will be to understand how the application of the presumption of parental involvement impacts upon people with protected characteristics and how the interpretation of those characteristics may have influenced the outcome. As part of this they will be engaging with the relevant groups – including, but not limited to, Black and Minority Ethnic survivors, deaf and disabled survivors, survivors of sexual violence and mothers.
The independent researchers undertaking the review will consider all available evidence, including from academics and professionals specialising in domestic abuse and sexual violence.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what representation there is on the advisory panel for his Ministry's Review of the Presumption of Parental Involvement for (a) Black and Minority Ethnic survivors, (b) Deaf and disabled survivors, (c) survivors of sexual violence and (d) mothers.
Answered by Alex Chalk
The Review of the Presumption of Parental Involvement builds directly on the work of the Harm Panel. Independent researchers will draw from the evidence gathered during the public call for evidence from that review and will conduct additional research which will include detailed case file analysis to assess the application of the presumption of parental involvement.
The Advisory Group has been assembled from a range of voices from across the family court system, and beyond. Their collective experience will be drawn upon to provide advice and inform the commissioned researchers.
A core element of the work of the independent researchers undertaking the evidence gathering will be to understand how the application of the presumption of parental involvement impacts upon people with protected characteristics and how the interpretation of those characteristics may have influenced the outcome. As part of this they will be engaging with the relevant groups – including, but not limited to, Black and Minority Ethnic survivors, deaf and disabled survivors, survivors of sexual violence and mothers.
The independent researchers undertaking the review will consider all available evidence, including from academics and professionals specialising in domestic abuse and sexual violence.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to accelerate the identification of accommodation for children released from custody.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
I recognise that stable accommodation is a key factor in the substantial wraparound support that children require upon their release from custody. My department is working across government to explore options for improving the provision of accommodation.
To plan for the effective resettlement of children who are released from custody, the Youth Custody Service is reviewing its casework model. This will lead to a new Resettlement Framework and improvements to the multi-agency working that is required to support children in preparing for their release.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to improve contact between children in young offender institutions and their (a) parents, (b) carers and (c) friends.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
During the COVID-19 pandemic it is more important than ever that children are able to speak to family, friends and carers given this will be a particularly unsettling period for many children in custody.
There has been a focus within the Youth Custody Service (YCS) on delivering essential activities such as regular phone calls (with young people having been allocated additional free phone credit and phone lines being opened for longer periods) and ‘Enhanced SECURE STAIRS’. This integrated framework of care jointly led by NHS England and NHS Improvement and the YCS provides the foundations on how the YCS works with children, underlining the vital role of social interaction and the importance of connectivity while adhering to the guidance on physical distancing. The Youth Estate has also been prioritised for in-room telephony installation and have used technology to facilitate virtual visits to enable all children and young people to stay in touch with their loved ones, and additional funding has been received for the roll out of secure in-room technology across public sector YOIs. Children and young people also have the opportunity to write and send letters, as well as having access to advocacy services and charities such as Barnardo’s and Childline.
Following publication of the National Framework for Prison Regimes and Services on 2 June, key aspects of regime delivery restarted across under 18 Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) from mid-July including social visits and the Custody Support Plan (CuSP) – providing children with a personal officer to work with on a weekly basis in order to build trust and consistency - as we continue to look to maintain regime in a manner that is safe and sustainable. During this period, it has been the priority of the YCS to maintain social interaction with children and their family: that is why, following the further national restrictions announced in England, face-to-face social visits with family (and contact with corporate parents and professionals) will continue for children in custody, ensuring sustained mental health and wellbeing. Where face-to-face visits are not possible, children and young people will still be able to continue contact virtually with their loved ones.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of introducing a right to review for children held in custody cells for more than 20 hours per day.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
Following the H M Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) thematic report on separation in under-18 Young Offender Institutions (YOIs) published in January, and the subsequent publication of the Separation Taskforce’s report in June, we have committed to establishing a new system and approach for separation, with work now progressing. This work and policy will include a range of aspects, including review of decisions and representations.
This is in addition to immediate actions taken in response of the HMIP thematic report, including: the introduction of additional resources to ensure robust management and improve national and local oversight; the introduction of a national single point of contact to review oversight arrangements for separation, ensuring local accountability is in place across establishments and feeding in centrally; and a new approach to ensure separation data for public sector YOIs is captured centrally on a monthly basis.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to page 65 of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ Annual Report 2019-20, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the statement from the inspector that there has been a strategic failure in the delivery and governance of children's custody.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
I welcome Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ Annual Report 2019-20 and take very seriously the report’s assessment of youth custody highlighted by the Hon. member.
In the short to medium term, the Youth Custody Service is carrying out a reform programme designed to create a child-focused youth estate. For example, the new youth justice specialist role continues to be embedded within the YCS, with funding for every prison officer in youth custody services to take up a foundation degree in youth justice. The YCS has also commissioned a programme of research, in collaboration with academics, to evaluate and learn lessons from the impact and response to Covid-19. The results will inform its recovery planning.
In the longer term, we aim to replace the existing estate with a network of secure schools and similar smaller units, drawing on evidence that smaller, more therapeutic units operated by child-focused providers are more effective in reducing reoffending and improving outcomes for children in custody. We are making progress toward the planned opening of the first secure school in 2022.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to page 68 of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ Annual Report 2019-20, for what reason the use of force and persistent use of pain-inducing techniques have increased in young offender institutions.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The safety and wellbeing of children in custody is paramount and I am clear that restraint should be used only when there is no other suitable alternative. Whilst the number of children in custody has reduced by 68% over the last ten years since 2009/10, this has resulted in a concentrated cohort with particularly complex needs or challenging behaviour, with children and young people (including 18 year olds) serving sentences for violence against the person offences accounting for over half (55%) of the youth custody population in 2019/20.
Following the publication of Charlie Taylor’s independent review in June, we have committed to removing the use of pain inducing techniques (PITs) from the Minimising and Managing Physical Restraint (MMPR) syllabus, to ensure that these are a last resort to prevent serious physical injury to children or staff. Work is well underway on this, and we are looking to remove the use of PITs from the MMPR syllabus by the end of the year, with a suite of training to commence throughout 2021 to ensure full implementation and understanding across sites. In line with the recommendations made, an independent review panel has been set up which will sit for the first time in December to agree Terms of Reference, prior to the panel reviewing incidents involving PITs or serious injury or warning signs (SIWS) in each establishment twice a year and creation of individual action plans for each site.
HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) have visited all under 18 Young Offender Institutions for scrutiny visits during the Covid-19 period. It is encouraging that they found all sites to appear ‘calm and well-ordered’. However, there is still more work to do and the Youth Custody Service will continue to closely monitor levels of violence, self-harm and restrictive physical intervention across the youth secure estate as work continues to evaluate and learn lessons from the Covid-19 period and inform future planning.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to pp. 67-68 of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ Annual Report 2019-20, what steps he is taking to remedy the increase in violence and self-harm at Feltham A.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
Following the annual inspection of Feltham A by HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) last Summer, a resulting action plan saw changes to the senior leadership team at the site as well as a number of actions for urgent improvements including an intervention plan focused on reducing the risk of violence. This included a targeted review of specific Use of Force incidents, focussing on governance, reporting procedures, techniques, practice and review.
Whilst the Covid-19 pandemic has meant that Feltham A has not been fully inspected by HMIP since, they visited in July as part of scrutiny visits during the Covid-19 period with HMIP praising the ‘swift actions’ taken at the start of the pandemic, communication and creativity shown by managers and noting that the YOI appeared ‘calm and well-ordered’ and that recorded self-harm had reduced since the start of the pandemic. Whilst this is encouraging, there is still more work to do and the Youth Custody Service will continue to monitor levels of violence and self-harm at Feltham A to ensure stability within the site.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to page 74 of Her Majesty's Inspector of Prisons for England and Wales Annual Report 2019-20, for what reason the secure training centres at (a) Oakhill and (b) Medway have not achieved the changes recommended to improve their effectiveness.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
The Youth Custody Service (YCS) have been working with the contractors at Oakhill to drive improvements in the service delivered to children. Since 2017, Oakhill has moved from overall ‘Inadequate’ inspection rating to ‘Requires Improvement to be Good’ for the Centre in 2018. The YCS continued to work with the Centre to drive improvement with the April 2019 annual inspection showing all areas assessed as being either ‘Good’ or ‘Requiring Improvement to be Good’ displaying upward progress from the previous year. However, inspectors observed that significant progress was still needed for the Centre to achieve an improved overall rating of ‘Good’.
Inspectors said after visiting in April 2019 that “Incremental progress has been made by a newly formed permanent senior leadership team in addressing some, but not all, of the recommendations made at the last inspection. The recently introduced range of structural changes and newly introduced initiatives are intended to accelerate the progress of improvement over the coming year. However, at the point of the inspection, several significant shortcomings in critical areas of the centre’s work with children continue to require significant improvement, particularly the need for stronger operational management oversight, in order to embed their implementation”.
The YCS recognises the need for further change at Oakhill and since the April 2019 inspection G4S have strengthened their management through the appointment of a new Deputy Director and a new Head of Education. To ensure Oakhill are making progress on the actions, the Centre is being overseen by an external assurance team led by an experienced operational manager and former interim Director of Oakhill.
Medway STC stopped accommodating children in January 2020 and was decommissioned at the end of March 2020 as part of plans to establish our first Secure School run by Oasis Charitable Trust. We have now launched the tender for the refurbishment of classrooms and residential areas For the Oasis Restore Secure School. These refurbishments are being carried out to provide an environment where young people feel able to engage with integrated care, health and education services in order to begin to turn their lives around.
Asked by: Peter Kyle (Labour - Hove and Portslade)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to page 65 of Her Majesty’s Inspector of Prisons’ Annual Report 2019-20, for what reason more than 50 per cent of recommendations made by the inspector in the outcome categories of safety, respect, purposeful activity and resettlement had not been achieved by young offender institutions.
Answered by Lucy Frazer
Unlike the adult estate, HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) run an annual inspection process for under 18 Young Offender Institutions (YOIs). Whilst it is of great importance that sites take necessary actions to improve outcomes for children, in line with recommendations, it can be challenging to fully implement all recommendations within this timeframe. To ensure HMIP recommendations are implemented as fully as possibly, the Youth Custody Service is increasing assurance activity in this area to ensure that support and challenge can be directed as needed.