Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Oral Answers to Questions

Philip Davies Excerpts
Tuesday 10th July 2012

(12 years, 4 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sure that we are now much better informed, but anybody would think that these lawyers are paid by the word.

Philip Davies Portrait Philip Davies (Shipley) (Con)
- Hansard - -

3. How many sentences he has asked the Court of Appeal to review because they appear to be unduly lenient since May 2010; and in what proportion of those cases the sentence was subsequently increased.

Dominic Grieve Portrait The Attorney-General (Mr Dominic Grieve)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The Attorney-General’s Office records show that from 10 May 2010 to 6 July 2012 the Solicitor-General and I have referred the sentences of 188 offenders from 135 separate Crown Court cases to the Court of Appeal. One of those offenders’ sentences has yet to be considered. Of 187 individual sentences that have been considered since May 2010, the Court considered 87% to be unduly lenient and increased the sentences of 155—or 83%—of them. Annual statistics are published on my Department’s website, and the 2011 figures were published last week.

Philip Davies Portrait Philip Davies
- Hansard - -

May I warmly congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend on taking forward these unduly lenient cases and making sure that proper sentences are handed out? However, can he tell us what remedial action is taken against the lily-livered, wet, soft, liberal judges who hand out these unduly lenient sentences in the first place to make sure that this does not happen again?

Dominic Grieve Portrait The Attorney-General
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am afraid that I do not entirely agree with my hon. Friend’s basic premise. Just to get the position in perspective, I should say that 95,795 sentences were passed in the Crown Court in 2011, and we had referred to us in that period some 377 requests to reconsider sentences. Many of those requests were in fact wrong, and the total number we referred reflects the sorts of cases that we identify where a mistake has been made. I have to say to him that I am afraid that in human affairs such mistakes will always be made, which is precisely why we have the mechanism we have got to try to ensure that they are corrected.