Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of his Department's compliance with the Protocol between the Lord Chancellor (on behalf of the Government) and the Law Commission, HC 499, published on 29 March 2010, in the context of the average time taken by the Government to respond to Law Commission reports in the last five years.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Shadow Secretary of State for Defence
The Protocol sets out the working agreement between Government and the Law Commission in respect of the Government responding to full and final published reports. An interim and final response should be provided as set out in the Protocol, but additional response time can be agreed with the Commission, if necessary.
However, the type of work commissioned by government can vary in length and will not always lead to a full report being produced, so it is not possible for the Ministry of Justice to state the average time it has taken for the Government to respond to each Law Commission report in the last five years.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect of (a) single-sex members clubs and (b) other barriers to achieving a gender-balanced judiciary.
Answered by Alex Chalk
No known assessment has been undertaken by the department on the potential effect of single sex membership clubs. It is not a requirement to record club membership for judicial officeholders. Judicial appointments are made solely on merit and information is not collected from candidates for judicial office about membership of clubs or networks.
The Lord Chancellor works closely with the Lord Chief Justice, Chair of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) and other members of the Judicial Diversity Forum (JDF), including the three relevant legal professional bodies, to assess barriers to achieving greater gender diversity in the judiciary. In September 2020, JDF members published a summary of wide range of actions they are undertaking at different career stages, collectively or individually, to help increase diversity in the judiciary, including for women. The JDF will publish a one year update to the action plan this Autumn.
The proportion of female court judges has increased by 10 percentage points since 2014, to 34% as at 1 April 2021, and for tribunal judges it has increased by 7 percentage points to 50%, over the same period.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure reasonable adjustments for people with disabilities who do not have access to the internet at home in court hearings during the covid-19 outbreak.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
In response to the current pandemic, video hearings provide an additional channel for conducting a hearing. However, they may not be suitable for everyone. The decision to hold a hearing by video is for the judge, panel or magistrate, taking into account the needs of the parties, including any disability or difficulties with access.
Participants are asked to tell the court or tribunal if they need support or cannot participate effectively in the video hearing. The judiciary will consider reasonable adjustments or alternative arrangements to ensure disabled users can participate. For a participant without access to the internet they can access a video hearing by telephone, or the judiciary may decide it’s more appropriate to hold a face to face hearing.
The judiciary and HMCTS staff have access to reasonable adjustment guidance and training. All guidance raises awareness of the issues people may face, and the reasonable adjustments which may help them to fully participate in hearings.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 9 September 2020 to Question 84222 on Employment Tribunals Service: Applications, what the (a) median and (b) mean clearance times were for single and multiple Employment Tribunal claims in quarter 1 of 2020-21.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The information requested is a subset of the Tribunal Quarterly Statistics which were due to be published on 10 September 2020, however they have been delayed.
It is intended that full publication will be released as soon as practicably possible and will cover the period up to June 2020.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service publish management information on outstanding workload and average clearance time for single Employment Tribunals. The figures reflect the data held on the case management system and will have some definitional and timing differences from the official statistics. This information can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/hmcts-management-information-july-2020
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 7 September 2020 to Question 84223 on Employment Tribunals Service: Finance, what the outstanding caseload was for Employment Tribunals in quarter 1 of 2020-21.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The information requested is a subset of the Tribunal Quarterly Statistics which were due to be published on 10 September 2020, however they have been delayed.
It is intended that full publication will be released as soon as practicably possible and will cover the period up to June 2020.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service publish management information on outstanding workload and average clearance time for single Employment Tribunals. The figures reflect the data held on the case management system and will have some definitional and timing differences from the official statistics. This information can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/hmcts-management-information-july-2020
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the current longest waiting times are between an application for an employment tribunal and the date of first hearing, for each employment tribunal office.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The latest information on the longest waiting times between an application for an employment tribunal and the date of first hearing, for each employment tribunal office is from March 2020 and is set out in the following table.
Of the cases with a first hearing in March 20, the maximum time (in weeks) from receipt to first hearing |
| ||
| |||
| 1 March - 31 March 2020 |
| |
| Single Claims1 | All Claims2 |
|
Aberdeen | 76 | 76 |
|
Birmingham | 133 | 133 |
|
Bristol | 99 | 99 |
|
Cardiff | 83 | 102 |
|
Dundee | 33 | 42 |
|
Edinburgh | 73 | 73 |
|
Glasgow | 67 | 74 |
|
Leeds | 70 | 70 |
|
London Central | 120 | 120 |
|
London South | 165 | 332 |
|
Manchester | 124 | 124 |
|
Newcastle | 64 | 64 |
|
Nottingham | 113 | 113 |
|
Stratford | 160 | 160 |
|
Watford | 136 | 136 |
|
1 Single claims are made by a sole employee/worker, relating to alleged breaches of employment rights.
2 Multiple claims are where two or more people bring proceedings arising out of the same facts, usually against a common employer. In this instance the lead multiple claim would be listed for hearing. This table provides the maximum listing time for both single and lead multiple claim cases.
Average clearance times for claims in January to March 2020 were 38 weeks for single claims and 90 weeks for all claims.
Waiting times are taken from receipt of a claim to the date of the first hearing that can dispose of a case and this data refers to both single and multiple claims.
Timeliness is impacted by the complexity of a case, with each one dealt with on its own merits and, as such, some cases can take longer than others and may have one or more case management preliminary hearings listed, in advance of a full hearing. Single claims, whilst made by a sole employee, may contain more than one complex complaint which will require significant case management prior to any hearing.
95% of multiple claims are stayed awaiting decision from a lead claim, as these are usually complex claims involving jurisdictions such as equal pay, holiday pay and pensions, it can take some time for these claims to be dealt with. This explains why the oldest claims in the table exceed six years in length as they spend the majority of this period as a stayed claim
The data provided has been taken from a central database and, as such, is management information. Although care is taken when processing the data, it is subject to inaccuracies inherent in a large-scale recording system and is the best data that is available.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the budget was for the Employment Tribunal Service in each year from 2010-11 to 2020-21.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
The gross budget for the Employment Tribunal Service in each year since the 2010-11 financial year is as follows:
2010/11 - £60.9m
2011/12 - £62.6m
2012/13 - £58.0m
2103/14 - £53.4m
2014/15 - £50.9m
2015/16 - £51.2m
2016/17 - £41.4m
2017/18 - £52.4m
2018/19 - £56.3m
2019/20 - £66.2m
*2020/21 - £70.8m
These figures are for costs only, and exclude fees received and overheads of the tribunal.
*The figure for the current 2020-21 financial year is provisional and may be subject to change.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department is conducting an internal review of domestic abuse policy.
Answered by Alex Chalk
We are determined to drive the fundamental change necessary to keep victims of domestic abuse and their children safe. The Domestic Abuse Bill is the culmination of significant policy work and consultation on how we improve our response to this crime, which we are committed to keeping under review. Most recently, on 25 June 2020, we published our comprehensive report into the family courts system: ‘Assessing risk of harm to children and parents in private law children cases’.
We are taking immediate action to implement the panel’s recommendations, and will be undertaking further work to address the long-standing, systemic issues identified in the report particularly where there are allegations of domestic abuse. This work will include a review into the presumption of ‘parental involvement’ and whether the right balance is being struck between the risk of harm to children and victims, and the right of the child to have a relationship with both parents.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when the Law Commission will publish its consultation paper on hate crime; and whether the review has been delayed from its original time frame of 18 months.
Answered by Alex Chalk
The Law Commission continues to make good progress on the Hate Crime Consultation Paper, although some delay is inevitable given the impact of Covid-19.
The Law Commissioners are considering when to publish consultations on a case-by-case basis, based on whether they will be able to undertake sufficiently open and transparent consultation during the current circumstances. That is an essential aspect of the way they work. It is particularly important in relation to the Hate Crime project.
The Commissioners are keeping the situation under review and they will announce their decision on publication as soon as they can.
Asked by: Stella Creasy (Labour (Co-op) - Walthamstow)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many declarations of incompatibility the Supreme Court has issued, and how many declarations of incompatibility the Government has acted on.
Answered by Chris Philp - Shadow Home Secretary
All declarations of incompatibility made under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the actions taken to address them are set out in the Government’s annual report to the Joint Committee on Human Rights. The latest report was laid before Parliament on 30 October 2019 and we have not been notified of any further declarations of incompatibility since then.