Asked by: Sam Tarry (Labour - Ilford South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much the Government has spent on providing bail outs to private probation companies in the last five years.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
There have been no Government bail outs to private probation companies in the past five years.
Asked by: Baroness Cox (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they have made to (1) the government of China, and (2) the government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, about Jimmy Lai, including (a) securing consular access, (b) ensuring his right to a defence counsel of his choice, (c) ensuring he receives a fair trial, and (c) securing his release on bail while awaiting trial.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We are actively monitoring the targeting of pro-democracy figures, journalists and publishers in Hong Kong, and are following these cases, including Mr Lai's carefully.
Accredited diplomats at our Consulate-General in Hong Kong will continue to attend Mr Lai's court proceedings. We have requested consular access to Mr Lai. Mr Lai was sentenced to 5 years and 9 months for a charge of fraud on 10 December and is not currently eligible for bail.
Foreign Lawyers are permitted to practice in Hong Kong, provided they complete the relevant registration and entrance requirements. We are watching closely how the Chief Executive and Hong Kong authorities act to implement the 30 December interpretation of the National Security Law. As we have said, the National Security Law is being used to curtail freedoms, punish dissent and shrink the space for opposition, and we consider it to represent a clear and serious breach of the Sino-British Joint Declaration.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an estimate of number of defendants accused of (a) rape and (b) sexual assault who have been given conditional release on bail in each year since 2010.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Information on the number of defendants given conditional bail by the courts is not centrally recorded in the Court Proceeding Database held by the Ministry of Justice and to obtain it would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the department.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of the impact on courts of remanding defendants when Operation Safeguard is active.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
The activation of Operation Safeguard was announced on 30 November 2022, via an oral statement. Operation Safeguard is a contingency that provides additional headroom for use as needed. We are not currently housing prisoners in police cells as a result of Operation Safeguard.
The courts will continue to make decisions about remanding defendants on bail or in custody in accordance with the law, and their ability to do so will not be impacted by Operation Safeguard. We are monitoring the remand population closely.
Following the conclusion of barristers’ strike action, we remain committed to driving down the outstanding caseload to improve waiting times for all users of the criminal justice system.
Asked by: Ellie Reeves (Labour - Lewisham West and Penge)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many women have been held in prison on remand in each of the last five years; and of those women, how many were held for (a) six months or less, (b) over six months to 12 months (c) over 12 months to 18 months, (d) over 18 months to 24 months and (e) over 24 months.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
The number of women in prison on remand in each of the last five years (as of a snapshot at September 30 in each year), by length of time on remand on that snapshot date, is provided in the below table. Increases in the remand population since March 2020 are believed to be associated with restrictions on court activity arising from the COVID pandemic, and more recently with industrial action from barristers.
| 30/09/2018 | 30/09/2019 | 30/09/2020 | 30/09/2021 | 30/09/2022 |
All | 549 | 571 | 614 | 620 | 673 |
6 months or less | 492 | 488 | 480 | 465 | 530 |
More than 6 months, up to 12 months | 45 | 64 | 99 | 116 | 98 |
More than 12 months, up to 18 months | 6 | 11 | 23 | 25 | 21 |
More than 18 months, up to 24 months | * | 5 | 8 | 9 | 13 |
More than 24 months | * | 3 | 4 | 5 | 11 |
Independent judges make the decision whether to remand a defendant based on the risk to public safety and whether they are likely to reoffend, abscond or obstruct the course of justice.
Data sources and quality
The figures in this table have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Time on remand estimation
For those in the remand prison population this estimation is based on the difference between the date of an individual’s first entry to the prison estate for the current set of [alleged / proven] offences and the date of the data extract [in this case 30 Sep 2022]. This may not accurately reflect ‘time on remand’ for reasons including that the ‘remand spell’ has a ceiling of the date of the extract (i.e. that this isn’t the end of the period of time on remand), and also that it may include time on bail in the community (for example for individuals who are bailed, but then breach bail conditions and are remanded in custody).
Disclosure control
An asterisk (*) has been used to suppress values of two or less. This is to prevent the disclosure of individual information. Further disclosure control may be completed where this alone is not sufficient.
Source: Prison NOMIS
PQ 121085 (Ministry of Justice; Data and Analysis (Directorate))
Asked by: Dan Jarvis (Labour - Barnsley Central)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information his Department holds on the number of sex offenders awaiting sentencing who have gained permission to leave the country, as specified in their bail conditions, since 2010.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The decision to remand an individual in custody or to grant bail is solely a matter for the courts acting in accordance with the law on a case by case basis.
Bail can only be refused where there are substantial grounds for believing that the individual would abscond, commit further offences, interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. Where the court grants bail, it does so with the proviso that the individual attends court, does not commit another offence while on bail and does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. The court may also decide to impose certain conditions to help ensure that the individual complies with these requirements and to help mitigate any other identified bail risks. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the surrender of passports to prevent the individual from travelling abroad.
The court can also impose a Sexual Risk Order where an individual has committed an act of a sexual nature which suggests that they pose a risk of harm to the public in the UK or children or vulnerable adults abroad.
The Government is working to ensure the courts have all the information they need to make an informed decision about the risk posed by an individual.
Information relating to bail conditions that are imposed by the courts is not centrally recorded in the Court Proceeding Database held by the Ministry of Justice and to obtain it would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the department.
On 17 January, the Justice Select Committee published its report entitled "The Role of Adult Custodial Remand in the Criminal Justice System". The report makes recommendations which relate to bail conditions and to the availability of data. The Government will publish its response to the report on 17 March.
Asked by: Dan Jarvis (Labour - Barnsley Central)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of policies applying to bail conditions for sex offenders awaiting sentencing.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The decision to remand an individual in custody or to grant bail is solely a matter for the courts acting in accordance with the law on a case by case basis.
Bail can only be refused where there are substantial grounds for believing that the individual would abscond, commit further offences, interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. Where the court grants bail, it does so with the proviso that the individual attends court, does not commit another offence while on bail and does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice. The court may also decide to impose certain conditions to help ensure that the individual complies with these requirements and to help mitigate any other identified bail risks. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the surrender of passports to prevent the individual from travelling abroad.
The court can also impose a Sexual Risk Order where an individual has committed an act of a sexual nature which suggests that they pose a risk of harm to the public in the UK or children or vulnerable adults abroad.
The Government is working to ensure the courts have all the information they need to make an informed decision about the risk posed by an individual.
Information relating to bail conditions that are imposed by the courts is not centrally recorded in the Court Proceeding Database held by the Ministry of Justice and to obtain it would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the department.
On 17 January, the Justice Select Committee published its report entitled "The Role of Adult Custodial Remand in the Criminal Justice System". The report makes recommendations which relate to bail conditions and to the availability of data. The Government will publish its response to the report on 17 March.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made on the impact of court backlogs on length of bail times.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Our decisive action in the Courts kept justice moving during the face of an unprecedented pandemic and as a result, the outstanding caseload in the Crown Court had reduced from 60,400 cases in June 2021 to 57,300 cases at the end of March 2022.
However, the caseload increased again from April, primarily due to the Criminal Bar Association action, and stood at 62,500 at the end of October. Thanks to actions taken to restore Crown Court operations, including removing the limit of sitting days in the Crown Court, extending Nightingale courts, and increasing Magistrates’ Court sentencing powers, the caseload has now decreased and stood at 61,900 at the end of November.
Information about the length of time that individuals spend on bail is not centrally recorded in the Court Proceeding Database held by Ministry of Justice and to obtain it would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the department.
HMPPS provides temporary accommodation as an alternative to custody, if deemed appropriate by the courts. Approved Premises (APs) and Community Accommodation Service-Tier 2 (formerly the Bail Accommodation Support Services (BASS)) are a community-based alternative to custody that can be used by Courts, in conjunction with other conditions including electronic monitoring. We are increasing these provisions, so that courts can bail more defendants where that course of action is appropriate.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average length of time spent on bail has been in each year since 2010.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
This information is not centrally recorded in the Court Proceeding Database held by the Ministry of Justice and to obtain it would involve a manual interrogation of court records which would result in a disproportionate cost to the department.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what estimate she has made of the (a) number and (b) proportion of bails that have been extended beyond 28 days in each of the last 12 years.
Answered by Chris Philp - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office have published data on the number of pre-charge bails that concluded in each financial year, broken down by duration, as part of the Police Powers and Procedures publications since the year ending March 2018.
The Home Office began collecting and publishing data on the outcome of pre-charge bail records for the year ending March 2021. However, it is not possible to determine from this data whether a pre-charge bail expired due to the defendant not being charged within 28 days.
The pre-charge bail system was reformed through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 on 28 October 2022. As part of the Government’s consultation on pre-charge bail, timescales were extended to better reflect the operational policing realities. The initial bail period is now 3 months which can then be extended for more complex cases.