Asked by: Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that businesses that wish to establish secure transportation services for children and young people have in place behavioural management policies that set out (1) how children and young people’s human rights can be protected; (2) the conditions for the use of restraint during transportation; and (3) the official reporting procedures that are in place in case of restraint being used.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The most recent Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (PECS) procurement process, which covers securely moving both adults and children, commenced in August 2020 and runs for ten years. This contract covers a range of services including secure transportation between prisons, police stations and other named places of detention and courts as well as transportation of prisoners between prison establishments and includes transition moves from the youth to adult estate.
The Criminal Justice Act 1991 (as amended) and section 12 and Schedule 2 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 as amended by the 2007 offender management act, covers staffing requirements for moving children. All suppliers must demonstrate their technical and professional ability to deliver services, including compliance with the Equality Act 2010, as well as a sound economic and financial standing during any procurement process.
Requirements for the supplier to implement behavioural management policies are included within the PECS contract outlines and cover Human rights, where use of restraint may be applicable and a requirement that any use is reported. There is an expectation that mechanical restraints would not be routinely used for children unless a risk assessment confirms they are necessary.
The PECS suppliers are required to adhere to Prison Service Instructions covering the use of restraint, and their Standard Operating Procedures, training and supervision will be structured around these policy documents. Further to this the PECS contract requires suppliers to have a programme of development and refresher training for their staff which includes training for dealing with young people. Suppliers are also required to review any use of force and ensure that any appropriate lessons are learned, shared and implemented.
Asked by: Lord Watson of Invergowrie (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what official regulatory requirements must be met and demonstrated before an organisation can operate secure transportation services for children and young people.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The most recent Prisoner Escort and Custody Services (PECS) procurement process, which covers securely moving both adults and children, commenced in August 2020 and runs for ten years. This contract covers a range of services including secure transportation between prisons, police stations and other named places of detention and courts as well as transportation of prisoners between prison establishments and includes transition moves from the youth to adult estate.
The Criminal Justice Act 1991 (as amended) and section 12 and Schedule 2 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 as amended by the 2007 offender management act, covers staffing requirements for moving children. All suppliers must demonstrate their technical and professional ability to deliver services, including compliance with the Equality Act 2010, as well as a sound economic and financial standing during any procurement process.
Requirements for the supplier to implement behavioural management policies are included within the PECS contract outlines and cover Human rights, where use of restraint may be applicable and a requirement that any use is reported. There is an expectation that mechanical restraints would not be routinely used for children unless a risk assessment confirms they are necessary.
The PECS suppliers are required to adhere to Prison Service Instructions covering the use of restraint, and their Standard Operating Procedures, training and supervision will be structured around these policy documents. Further to this the PECS contract requires suppliers to have a programme of development and refresher training for their staff which includes training for dealing with young people. Suppliers are also required to review any use of force and ensure that any appropriate lessons are learned, shared and implemented.
Asked by: Sarah Olney (Liberal Democrat - Richmond Park)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what data their Department holds on the (a) number and (b) total cost of replacing (i) laptops, (ii) mobile phones, (iii) memory sticks and (iv) external hard drives that have been (A) lost and (B) stolen in the last year.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Please find the requested data summarised in the table below:
| Laptops | Mobile Phones | Memory sticks | External hard drives |
Lost | 139 | 44 | 0 | 0 |
Stolen | 86 | 7 | 0 | 0 |
Total devices | 225 | 51 | - | - |
Total cost of replacing | £239,220.00 | £19,023 | - | - |
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has around 91,875 employees across the department. The proportion of lost and stolen devices therefore are low compared to this number.
The MoJ, including its executive agencies (HM Courts & Tribunals Service, HM Prison & Probation Service, Legal Aid Agency, Office of the Public Guardian and Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority) and smaller public bodies, treats lost or stolen devices seriously and have processes in place to ensure that when a device is reported as lost or stolen, action is taken immediately to disable the device. All incidents are subjected to an initial security risk assessment with further action on a proportional basis.
It is MoJ policy that all laptops and removable media are encrypted to minimise the impact if a loss were to occur. All mobile phones are deactivated once reported missing to minimise the impact if a loss was to occur.
There is also published guidance on what to do which can be found via this link: https://security-guidance.service.justice.gov.uk/lost-devices-incidents/#lost-devices-or-other-it-security-incidents.
Asked by: Earl Russell (Liberal Democrat - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that unaccompanied child asylum seekers arriving in the UK are not placed in adult prisons.
Answered by Lord Murray of Blidworth
Determining the age of a young person is a difficult task and therefore, the age assessment process for immigration purposes contains safeguards.
Where a new arrival does not have genuine documentary evidence of their age and their claimed age is doubted, an initial age decision is conducted as a first step to prevent individuals who are clearly an adult or minor from being subjected unnecessarily to a more substantive age assessment and ensure that new arrivals are routed into the correct accommodation and processes for assessing their asylum or immigration claim. The lawfulness of the initial decision on age process was endorsed by the Supreme Court in the case of R (on the application of BF (Eritrea)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 38.
Where doubt remains and an individual cannot be assessed to be significantly over 18, they will be treated as a minor for immigration purposes until further assessment of their age by a local authority.
The Home Office initial decision on age is not binding on the courts, and where the Court has doubt whether the individual is a minor or not, the courts will take a decision on the age of an individual before them based on the available evidence. This decision would then determine the type of detention estate someone is sent to if given a custodial sentence or remanded in custody. If an individual is sent to an adult prison and is later found to be a child, they can be moved to the youth custody estate if there continues to be a need to detain them.
The recent legislative reforms introduced by this government will improve the accuracy of the scientific age assessment outcomes, minimising the risk that a person will be incorrectly treated as either an adult or a minor and ensure that age-appropriate services and care are reserved for genuine minors.
Asked by: Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic & Labour Party - Foyle)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has had recent discussions with his counterpart in Northern Ireland on trends in the level of deaths from pregabalin consumption in the north west of Northern Ireland; and whether he plans to take steps to amend sentencing guidelines in the context of these trends.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The maximum penalty specified in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 for supply of a class A controlled drug is life imprisonment, and for class B or C it is 14 years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. The government reclassified pregabalin as a Class C controlled drug in 2019 following an assessment of its harms by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.
Sentencing guidelines are developed by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales (‘the Council’). The Council is an independent body which decides on its own priorities and work plan. Guidelines produced by the Council are not applicable to courts in Northern Ireland, as sentencing is a devolved matter.
The Council recently reviewed and revised its drug offences sentencing guidelines, which came into force on 1 April 2021. They set out that exposure of a drug user to the risk of serious harm over and above that expected by the user is an existing aggravating factor for the offence of supplying a controlled drug. An aggravating factor makes an offence more serious and is considered by the court when sentencing.
Justice Ministers have not discussed pregabalin-related deaths with the Northern Ireland Department for Justice.
Asked by: Colum Eastwood (Social Democratic & Labour Party - Foyle)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department plan to take steps to strengthen sentencing guidance on dealing and supplying drugs which lead to the death of those who consume them.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The maximum penalty specified in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 for supply of a class A controlled drug is life imprisonment, and for class B or C it is 14 years imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. The government reclassified pregabalin as a Class C controlled drug in 2019 following an assessment of its harms by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.
Sentencing guidelines are developed by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales (‘the Council’). The Council is an independent body which decides on its own priorities and work plan. Guidelines produced by the Council are not applicable to courts in Northern Ireland, as sentencing is a devolved matter.
The Council recently reviewed and revised its drug offences sentencing guidelines, which came into force on 1 April 2021. They set out that exposure of a drug user to the risk of serious harm over and above that expected by the user is an existing aggravating factor for the offence of supplying a controlled drug. An aggravating factor makes an offence more serious and is considered by the court when sentencing.
Justice Ministers have not discussed pregabalin-related deaths with the Northern Ireland Department for Justice.
Asked by: Ruth Cadbury (Labour - Brentford and Isleworth)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many individuals on remand for terror-related charges are held in Category B prisons as of 8 September 2023.
Answered by Damian Hinds - Minister of State (Education)
Information on the number of persons in custody for terrorism-connected offences are routinely published on gov.uk and include a total figure for those who have been convicted and those being held on remand. The latest figures show that as at 31 March 2023, there were 232 persons in custody for terrorism-connected offences in Great Britain. This and future bulletins can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/operation-of-police-powers-under-the-terrorism-act-2000-quarterly-update-to-march-2023.
Given the sensitive nature of the information, we do not publish any further breakdowns, or disclose operational detail (e.g., the categorisation and location of terrorist offenders) which may lead to the identification of individuals or undermine our national security efforts.
All prisoners are categorised under the Security Categorisation Policy Framework. Those whose offences meet the threshold for consideration for Category A are then referred to the national Category A team in HMPPS and assessed against that policy. Generally, remand prisoners are held in Category B reception prisons which are designed to serve their local courts. In each case, risk assessments are carried out to determine the appropriateness of the specific placement of each prisoner. The risk assessment looks at a range of factors, not just what offence on which someone has been charged.
Asked by: Lord Bishop of Gloucester (Bishops - Bishops)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the pilot, launched in March 2021, with 15 magistrates’ courts, involving the Ministry of Justice, HMCTS and the probation service, of an alternative delivery model to increase the number of cases receiving pre-sentence reports.
Answered by Lord Bellamy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Pre-Sentence Report (PSR) Pilot tested an Alternative Delivery Model for PSRs in 15 magistrates’ courts’ and concluded in March 2023.
Monitoring data collected during the pilot revealed that pilot courts delivered a higher proportion of PSRs per in-court disposal than non-pilot courts, including for each of the priority cohorts (young adults aged 18-24; women; offenders at risk of short-term custody). We also conducted a process evaluation to explore how the Alternative Delivery Model was implemented, including identifying any benefits, challenges, or unintended outcomes. The process evaluation was published on 15 June 2023 (Process evaluation of the Pre-Sentence Report Pilot - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)) and has found that:
Findings from the pilot have shown some successful elements of the Alternative Delivery Model that we will now integrate into national delivery. This includes rolling out a refreshed training package for probation staff in court across England and Wales and rolling out the processes for the early identification of cases that would benefit from a PSR.
Asked by: Lee Anderson (Reform UK - Ashfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made on the effectiveness of the criteria for releasing prisoners who have committed a serious crime.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
This Government has ensured that the courts have the fullest range of sentencing powers available to deal effectively with serious offenders, with release provisions that protect the public.
Those who commit the most serious offences may be given a life sentence, where the court sets a minimum period in custody (the tariff) after which the prisoner may be released by the Parole Board only if it is satisfied that detention is no longer necessary to protect the public. Other serious sexual and violent offenders may be given an Extended Determinate Sentence or a Sentence for Offenders of Particular Concern where they must serve their custodial term in full unless the Parole Board assesses they are safe to release before that point, having served at least two-thirds in prison. In the Victims and Prisoners Bill, we are strengthening the test which the Parole Board must apply when considering the release of prisoners. The new test makes clear that protecting the public must be the sole consideration - a prisoner must not be released unless there is no more than minimal risk of the prisoner committing a further offence that would cause serious harm. We also introduced a Serious Terrorism Sentence where a minimum custodial period of 14 years is imposed which must be served in full.
Most prisoners serve a standard determinate sentence of imprisonment which, in most cases, means release is automatic at the half-way point on licence for the remainder of the sentence. In the Police Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, for those sentenced to 4 years or more for certain serious sexual and violent offences, we strengthened the provisions to require those offenders to serve two-thirds of their sentence in prison, to better reflect the severity of their crimes. The Act also introduced a new power to prevent the automatic release of prisoners who receive a standard determinate sentence, if they pose a danger to the public.
Asked by: Anne McLaughlin (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North East)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of a permanent ban of (a) forced prepayment meter installations and (b) the remote switching of smart meters to prepayment mode for households where there is a disabled person present.
Answered by Amanda Solloway - Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
A permanent ban on the use of involuntary prepayment meter installation would likely see a move to using debt enforcement via the courts and bailiffs, which is not a desirable outcome.
The Code of Practice that Ofgem have agreed with industry and consumer groups sets out clear procedures that suppliers must follow, strengthening protections for customers in vulnerable situations, including banning involuntary switching for customers in high-risk categories.