| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
14 Oct 2003 : Column 39W—continued
Criminal Injuries Compensation
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average turn-around for applications to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority was in the last 12 months; and what percentage were settled within a year. [128360]
Paul Goggins: The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority advise that in the year ending 31 August 2003, the average time between the date an application was received and the date the applicant was notified of the decision on that application was, for the 72,531 cases so determined, 294 days. In 53,159 cases (73 per cent.) the decision letter was issued within 12 months of receipt of the application.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of complainants in criminal investigations claimed compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation scheme in the last 12 months; and what percentage pursued a civil action for damages. [128361]
14 Oct 2003 : Column 40W
Paul Goggins: Such information is not recorded centrally.
Mr. Denis Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions in each of the last five years criminal courts in England ordered offenders to pay compensation to their victims. [127252]
Paul Goggins: The number of offenders ordered to pay compensation for all offences at all courts, England 1997 to 2001 is as follows:
| Year | Offenders ordered to pay compensation(14) |
|---|---|
| 1997 | 95,410 |
| 1998 | 99,198 |
| 1999 | 99,337 |
| 2000 | 98,558 |
| 2001 | 100,910 |
(14) These data are on the principal offence basis
Statistics for 2002 will be published in December.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are being taken to issue guidelines which prescribe the relationship between the police and personal injury solicitors. [128359]
Paul Goggins: The Government's publication "Complex Child Abuse Investigations: Inter-Agency Issues" refers directly to matters relevant to the disclosure of information by the police to solicitors in historical abuse cases. We feel that this provides sufficient guidance, as there should be no need for any further relationship between the two parties.
Criminal Justice Bill
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under what circumstances the Court will waive the double jeopardy rule and allow retrial to take place under the Criminal Justice Bill. [128524]
Paul Goggins: Under the provisions of Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Bill, the Court of Appeal will be able to order a retrial in respect of certain serious offences for which there has previously been an acquittal, where the court is satisfied that there is new and compelling evidence which is relevant tot he guilt of the acquitted person, and that it is in the interests of justice for a retrial to proceed.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what the purpose is of altering the procedures and revising the Codes of Practice as set out in clause 7 of the Criminal Justice Bill; [127669]
- (2) what the purposes are of altering the procedures and revising the Codes of Practice as set out in clause 7 of the Criminal Justice Bill. [128624]
Paul Goggins: The purpose of clause 9 (formerly clause 7) is to enable the Codes issued under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to be updated and reviewed on a more frequent basis to maintain their relevance and accuracy. It provides for a targeted, quicker and less bureaucratic approach and allows the Secretary of State discretion in the process of updating and making changes by applying a level of scrutiny
14 Oct 2003 : Column 41W
proportionate to the amendment or change. The Home Affairs Select Committee would advise the Secretary of State on the level of Parliamentary scrutiny required in every case.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what the purpose is of the proposal in clause 23 of the Criminal Justice Bill to transfer responsibility for charging from the police to the Crown Prosecution Service; [127670]
- (2) what the purposes are of the proposal to transfer responsibility for charging from the Police to the Crown Prosecution Service in Clause 23 and of Schedule 2 of the Criminal Justice Bill. [128626]
Paul Goggins: The purpose of the new arrangements is to enable the police and Crown Prosecution Service to develop a common approach to case preparation, increasing the likelihood that charges will be correct from the outset and facilitating a more efficient and effective court process. When similar arrangements were piloted last year, the results showed improvements in terms of substantially lower discontinuance, more guilty pleas at first hearing and significant falls in cracked and ineffective trials.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether HM Government will adopt the Home Affairs Committee's recommendation on including a time limit in the primary legislation on imposing conditions on bail before charge in the Criminal Justice Bill. [128522]
Paul Goggins: The Government have considered the Home Affairs Committee's recommendation that there should be a limit on the duration of pre-charge police bail in cases referred to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision as to charge. The Government accept that bail granted to suspects in these circumstances (whether subject to conditions or not) should be for a reasonable period only, but it has decided that it would be appropriate to make this clear in guidance, rather than to include a time limit on the face of the Bill. No statutory restrictions on the duration of police bail exist at present, and the final evaluation report of the charging pilot recommended against imposing such a limit in these cases.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how the Criminal Justice Bill modifies the general exclusionary rule against hearsay evidence. [128617]
Paul Goggins: The main provisions remove the old common law rule against the admission of hearsay evidence, and provide a clear statutory scheme for the admission of such evidence. Under the Bill, statements made out of court will be admissible as evidence in the following circumstances:
- the witness is unavailable for a specified reason;
documentary records have been compiled by business;
it is admissible under the common law rules which have been preserved or other statutory provision;
the parties agree that it can go in; or
the court gives leave to admit the statement.
14 Oct 2003 : Column 42W
witnesses in serious cases to use their video recorded statements in place of their main evidence. Further details are contained in the Explanatory Notes, which have been published to accompany the Bill.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Government will accept the recommendation of the Home Affairs Committee to delete Clause 5 pertaining to detention time limits in the Criminal Justice Bill. [128623]
Paul Goggins: I refer my hon. Friend to the Government Reply to the Second Report from the Home Affairs Committee (column 5787). Extending detention in the way proposed will help impact positively on dealing with serious offences such as street robbery.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the Government will accept the recommendation of the Home Affairs Committee to amend Clause 7 of the Criminal Justice Bill in order to preserve the existing procedures in the circumstances of a Code being established for the first time and where revisions of substantial importance or significance are made to the Codes. [128625]
Paul Goggins: Government amendments tabled during debate in the Lords Committee provide for any entirely new PACE Code to be subject to affirmative procedure. We also accept that significant changes to existing Codes may be subject to the same process but that there should be scope to consider the most appropriate procedure to be followed in each case. That is why we have given an undertaking to consult the Home Affairs Select Committee in every case on which procedure should be followed and to be bound by the Committee's advice.
Criminal Justice Boards
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the effect of the formation of the local criminal justice boards on the delivery of services. [130495]
Paul Goggins: Local Criminal Justice Boards were launched on 1 April 2003. They are subject to ongoing assessment against targets. Only the first quarter figures for performance are currently available to assess performance.
The Local Boards have been tasked with delivery of the Criminal Justice System Public Service Agreement targets. Their key priorities are to increase the number of crimes for which an offender is brought to justice and to improve the level of public confidence in the criminal justice system. Additionally they have targets to reduce the number of ineffective trials, ensure the Persistent Young Offender pledge is met and improve timeliness. Where applicable, Local Boards have targets to reduce street crime.
Each Local Board has set out in delivery plans what their precise targets are and how they intend to achieve them. Progress against these plans is monitored and appropriate feedback and support is given. Local Boards have recently completed and received feedback on their first quarter self assessment.
14 Oct 2003 : Column 43W
Additionally the National Criminal Justice Board, at its monthly meetings, monitors the overall performance of Local Boards. Members of the Board—Ministers and Senior Officials—visit Local Areas on a regular basis.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |