|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 25 January 2006 to the hon. Member for Crosby, Official Report, column 2135W, on pornography, how many successful prosecutions have been brought in each of the last three years under (a) the Obscene Publications Act 1959, (b) the Indecent Displays Act 1981, (c) the Communications Act 2003, (d) the Video Recordings Act 1984 and (e) the Protection of Children Act 1999 for the illegal transference of pornography to minors. 
Fiona Mactaggart: Data from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice reform, showing the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for selected offences related to pornography, is provided in the attached table, for England and Wales, 200204. It is not possible to identify how many of these prosecutions relate to the illegal transference to minors because the individual circumstances of these prosecution are not collected centrally. Data for 2005 will be available in the autumn of 2006.
|Offence description||Principal statue||Proceeded against||Found guilty||Proceeded against||Found guilty||Proceeded against||Found guilty|
|Prohibition of publication of obscene matter||Obscene Publications Act 1959 S.2(1) as amended by Obscene Publications Act 1964 8.1(1)||52||42||39||31||30||25|
|Take, permit to be taken or to make distribute or publish indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children||Protection of Children Act 1978 S.1 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.84||582||434||1,464||1,048||1,097||978|
|Indecent matter publicly||Indecent Displays (Control) Act 1981 SS.1 and 4||3||||6||3||2|||
|Supplying video recording of unclassified work||Video Recording Act 1984 S.9 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88||62||59||44||44||42||31|
|Video recording of unclassified work for the purpose of supply||Video Recording Act 1984 S.10 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88||64||62||40||31||49||43|
|Supplying video recording of classified work in breach of classification||Video Recording Act 1984 S.11 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88||22||14||25||17||11||8|
|Certain video recordings only to be supplied in licensed sex shops||Video Recording Act 1984 S.12 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88||9||4||13||10||64||48|
|Supply of video recording not complying with requirements as to labels etc||Video Recording Act 1984 S.13||||||||||1|||
|Supply of video recordings containing false indication as to classification||Video Recording Act 1984 S.14 as amended by Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88||||||2||||2||2|
|Improper use of public electronic communications network||Communications Act 2003 S.127||n/a||n/a||n/a||n/a||214||143|
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people in Peterborough who were tagged on early release from prison have breached the rules governing their early release in each of the last five years. 
15 people were recalled to prison in 2005 for failing to comply with the curfew conditions after being released early on home detention curfew from Peterborough prison. 204 people in total were released from Peterborough prison on home detention curfew during 2005. The prison opened on 28 March
16 Feb 2006 : Column 2354W
2005. Information on the total number of people serving their curfew period while living in Peterborough is not centrally available.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners in (a) Chelmsford, (b) Coldingley, (c) Elmley and (d) Rochester prison have tested positive for drugs in each year since 1997. 
Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 8 February 2006]: There are three main types of drug testing in prisons: clinical; mandatory; and voluntary. Data on clinical and voluntary testing are not held centrally. The random mandatory drug testing programme is used to measure levels of drug misuse in prison. The random MDT figures are given in the following table:
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many inmates at each prison were subject to (a) closed visits and (b) visit bans in each of the last 12 months for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement. 
Fiona Mactaggart: Information relating to individual prisons is not collated centrally in the format required. I shall write to the hon. Member with available information and place a copy in the Library.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost of the performance testing exercise at HMP Wandsworth was; what assessment he has made of its impact; how he intends to monitor performance against the defined outputs of the exercise; what assessment he has made of the value for money of the exercise; and if he will make a statement. 
Fiona Mactaggart: Performance testing was introduced as a mechanis, to improve performance in poorly performing establishments. The additional cost of the performance test process at Wandsworth prison was £200,000. This excludes any contribution made from within the establishment's existing resource.
Wandsworth was awarded a service level agreement as a result of their successful bid. The area manager and the regional offender manager monitor performance closely to ensure that performance levels are sustained. Performance testing has proved to be an extremely cost-effective mechanism for improving poorly performing establishments. A full report on progress made at Wandsworth since the performance test will be submitted to the interim chief executive of NOMS. This will highlight significant improvement against a range of indicators, including better basic conditions for prisoners, a more constructive regime and improved security and standards audit scores.
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) prison governors, (b) prison officers and (c) other prison staff have been found with (i) controlled drugs and (ii) other contraband at each prison establishment in each of the last five years; how many cases in each category were referred to the police for investigation; and if he will make a statement. 
The investigations database does not record whether cases are referred to the police for investigation. Investigations are not categorised by grade making it impossible to distinguish between governors, prison officers and administrative grades who have been investigated for drug-related offences. The total in the table relates to the number of staff and not investigations. Whether every individual was found with items in their possession could be established only at proportionate cost.
16 Feb 2006 : Column 2356W
|Nor Sea Camp||1|
Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the capacity is of prisons in England and Wales; and how many prisoners were detained at the most recent date for which figures are available. 
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the (a) Certified normal accommodation (CNA), (b) in use CNA and (c) prisoner unlock figure was for each prison establishment as of 28th October 2005. 
Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 16 February 2006]: The figures requested for 28 October 2005 are set out in the table. Certified normal accommodation (CNA) level is the uncrowded capacity of the establishment. All establishments operate within their operational capacity, which is the total number of prisoners that an establishment is certified to hold taking into account control, security and the proper operation of the planned regime.
|Prison name||Baseline CNA||In use CNA||Unlock|
|East Sutton Park||94||94||95|
|North Sea Camp||306||306||292|
Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 16 February 2006]: The transfer of operational management of a prison from the public sector to the private sector, or vice versa, would normally occur under the terms of a market test. Under a market test of an existing establishment, an invitation to tender (ITT) is issued to potential bidders from all sectors, including the incumbent management.
The ITT contains the criteria against which tenders will be evaluated. The criteria for the evaluation of compliant bids for past market tests of prison management have been financial and operational deliverability and the consequent demonstration of comparative value for money.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|