|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of implementing the proposed transition from the conditional fee agreement scheme to the proposed contingency fees scheme; 
(3) what research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the likely effects on the level of fairness in respect of access to the justice system of the implementation of his proposal for the replacement of conditional fee agreements with a contingency fees scheme; 
(5) what estimate he has made of the net effect on Exchequer revenue, taking into account the estimated change in the number of litigation actions against the Government, of the proposed replacement of conditional fee agreements with a contingency fees scheme in each of the first five years of the operation of that proposed scheme. 
Mr Djanogly: As my right hon. and learned Friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor informed the House on 15 November Official Report, columns 659-72, the Government have now published the consultation paper, 'Proposals for Reform of Civil Litigation Funding and Costs: Implementation of Lord Justice Jackson's Recommendations'. This includes proposals relating to the reform of conditional fee agreements (CFAs) and damages-based agreements (DBAs) or contingency fees. I should make it clear that Sir Rupert Jackson did not recommend replacing CFAs with contingency fees or DBAs. Rather he suggested that CFAs should be reformed and that DBAs should be permitted in litigation as an additional funding mechanism. That is what we are consulting on.
The intention is to increase the choice of funding options available to claimants to pursue necessary claims. Sir Rupert is of the view that implementing his proposals, particularly those on the reform of CFAs, would deliver significant costs savings including for Government. The consultation paper and preliminary impact assessments are available on the Ministry of Justice website:
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much his Department's agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent from the public purse on influencing public policy through (a) employing external (i) public affairs companies, (ii) strategic consultancies and (iii) corporate communications firms, (b) external marketing and (c) other activities in each year since its inception. 
Mr Kenneth Clarke: The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) does not centrally collate data on expenditure on influencing public policy. It would incur disproportionate costs to examine every transaction made relating to public affairs companies, strategic consultancies, corporate communications firms and external marketing.
It is though possible to provide information relating to the MoJ, its agencies and NDPBs' total expenditure on consultants since 2007, and the MoJ and its agencies' expenditure on external marketing since 2008.
"Professional services provided by, for example, lawyers, surveyors and architects and the employment of specialists on an interim basis to deliver project solutions, providing expertise for a defined period of time that is not available in-house."
For external marketing, the expenditure provided is for the MoJ and its agencies but not the NDPBs. Many NDPBs; including but not limited to the Legal Services Board, the Information Commissioner's Office and the Legal Ombudsman, do not spend any of their budgets on external marketing or informing public policy. Other NDPBs do not record their external marketing expenditure separately from their total communications spend. It would incur disproportionate cost to indentify external marketing expenditure for the NDPBs.
I have provided the information for 2008-09 and 2009-10. Due to changes in the MoJ's organisational structure it would not be possible to indentify the external marketing expenditure for 2007-08 without incurring disproportionate cost.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many cases have been brought before each magistrates court in each of the last two years; and how many of those cases resulted in a custodial sentence. 
Mr Blunt: I am placing in the House Library the information requested on how many cases brought before each local justice area in each of the last two years (2008 and 2009 latest available); and how many resulted in a custodial sentence. The tables include defendants proceeded against, found guilty, sentenced and a sentence breakdown, including those given a custodial sentence.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many incidents of self-harm were recorded amongst (a) male and (b) female prisoners in the most recent year for which figures are available. 
|(1) The numbers of different individuals are based on prison numbers. An individual who was in prison custody on two occasions during a year but with two different numbers would be counted twice if he/she had self harmed at least once each time.|
Data Sources and Quality:
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems. Care is taken when processing and analysing the returns but the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Although the figures are shown to the last individual the figures may not be accurate to that level.
NOMS has a broad, integrated and evidence-based prisoner suicide prevention and self harm management strategy that seeks to reduce the distress of all those in prison. This encompasses a wide spectrum of Prison and Department of Health work around such issues as mental health, substance misuse and resettlement. Any prisoner identified as at risk of suicide or self-harm is cared for using the assessment, care in custody and teamwork (ACCT) procedures.
Mr Blunt: The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the proportion of children in (a) England and Wales, (b) London and (c) the south-east who have at least one parent in prison. However, according to a self-report survey of 1,435 adult prisoners sentenced to between one month and four years in England and Wales in 2005-06, 54% of prisoners had children under the age of 18 at the time of imprisonment.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many incidents of attacks on (a) prison staff and (b) prisoners were recorded in prisons where the victim (i) was and (ii) was not hospitalised in each of the last 10 years; 
|Recorded prisoner-on-staff and prisoner-on-prisoner assaults by hospitalisation: 2000-09|
|Recorded prisoner-on-staff and prisoner-on-prisoner assaults by weapon-use: 2000-09|
|(1) The hospital attendances in this table refer to those arising immediately from assault incidents. They do NOT include other types of hospital attendance such as A and E or overnight visits nor do they include any subsequent hospital visits that may be required to continue treatment.|
(2) The majority of assault incidents do not involve weapons. Of those that do most involve items that may be found to hand. Relatively few involve an actually designed for purpose weapon.
Numbers of assaults requiring hospital and the numbers involving weapons, in these tables will exceed the actual numbers (in the 2nd rows). This is due to double counting in the assault classifications.
Mr Blunt: Prisons deploy a robust and comprehensive range of security measures to reduce drug supply. These include the use of drug detection dogs, close working with the police, CCTV, use of more effective intelligence systems and mandatory drug testing.
Mr Blunt: The table shows figures for offenders receiving their first immediate custodial sentence at the age of 18 to 20, as recorded on the police national computer. These figures are derived from table 6.3 of "Sentencing Statistics: England and Wales 2009" which was published on 21 October 2010.
|Offenders aged 18-20 receiving an immediate custodial sentence for an indictable offence, with no previous custodial sentences, 2007 to 2009, England and Wales|
|Number of offenders aged 18-20 sentenced to immediate custody||Number of offenders aged 18-20 receiving their first immediate custodial sentence|
The figures have been drawn from the police's administrative IT system, the police national computer, which, as with any large-scale recording system, is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the police.
Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 18 October 2010, Official Report, column 541W, on rape: victim support schemes, what funding will be available for (a) existing and (b) new rape crisis centres in the comprehensive spending review period. 
Following the conclusion of the comprehensive spending review and the allocation of the departmental settlement, work is ongoing within the Ministry of Justice to finalise budgets, including funds allocated to the rape crisis commitment.
Mr Blunt: The Government believe that by introducing more effective sentencing policies and rehabilitative services we can deliver greater reductions in reoffending, deter future crime and protect the public. We will publish our proposals for a new approach to sentencing and rehabilitation, and how we will deliver more for less, in a Green Paper to be published in December. The Green Paper will be open to public consultation. We are conducting a full impact assessment of these proposals.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the average cost to the public purse was of detaining an offender in a young offender's institution in the last three years for which figures are available. 
The figures provided are not intended to represent the total cost of providing custody and related services to young people. The calculation is based upon allocated budget funding at the beginning of the relevant financial years, rather than actual expenditure at the close of those years.
While the methodology for calculating costs are the same for 2010-11 and 2009-10, it differs for 2008-09 and therefore caution should be taken when directly comparing the costs for 2008-09 with subsequent years.
|Secure estate sector||Average cost to the YJB per place per year as at 1 April 2010 (£)|
1. These are costs to the Youth Justice Board (YJB) as at 1 April 2010. They are not intended to represent the total cost of providing custody and related services to young people-specific exclusions follow.
2. Differences in the YJB funding streams included for these 2010-11 costs from the costs published for 1 April 2009 (2009-10 costs) are that:
The YJB no longer funds education in public YOIs (see note 6);
YJB funding for Advocacy Services is included (see note 4);
YJB funding for services provided by the Lucy Faithfull Foundation is included (see note 6).
3. These figures do not include VAT on Private YOI places.
4. Advocacy Services funded by the YJB are included in YOI costs.
5. These costs do not include YJB funding to National Offender Management Service (NOMS) prisoner escort management (PEM) for the provision of prison escort and custodial services (PECS) for young people.
6. For the YOI cost:
As of 1 April 2010, the YJB is no longer responsible for the budget for education funding and so this cost is not included in the above;
The YJB is not responsible for health funding budgets-except where specific services are commissioned (i.e. at the Keppel Unit)-and so the cost of health services in not included in the above;
For public YOIs, NOMS estimated that central overhead costs (excluding those for the Young People's Team) apportionable to the YJB at £7.601 million; the cost above uses the actual funding received from MOJ for these overheads of £5.070 million.
For public YOIs, the NOMS business rates, maintenance charges, capital charges and overheads for these charges have been estimated based upon 2009-10 levels and inflated;
YJB funding for the Lucy Faithfull Foundation is included.
|Secure estate sector||Average price per place per year as at 1 April 2009 (£)|
1. These figures do not include VAT on private YOI places.
2. The education costs paid to the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) is the agreed funding amount as at 1 April 2009 and is included. (The contracts were refreshed from August 2009).
3. Contributions to primary care trusts (PCTs) are at 2008-09 rates (no uplift has been applied to these) and is included.
4. The NOMS business rates, maintenance and capital charge elements of the public YOI costs have been included for 2009-10.
5. JASP (Juvenile Awareness Staff Programme) funding is included.
|Secure estate sector||Average price per place per year as at 1 April 2008 (£)|
1. This figure is based upon YJB funding for Prison Service (public) YOI places-it does not include private YOI places commissioned at HMYOIs Ashfield and Parc.
2. The NOMS capital charges and business rates are included, but not maintenance charges.
3. The YJB contribution to PCT funding for health care is included.
4. The YJB contribution towards LSC funding for education is included.
The period of Atos' contract ended, as planned, and the Department's Occupational Health provision was re-tendered through a full competitive Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) procurement exercise.
Lifestyle behaviours such as smoking, the harmful use of alcohol, drug misuse, poor diet and nutrition, being overweight and physical inactivity are acknowledged risk factors for a number of chronic diseases, including breast cancer. Later this year, we will publish a public health White Paper setting out details of our strategy for improving public health and reducing the risk factors associated with developing conditions such as breast cancer.
Diagnosing cancer earlier is also important in reducing mortality. Experts estimate that the NHS breast screening programme saves 1,400 lives per year by diagnosing cancer earlier. The Cancer Reform Strategy (CRS) included the commitment that the NHS breast screening programme would be extended to women aged 47 to 73. In June this year, we confirmed in the "Revision to the NHS Operating Framework 2010-11" that all local breast screening programmes should begin the extension in 2010-11 ensuring that more women have the opportunity to benefit from the screening service.
In September, as part of the national awareness and early diagnosis initiative, we announced that £9 million would be provided to support 59 campaigns that will work to raise awareness of the signs and symptoms of breast, bowel and lung cancers and to encourage early presentation at a general practitioner surgery.
Through the Cancer Drugs Fund, we will give cancer patients better access to the drugs that their clinicians believe will help them, and on 1 October, we allocated £50 million to the NHS to enable cancer patients to access appropriate drugs now. Following the spending review, we have committed £200 million per year for the drugs fund for the next three years, and are consulting on proposals for establishment of the fund.
We are also undertaking a review of the CRS to ensure that we have the right strategy to deliver improved outcomes for cancer patients including survival and mortality. We plan to publish the report later this winter.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what his most recent estimate is of the cost to the public purse of an emergency hospital admission for a patient whose primary diagnosis is haematological cancer; 
(2) what his most recent estimate is of the cost to the public purse of an emergency admission to hospital in each NHS trust area of a patient whose primary diagnosis is haematological cancer; 
Paul Burstow: For 2008-09, the average length of hospital stay for an emergency admission of a patient whose primary diagnosis was haematological cancer was 10.7 days. This is the latest period for which statistics are available.
Information on the average cost to the public purse of an emergency admission for a patient whose primary diagnosis is haematological cancer cannot be provided at national or trust level because the Department does not collect costs to the public purse by primary diagnosis.
The Department collects the costs to national health service providers of providing standard groupings of clinically similar treatments, known as healthcare resource groups (HRGs). Information on the estimated costs, at both national and trust level, of a non-elective admission for the HRGs that represent haematological procedures and disorders in 2008-09 has been placed in the Library. This does not include the costs of chemotherapy, which cannot be separately identified by primary diagnosis.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many births he expects there to be in NHS facilities in each of the next five years; and what estimate he has made of the number and proportion of such births which will require specialist care. 
In 2009 there were 663,490 maternity episodes in England of which 641,832 (approximately 96.7%) were births in national health service hospitals. In 2009, there
were 43,786 admissions into neonatal care, which amounts to some 7% of the total number of births in NHS hospitals.
Andrea Leadsom: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reasons the NHS funds non-medical circumcisions; and if he will issue guidance to healthcare commissioners on the priority to be accorded to such procedures. 
Paul Burstow: The national health service normally only performs circumcision where medically indicated. However, a primary care trust has a duty to protect the health of the public in their area and may decide to ensure that a safe and affordable male circumcision service is available in other circumstances, where there are concerns about harm to patients. There are currently no plans for the Secretary of State to issue guidance to health care commissioners on male circumcision.
Hazel Blears: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what reasons his Department's estimated expenditure on dementia research declined from 2.9 per cent. in 2007-08 to 1.4 per cent. in 2009-10 of expenditure from the research and development revenue budget. 
Prior to the establishment of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in April 2006, the main part of the Department's total health expenditure was devolved to and managed by national health service organisations. From April 2006 to March 2009, transitional research funding was allocated to these organisations at reducing levels. At the same time, an increasing amount of NHS research funding was awarded competitively through new NIHR programmes and schemes.
The NHS organisations reported on their use of these allocations in annual R and D reports, and each report included a figure of research spend on degenerative neurological disorders. These figures have been included in the Department's estimates of total annual spend on dementia research up to 2008-09.
Anne Milton: The customer service centre uses a significant proportion of non-permanent workers within the correspondence teams in order to maintain maximum flexibility to meet the Department's targets for responding to correspondence. Therefore, the number of staff in post at any one time fluctuates on a daily basis.
At 1 April 2009 there were 56.7 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff in post working in the customer service
centre correspondence unit of which 32.2 were permanent FTE staff and 24.5 were agency staff filling FTE posts.
At 1 April 2010, there were 57.94 full-time equivalent staff in post of which 33.74 were permanent FTE staff and 24.2 were agency staff filling FTE posts. The correspondence unit processes, on average, 86,000 pieces of correspondence per year.
Anne Milton: The information held on the Department's business management system is as shown in the following table. Due to retrospective billing by the Government Car Service, and the procedures employed by the Department which score expenditure on the system in the month in which an invoice is processed and paid, the figures do not necessarily relate to the costs incurred in the months in question.
|September 2010||October 2010|
|Minister||Travel and subsistence||Hospitality||Travel and subsistence||Hospitality|
|(1) Of this total, £10,633.15 represents the one-off "early surrender charge" made by the Government Car Service to the Department in response to the current Secretary of State's decision to give up his allocated Government car, and a further £7,027.38 represents the July monthly charge incurred during the notice period. In line with the new Ministerial Code, Ministers at the Department have given up their allocated cars and drivers and the existing contracts, which were subject to a 90-day contract termination period, ended on the 19 August 2010. However, due to retrospective billing invoices are still being received for this period as is also reflected in the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Anne Milton) and the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State's (Earl Howe) travel and subsistence costs shown above.|
Ms Bagshawe: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the number of adult social care users in receipt of direct payments in (a) each region, (b) each local authority area and (c) total in each of the last three years. 
The following table shows the number of service users and carers receiving direct payments at a council, regional and England level for the last three years. The 2009-10 data are provisional with final data expected to be published in early 2011.
|Table 1: Estimated number of service users and carers receiving direct payments during the period April to March|
|2007-08( 1)||2008-09||2009-10( 2)|
|Service users||Service users||Carers||Service users||Carers|
|Councils with social services responsibilities||Clients aged 18 and over receiving direct payments||Clients aged 18 and over receiving direct payments||All carers caring for a person aged 18 and over receiving direct payments||Clients aged 18 and over receiving direct payments||All carers caring for a person aged 18 and over receiving direct payments|
|(1) Information on carers receiving direct payments was not collected for the period 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008.|
(2) Data for 2009-10 are provisional. No estimates have been made for councils who failed to provide data so some regional totals and the national total are not provided. These will be available when final data are published for 2009-10.
(3 )Data less than or equal to five.
(4) Data not available.
(5) Data not provided.
RAP P2f, SD1, SD3 and PSSEX
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|