Skip to main content

Probation Service: Expenditure

Volume 470: debated on Monday 7 January 2008

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the expenditure of the Probation Service in England and Wales was in (a) 2003-04, (b) 2004-05, (c) 2005-06 and (d) 2006-07 on (i) drug treatment and testing orders, (ii) work on multi-agency public protection arrangements, (iii) basic skills and (iv) victims. (173768)

Expenditure is not reported according to the categories requested. Probation boards meet the cost of managing and enforcing Drug Treatment and Testing Orders (DTTO) and Drug Rehabilitation Requirements (DRR) through their grant as they see fit to meet their statutory duties. The following table shows the total budget allocation to probation areas in England and Wales over the period in question:

Allocation to probation areas to fund DTTO/DRRs supervision and enforcement costs in England and full DTTO/DRR costs in Wales

£ million

2003-04

24

2004-05

34

2005-06

39

2006-07

39

These figures include DTTO/DRR funding in Wales for the commissioning of drug treatment and testing directly from the treatment providers. In England, the treatment and testing components of the Drug Treatment and Testing Order (DTTO) and Drug Rehabilitation Requirement (DRR) are currently funded by a central contribution to the Department of Health Pooled Treatment Budget (PTB). The total contribution in 2003-04 was £29.7 million, rising to £42 million in each of the subsequent years, including 2006-07 as described in the following table below:

Amount paid to pooled treatment budget to fund DTTO/DRR treatment and testing in England

£ million

2003-04

29.7

2004-05

42

2005-06

42

2006-07

42

The costs relating to basic skills and victims were not separately identified by probation boards before 2005-06 except in trial costing exercises in 2002-03 and 2003-04 when the data were not complete.

In both 2005-06 and 2006-07 probation boards spent £12.2 million on victims. In 2005-06, the only year in which data were available for basic skills, expenditure was £9.4 million. Expenditure on MAPPA is not identified separately.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was spent on accredited programmes for the Probation Service in England and Wales in each financial year since 2003-04. (173802)

Probation boards meet the cost of delivering accredited programmes through their grant as they see fit to meet their statutory duties. Probation boards' spend on accredited programmes is as follows:

£ million

2005-06

77

2006-07

85

2007-08

86.5

There is no information relating to expenditure for years leading up to 2005.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was spent on central infrastructure, including IT, estates and approved premises, for the Probation Service in England and Wales in each year since 1997-98. (173803)

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what was spent on local infrastructure, including IT and estates, for the Probation Service in England and Wales for each financial year since 1997-98. (175380)

The 42 local probation boards are supported by a range of services provided at the centre of the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) and to varying extent recharged to the probation boards. The main items of infrastructure are Estate Management and Facilities Management for probation properties (including Approved Premises) and IT services. The gross cost of these services is as follows:

£ million

Resource

Capital

2006-07

148

11

2005-06

174

3

2004-05

130

27

2003-04

133

19

Notes:

1. Figures are not provided before 2003-04 as not all these services were managed centrally; expenditure was mainly met directly by local probation boards and figures are not held centrally.

2. There may be further related expenditure met locally by probation boards which is not separately identifiable. Other costs met centrally are not considered to be “infrastructure”.

3. From 2005-06 due to a classification of expenditure change, certain property expenditure previously treated as Capital is now treated as Resource.

4. IT expenditure may vary year-on-year according to the amount of one-off costs such as hardware upgrade.