Cookies: We use cookies to give you the best possible experience on our site. By continuing to use the site you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
House of Commons Hansard
x
Written Statements
31 October 2018
Volume 648

Written Statements

Wednesday 31 October 2018

Home Department

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures

The edit just sent has not been saved. The following error was returned:
This content has already been edited and is awaiting review.

Section 19(1) of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (the Act) requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of every relevant three-month period on the exercise of his TPIM powers under the Act during that period.

The level of information provided will always be subject to slight variations based on operational advice.

TPIM notices in force (as of 31 August 2018)

6

TPIM notices in respect of British citizens (as of 31 August 2018)

6

TPIM notices extended (during the reporting period)

0

TPIM notices revoked (during the reporting period)

1

TPIM notices revived (during the reporting period)

0

Variations made to measures specified in TPIM notices (during the reporting period)

3

Applications to vary measures specified in TPIM notices refused (during the reporting period)

2

The number of current subjects relocated under TPIM legislation (as of 31 August 2018)

4

The TPIM review group (TRG) keeps every TPIM notice under regular and formal review. The second quarter TRG meetings took place on 6, 7, 11, 22 and 25 June 2018 and 3 and 5 July 2018. The most recent TRG meetings took place on 12, 14, 18, 25 and 27 September 2018. The next round of TRGs will take place during December 2018.

Three individuals have been charged with breach of a TPIM notice. Their criminal trials have yet to be heard.

[HCWS1050]

Housing, Communities and Local Government

Planning Update

The edit just sent has not been saved. The following error was returned:
This content has already been edited and is awaiting review.

The Government remain fully committed to making planning decisions faster and fairer for all those affected by new development, and to ensure that local communities are fully involved in planning decisions that affect them.

Today I have published a consultation on whether applicants should be required to conduct pre-application consultation with the local community prior to submitting a planning application for shale gas development. The consultation will also seek views on the process of community consultation that should be required, and what stages of shale gas development should be covered by the consultation.

The Government recognise that early engagement with local authorities on shale gas applications, including capitalising on formal pre-application discussions, is critical in building confidence in decision making, securing support for development proposals, and setting realistic timeframes for decisions. Requiring applicants to conduct community pre-application consultation prior to undertaking shale gas development could further strengthen the role local people play in the planning process.

This consultation is open for 10 weeks until 7 January 2019. I will inform the House of the outcome of the consultation as appropriate.

[HCWS1051]

Justice

Secure Schools

The edit just sent has not been saved. The following error was returned:
This content has already been edited and is awaiting review.

Today, I am publishing guidance on “How to Apply to Run a Secure School” launching the provider selection process for the first school. This follows our acceptance of, and commitment to delivering Charlie Taylor’s secure schools proposal in December 2016 and the Secretary of State’s announcement on 2 October 2018 of the site for the first secure school.

In the Government response to Charlie Taylor’s review, we committed to tackling violence and improve outcomes for children in custody. By creating the first secure school, we are taking a major step towards delivering a truly reformed youth custodial estate that is fit for purpose, characterised by the principles set out in the Taylor review. That is:

child-focused providers

strong leaders with freedom and autonomy

a specialised workforce offering bespoke provision for individual children that has education, health, care and physical activity at its heart.

Secure schools will be run by academy trusts, not-for-profit organisations that are limited by guarantee. With secure schools, we want to place education and health at the heart of youth custody and create a therapeutic environment for the children in our care. It is imperative that the successful provider is driven to work with children in crisis.

We have worked in partnership with the Departments for Education and Health and Social Care, as well as NHS England, to achieve a truly cross-governmental commitment and approach to reforming youth justice. We have also engaged wholeheartedly with a wide range of stakeholders, and this has enabled us to benefit from insightful feedback from experts across the youth justice and education sectors. This means we can confidently say that the secure schools model is shaped by best practice and what we know really works.

We know that children in custody display a wide range of complex needs, so it is crucial that we provide the right type of education, support and care to address those needs. By empowering secure school providers to make key decisions, like being able to set and adapt the curriculum and timetable to provide meaningful activities, we can offer a bespoke service that best meets each child’s individual needs.

Giving providers the autonomy necessary to deliver services in an innovative way is a key part of the secure schools vision, but they will also be subject to a high level of accountability to ensure appropriate safeguards are in place. We are working closely with Ofsted and the Care Quality Commission to establish the inspection regime for secure schools, and this will be supplemented by monthly independent visitor reviews and independent oversight from organisations such as the local safeguarding children’s board.

We agree with the importance that David Lammy’s review on the treatment of, and outcomes for, black, Asian and minority ethnic individuals in the criminal justice system places on addressing disproportionality in the youth justice system. With Charlie Taylor’s vision of seeing the child first and the offender second, we want secure schools to enable all students, including those from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds, to have trust in the system and be able to access the meaningful support they need to make sure their offending does not continue into adulthood.

The decision has been taken to close Medway and reopen it as a secure school. Delivering the first secure school at this site will provide a fresh start for youth custodial provision in the south-east and ensure that provision remains in place in this crucial area of demand. The closure will enable us to set up the first school as quickly and cost-effectively as possibly, and it is a first step towards our future vision for youth custody. I would like to pay tribute to the hard work of staff whose work over the last two years has resulted in improvements for people living and working at Medway. These were recognised in a recent Ofsted report, which praised the care and consideration given by staff to improving Medway.

Secure school academy trusts will be funded in line with the terms set out in a funding agreement. They must adhere to this agreement and to the academies financial handbook. Academies are also subject to company law which requires that they have clear published frameworks for accountability. They are also subject to a system of independent audit of their accounts however secure schools will be subject to greater financial oversight.

The how to apply guidance is available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/secure-schools-how-to-apply.

[HCWS1052]