1. What recent estimate he has made of the cost of using police and court cells for holding prisoners in 2007-08. (192753)

The most recent estimate of the cost of holding prisoners in police cells in the financial year 2007-08 is approximately £68 million. During the 2007 calendar year, an average of 181 prisoners a night were held in police cells. Court cells were used to accommodate prisoners overnight between January and June 2007, and again in February this year. Invoices to the value of £1.73 million have to date been paid.

I thank the Secretary of State for confirming that the cost is indeed very expensive, at £460 a night, which is the price of a family holiday to the Canary islands. Does the Secretary of State not agree that, rather than pressing magistrates to consider non-custodial sentences, which they do already, a more effective way of reducing costs might be look into the care that prisoners with mental health problems receive when they are in prison, which the last report by the chief inspector of prisons described as being

“inappropriate for the level of need”?

It would enable us to ensure that such care addressed the full range of prisoners’ needs, reducing the risk of their reoffending upon release.

If the Liberal Democrats are departing from their support for community sentences, perhaps we should all know.

indicated dissent.

Apparently that is not the case.

Let me deal with the serious point that the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) raised about the treatment of mentally ill offenders. The chief inspector’s report acknowledges the considerable progress we have made in the treatment of mentally ill offenders. We are transferring many more from prisons to more appropriate facilities in the national health service, and since 2003 the NHS has been responsible for health care inside prisons. However, I accept, as I think the whole House does, that we must do more, and we are doing more. In addition, my noble Friend Lord Bradley is currently conducting a major review to see what further imaginative steps we can take to achieve the end that we all want, which is that prison should deal with serious and persistent offenders who do not have serious mental health problems; those who do are better dealt with elsewhere.

I hope that the Secretary of State will be able to look at the costs again. At more than £460, it is almost cheaper to put prisoners in a five-star hotel anywhere in the United Kingdom. That clearly cannot be right. Part of the problem is that it costs, I understand, under £1 to feed a child in school and about £3 to £4 to feed a patient; yet to feed a prisoner in one of those cells costs about £12. Will the Secretary of State look again at the costs associated with keeping prisoners in police cells?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman: the costs are too high. Having to use police cells is very much not just a second best, but a third best. I simply say that we use them a great deal less than the Administration that he supported. Of course, he is correct to talk about hotel accommodation, but one can freely leave hotel accommodation.

You can leave most cells!

For the record, fewer people escaped from prison last year than escaped in a week under the previous Administration in 1992.

Is it acceptable that yet another weekend has gone by when prisoners from courts on Friday were locked out of their full local prisons to be transported across the country to police and court cells, and then back to court on Monday? Rather than spending the equivalent of a night not just in a four-star hotel, but at the Ritz, on housing prisoners, surely it would be a better use of taxpayers’ money to spend more than £35 million on providing more than 400 new prison places.

We have provided additional prison places at twice the rate of the previous Administration—2,000 a year on average, compared with 1,000. None of us believes that the use of police or court cells is acceptable. We want to get prisoners out of them as quickly as possible. However, while the hon. Gentleman’s memory might be short, mine is a little longer. On average, we used 181 police cells a night last year, but the rate was running at 1,100 a night in 1991-92; indeed, back in November 1980, the use of police cells peaked at an astonishing 3,540. I will take lectures from a lot of people, but not from those on the Opposition Front Bench.

2. What consideration his Department has given to acquiring a prison ship. (192754)

In December last year, we accepted recommendations made by Lord Carter of Coles on prisons, which included the acquisition of a prison ship. We have already made it clear that we intend to commence a new competition for such a vessel.

I thank the Minister for his reply. In October 2006, the Home Office said it was looking for a new prison ship, and in December last year the Secretary of State said that the Ministry of Justice was actively looking to secure a new prison ship. What confidence can we have that this latest effort will not sink without trace, as the last two did?

The hon. Lady should recognise that we have had a competition for a prison ship; I commenced and closed that competition in January this year, because no suitable ships were found. We have commenced a new competition and we will assess the initial market test bids in April this year. If it is economic for the taxpayer—that, I am sure the hon. Lady will agree, should be our criterion—we will start the purchase of such a ship. Our key test, which has not been met to date, is that providing those additional places should be economic for the taxpayer.

Could that failure to purchase a prison ship have led to this situation in my constituency? A serial robber with more than 100 convictions was able to walk free from an open prison just three years into an 11-year sentence. Will a Minister please agree to meet me to discuss the issue for 15 minutes? It has caused huge concern in my constituency.

I will always happily meet any Member of Parliament about any issue. If the hon. Gentleman had raised the matter with me before he took up the time of the House today, I would have agreed to meet him then. When we do meet, I hope that he will have done his research—looked at the number of absconds and escapes in 1996-97 and compared it with that in 2006-07. He will find that the performance of this Labour Government has been immensely better than that of the Conservative Government. There were 33 category C escapes in the last year of that Conservative Government; there have been only two, to date, in the latest year of this Labour Government. The hon. Gentleman must do his research before bringing his recommendations to me.

3. What his Department’s policy is on housing offenders in bail accommodation; and if he will make a statement. (192755)

The Government are providing offenders who are eligible for release on home detention curfew but have nowhere to live, and defendants whom the courts decide can safely be bailed, with accommodation and support in the community.

Unfortunately, ClearSprings Management Ltd has a number of properties in my constituency, which is testament to the disaster of penal policy under the Government. What message does the Minister want to convey to my constituents, given that they see people who should be in prison moving into their neighbourhoods? That has happened without any proper consultation or information for local residents. Is it not time that the Minister reassured the public and that the scheme was scrapped?

I am grateful for the hon. Gentleman’s comments. Currently, there are four ClearSprings properties in Peterborough. He knows that there has been consultation with the police, the local probation board and Conservative-controlled Peterborough city council about those properties, but none of them has raised any objections. None of the properties’ neighbours has raised any objections either, and the scheme is working well. The hon. Gentleman has raised objections now during parliamentary questions, but he should discuss the issue with his colleagues at Peterborough’s Conservative city council—they could have stopped the scheme had they raised objections when it was proposed.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that there is very little suitable and safe bail accommodation for women; in fact, many women prefer to be in prison because of the nature of the bail accommodation offered. Does he not agree that more and suitable bail accommodation for women and more support services to go with it are essential?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. One of the purposes of the ClearSprings scheme is to ensure that women in particular can be bailed rather than await their sentences and court hearings in prison. That means that families can stay together and that many children are not taken into care. Ultimately, many of those women may not be given a custodial sentence. The scheme is an economic and efficient use of resources and it helps keep families together. I commend it to the House.

The Minister and I have corresponded on the ClearSprings proposals for Bodmin in my constituency. He will be aware that under Government guidelines there should have been consultation with the local authority. That did not take place on this occasion. Will the Minister agree to publish the evidence showing that there is a need for such a facility in Bodmin, and urgently review the instruction he has given ClearSprings to provide it?

From recollection, I should say that I have written to the hon. Gentleman in the past day or so about the scheme that might operate in the North Cornwall constituency. I shall certainly consider his objections. However, the issue remains: if, when ClearSprings proposes a property, the police or the local council object to it being used for such a purpose, it will be withdrawn from the potential use. If North Cornwall district council objects, we will certainly revisit the scheme and examine the hon. Gentleman’s concerns.

In respect of ClearSprings hostels, particularly the accommodation of offenders on home detention curfew, will the Minister confirm, first, that subject to any risk to the staff working in the hostel there is no exclusion for violent offenders and, secondly, no exclusion for persistent and prolific offenders? If he can confirm both those points, is he surprised that there is a significant level of local opposition to the hostels?

The hon. Gentleman will know—I am sure he does—that sex offenders subject to notification requirements under the Sex Offenders Act 1997, violent and sex offenders currently serving an extended sentence, prisoners who fail to comply with curfew orders, fine defaulters, foreign national prisoners, prisoners charged with homicide, causing explosions, possession of offensive weapons, possession of firearms, cruelty to children or racially aggravated offences, among others, are not entitled to home detention curfew. Prisoners who are on such curfew or are on remand in the community rather than taking up valuable prison places are thus prisoners who have committed lower categories of offences. I hope that that will reassure the hon. Gentleman.

4. How many additional prison places have been created for young offenders and adult offenders since 1997. (192756)

An additional 21,000 places have been provided since 1997, of which about 2,500 have been for young offenders.

We learn that prisons are full and that those convicted of burglary and theft will not be given custodial sentences if they are addicted to drugs or other substances. What message are the Government sending to people who have been convicted, and in those circumstances how can he persuade them not to go on and reoffend?

I am sorry to tell the hon. Lady that what she says is not correct. The Sentencing Guidelines Council recommendations on certain offenders are intended for consultation. If the hon. Lady or her colleagues on the Opposition Front Bench have comments to make about them, let us receive them. [Interruption.] I have just received some of them. If the hon. Lady goes around prisons now or in six months’ or a year’s time, she will find that a large number of burglars—some prolific, some less prolific—and drug offenders are quite properly there because prison is where they should be. At the same time, however, Conservative Front Benchers have just issued some proposals—the hon. Lady needs to be aware of them—for a “rehabilitation revolution”, so—

Order.

Is it not time that we placed more emphasis on link and support workers so that when prisoners are on release, they have a chance of remaining within their community? Currently, 150 prisoners could be released from Holme House prison, yet there are only two link workers, so we would be asking them to do the impossible. We would need fewer prison places if we supported these prisoners more on release.

I accept that we have to do more, but we have done a huge amount to improve training within prisons and to improve the link between training, probation and life outside prison; and through offender managers and probation officers we have sought to get serious offenders through prison and then through probation.

What discussions has the Secretary of State had with the Home Secretary about making provision for 20,000 rehabilitation places so that hard drug users aged 18 to 25 can be offered a clear choice: either get rehabilitated and off drugs or go to prison? If we emphasised that if they fail to complete their rehabilitation, they will go to prison, would it not send out a clear message?

I have many discussions with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary about drug issues, which are at the root of so much crime—notwithstanding the fact that crime has come down so much over the past 11 years. [Laughter.] It has come down by 30 per cent. across the country, including in nearly every constituency represented by Conservative Members. [Interruption.] Hon. Members should not mock official statistics, which are now under the control of Parliament. Conservative Members are rightly happy to quote statistics against us, but they need to recognise the good work of the police, the probation service and their own local authorities in bringing crime down.

On the hon. Gentleman’s specific point, orders are already provided to courts by which precisely the choice that he mentions is given to drug users and drug offenders. The difficulty is not in laying down the law, but in ensuring that these people who lead very chaotic lives get the point. The reason the number breaching probation has gone up from 300 in 1997 to 5,000 today is partly the enforcement of such orders.

At 40 per cent. less cost, community sentencing can deal with four times the number of people who are in prison. We know that community sentencing is 14 per cent. more successful in terms of the reoffending rate. Should we not be looking at extending community sentencing, rather than increasing prison places?

We have to do both. We need to provide, and we are providing, an increase in prison places at a faster rate than has happened before. Alongside that, we are greatly strengthening the provision of probation. My right hon. Friend the Minister of State announced this morning an additional £40 million of funding for probation.

In January, the Ministry of Justice claimed that the

“current prison building programme…continues apace, with over 2,500 places to be delivered in 2008”.

How many of those 2,500 places are the shortfall on the failure to deliver on the 2,500 places promised for 2007 by the then Prime Minister, Mr. Blair? What prospect is there of their being delivered, given that the latest statistics suggest that, since December last year, the number of prison places has in fact fallen by one?

The number of prison places has not fallen by one, I assure the hon. and learned Gentleman, because we continue to ensure maximum safe use of existing accommodation. In addition, last year, 1,522 places were provided; this year, he is right to say, we are providing about 2,500 additional places. We will continue to provide additional places up to the net 96,000 by 2014.

6. What steps he is taking to tackle the availability of illegal drugs in prisons. (192758)

Prisons have a comprehensive framework of supply reduction measures and have achieved considerable success. Drug use as measured by random mandatory drug tests has dropped by 64 per cent. since 1996-97. I have announced today that the director general of the Prison Service has commissioned David Blakey, former inspector of constabulary, to conduct a review of the effectiveness of the measures to disrupt the supply of illicit drugs into prison.

I thank the Minister for his answer and welcome today’s announcement on the control of the supply of drugs. Can he confirm that the review will include the tightening of controls around the smuggling of items such as mobile phones into prisons? I understand that some prisoners use mobile phones in their cells to continue the criminal, drug-related activity that they were happily pursuing outside.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, because she highlights one of the key issues that we need to address—mobile phone usage in prison. We are examining closely what else we can do, and I am sure that the former inspector of constabulary, Mr. David Blakey, will consider that issue as a particular concern. We have employed mobile phone detectors in high-security prisons, and we are analysing recovered phones and working hard to monitor mobile phone traffic so as to take strong action. We will take further action in due course in the light of the report.

Dartmoor prison in my constituency has an excellent resettlement unit, but it has been devastated by a Prison Service decision to remove those who were working in the unit and ship in, as a result of overcrowding, people in the last few weeks of their sentence, thus undoing all the unit’s good work. Will the Minister look into what has happened at Dartmoor prison and urgently restore the resettlement unit to do the good work it has been doing for the past few years?

Following Question Time, I will certainly look into the situation in Dartmoor, as I am not aware of the issues that the hon. and learned Gentleman raises. I give him an assurance that we are committed to ensuring that we have reintegration back into society and resettlement of prisoners when they leave prison, and to trying to make prisoners drug free and rehabilitated away from the problems that often led them into crime in the first place.

May I support the point made by the hon. and learned Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Cox)? When the Minister considers the issue, will he also look at schemes in Plymouth that try to stop the revolving-door syndrome, not just from Dartmoor prison but from Exeter prison, which has been doing some very good work but needs additional support?

I am keen to ensure that we take action on drugs in prison. The vast majority of people who go into prison have a drug problem. Unless we use their time in prison to tackle that problem and to reintegrate them into society, they will continue to have a drug problem outside, and that will lead to further crime.

I am happy to look at the schemes in operation in Plymouth and at Exeter prison. We have already announced an additional 1,000 mandatory drug schemes in the community across the country for the next financial year, and I hope that the review announced today has given impetus to what else we can do to stop the vile trade of drugs in prison, which can involve people outside prison. We certainly need to take strong measures to stop that.

Is it not shameful that there is not a single drug-free prison in the country at the moment? Will the Minister accept my challenge to create one drug-free prison by the end of the year?

I point out to the hon. Gentleman, as I did in the answer, that there has been a 64 per cent. fall in drug use in prison in the past 10 years. I know, and I am sure that on reflection he knows, that it is immensely difficult for the Prison Service to prevent drugs from entering prisons in every circumstance—[Interruption.]— but I hope to do that. If he looks at the paper produced in January on the prison policy update, he will know that we are trying to introduce drug-free wings in prisons. One of this year’s objectives is to secure and increase the number of drug-free wings in prison. I hope that we can have a drug-free prison in the next 12 months, but he will know that that is a tremendous challenge. We have improved matters with the 64 per cent. drop in drug use since his Government were in power and we intend to do more.

May I commend my right hon. Friend on the fall in the number of drugs circulating in prison? However, what can be done about the way in which some people outside prisons try to smuggle drugs in, not by coming into the prison, but by, for example, stuffing the bodies of dead birds with drugs and throwing them over the walls of the prison so that prisoners can retrieve them, as highlighted in the report of the all-party prison health group recently?

The Prison Service and the police are vigilant to all methods of trying to secure the flow of drugs into prison. We have to look at attempts to project material over walls into prisons. There are ways in which prisoners and people outside try to smuggle drugs in through the supplies to prisons. Occasionally, a very small number of staff are convicted of trying to smuggle drugs into prison. We take the problem extremely seriously. The continuing use of drugs in prison is one of the most dangerous aspects of prison life. I assure my hon. Friend that we will do all we can. Today’s announcement, and indeed announcements that I hope to make in the next few days on further initiatives on drugs, will, I believe, reduce still further the amount of drugs in prison and improve on the 64 per cent. fall in drug use that we have achieved in the last 10 years of a Labour Government.

The Minister’s answers have been deeply unsatisfactory. A number of convicted women prisoners in Send prison in Surrey are bravely trying to tackle their drug addiction by going through the RAPt—the Rehabilitation for Addicted Prisoners Trust—12-step rehab programme. They tell me—is this not astonishing?—that their efforts are hindered by the ready availability of hard drugs throughout that prison. It is not just one prison that we need drug-free, but Send prison and many more need to be drug-free as well. We need action, not words.

I know that the hon. Gentleman takes a keen interest in the matter for genuine and important reasons. If he looks at the prison update policy paper produced in January, he will see that it records what we are doing: 440 active search dogs; CCTV surveillance on all social visit areas; low-level fixed furniture in category C prisons and above; measures taken in conjunction with the police to police visiting areas; mandatory drug testing with around 60,000 random and 40,000 targeted tests each year; telephone intelligence; new machinery to recover mobile phones; and the supply of good practice to prisons to help to have effective measures nationally.

A tremendous amount of work is going on. The review that I announced today is a precursor to further recommendations coming to the Government by May this year. I intend to make further statements to the House before the end of the week on other measures that we are taking. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will support us in those efforts.

7. What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of non-custodial community sentences in preventing reoffending. (192759)

Not all the data that I am about to give can be explained by the sentences imposed. That said, the latest available data for the 2004 cohort of adult offenders show that reoffending by those serving community sentences decreased by 6.7 per cent. between 2000 and 2004. Among the 2004 cohort of offenders the proven rate of adult reoffending within two years of custodial sentences was 64.7 per cent., compared to 50.5 per cent. in the case of community sentences.

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his answer and I am glad that everything is going so well with adult non-custodial sentences, but when I visited the Erdington youth offending service team last week I was struck by the wide variety of strategies and programmes existing under the overall umbrella of non-custodial sentences. Will the Secretary of State tell us a little about how the Department assesses programmes, and how it decides what works and what does not? It is important to be able to explain that to people. Perhaps the Secretary of State would like to meet me for a little chat about it.

Yes to the little chat, or even a long chat.

It is fundamental to the effectiveness of and public confidence in community sentences, whether they are imposed on juveniles or adults, that they work and are rigorously assessed. My Department and the Home Office spend a considerable amount of public money on research and statistics to ensure that that happens. The new chair of the Youth Justice Board—[Interruption.] She is a woman, which is why I am not calling her the chairman. She is well aware of the importance of ensuring the effectiveness of community sentences.

A few weeks ago, I had an exchange with the Secretary of State about the possibility of introducing phased community penalties. The first few months would be devoted to getting people off drugs, while the next few months would be concerned with employment and reintregrating people in society. Would either the Secretary of State or the Minister of State be prepared to meet me, and representatives of the National Association of Probation Officers, to discuss the matter further?

Of course. There is no single truth about how such sentences can be made to work better, but we all agree about the aim. The more effective we can make them—and there is no monopoly in ideas—the better it will be for our communities.

Given that we know that non-custodial sentences are just as effective in preventing reoffending as custodial sentences, why do the courts still persist, in breach-of-trust cases, in sending individuals who pose no danger to the public to prison for long terms? Is it not time that we adopted a different approach to, for instance, those who commit theft from employers, and punished them effectively in the community rather than in prison?

It is important for the courts to have at their disposal a wide range of sentences to deem appropriate in the circumstances with which they are dealing. It is an important part of our democracy that we have an independent judiciary, and that we do not criticise sentences when they are passed but rely on the judgment of the judiciary. As for breach of trust, I fear that my hon. Friend and I may simply take different views. My view is that it is an aggravated element of an offence if someone who is trusted by his employer to hold money egregiously breaks that trust.

How many prisoners who are currently serving short sentences does the Secretary of State think should not be in prison?

That is an interesting question, which both the right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden (David Davis) and the hon. and learned Member for Harborough (Mr. Garnier) have sought to answer. The right hon. Member for Haltemprice and Howden has said that he wants prisoners not to be remanded in custody if they can safely be remanded elsewhere. The question is how we can make bail and non-custodial sentences as effective as possible. That will include measures such as home detention curfew and tagging, to which the Conservatives have objected but which is one of many measures that have led to much safer communities. Notwithstanding the mocking laughter that we hear from Conservative Members, the fact is that the public are increasingly aware that crime has fallen under this Government, whereas under the Conservative Government it doubled.

8. How many convicted criminals served reduced sentences as a result of prison overcrowding in each of the last four years. (192760)

End-of-custody licence was introduced on 29 June 2007. Under the scheme, up to 31 January 2008 18,583 prisoners serving sentences of between four weeks and four years were released up to 18 days earlier than they otherwise would have been.

As the Minister says, since the Prime Minister came to office in June 2007 more than 18,000 prisoners have benefited from the early release system. They have also gone on to commit 300 crimes and at least one murder. Will the Minister undertake to end this crisis once and for all, and commit here today that in future she will keep these people behind bars where they belong and that the capacity in our prisons will be increased?

No, I will not commit to that. The hon. Gentleman is right that 1 per cent. of those released on end-of-custody licence have reoffended while on licence, and that is of course regrettable. However, it is not the case that saying today that end-of-custody licence will end would solve this problem. In order to end the licences, we would immediately have to find some 1,300 places at any one time. We have said that this is a temporary measure and that we will keep under constant review when it ought to come to an end, but today is not the time to end it.

Should courts not be obliged to set minimum sentences in every single case, thus eradicating at a stroke the scandal of prisoners being released early just because of prison overcrowding, rather than because it is in the national interest?

A healthy debate on sentencing is taking place within parties and in this House, and that will no doubt continue. However, the right hon. Gentleman seems to be suggesting that the introduction of end-of-custody licences was the first time in the history of Parliament that convicted criminals had been released early—in this case 18 days early—but that is untrue. In 1984, the Government that he supported changed parole eligibility to let people out on parole earlier. In 1986, they extended remission for good behaviour to those serving under 12 months from a third to a half, thus allowing out early a whole load of convicted criminals. In 1992, they introduced automatic release at the halfway point of—

Order. I think the point has been made.

Given the evidence that a fundamental part of rehabilitation is the education and training opportunities that prisoners have in prison, and given that there are long waiting lists for those courses and that the increased use of early release makes it much harder for prisoners to complete the courses before they leave, what is the Department doing to ensure that prisoners who are released early are able to continue with the education and training they undertake in prison, to enable them to rehabilitate successfully afterwards?

The hon. Lady raises some interesting points. The entire concept of offender management means that we are in a much better position to ensure that the courses that prisoners start while in prison can either be completed or continued outside in the community. We have done that by making sure that the adult education and basic skills courses available in prison are the same as those available outside prison. Offender management means that when the probation service takes over the care of released offenders it can ensure that the correct opportunities are available to them, which will help both to reduce the chances of their reoffending and, it is to be hoped, to reintegrate them into society properly.

Is it not obvious from these exchanges that the public—our constituents—are being put at risk because of the Government’s failing prisons policy? Is it true that since June 2007, 700 early release offenders have been recalled but, staggeringly, 124 are still at large? Why are they still at large, what is being done to apprehend them, and what offences did the 124 commit?

My understanding is that 4 per cent. of those released early on end-of-custody licence have been recalled, and that amounts to 673 people. They may have been recalled for a number of offences, but obviously they are in breach of their licence. Some 1 per cent., or 257 people, have reoffended in various ways. The Ministry of Justice regularly produces figures on these matters, so there is no attempt to hide that. Whenever anybody comes out it is possible that they will reoffend—some do and some do not—but these numbers are quite low compared with other types of release.

9. What representations he has received on the cost of providing details of forthcoming court cases to local media outlets. (192761)

Two representations have been made in relation to the cost of providing copies of court lists and magistrates courts registers to the press.

The cost of providing the lists to the Scarborough Evening News has risen from £800 to a prohibitive £15,000. Does the Minister agree with that newspaper’s editor, Mr. Ed Asquith, who says that that will be welcomed by criminals, whose crimes and punishments will no longer be covered in the local newspaper, and that the court system will lose much of its deterrent power?

I am delighted for the hon. Gentleman; he managed to get a good plug for his local newspaper into his question.

On the costs, there is a minimum fee of £5 for up to 10 sheets and 50p thereafter for a copy of any document provided by the court. I agree that local newspapers’ reporting is an important part of the court system, and indeed of the democratic process, both as a deterrent, as he mentioned, and as a way of allowing victims and others to know exactly what has happened in court. I shall examine the costs carefully, but the hon. Gentleman will understand that we are talking about costs to the public purse and we must ensure that they are appropriate in the circumstances.

10. What his most recent assessment is of progress on the prison building programme. [Official Report, 18 March 2008, Vol. 473, c. 6MC.] (192762)

The Government have announced a programme to provide an additional 20,000 prison places and increase overall capacity to just over 96,000 by 2014. As I explained, the programme has already provided 1,746 places, and it will provide about another 2,500 places this year.

Why are the Government pressing ahead with titan prisons? All my experience as a former prison visitor at Her Majesty’s Prison Wormwood Scrubs, which is an enormous establishment, suggests that local and smaller prisons are far more likely to reduce reoffending and increase rehabilitation.

What we also know, from the Carter report and much other experience both in the UK and in the United States, is that we must balance the issue of smaller prisons—I understand that they are desired, but they are not desired in the communities in which we may wish to put them—and the practicalities of being able to find fewer but larger sites for large prisons. What we are also determined to do, as we are doing with the cluster on the Isle of Sheppey and we will do with that in the Bromsgrove-Redditch area, is to ensure that within the perimeters we improve efficiency by merging back office functions and ensuring that there are different regimes for different categories of prisoner.

One of the problems we face in south Wales is the lack of capacity in Welsh prisons, which means that many prisoners end up going to prisons further afield—in England—and it is very difficult for families and friends to visit. Can the Justice Secretary say what plans he has to increase the capacity of prisons in Wales? Does he find that many local authorities tend towards nimbyism and very much fight against having local prisons?

The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, my right hon. Friend the Member for Delyn (Mr. Hanson), has both responsibility for prisons and the privilege of representing a Welsh constituency. He is on the case, consulting widely with a view to ensuring that additional prison capacity is available in Wales.

A not insignificant number of prison places are taken up by foreign prisoners who have completed their sentences. When I tabled a number of questions to the Secretary of State on the number of such prisoners in, for example, Bullingdon prison, the questions were transferred to the Home Office. Surely the Secretary of State for Justice has a real interest in ensuring that foreign prisoners who have completed their sentences are removed from prison and deported. The fewer places they take up, the less pressure there will be to build new prisons.

The hon. Gentleman is right that I have a very real interest in that. There are many spirited conversations between my officials and those at the Home Office, and between the Home Secretary and me, about ensuring that time-sentenced foreign national prisoners are removed from the country as quickly as possible by deportation or administrative means. That said, it happens that since they then become the responsibility of the Border and Immigration Agency, it falls to the Home Office to answer detailed statistical questions.

11. What measures he has put in place to increase co-operation with other Government Departments to improve the rehabilitation of offenders. (192763)

The new public service agreements, in particular those on making communities safer and on socially excluded adults, provide important levers to support a cross-Government focus on offender rehabilitation and reducing reoffending. To provide strategic direction for that work, and to promote an effective cross-Government partnership response, the Under-Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills, my hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr. Lammy), and I chair a reducing reoffending interministerial group, which includes Ministers from 15 Departments.

Will the Minister talk to colleagues in the Department of Health about making treatment and support available at all GPs’ surgeries to ex-offenders who have drug-related problems, instead of forcing vulnerable people to travel a long way to centres, en route to which they can be ambushed by drug pushers who are lying in wait for them?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We will certainly ensure that we try to support people leaving prison who have a history of using drugs while in prison and before. That is important to the reducing reoffending agenda. Ministers in both the Department of Health and the National Assembly for Wales sit on the interministerial group that I chair. We are considering positive solutions to ensure that we integrate care, so that offenders who leave prison have the support that they need to help them to reduce their reoffending behaviour.

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities. (192743)

This morning I published the report of Her Majesty’s chief inspectors of court administration, of the police and of the Crown Prosecution Service on the historical problems at Leeds magistrates court. I said in an accompanying written ministerial statement that the inspectorate’s report painted a lamentable picture of the historical failure there with regard to court adjudications, most of which occurred between 2001 and 2004. I drew the House’s attention to the fact that, since April 2005, the control and management of the magistrates court service has no longer been a matter for autonomous local magistrates courts committees but one for Her Majesty’s Courts Service, which was established under the Courts Act 2003.

My right hon. Friend will recall the substantial vote last March in favour of a wholly elected upper House. What progress is he making towards implementing proposals for the reform of the upper House? Does he agree that the question of the voting system in that House cannot be entirely dissociated from the debate about the future voting system for this House?

On the progress of the reform of the other place, I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that we have a cross-party group, including representatives of the Opposition Front Bench, the Liberal Democrats, the Cross Benchers and the Lords Spiritual. It is making good progress within the clear mandate set by this House for a second Chamber that is either 100 per cent. or 80 per cent. elected.

The voting system is a matter of great debate among parties, and my hon. Friend and I might have slightly different views on the matter.

T2. There is growing concern about the explicit details on so-called suicide websites about methods that can be used. What steps can the Government take to control the content of such sites and restrict access to them? (192744)

We are as concerned as my hon. Friend, her constituents and people across the country about these appalling websites. The Under-Secretary of State for Justice, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle), is looking into the matter urgently. As my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Mrs. Moon) will know, dealing with websites—particularly if the servers are abroad—is technically difficult, but we aim to do our best in those circumstances and to make an announcement as quickly as possible.

May I bring the Secretary of State back to a previous answer that he gave to the hon. Member for Bridgend (Mrs. Moon)? There seems to be an inherent contradiction between on the one hand praising the effectiveness of community sentences, as well as the perfectly sensible remarks made by the Secretary of State at the Guardian criminal justice summit, which have been rather unfairly criticised, and on the other hand announcing that more and bigger prisons will be built. Does the Secretary of State not accept that important lessons can be learned from countries such as Denmark, where the crime rate is equivalent to that in this country but the incarceration rate is much lower and the success rate for prisoner rehabilitation is much higher?

We want to learn from the experiences of countries across the world. It just happens, for all sorts of reasons, that Denmark has a lower prison population per head than we do. The crucial test of a penal policy should not be the arbitrary figure of the number of prisoners per head of population, but whether the overall policies are working to make our communities safer and to reduce levels of victimisation. I have put the Government’s record in perspective. There is the lowest level of victimisation since the British crime survey was established by the Conservatives in 1981. Crime has come down, but there are still many serious violent and persistent offenders at large. Telling our constituents whether the overall aggregate record is down or up serves no purpose if they have been the victim of a crime.

Reoffending?

Reoffending is also greatly improving, and I note that the Conservative party promises to cut 12,000 prison places through its so-called rehabilitation revolution. However, we will learn from anybody.

T4. The unnecessary staking of headstones in graveyards across the country by zealous burial authorities continues apace. Is there any good news on progress towards issuing some appropriate health and safety guidance so that we can get rid of that monstrosity? (192746)

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I know that he is already qualified as a topple tester. He is right that we must deal with the issue with proportion and so on. We are keen to see that local authorities respond in a proportionate fashion and that they realise the sensitivity of the work that has to be done as well as making sure that it is done with health and safety in mind in a way that deals with the matter when the situation is dangerous rather than in an unnecessarily over-bureaucratic fashion.

Does the Lord Chancellor not understand that it is profoundly un-British to demand that the public swear oaths of allegiance, subscribe to statements of values or fly flags in their lawns? The public will surely see straight through synthetic patriotism. Last week, the Culture Minister attacked the BBC Proms. Why should the public have anything to learn from this Government about Britishness?

I am a long-time Prom-goer; I love the Proms. I am entitled to say that I did not agree with what my right hon. Friend the Member for Barking (Margaret Hodge) said about the Proms. My judgment is not hers. As for flying flags, I am proud to be British. We have done a great deal. No party has the monopoly on being British and being proud of it. I remind the hon. Gentleman that some of his colleagues proposed that we did more to ensure that the Union flag was flown from Government buildings and Portcullis House. We have ensured that that is done.

But surely 10 years of learning about British history would be more valuable to instil an understanding of British values than a 10-minute ceremony for 16-year-olds? Does the Justice Secretary really think that British values can be reduced to a slogan or a statement of values drawn up by focus groups at the taxpayer’s expense?

The hon. Gentleman ought to read the report and proposals of my noble and learned Friend Lord Goldsmith—he may have done so but not digested them—and there ought to be proper debate about them. I doubt that the hon. Gentleman’s views are shared by many other people on the Conservative Benches.

Secondly, we now have citizenship ceremonies for new citizens. When they were introduced there was some scepticism about them on both sides of the House, but they have turned out to be valued rites of passage for new British people who are becoming British citizens. There is a lot to be said for our getting across to existing British citizens—born British, not adopted British—what it means to be British. It should not be a party issue.

Has the Lord Chancellor recently requested a factual paper from the Treasury on the Barnett formula? Even though the formula is much, much older than devolution, the perception of devolution in England is undoubtedly affected by its existence and the fact that it is overdue for reform.

I have not needed to request papers on the Barnett formula, because the way it operates is perfectly public. Briefing is available from the Library and the formula has been used by successive Governments, including—in unamended form—the Administration between 1979 and 1997.

T5. The Secretary of State will be aware that an organisation called ClearSprings is, on behalf of the Government, buying residential properties in Basildon district to house offenders released early from prison. Given the complete lack of consultation with local residents on the issue, which means that they could wake up one day to find that they were living next door to an open prison, will the Secretary of State cancel those plans for Basildon district, which are being seen only as a way of reducing prison overcrowding by stealth? (192747)

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising that issue. I looked into a number of the concerns that had been raised recently about ClearSprings properties. There was concern in Basildon and I looked into whether the Conservative-controlled district council, had exercised its veto. I have to report to the hon. Gentleman that had the council done so, we would not be proceeding with the properties in Basildon. The Conservative-controlled district council in Basildon did not veto the proposals—

Was it consulted?

It was consulted, as were the police and I am aware of that because my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Angela E. Smith) also has such properties and has referred to me recent press coverage in Basildon on the matter. The Conservative-controlled district council did not veto the properties.

T6. Is not the absence of a financial limit on election expenditure on campaigning outside an election period, in effect, the buying of votes? It is an anomaly that ought to be corrected urgently. For that reason, is it not time that we stopped talking about it and actually did something? (192748)

As my hon. Friend will be aware, the report of the inquiry and review by Sir Hayden Phillips recommended that there was a strong case for limits on spending to apply both locally and nationally for a whole Parliament and not just for a period beforehand. In addition, one of the wholly unintended consequences of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 was that far from local controls being made stronger—as was believed by both main parties—they have actually been made shorter and weaker. We were aware of that, but it is also important, which is why we are giving the matter consideration, that there should be a broad consensus for changes in party funding, because it cannot and should not be used as a partisan tool in the hands of one party or another.

T7. Today’s extraordinary reports into the events at Leeds magistrates court have uncovered an astonishing example of systematic and deliberate abuse. With regard to the collusion that appears to have happened between Leeds magistrates court, West Yorkshire police and West Yorkshire Crown Prosecution Service, does the Secretary of State agree that it was a deliberate attempt to withdraw warrants when they should not have been withdrawn? With regard to the whole episode, does he agree that it may be appropriate to pursue criminal charges, because it was clearly a deliberate attempt to undermine justice? (192749)

The matter is very serious indeed; I have made that clear. In my judgment, the issue arose partly because of the shambolic way in which the local magistrates ran the magistrates courts committee, and the lack of effective administration. As the hon. Gentleman will recognise, the inspectorate praised the work of Her Majesty’s Courts Service, which took control of Leeds magistrates court, and other magistrates courts, in 2005. The protocol came as an astonishing surprise to me. It is in appendix 12 of the report, which contains the extraordinary phrase about the need to “get rid” of outstanding warrants. He will forgive me, but I cannot comment on disciplinary processes that are taking place, except to say that they are being pursued, as I do not wish to prejudice their outcome.

T8. Following on from the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert), does the Secretary of State believe that allegiance should be sworn to the United Kingdom, to Her Majesty the Queen, or to an emerging federal president of Europe? (192750)

Not the latter, in any circumstances, whether the president is federal or otherwise; I say that to reassure the hon. Gentleman. I should say to him, before he gets too excited about the issue, that if he looks at the pledges that new citizens are required to make, he will see that there is an oath of allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen—we are a constitutional monarchy and, so far as my party and I am concerned, long may that continue—and a pledge of loyalty to other citizens in the United Kingdom.

May I draw my right hon. Friend’s attention to a situation that my constituent found himself in? He was returned to prison while on a home curfew tag. He found a job that required him to leave home 15 minutes before his curfew ended in the morning, and as a result he was returned to prison. Surely the administration of the system should be able to cope with a request for an alteration to curfew hours in cases where somebody is actually trying to rehabilitate themselves. Will my right hon. Friend look into the matter, and perhaps make the system more flexible to meet people’s needs?

My hon. Friend raises an important point. I will certainly look into whether we can ensure flexibility in genuine cases where there are issues to do with employment or other matters. I will certainly reflect on the matter, and I will write to my hon. Friend in due course.

T10. My constituency’s population is growing rapidly; in fact, in the 2001 election, it was the constituency with the second largest population in Britain after the Isle of Wight. The next parliamentary boundary review will not take effect until after the next election, and will be based on data from 2000 that precede the 2001 census. Will the Secretary of State commit himself to having more frequent parliamentary boundary reviews, using data that are forward-looking, rather than backward-looking? (192752)

The hon. Gentleman raises an important point, and I broadly agree with him. What we need is more frequent reviews, and reviews that take account of population, rather than being based simply on electoral rolls, because electoral rolls are not necessarily a clear surrogate for population. As he says, the reviews should be forward-looking, rather than very outdated, as they sometimes are. I am happy to meet him to discuss the matter.

I thank the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice), for the courtesy and time that she gave me last week when I met her to discuss my concern about the secrecy surrounding family courts. Would she not agree that natural parents should get more justice, and more rights, in the family courts system?

I was very happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss a particular case in his constituency. I would say to him that, first and foremost, the family courts must look after the interests of the child. It is on that basis that they must move forward. Of course, they must also take into account the evidence that is put in front of them, but the most important thing is to ensure the child’s safety and protection.