1. What recent steps his Department has taken to reduce reoffending rates for young offenders. (316129)

Since 2000, the frequency of juvenile reoffending has dropped by more than 20 per cent.—the trend is significantly downwards. The number of first-time offenders coming into the criminal justice system is also down. Our approach to reducing reoffending still further is detailed in the youth crime action plan, which is backed by £100 million of funding. The plan focuses on a triple-track approach of tough enforcement, non-negotiable support and prevention.

Given that many hundreds of young people who commit crime have previously been behind bars on three or more occasions, why are there no major incentives for young offender institutions to be rewarded for cutting reoffending rates?

I am interested in incentives throughout the system, but it is difficult to attribute a particular cut in reoffending to the actions of one particular institution, course or individual. So although incentives are a good and fine thing, designing what they are and how they work is slightly more difficult.

I thank the Minister for giving evidence this morning to the Select Committee on Home Affairs inquiry into crime prevention, when I mentioned to her a group that we had met called User Voice. It is a group of ex-offenders who wish to help to prevent young offenders from following the path into crime. Will she meet the group and thus recognise the importance of young ex-offenders who are trying to be a model to prevent others from getting involved in crime?

It was of course a great pleasure for me to give evidence to the Committee this morning—the time passed very swiftly. I am more than happy to meet the group to which my right hon. Friend refers. I meet groups of ex-offenders in my constituency who believe that mentoring can be an excellent way of trying to turn those who are on the path into custody away from crime.

In 2007, the Government talked about

“delivering improved outcomes for young black people in the criminal justice system”.

However, the latest published figures show that among 15 to 17-year-old prisoners, 17 per cent. of those on remand and 13 per cent. of those sentenced are black. Given the year-on-year increase in the over-representation of young black people in custody, how does the Minister rate the performance of the designated ministerial champion tasked with reducing those numbers? I refer of course to the Justice Secretary.

I rate my right hon. Friend extremely highly; he is very good at everything he does as far as I am concerned. The particular issue that the hon. Gentleman raises is very difficult, and we must recognise that black and minority ethnic people are still over-represented in our criminal justice. The reasons for that over-representation are complex. Work is going on to try to tackle it but, as he rightly says, there is still a lot to do.

2. What education and training opportunities are available to offenders (a) on remand and (b) serving short-term custodial sentences to help them find employment following release. (316130)

We have increased spending on education and training threefold in the past few years. In prisons we provide a curriculum with a broad focus on employability, ranging from preparatory employment skills, literacy and numeracy, to higher level qualifications and skills training. A new unit-based qualifications and credit system will be particularly valuable for those serving short sentences, as it will allow learning to take place in short modules, which can be continued out in the community.

My hon. Friend would be very welcome to come before my Select Committee, which is currently examining the not in education, employment or training—NEET—population. We are finding that a large number of young people who begin short custodial sentences or spend a long time on remand break their education and find it very difficult to get back, so can we have more of these short courses and can they be well funded?

My hon. Friend rightly says that there is an issue to address in respect of ensuring that people who have not engaged in education and training at the earliest possible opportunity in their lives get a chance to do so and are helped to stick at it in whatever setting. I have been collecting Select Committees lately. If that was an invitation, I might just come along to his Select Committee to tell him what I think about this and his fellow members of the Committee—[Laughter.]—I said “if” that was an invitation. I am happy to say that the number of 16 and 17-year-old NEETs in the system has been falling and now stands at 5.2 per cent., but there is clearly more to do in that respect.

Education and training opportunities, especially for young offenders, are still very poor. At Reading young offenders institution, for example, there are only five hours a week of education and training, and at Rochester only three and a half hours. Why are those figures—they are Government figures—so bad?

In the YOI estate, we aim for 25 to 30 hours of education and purposeful activity. I realise that outcomes vary across the estate, and we strive to improve that because it is something that can make a difference to the lives of these young people.

Visiting prisons and young offenders institutions in my area, one notes how variable the facilities are. Younger people often need hands-on experience with equipment to gain technical expertise. Is that something that the Government are making efforts to improve?

Yes. We have a corporate alliance of 100 employers across various sectors, many of which actually provide work-based training in prisons and young offenders institutions, which give those who take the courses not only employment while in prison but qualifications and, sometimes, the promise of a job when they leave prison. That has to be the way forward. Some 38 per cent. of those released from custody are released into education and training, and 26 per cent. into employment.

Is not the greatest impediment to training and getting a job the simple fact that all the efforts to help an offender upon release from prison are fragmented, and the first person they are likely to meet when they step through the prison gate with £40 in their pocket is the local drug dealer? What plans do the Government have to ensure that national offender management becomes genuinely local offender management, and that the ex-offender is met at the gate by someone responsible for their rehabilitation, so that over time reoffending is dramatically reduced?

While the Conservatives talk about a rehabilitation revolution, the Government have been providing it and we already have such schemes. Because of the creation of the National Offender Management Service and closer working together at a local level in education, health and local authority services such as housing, this is already happening. I am not saying that we cannot do more—we can, and we must—but the Conservatives should recognise the significant impact that has already been made on reducing reoffending.

3. What assessment he has made of the recommendations in Lord Jackson's review of civil litigation costs; and if he will make a statement. (316131)

Lord Justice Jackson’s review was published on 14 January. Anybody who has read its 550 pages—as I am sure the hon. Gentleman has done—will note that it is remarkable for its thoroughness and imagination. It makes recommendations for fundamental reforms to reduce costs in the civil justice system. We are now actively assessing the implications of Sir Rupert’s proposals, including—crucially—their economic impact.

Does the Secretary of State accept that if the proposals are implemented, especially those on litigation costs for industrial personal injuries, it will be ordinary men and women with, say, asbestosis or byssinosis who will lose out? That will be in direct opposition to the commitment made on behalf of the Government by the right hon. Member for Ashfield (Mr. Hoon) on 14 April 1999, when he said that the costs of litigation should lie, in the first place, with those who have actually caused the damage.

I am afraid that I do not share the hon. Gentleman’s opinion about the impact of Lord Justice Jackson’s proposals, which are designed to reduce the costs of civil litigation overall. Those costs have risen too high, and that is a bar to proper access to justice. Of course, he makes scores of interlinked recommendations, and they have to be examined with great care, but I hope the hon. Gentleman will do Lord Justice Jackson justice—no pun intended—given the thoroughness of his report, and recognise that his whole aim was to reduce costs and improve practical access to justice.

I am a non-practising solicitor because I do not believe in moonlighting. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that when considering implementation of the Jackson review he will seek to avoid lessening access to justice, with fewer so-called no-win, no-fee agreements or a greater burden on the already stretched legal aid system?

I know that legal aid is understandably a matter of concern, but it must be said that the legal aid system in England and Wales, both for civil and criminal legal aid, is by far and away the most generous system in the western world. It compares by a factor of about three with systems in comparable common law jurisdictions, such as Australia and New Zealand. Part of the problem concerning the burden on the civil legal aid fund and the public purse from, for example, actions for medical negligence are the costs of litigation. Those are in nobody’s interest, except those who directly benefit. Lord Justice Jackson has made specific proposals for conditional fee arrangements: he proposed that they should be abolished and replaced by an alternative of contingency fees, under which the litigant, applicant or plaintiff would pay his or her side’s own costs out of any damages recovered, and that there be a 10 per cent. uplift in damages. That is a central recommendation of Lord Justice Jackson’s review, which, as I have already made clear, we are examining with great care.

We, too, welcome this remarkable magnum opus. The Secretary of State will be aware that Lord Justice Jackson was very critical of referral fees and some of the practices of claims management companies. What is the Secretary of State’s view of that, and can he now give a cast-iron guarantee that when it comes to referral fees and claims management matters, there will be no special exemptions or cosy deals for the trade unions?

I am not intending that there should be any cosy deals with anybody in the implementation of the report. The hon. Gentleman will, I am sure, have read with care chapter 20 of the Jackson report.

I have read every word of the report.

There will be an examination straight after this.

The recommendations for referral fees actually came not from the trade unions but directly from the Office of Fair Trading, which still supports referral fees. That said, I fully understand the objections raised by Lord Jackson about referral fees. We have to look at all the recommendations in the round and make judgments in the round, not least after the economic assessment that we are making at the moment.

4. What steps he plans to take to reduce the number of prisoners reoffending within two years of release; and if he will make a statement. (316132)

We have had substantial success in reducing youth and adult reoffending, which fell by 23.6 per cent. and 20.3 per cent. respectively between 2000 and 2007. The Government will continue to work towards driving down reoffending and to ensure that, alongside punishment, we also try to reform offenders.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. She will be aware that there is something of a revolving door as two thirds of people are reoffending. We are now talking about 20,000 extra places being made available for people who have committed crimes. Should we not be looking at why these crimes happen and why people get involved in criminality in the first place, and trying to prevent them from ever getting involved in criminality?

Of course we should, and we do both. It is not unconnected, in my view, that crime has fallen by one third and that we incarcerate serious and dangerous offenders for longer. Those things are not unconnected. Violent crime is down by 41 per cent., although the Conservative party appears unwilling to accept it. There are fewer victims of crime than ever before and one now has the lowest chance of being a victim of crime since records began. These are substantial achievements that the Conservative party ought to recognise.

It is disappointing to hear a Minister still claiming that the fall in crime has to do with the increase in the prison population, given that the same fall in crime has happened throughout Europe, apart from Belgium, without the same prison policy being in place. Does the Minister not recognise that the real underlying problem is that too many people are in prison in the first place for crimes that would be better dealt with by systems that work, such as restorative justice and getting them off drugs and drink?

We have increased fifteenfold the amount of money that we spend on drug interventions in prison and the amount we spend on providing prison education threefold. They are substantial achievements. Some 38 per cent. of those leaving prison enter education and training; 26 per cent. get a job and 80 per cent. enter settled housing. That is tackling the underlying causes of crime. Not only do we protect the public by incarcerating dangerous and severe offenders for longer, but we tackle the causes of crime.

What progress have the Government made on ensuring that offenders have bank accounts when they leave prison? Without bank accounts they cannot access accommodation or employment, and they are one of the things that help to prevent reoffending.

My hon. Friend is right. We have some arrangements between bankers and the Department, and through those we are exploring the provision of basic bank accounts to offenders. Clearly there are difficulties, and some banks have concerns about allowing a certain type of offender to have a bank account. However, we believe that we can overcome some of those difficulties by continuing to discuss such matters, and we are seeing some progress in that regard.

Neither reducing reoffending nor public protection is served by this Government’s reckless early release scheme. Can the Minister tell the House whether she or the Secretary of State plans to announce the end of early release before 6 May?

I cannot say anything other than that we keep the matter closely under review. The policy was announced as a temporary measure to deal with overcrowding. We have said that we want to end it as soon as practically possible, and I, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and others keep that under review frequently.

That was a gentle masterpiece of obfuscation, so let me try again. Can the Minister confirm that the official advice that she and the Secretary of State are receiving from their Department or the Prison Service warns against ending early release now, because the lack of cells means that it would have to be reintroduced in a matter of weeks or months? Can she reassure the House that there are no plans to leave the next Government the poison pill of a looming prison crisis?

I am not about to start bandying official advice across the Dispatch Box, and I do not think that any Minister, in any Administration, would seek to do that. I will therefore not rise to the bait that the hon. and learned Gentleman is dangling before me. Beyond saying that we keep the matter, which we take very seriously, under constant review, I have nothing to add.

5. What assessment he has made of the merits of ending the re-registration requirement for service voters. (316133)

Ending re-registration altogether would create inaccuracies in the register. However, the Government recognise the need to respond to the special circumstances of service voters. That is why we have laid before Parliament an order that extends the declaration period for service voters from three to five years, and why we are taking forward further measures to help service voters to register to vote and, indeed, to vote.

Before the last general election I took this matter up because I discovered that there were shamefully low levels of service voter registration. I welcome what the Government have said. I last had a meeting with the Electoral Commission in, I think, October, when we discussed this. I am sure that, like me, the Minister wishes to make it as easy as possible for people fighting—and possibly dying—in places such as Afghanistan to be able to vote. May I therefore urge him to reconsider so that perhaps people could register as service voters when they join the forces, as I did, and then de-register when they leave? That would be very easy: it worked in those days, and I managed to vote Conservative throughout those days as well.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his interest in the matter. He brings a lot of experience to it, and I am grateful to him. I agree with him entirely: it is crucial that those who are prepared to make such sacrifices for their country should be able to have that important say in the future of their country. There is no question about that. I will of course take into consideration what he has said. We have set up a working party, with Ministry of Defence officials, Ministry of Justice officials, and representatives of the families and the armed services, to see how we can achieve long-term solutions to what is a difficult problem.

I very much welcome the hon. Gentleman’s suggestion. I promise him that we will take it forward and have a look at it. I know that he will agree with me and would not want to recreate the sort of inaccuracies that were in the register before 2000. However, I can reassure him that we are making efforts to ensure that our servicemen in Afghanistan in particular are enabled to register to vote in the forthcoming election, and then able to vote. The proxy vote system is available to everybody. We are trying to expedite postal voting for service personnel as well, and we will be announcing measures to that end shortly.

6. What recent estimate he has made of the number of people in prison who maintain their innocence. (316134)

The information requested is not collected. A person who believes that they have been the victim of a miscarriage of justice can appeal against their conviction. If the appeal is unsuccessful, the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be asked to review the case. The commission has the power to refer a conviction to the Court of Appeal.

I thank the Minister for that answer. Does she think there would be any merit in the Government undertaking a study of miscarriages of justice, and of the correlation between unevidenced assertions and compensation in miscarriage of justice cases?

There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the number of wrongful convictions is rising. The Court of Appeal quashes about 200 convictions each year, and I see no reason at all to make any change to the current arrangements.

One group of people who often have difficulty expressing and establishing their innocence are those on the autistic spectrum. In the state of Maryland in the United States, this is being tackled by the Maryland curriculum, which trains court officers and police officers to recognise autistic behaviour. Would my hon. Friend be prepared to review the Maryland curriculum to see whether there would be any merit in introducing such a scheme in the United Kingdom?

My hon. Friend has given the House some interesting information, and I would be more than happy to ask officials to look into it in more detail. He might also be aware of the Bradley report, in which my noble Friend Lord Bradley identifies the difficulties experienced by people with mental health and other learning difficulties. The report examines how the criminal justice system should approach these issues and suggests alternative ways of dealing with them, where possible.

I am disappointed, although not surprised, that the Minister responded to the original question by saying that the Government do not collect this information at all. About a year ago, they said it would serve no useful purpose to collect it. Does she not recognise that there is a useful purpose? When prisoners maintain their innocence, it can often lead to their being held in prison for longer, perhaps because they are held not to have completed various courses. Do the Government not see that there would be a purpose in making a study of cases such as those?

When someone is convicted, it is only right that the system accepts that the court’s decision is right and, if they are sent to prison, the prison system should accept the decision on that basis. The person has an opportunity to appeal, and if the appeal is unsuccessful, they also have an opportunity to refer the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The hon. Gentleman seems to be suggesting that people who maintain their innocence might not get parole or be considered appropriately. It would not be lawful for the Parole Board to exclude someone from an opportunity for parole simply because they maintained their innocence. There are some courses that it would be inappropriate for such people to attend, such as sex offending treatment, simply because if they could not admit their offence, it would be difficult to discuss with them how they were going to progress from it.

7. What recent estimate he has made of levels of self-harm in women’s prisons. (316136)

About half of all incidents of self-harm across the entire prison estate are perpetrated by women, who comprise only 5 per cent. of the prison population. Levels of self-harm in women’s prisons are broadly stable, although they are high. The number of self-inflicted deaths, however, has gone down to a three-year average of 60, which is a significant improvement on the past few years.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that response. On a recent visit to New Hall women’s prison, I was shocked to see the levels of self-harm among very vulnerable females. Some of the women are serving jail sentences for offences such as the non-payment of their television licence fee. Is there more that the Government can do to reduce the serious level of self-harm in women’s prisons?

We are taking steps to try to deal with serious self-harm in all our prisons. One of the best ways of preventing vulnerable women from self-harming is to try to provide alternatives to custody for petty offences. This enables the women to remain in the community while tackling their offending behaviour. In that respect, using the £15.5 million of extra resources that we have made available to divert women from custody is probably the best way of tackling this issue.

Given what the Minister has just said and given the overwhelming evidence recently provided in the Corston and other reports, it is clear that far too many women in prison should not be there. More should be done, as it has been estimated that up to half the female prison population should not be in prison—we really should grasp this nettle and act urgently.

I am doing my best to do that. The hon. Gentleman’s analysis that some women in prisons should not be there may well be correct, but it is sentencers who send people to prison and we have to provide places for them. We have to find alternatives in the community for many of these vulnerable women that command the respect and support of sentencers. That is what some of the money in the diversion projects I mentioned is being used to do. It shows some progress that there has been a 4.2 per cent fall in the number of women in prison over the last year during which these projects have been working, while at the same time the male prison population has increased by 2 per cent.

May I gently say that the comprehensiveness and courtesy of ministerial replies is greatly appreciated by hon. and right hon. Members, but I think that the abridged rather than the “War and Peace” version will suffice.

I very much welcome what my hon. Friend said about providing diversionary tactics for women in prison. Welsh women, if sentenced to a period in prison, have to serve their time in England at some considerable distance from their families. What ways can be found to help to ensure that there are greater diversionary opportunities for sentencers in Wales so that women are able to serve their sentence closer to family support in Wales?

My hon. Friend is correct: about 50 or so Welsh women are serving their prison sentences in English jails, as there are no women’s prisons in Wales. We do not intend to build one, but we are providing support both in south and north Wales for diversionary projects that might enable sentencers not to impose short prison sentences for those who really would do better with community sentences.

8. What progress has been made in his review of sentencing for people convicted of burglary offences. (316137)

The maximum sentence for burglary of dwellings is 14 years; for non-domestic burglary, it is 10 years; and for aggravated burglary, it is life. Within the statutory framework, it is for the Sentencing Guidelines Council to issue guidelines to the judiciary. The SGC issued guidelines for non-domestic burglary in 2008; following R v. Saw in 2009, it is currently preparing guidelines for domestic burglary.

I am grateful to the Minister for that answer. Twelve months ago, the Secretary of State and the then Minister of State said that they were looking at toughening up the sentencing policy for burglary offences. Will the Minister tell me what is happening with first-time offenders who commit burglary?

Within the statutory framework, it is of course for the courts to determine what is appropriate, and the framework is quite extensive. As a result of that framework, we are seeing that the average custodial period for burglary has increased from 15.5 months in 1998 to 17.4 months in 2008. Overall, burglary has more than halved since 1997.

9. If he will take steps to strengthen accountability arrangements for returning officers. (316138)

The Government are aware of concerns that have been raised in Parliament about the accountability of returning officers and registration officers, and we are exploring ways to address them. I have to say to the right hon. Gentleman that any changes should take place only if they support the principle of the independence of these officers.

Notwithstanding that independence, does the Minister not agree that he should make it very clear to returning officers at the forthcoming general election that unless there is very good geographical case against, all counts should take place on the night?

I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that on a personal level I have made that very clear, as indeed has my right hon. Friend the Justice Secretary. I think that that is a settled view across the House. However, as the Minister responsible for elections, I have to proceed in a way that respects the integrity and independence of the system and of those officers. As I have said, we are exploring ways of addressing this issue; we will announce the outcome of that review very shortly.

I welcome the Minister’s comments, but does he appreciate that this is a cross-party issue? Indeed, we agree with Mr. Speaker when he says that we do not want slow-motion democracy, but instant democracy. In a modern democracy, we should be able to achieve that.

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. She and many other Members in all parts of the House have made the same points extremely cogently in recent weeks, and their concerns have been taken on board. As I have said, we will announce the result of our explorations very shortly.

I know that the Minister is well aware of the strength of feeling and cross-party opinion on the matter referred to by the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale (Geraldine Smith). He will have seen the massive number of signatures attached to an early-day motion on the subject, he was present at a debate in Westminster Hall last week, and he will know that new clause 98, tabled to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill, is due to be debated this evening.

The Minister has been offered a great opportunity to take action to preserve the constitutional convention under which the government of our country is determined without delay after a general election. Either he can accept new clause 98, or the Government can present further proposals to give powers to the Electoral Commission forthwith to ensure that election night is not lost and democracy is preserved.

I have already made clear my great personal sympathy with the view that has just been expressed so cogently by the hon. Lady. Her new clause plays a valuable part in the debate, and I will respond to it at the appropriate time rather than during Question Time. However, while I share her views on a personal level, I am sure that all Members would wish to preserve the other fundamental constitutional underpinning of our electoral system, namely the independence and integrity of the returning officer.

Does my right hon. Friend accept that this question is not really about protecting the independence of the returning officer, but about protecting the right of the British people to know the results of our election at the earliest possible opportunity? I do not always agree with Opposition Front Benchers, but in this instance they are absolutely right. New clause 98, or another one, would come in very handy to concentrate returning officers’ minds.

I have already made clear several times that I personally agree entirely with my hon. Friend’s point. However, it is very important—I ask all Members to respect this—that we proceed in a way that does not give the impression that politicians are interfering with the independence and integrity of the electoral system. We know the view of Members in all parts of the House, and we must find a way of meeting it that does not compromise those fundamental constitutional principles.

10. What plans he has to improve the performance of the probation service. (316139)

The performance of the probation service has improved significantly in recent years from the variable and insufficiently supervised base that I found on becoming Home Secretary in 1997. Since then funding has increased by 70 per cent., staff numbers by 49 per cent., and case loads by 53 per cent. All but one of the 41 probation areas are meeting or exceeding their targets, but the whole service is committed to driving up standards further. I have no doubt that the introduction of probation trusts is providing its own dynamic for change and improvement.

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for his answer, but is he aware that, owing to the Government’s obsession with bureaucracy and centralisation, the probation service now uses a plumber from Birmingham to fix a loo seat in Norwich, and an electrician from Devon to change a light bulb in Birmingham?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the rather unsatisfactory shared-facilities arrangement that was entered into some years ago. I was not aware that it had led to the situation that he has described, but I am certainly aware of concern about it. I have received representations about the arrangement from many probation officers and probation trusts, and we are trying to disentangle the service from it.

11. How much his Department plans to spend on the national victims service in 2010-11. (316141)

The national victims service has been allocated £8 million for the financial year 2010-11. Of that, £2 million will be allocated to the homicide scheme, and the remaining £6 million will provide the enhanced service for other victims of crime. The service will be delivered, in partnership with the Government, by the charity Victim Support. It builds on huge improvements for victims in the past 10 years to change the culture of the criminal justice system in responding to the practical and emotional needs of victims.

I thank the Minister for her response, but Ministers have already said that the national victims service will be funded from efficiency savings in the Department. Will the Minister tell us precisely how those efficiency savings will be made?

We have already allocated the funding, and we have made the efficiency savings. The money has not been taken away from other victims’ services provided by the Department. What we do with that money is important. Victim Support already provides a good service, and I am absolutely confident that the national victims service will provide an even better one.

12. What steps his Department is taking to increase the rate of electoral registration. (316142)

The Electoral Administration Act 2006 imposed new duties on electoral registration officers to take all necessary steps to ensure a comprehensive and accurate register and to encourage voting. The phased implementation of individual registration across Great Britain will be supported by a drive to improve registration rates.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. What measures might his Department take to ensure that the money it sends to the Department for Communities and Local Government for electoral registration is actually spent on electoral registration?

I agree that the money that the Government allocate to local authorities for that purpose ought to be spent on that purpose, but as my hon. Friend well knows, he needs to raise the matter with DCLG Ministers, not those at the Ministry of Justice.

In areas of very low registration, is there not a case for resources to be targeted, so that there can be active canvassing of households in order to ensure much greater registration in those areas?

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. We know that there are fundamental disparities in registration rates, especially among minority ethnic groups, people in privately rented accommodation, unemployed people and young people. That is why the Electoral Commission is specifically targeting registration campaigns on those under-registered groups. There is a good case for targeting, and we are doing that.

The Minister will be aware that there are about 2 million British citizens living as immigrants in other EU countries and an estimated 10 million to 12 million living outside our borders all over the world, but just 13,000 of them are registered to vote. That is the lowest figure for overseas citizens who are registered to vote in any democracy. Why is it so low?

I suspect that my right hon. Friend already knows that overseas voters are, quite rightly, subject to the same registration requirements. It is often very difficult to find them, but that is not to say that we are not doing everything we can to encourage citizens overseas to register. The Electoral Commission has been carrying out promotional campaigning on the issue, and I hope that my right hon. Friend will come forward with suggestions as to how we can do still better.

13. When he next expects to meet the chief executive of the Legal Services Commission to discuss the commission’s work in procurement of legal aid in England and Wales. (316143)

Meetings are regularly held with the Legal Services Commission, at which a wide range of issues are discussed. One of the key current items on the agenda is the Public Accounts Committee report, which we welcome.

I am very pleased that the Minister will be discussing those issues. When she meets the LSC chief executive, will she discuss why it overpaid solicitors by £25 million in 2008-09, why its accounts have been qualified, and why the head of the National Audit Office says that it does not understand the markets in which it is buying services? Is that not an appalling record that needs to be fixed?

If I may just correct the hon. Gentleman, it will not be me who will be meeting the LSC; it will be my noble Friend Lord Bach. Having spoken to Lord Bach, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that he will be discussing the issue of overpayment. Since the NAO report came out, 10 per cent. has already been recovered. We are taking a very robust view on the way in which the whole thing has been dealt with, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that further information will be forthcoming shortly.

14. What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of bail hostels in assisting prisoners’ resettlement. (316144)

Approved premises—formerly known as probation and bail hostels—are the most effective form of supervision for many high-risk offenders on release from custody. They are far better than dispersing such offenders into less suitable accommodation elsewhere in the community. While in approved premises, offenders undertake offending behaviour work and purposeful activity to help them reintegrate into the community and reduce the risk that they will reoffend.

I thank the Minister for that answer, but Government figures show that a quarter of all those living in bail hostels are returned to prison because they have either reoffended or broken the rules. Does the Minister therefore think it fair that, if our suspects cannot be bailed to their own homes, we should be obliging other communities and neighbourhoods to take them?

The fact that there are recalls from approved premises because of breach of rules, absconding, further arrests or remand for other offences is a sign that supervision of those offenders is working. Such offenders are often highly dangerous and pose a high risk of harm. It is better that they are looked after in the community—which is often the community from which they originally come—with much greater levels of supervision than would be possible in any other way. Many of these people have been released at the end of their sentences and therefore cannot be retained in custody but need to be properly supervised when they are in the community. The fact that many of them return to prison is a sign of success.

15. What financial provision has been made in respect of staff redundancies at the Croydon land registry office. (316145)

If the proposed closure of the Croydon land registry goes ahead following the consideration of the responses to the public consultation, which closed recently, the estimated figure for redundancies is £11.7 million. The Land Registry plans to announce its final decisions, including a decision on Croydon, and to publish a full-responses document in March.

Will the Minister take a keen interest in such a decision, particularly bearing in mind the fact that the Croydon land registry managed to secure a cost per unit of £14.01, which is much better than the target of £16.54? It is the best performing office of all land registries in terms of its cost per unit. Let us bear in mind, too, the fact that the sale of the building will cost the taxpayer—

Order. The hon. Gentleman is pushing his luck. He got in and he had his opportunity, but he cannot have two bites of the cherry.

I will of course continue to take a keen interest in the proposals. I commend the hon. Gentleman for his diligence on behalf of his constituents in Croydon land registry and I know that the Land Registry will consider his remarks with great interest. The results of its deliberations will be announced in March.

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities. (316154)

I would like to draw the House’s attention to two major reviews that have been announced recently. First, a working party has been established to examine issues relating to the substantive law of libel in response to concerns that our libel laws might be having a chilling effect on freedom of expression. Secondly, there will be a review of the family justice system in England and Wales to ensure that we can improve outcomes for children, support parents as fully as possible and ensure that court time is focused on protecting the vulnerable. These important issues need proper and due consideration and that could lead to a fundamental shift in the way in which family justice is done from the current adversarial system to a more inquisitorial system.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that community payback schemes are not only effective in dealing with offenders but popular with local communities, who believe that they provide valuable payback to the community. Will my right hon. Friend tell the House whether he intends to expand those schemes ?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that community payback schemes are increasingly popular. They have become additionally popular since 1 December 2008, when we introduced the high-visibility jackets so that the public could see who the offenders were. The system is working very well and, as I have seen in many parts of the country, the public are now voting on which schemes they want the offenders to undertake. We want to see the schemes expanded. The question of how many offenders end up on them is a matter for the courts, but they are expanding and we back that.

T2. Will the Justice Secretary kindly explain why we will be wasting time today debating the alternative voting system rather than all the proposals of the Wright Committee report? We ought to debate them all instead of simply selected items in due course, as the Government propose. We need to discuss the whole report; why are we not debating it? (316155)

The Opposition are Johnny-come-latelies to the issue of parliamentary reform—[Hon. Members: “Rubbish!”] It is true. It was my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister who ensured that the suggestion from our hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Dr. Wright) to establish a Committee was implemented. We have wholeheartedly welcomed the report. There will be a full day’s debate on the whole report and there will then be votes on it. If the hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire (Mr. Vara) has concerns about the items on the Order Paper, my strong advice to him is to talk to his Chief Whip before he next stands up and makes pronouncements about it.

rose—

Order. I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for what he has just said. I suppose that his answer is living proof that once a Leader of the House, always a Leader of the House. It was very generous of him to answer what was effectively a business question, but I do not think that we need further supplementaries on that particular matter, which is not relevant to the Ministry of Justice.

T3. When will my right hon. Friend do something about the bloodsuckers who benefit when small businesses or individuals go bankrupt? One of my constituents was bankrupted for a sum of £9,000, but by the time PricewaterhouseCoopers had finished administering the case, she owed £80,000. When I inquired about that case, PWC charged her £800 for answering my letter. (316156)

I fully sympathise with my hon. Friend and his constituent. If he wants to give me the details of that case, I will happily take it up not only within the Ministry of Justice but with colleagues in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, because I understand that small firms in particular that have become bankrupt or insolvent need immediate help. We have been doing a great deal of work in that area during the current economic crisis, and I am more than happy to share some of that with him.

T5. The court fees paid by Leeds city council to cover care and adoption proceedings used to be capped at £150, but on the new scale it pays anything between £2,225 and £4,825. That acts as a tax on keeping children safe. There is the Francis Plowden review to consider, but this matter seems to be taking too long. Will the Justice Secretary say when the issue will be addressed and when the review will be made public? (316158)

Let me point out to the hon. Gentleman that there was a transfer of funding of £40 million from my Department to the revenue support grant to provide fully adequate compensation to local authorities for the increase in fees. [Interruption.] That was not ring-fenced, because local authorities object powerfully to ring-fencing, but they have had the money and we have lost the money. We are now studying Francis Plowden’s recommendations with care.

T4. May I ask my right hon. Friend whether an update of measures on witness protection—more importantly, witness protection in the courts—is under way? (316157)

We have made huge improvements on witness protection in recent years. The Crown Prosecution Service, the police and the courts now have witness protection measures in place, and some £22 million a year is spent by the police. We changed the law in 2008 to provide for a statutory scheme of witness protection, and that has been further extended by measures in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 regarding victims of serious gang and knife crime, which will shortly come into force.

T6. There are 10,000 foreign national prisoners in British jails at the expense of British taxpayers. That is a massive 13 per cent. of the prison population. Will the Lord High Chancellor of all England confirm that, as of this moment, not a single foreign national prisoner has compulsorily been returned to his or her country of origin? (316159)

The proportion of foreign nationals in prisons in England and Wales is far lower than the European average. In most European countries, it is about 20 per cent. or much higher, particularly in southern European countries, so we are at the bottom of the league table, and I am glad that we are. On compulsory repatriation, the hon. Gentleman will know that it has been a long-standing practice of Governments, including those whom he has supported, for prisoner transfer arrangements to be subject to the consent of the prisoner. We are changing that practice, and the arrangements apply right across Europe.

Can the Justice Secretary, even in his wildest dreams, think of any scheme dafter than the one under which pleural plaques victims in Scotland are compensated by the British taxpayer while English pleural plaques sufferers get nothing?

I obviously understand the concern that my hon. Friend raises, but he will be well aware that Scotland is a separate jurisdiction in respect of civil law. It is therefore inevitable that differences will arise—that is a natural and inevitable consequence of devolution. I understand his frustration about the issue of pleural plaques in this country, which is widely shared, but we continue to look actively for a solution.

T7. The Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice), is the Minister with responsibility for the family courts. She will recall the meeting that she had with the hon. Member for Wealden (Charles Hendry) and myself, at which we discussed the conflicts of interest that can arise when solicitors are introduced to clients by local authorities and then paid by both sides. What have her conversations with local authorities about this matter brought up? (316161)

I have not had any conversations with local authorities on this matter, but I shall be raising it with the Law Society and with other bodies that have a professional interest in it.

Ministers will be aware that there are currently 66 electoral registration officers who are not fulfilling their role of registering electors. What can be done to improve the situation?

May I commend my hon. Friend on his diligence in pursuing this matter? It is a scandal that 3 million or more people in this country who are eligible to vote are not able to do so because they are not registered. He has been diligent in trying to improve the situation. As he knows, the Government have taken a range of measures to try to drive up registration rates. The Electoral Commission is now monitoring the performance of all electoral registration officers closely. It is determined to make sure that they all do their job and that the scandal of having 3 million people not on the register when they should be is ended.

T9. Will the Secretary of State tell us when a decision will be made on compensation for pleural plaque victims? He has been saying for 18 months that an announcement is imminent. Will it be made before the general election? (316163)

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to chide me for saying that, and I wish that I could be more precise. However, I—

He is going to leave it to us.

No, as that would be leaving it for a very long time indeed. Counting chickens is not a wise idea but, to come back to the question, my hope remains that we can make the announcement as soon as possible.

Will the threat of prison for visiting Israeli politicians make it easier or harder for the UK Government to secure peace in the middle east?

I think that my hon. Friend is referring to the issue of arrest warrants and universal jurisdiction. Action on that is currently being considered by Government.

In response to a question from the right hon. Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane), the Minister of State, the right hon. Member for North Swindon (Mr. Wills), said that overseas voters were subject to the same registration requirements as domestic voters. If he is not aware that overseas voters have to re-register annually—whereas here, of course, only households have to register—perhaps it is no surprise that he has taken such small steps to increase overseas participation. What is he going to do about it?

The hon. Gentleman is well aware that we are introducing individual registration in this country. That is welcomed by his Front-Bench team, and I hope that he will welcome it too. We are doing a great deal to try to increase registration rates among overseas voters, and we have changed the requirements in all sorts of ways. He well knows that we are looking at how we can make attestation an easier process for overseas voters. We are not negligent about these matters. We are trying to do our best but, as I pointed out to my right hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane), it is sometimes difficult when people choose to live overseas. They do not register their presence with our missions overseas, and so they can sometimes be very difficult to trace. That is the fundamental problem, as the hon. Gentleman ought to know.

When are the Government going to take steps to lessen markedly the use of these wretched super-injunctions, which hide from the public legal process even the fact that they have been obtained, let alone their content?

That is principally a matter for the courts. The recent judgment by Mr. Justice Tugendhat was important. It made clear the limitations on the so-called super-injunctions, as have other members of the senior judiciary. If my hon. Friend has in mind the case involving The Guardian, I can tell him that part of the problem was that the interpretation of the court order did not necessarily accord with the order’s actual wording.

The Justice Secretary is aware of my concern about sentencing guidelines that allow shop theft offenders to be let off with a private notice penalty. Those offenders should be referred to court so that their substance abuse might be addressed. What progress has been made on that?

I am so well aware, and so is my Department, that there is an official who works virtually full time on the concerns of the hon. Lady, whom I commend for her assiduity. We have changed the guidelines significantly so that fixed penalty notices for shop theft are made available only for a first offence when there is no evidence of drug or other substance misuse. There are other restrictions, too, and we look to the police strictly to enforce those guidelines.

What advice would the Secretary of State give to my constituent Joanne Foster, whose partner was killed by a man who has committed a string of violent offences during his career—and who has been sentenced to what will turn out to be two years’ imprisonment? Is that adequate? Is that justice?

First, may I express my profound sympathies and condolences to the family in respect of their loss? The hon. Gentleman will excuse me, but I cannot possibly comment on the detail of an offence without knowing a great deal more about it. If he cares to let me know about it, however, I shall write to him explaining the view of the court, which is independent, so that he can pass it on to the family.

I do not want to cause friction in the Winterton household. I have called Sir Nicholas; I now call Ann Winterton.

Jolly good! As we seek to reduce reoffending, why are young offenders not positively encouraged to take part in Duke of Edinburgh award schemes—not least because those schemes in turn encourage self-confidence and self-discipline and are very much favoured by employers, thereby leading, hopefully, to a job?

It is a great scheme, and there is no doubt that many schemes are available. I expect that some youngsters in youth offending institutions and in custody are so encouraged, and I hope that more will be in due course.

Over the Christmas recess, the chief constable of West Yorkshire police, Sir Norman Bettison, highlighted his concerns that burglars were being let out of prison early because there were not enough prison places, thereby causing an unnecessarily high burglary rate in West Yorkshire. What is the Secretary of State doing to address that outrageous state of affairs, which the chief constable of West Yorkshire police has highlighted?

The end-of-custody licence scheme is unsatisfactory, as I and the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) have already said, and we wish to bring it to an end as quickly as possible. That said, there has been a dramatic reduction in burglary rates over the past dozen years throughout the country and a dramatic improvement in the number of prison places. That contrasts very sharply with the policy of the hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve), the shadow Justice Secretary, who is committed to reducing the prison population to its 1993 level, which would mean not an increase in prison places, but a cut to 43,000.

Further to the question that my hon. Friend the Member for Kettering (Mr. Hollobone) put, the independent monitoring board report on HM prison Wayland in my constituency found that the UK Border Agency routinely detains foreign nationals beyond their release date. The report says:

“This practice…is…poor use of a training prison to warehouse foreign nationals indefinitely.”

Why have the Government not done anything about it? What are they going to do to engage the UK Border Agency to deal with that serious issue?

We are doing a great deal to ensure that time-served foreign national prisoners are deported. When we can, we transfer them during their sentence, but in many cases we have to deport them at the end of their sentence, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I are working very closely together. The result is a very significant increase in the number of deportations—particularly, if I may say, given the shambles of a situation over which the previous Conservative Government presided until 1997.

Does the Secretary of State and Lord High Chancellor believe that there should be a change in the law with regard to the wearing of the burqa in public places?

No I do not, and I would strongly recommend against a change in the law.

I think the hon. Gentleman would look quite good in one.

My hon. Friend the Minister is offering the hon. Gentleman some advice that I shall not pass on; it is equivalent to saying that he looks good on the radio.

All of us may have views about the wearing of the burqa, but I do not believe that the matter should be the subject of the criminal law—that would be expecting the police to remove these items of apparel from women who chose, for religious or cultural reasons, to wear them. That should have no part in the system of law in the United Kingdom.

It is encouraging to see the House in such a good mood this afternoon.