A Government Response to Consultation on Arrangements Concerning Whiplash Injuries in England and Wales, Cost of Motor Insurance - Whiplash, a Government Response to the House of Commons Transport Committee
A Government Response to Consultation on Arrangements Concerning Whiplash Injuries in England and Wales, Cost of Motor Insurance - Whiplash, a Government Response to the House of Commons Transport Committee
Dated October 2013. Response to Consultation paper CP17/2012, Cm. 8425 (ISBN 9780101842525) & the Transport Committee's 4th report, HC 117, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215061423)
The Government has struck a reasonable balance in the way it is planning to exercise its right to opt-out of pre-Lisbon Treaty EU policing and criminal justice measures, but the way it has engaged Parliament in the decision-making process has been badly handled and 'cavalier'. The Government left the Commons select committees far too little time to assess the reasons for their decisions on EU justice opt-ins, and did not provide the full impact assessment which was needed. The Committee agrees with the Government's plans to seek to opt back into seven of the sixteen measures, and not to opt into a number of others. The Committee also raises questions about the Government's intention not to opt back into two specific instruments, the Probation Measures Framework Decision and the Framework Decision on the settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction. The Committee also calls on the Government to provide an assessment of the effect of the extension of the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the European Union over the measures covered by the opt-out. The Committee also agrees with the Government's proposal to seek to rejoin decisions on data protection in policing and criminal justice, and on a data protection secretariat, but says that the arguments are more finely balanced in relation to the Framework Decision on settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction
This is the second report of the IDMG on Human Trafficking; the group with responsibility for overseeing and assessing the UK's efforts to tackle human trafficking and modern slavery. The report provides an assessment of human trafficking in the UK building on the first report of the group which was published in October 2012. It shows that 1186 people were identified and referred for support in 2012 - an increase of 25% in the number of referrals from 2011 - though it is acknowledged that these figures are an underestimate of the largely hidden problem. The report shows that trafficking remains primarily an organised crime associated with gangs. Action to address the problem is planned with a Modern Slavery Bill to be published this year in draft form for pre-legislative scrutiny. The bill will consolidate into a single act the offences used to prosecute slave drivers. It will also introduce Trafficking Prevention Orders to restrict the activity and movement of convicted traffickers and stop them from committing further offences and a new Anti-Slavery Commissioner to hold law enforcement and other organisations to account. The offence of slave driving will carry a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, with those who already have a conviction for a very serious sexual or violent offence facing an automatic life sentence.
The creation of the Ministry of Justice made significant changes to the Lord Chancellor's responsibilities, which may affect, in practice or public perception, the core responsibility of being the guardian of judicial independence. This report looks at the way these changes were made and finds the Government underestimated the significance of the changes it announced. The lack of sufficient consultation led to a public conflict between the senior judiciary and the previous Lord Chancellor, which could have been avoided if the lessons from the way changes to the Lord Chancellor's office were announced and effected between 2003 and 2005 had been learnt.
The Government accepts the overwhelming majority of the recommendations made in the final report of the Family Justice Review (2011, ISBN 9780108511158), and proposes a system with children's and families' needs at its heart. The proposed reforms will put practical measures in place to ensure children's voices are heard before and during the court process. A new Family Justice Board will be established in April 2012 and will take the detail of the recommendations forward. All measures will comply with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Changes to public law are designed to tackle delay and put more focus on the child. Changes to private law will support families to reach their own agreements without needing to being their issues to the courts. Mediation and other support services will again be child-centred, and with a presumption of shared parenting where separation occurs. A new web and telephony service providing a single gateway to advice and guidance for separating parents will be commissioned in 2012 and operational in 2013. Divorce proceedings will be streamlined. Cafcass will move under the sponsorship of the Ministry of Justice. Those working in the family justice system need to change culture and practices if these reforms are to succeed, and judicial leadership is critical. Family courts must be as child-friendly as possible. Annexes cover detailed responses to the Review's recommendations, an update on developing the evidence base for family justice, impact assessments and key references and supporting documents.
Central government and local authorities spent £800 million in 2009-10 dealing with youth crime, primarily through the Youth Justice Board nationally and Youth Offending Teams locally. The National Audit Office has estimated that the total costs to the UK economy of offending by young people could be up to £11 billion a year. In recent years, the Youth Justice Board has been effective in leading reform within the youth justice system and diverting resources to the offenders most at risk of committing future crimes. Since 2000 youth custody has fallen during a period when the number of adults in custody has continued to rise. This is a noteworthy achievement in which the Board has played a central part. Some areas of difficulty remain, however, particularly with more serious offenders. Dealing with these offenders is difficult, but it has been made more so by poor quality assessments and sentence planning in one third of cases, together with a lack of research into the relative effectiveness of different programmes. Following the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review, the Ministry of Justice decided to abolish the Youth Justice Board, though it did not take into account the Board's performance in making this decision. Such reorganisation could impact on building on the progress achieved to date. Following the abolition, it will be the role of the Ministry to maintain the successes that the Board has achieved in its oversight of the youth justice system, and to address effectively areas where more needs to be done.
The National Audit Office has reported today that recent improvements to the youth justice system have contributed to reductions in recorded youth crime. However, despite a 25 per cent reduction in the volumes of reoffending, young offenders who receive more serious community sentences or custodial sentences remain as likely to offend again as they were ten years ago when the youth justice system was brought in. The NAO estimates that, in 2009, offending by all young people cost the economy between £8.5 billion and £11 billion. The current number of first-time entrants is the lowest since comparable records began in 2001. The number of young people held in custody has reduced by 14 per cent over the past five years, at a time when the adult prison population grew by 14 per cent. And the proportion of all young offenders who reoffend fell from 40 per cent in 2000 to 37 per cent in 2008, with the volume of their reoffending dropping by 25 per cent. However, the rates of reoffending for those who receive most of the youth justice system's resources are much less encouraging. The proportion of young offenders receiving more serious community sentences who go on to reoffend has gone up since 2000. Although the number of offences committed by these young people has reduced, this suggests that reform remains particularly difficult with the most challenging offenders. Recent reforms to the system should help ensure that resources are directed at offenders most at risk of reoffending, and prevention programmes have taken pragmatic approaches based on the available evidence. Some three-quarters of Youth Offending Team managers agreed that it is difficult to find evidence of what works for certain areas of their work. With resources likely to reduce, the youth justice system is therefore in a weak position to know which activities to cut and which to keep to ensure that outcomes do not deteriorate.
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 received Royal Assent on 30 November 2000 and came into full effect on 1 January 2005. The Act gave the public, for the first time, a statutory right (subject to appropriate limitations) to i) find out if a public authority held specified information and, ii) if so, to be provided with access to it. This Memorandum revisits the original objectives and evaluates whether those have been met. It is felt that the FIOA has become embedded in the culture of public authorities and its effects on openness and transparency are clear. The successes do not come without cost, however, primarily in the form of concern at the time taken to process and respond to FOI requests, to conduct public interest tests and consider exemptions. The extent though to which original decisions are neither complained against, or are upheld on complaint, indicate that the FOIA is working largely as it should
The effective operation of devolution stands the best chance of success if both the UK and Welsh governments share knowledge and understanding, concludes the Welsh Affairs Committee in this report. The Committee makes a number of recommendations to improve the relationship between Wales and Whitehall. A broad review of how intergovernmental relationships are coordinated is required. The Joint Ministerial Committee should meet on a regular basis and ministers at all levels should be alert to the consequences of policy and legislation on devolved areas. The Cabinet Office should take lead responsibility for devolution strategy in Whitehall. Whitehall has lost a focus on the devolution settlement and too often has displayed poor knowledge and understanding of the specificities of the Welsh settlement. The Civil Service needs more consistent training and clear department-by-department focus on retaining devolution knowledge and understanding. The Welsh Assembly Government should have the confidence to interact with Whitehall and to promote areas of good practice. The Cabinet Secretary and the Permanent Secretary to the Welsh Assembly Government should give evidence annually to the Welsh Affairs Committee. Finally, reform of the Barnett Formula is required. The current financial settlement does not appear sustainable and a new arrangement needs to be built on an agreed and enduring basis which is demonstrably fair and sensitive to the particular circumstances of Wales.
This is a new strategy to deal with the challenges we face from serious and organised crime. It is published to coincide with the launch of the new National Crime Agency (NCA) and reflects changes to the threats faced and the lessons learned from previous work. Organised crime includes drug trafficking, human trafficking, and organised illegal immigration, high value fraud and other financial crimes, counterfeiting, organised acquisitive crime and cyber crime. The aim of the strategy is to substantially reduce the level of serious and organised crime affecting the UK and its interests. The strategy uses the framework developed for our counter-terrorist work and has four components: prosecuting and disrupting people engaged in serious and organised crime (Pursue); preventing people from engaging in this activity (Prevent); increasing protection against serious and organised crime (Protect); and reducing the impact of this criminality where it takes place (Prepare). The strategy lists strategic objectives under each of the four areas of work. Tactical operational objectives (e.g. priority crime groups) will be set by the NCA with law enforcement agency counterparts. Our immediate priority is the work set out under Pursue to prosecute and relentlessly disrupt organised criminals and reduce the threat they pose. Like other threats to our national security, serious and organised crime requires a response across the whole of government, and close collaboration with the public, the private sector and with many other countries
Joint response to HC 978, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215066169); HC 954, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215066091); and HC 972, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215066152). These were in turn Government responses to the European Scrutiny Committee's 21st report, HC 683, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215063465); the Home Affairs Committee's 9th report, session 2013-14, HC 615, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215063410); and the Justice Committee's 8th report, HC 605, session 2013-14 (ISBN 9780215063403) respectively
The Government's objective is to build a strong economy and a fair society, in which there is opportunity and security for all. The 2007 Pre-Budget Report and Comprehensive Spending Review, 'Meeting the aspirations of the British People' (Cm 7227), presents updated assessments and forecasts of the economy and public finances, describes reforms that the Government is making and sets out the Government's priorities and spending plans for the years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11, including: maintaining macroeconomic stability; investing in the future with total public spending rising from £589bn in 2007-08 to £678bn in 2010-11 including an additional £2bn for capital investment in public services; continuing the sustained investment in the NHS, with resources rising from £90bn in 2007-08 to £110bn by 2010-11 and with value for money savings of at least £8.2bn contributing to the funding of the conclusions of the Darzi Review 'Our NHS, our future'; further sustained increases in resources for education, science, transport, housing, child poverty, security and international poverty reduction and the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games; simplifying the tax system to make it fairer, simpler and more efficient; modernising the tax system through major reforms to inheritance tax and capital gains tax; steps to protect the environment, including reforms of the tax regime for aviation and a new Environmental Taxation Fund to support the demonstration and deployment of new energy and efficiency technologies. For related publications, see 9780102944556 (2007 Budget Statement), 9780101698429 (2006 Pre-Budget), and for the Darzi Review see (http://www.ournhs.nhs.uk/files/283411_OurNHS_v3acc.pdf)
the proposed abolition of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council, twenty-first report of session 2010-12, report and appendices, together with formal minutes and oral evidence
the proposed abolition of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council, twenty-first report of session 2010-12, report and appendices, together with formal minutes and oral evidence
Administrative justice" includes the procedures used by public authorities for making decisions in relation to individual people, the law that regulates decision-making, and the systems (such as the various tribunals and ombudsmen) that enable people to challenge these decisions. There are around 650,000 administrative justice hearings each year - more than three times the number of criminal justice hearings - and it is estimated that resolving citizen's complaints costs central government over £500 million per year. The functions of the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council (AJTC) include keeping the whole administrative system under review and considering ways to make the system accessible, fair and efficient. The Government proposes to abolish the AJTC using powers in the Public Bodies Act 2011, and to give its functions to the Ministry of Justice. It is expected to bring forward the necessary secondary legislation later this year. The Committee finds that the Government's rationale for winding up the AJTC is questionable, that the Ministry of Justice may not have either the resources or the expertise to take on its functions and doubts the level of cost savings that the Government estimates will be achieved. The Committee also recommends that the House of Commons Justice Committee take its findings from this inquiry into account when it considers the Government's proposed legislation.
In safeguarding national security the Government produces and receives sensitive information. This information must be protected appropriately, as failure to do so may compromise investigations, endanger lives and ultimately lessen its ability to keep the country safe. The increased security and intelligence activity of recent years has led to greater scrutiny including in the civil courts, which have heard a growing numbers of cases challenging Government decisions and actions in the national security sphere. Such cases involve information that under current rules cannot be disclosed in a courtroom. The UK justice system is then either unable to pass judgment and cases collapse or are settled without a judge reaching any conclusions. This green paper aims to respond to the challenges of how sensitive information is treated in the full range of civil proceedings. It looks for solutions that improve the current arrangements while upholding the Government's commitment to the rule of law. It also addresses the need for public reassurance that the national security work is robustly scrutinised, and that the scrutinising bodies are credible and effective. The proposals in this consultation are in three broad areas: enhancing procedural fairness, safeguarding material and reform of intelligence oversight.
This report examines the arrangements in place for communication between the UK Government and Scottish Executive, particularly when the UK Government formulates international policy which will specifically affect Scottish interests and devolved matters. Generally there are effective channels of communication at both ministerial and official level between the two governments. Whitehall tends to overlook the Scottish angle of policy and legislation more often in those departments which are unfamiliar with devolved matters. We recommend that the Government ensures that each department has a devolution champion to ensure that there is a good level of awareness of devolution issues. The revival of the Joint Ministerial Committee should provide an important forum for discussion between Ministers of the UK Government and devolved administrations. However, there is little opportunity for parliamentary scrutiny of the outcomes and effectiveness of the Committee's meetings. The report welcomes the publication of the new Protocol for Avoidance and Resolution of Disputes as the 2001 Memorandum of Understanding did not provide adequate guidance on how disputes between the UK and Scotland should be resolved. This was demonstrated during the communications between the governments on the UK's negotiations with Libya on the Prisoner Transfer Agreement. Both Governments should display the necessary political will to ensure that both understand each other's point of view and demonstrate the mutual respect which should characterise all their dealings.
Public authorities have a duty to ensure looked after children are not at greater risk of being drawn into the criminal justice system than other children. The relevant authorities must continue to support looked after children and care leavers when they are in, and when they leave, custody. The substantial decrease since 2006/07 in the number of young people entering the criminal justice system for the first time is welcomed but looked after children have not benefited from this shift to the same extent as other children. The Youth Justice Board has done excellent work to halve the youth custodial population over the past decade but continues to spend £246 million a year detaining a small fraction of young offenders. Recommendations include: a statutory threshold to enshrine in legislation the principle that only the most serious and prolific young offenders should be placed in custody; devolving the custody budget to enable local authorities to invest in effective alternatives to custody; and more action to reduce the number of young people who breach the terms of their community sentences and the number of young black men in custody. The aim of improving the basic literacy of offenders, as outlined in the Transforming Youth Custody consultation paper is endorsed, but is it most useful to focus resources on the secure estate, given that the average length of stay is currently 79 days? The greater focus should be on improving transition between custody and the community, and on improving provision in the community and incentivising schools and colleges to take back difficult students.
This report sets out the events surrounding the Ministry of Justice's process in 2013 to retender its electronic monitoring contracts, currently with private contractors G4S and Serco, and its subsequent decision to commission a forensic audit of the contracts by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). The Department is in dispute with G4S and Serco over the amount of money by which the Department may have been overcharged for electronic monitoring services under the current contracts. Both contractors are also now subject to a criminal investigation by the Serious Fraud Office. The Department believes that both providers charged for work that had not taken place, in a way that was outside what was set out in the contracts for the electronic monitoring of offenders. PwC's estimate is that the potential overcharge may amount to tens of millions of pounds. The NAO's report includes examples of disputed billing practices which show that, in some instances, both contractors were charging the Department for monitoring fees for months or years after electronic monitoring activity had ceased; over similar timescales where electronic monitoring never occurred; and multiple times for the same individual if that person was subject to more than one electronic monitoring order concurrently. G4S has said that it intends to offer the Ministry £23.3 million in credit notes in respect of issues it has identified to date. Serco has stated that it will refund any amounts that it agrees represents overcharging. The Department has not currently agreed to any refund offers made by the providers.
The report EU Police and Criminal Justice Measures: The UK's 2014 Op-out Option (HL 159) examines the consequences to the UK should the Government choose to opt-out of approximately 130 EU police and criminal justice measures, that were adopted before the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) is the single most important pre-Lisbon police and criminal justice measure and, if the Government decides to exercise the opt-out, the Committee recommends that it should opt back in to the EAW immediately, to avoid any gap in its application. The Committee also expresses particular concern about the potential impact that the opt-out, including the loss of the EAW, could have on efforts by the UK and Ireland to effectively tackle cross-border crime, and does not believe that possible alternatives to the EAW would be adequate. The Committee concludes that the Government has not made a convincing case to opt-out and that to do so would h
The Communities and Local Government Committee calls on the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) to raise its game significantly. To deliver its role as independent arbitrator in disputes about unfair treatment or service failure by local authorities, the Local Government Ombudsman must tackle operational inefficiencies rapidly and conduct its own activities with credible effectiveness. The LGO must implement the changes identified by the recent Strategic Business Review. The LGO management's rationale for not publishing the 2011 Strategic Business Review in full was unconvincing and suggests there may be insufficient appetite for change within the LGO. The LGO must explain which findings from the Strategic Business Review will be implemented in full and in part, and provide a timetable for this. It also needs to set out the arrangements and timetable for appointing the new Chief Operating Officer (and their responsibilities). In future the LGO must be completely clear with all parties about the criteria it applies in order to determine whether cases are assigned to be resolved through a mediated process to achieve redress, or are allocated for full investigation and formal determination. Likewise the LGO must be transparent about the procedures that apply when any case is moved from one process to another - such as when mediation fails. The Government must explain how it will monitor the implementation of reorganisation at the LGO. An annual, independent staff survey should be reinstated at the LGO with results published.
This document details the Government's strategic plan for the criminal justice system to 2011 based on four priorities: effectiveness in bringing offences to justice; engaging the public and inspiring their confidence; putting the needs of victims at the heart of the justice system; and developing simple and efficient processes which make the best use of resources, expertise and technology. To deliver efficient and effective services, the criminal justice agencies (including the police, prosecution services, courts, youth justice, probation and prison services) will need to work closely together through their local criminal justice boards (LCJBs) and other local partnerships. This will also support the Government's wider crime reduction and re-offending strategies to make communities safer, as set out in the Home Office crime strategy document "Cutting crime: a new partnership 2008-2011" (available at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/crime-strategy-07/crime-strategy-07?view=Binary).
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.