Page:Hansard (UK) - Vol 566 No. 40 August 29th 2013.pdf/102

1027W Mrs Grant: The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information centrally. Agencies with duties under the Code handle complaints under their own internal complaints processes. Collection and retention ofcomplaints data is carried out at a local level. The Parliamentary and Health Ombudsman also retains data from those complaints from victims referred to them by a Member of Parliament.

The Government recently held a public consultation on a revised Code of Practice for Victims of Crime. This included proposals to improve the transparency and effectiveness of the complaints process to ensure that all criminal justice agencies provide quick and thorough responses to victims and that the onus is on agencies, not on the victim, to redirect complaints to the right place. The consultation ran from 29 March 2013 until 10 May 2013 and we intend to publish the Government’s response this summer.

In addition, as part of the wider criminal justice reform agenda, the Government is committed to improving the accountability of the criminal justice system so that victims can hold the system to account if things go wrong.

Damian Green: I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Home Department.

The Police National Computer (PNC) already provides a central record of all charges, cautions, reprimands, warnings and penalty notices.

Authorised PNC users, within all police forces, are able to view full records for every police area.

Jeremy Wright: The Ministry of Justice has not made an estimate of the relative cost per day of monitoring an individual using these two different technologies. Most of the electronic monitoring which takes place under the current contracts uses radio frequency technology.

The next generation of electronic-monitoring contracts, currently out to tender, will provide for the use of both radio frequency and global positioning system technology—and we anticipate that the overall cost will be significantly lower than at present.

Jeremy Wright: Unlawful possession of a knife or offensive weapon is a serious criminal offence which carries a maximum four-year custodial sentence. Where someone is actually harmed there are a range of existing offences against the person, in particular offences of wounding or causing grievous bodily harm, that reflect the seriousness of the offending behaviour and the harm caused.

In the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2013, the Government introduced the new offences of threatening someone with a knife in a public place or a school which came into force on 3 December 2012. These offences carry a minimum sanction of six months custody for adults and a four-month Detention and Training Order for juveniles.

The Government is also considering whether there is a case for further changes to be made to the sentencing framework for knife possession as part of the knife sentencing review.

Within the sentencing framework, it is for judges and magistrates to decide the appropriate sentence in individual cases taking account of the harm the offence caused and the culpability of the offender. Under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 there is an obligation on courts when sentencing for offences to follow the guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council, unless it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.

Available information on the number of offenders sentenced at all courts to immediate custody, and those who received the maximum sentence of four years, for knife possession offences, in England and Wales, in each year from 2005 to 2012, can be viewed in the table.

Following further validation and receipt of additional magistrates court records, a number of revisions have been made to previously published 2011 information. As such, 2011 figures may not match what was previously provided.

Court proceedings data for 2013 are planned for publication in May 2014.