Parliamentary Search

Written question asked by Richard Burgon (Labour) on Monday, 25 March 2019, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Wednesday, 27 March 2019. It was answered by Rory Stewart (Conservative) on Friday, 29 March 2019 on behalf of the Ministry of Justice.

Reoffenders

Question

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in how many cases Serious Further Offence reviews have cited excessive workload as a contributory factor to that offence.

Answer

Under the Probation Serious Further Offence (SFO) Review Procedures, the National Probation Service (NPS) or Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) must undertake a review where an offender under statutory supervision in the community is charged with a qualifying offence – a “notification”. Not every notification results in a conviction for an SFO. The NPS or CRC has three months to complete a review and will complete each review unless charges are dropped beforehand.

SFOs are rare. Fewer than 0.5% of offenders under statutory supervision are convicted of a serious further offence.

No SFO reviews have been reopened since 2010.

Data regarding the number of SFO reviews that cited excessive workload as a contributory factor to that offence are not collated as part of the SFO review process and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Data regarding the number of SFO reviews that cited inadequate management supervision as a contributory factor to that offence are not collated as part of the SFO review process and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Secondary information

Type
Written question
Reference
236512
Session
2017-19
Grouped for answer
Yes
Subjects
Reviews Reoffenders
Contains statistics
Yes
Link
View this Written question on www.parliament.uk