Search Results

1-20 of 47 results for subject:"Crown Prosecution Service Review"

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Solicitor General, what progress has been made in respect of Cm 3960, Summary of the Report, paragraph 26, concerning the shift in CPS priorities from involvement in relatively minor cases to serious crime cases in the Crown Court. - Inc figures. (Holding answer 14 February 2002).

Asked by

Claire Curtis-Thomas (Labour)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

7 February 2002

For answer on

6 March 2002

Answered on

6 March 2002

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Solicitor-General what progress has been made in respect of Cm 3960, Summary of the report, paragraph 26, concerning the shift in CPS priorities from involvement in relatively minor cases to serious crime cases in the Crown Court. [35965] The Solicitor-General: [holding answer 14 February 2002]: The CPS is making steady progress implementing changes to deliver the reforms recommended by Sir Iain Glidewell in his review of the CPS to bring about better justice. The CPS has been restructuring its front-line operation, working more closely with the police in the preparation of magistrates and Crown Court cases, by establishing co-located criminal justice units and trial units, which focus resources towards the more serious cases and better support for victims and witnesses. By the end of March 2002, the CPS will have 51 dedicated trial units in place across 29 areas, focusing efforts on Crown Court cases. These structural changes are enabling early legal advice before charge, to ensure that prosecutions are built on secure ground. The CPS and police are currently piloting the recommendations of Sir Robin Auld that the CPS should take over responsibility from the police for determining the charge from the outset of the case. More Crown Prosecutors are benefiting from greater exposure to Crown Court proceedings and their skills, experience and expertise in dealing with the more serious cases are being developed. The CPS is presently training 100 Crown Prosecutors annually to secure accreditation as Higher Court Advocates with full rights of audience to appear in the Crown Court on a more regular basis. They have gained positive feedback from the judiciary. To support Crown Prosecutors, a modern IT infrastructure has been deployed providing a suite of up-to-date electronic legal reference products and a new electronic case management application is planned for 2003. More lawyers, caseworkers and administrative staff have been recruited in the last 12 months, from resources provided by the last spending review.

Date

6 March 2002

Reference

35965; 381 c309-11W

House

House of Commons

Solicitor-General

Answered by

Ross Cranston (Labour)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Oral answers to questions

Date

21 October 1999

Reference

336 c566-7

House

House of Commons

Solicitor-General

To ask Mr Attorney General, What progress he has made on the implementation of the Glidewell Report; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

Andrew George (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Oral questions - Lead

Status

Answered

Date

21 October 1999

Reference

93415; 336 c566-7

House

House of Commons

Crown Prosecution Service annual report 1998/99.

Type

House of Commons papers

Notes

Series maintained in Stats since 1987; Stats 21.7.99

Date

21 July 1999

Reference

HC 675 1998/99

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper Dep 99/1296

Glidewell review of the Crown Prosecution Service: chart showing recommendations and final government response. Attorney General. 1999.

Deposited by

Attorney General

Type

Deposited papers

Date

1 July 1999

Reference

Dep 99/1296

House

House of Commons

Irvine of Lairg, Lord

How many of the 75 recommendations contained in the Review of the Crown Prosecution Service 1998 (Cm 3960) have been accepted in principle and how many have been implemented; and for what reasons any of the recommendations have either been rejected or remain unimplemented. [HL 2998].

Asked by

Lord Windlesham (Conservative)

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

29 June 1999

Reference

HL 2998; 603 c17WA

House

House of Lords

Attorney General

Statement on the Government's final response to the recommendations contained in Sir Ian Glidewell's report following his review of the Crown Prosecution Service; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

David Lepper (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

24 June 1999

For answer on

28 June 1999

Answered on

28 June 1999

Mr. Lepper: To ask the Attorney-General if he will announce the Government's final response to the recommendations contained in Sir Ian Glidewell's report following his review of the Crown Prosecution Service; and if he will make a statement. [88910] The Attorney-General: Shortly after coming into office, I set up a review of the Crown Prosecution Service. Its terms of reference, 12 June 1997, Official Report, columns 533-34, went to the fundamentals of the Service. An examination of the organisation and structure of the CPS was required along with consideration of what changes might be necessary to provide for more effective and efficient prosecution of crime. The terms of reference reflected the concerns expressed in the Labour Party paper, "The Case for the Prosecution". That paper was prepared while in opposition after considering the disquiet expressed by a wide range of individuals about the criminal justice system. As is well known by now, Sir Iain Glidewell conducted the review, assisted by Sir Geoffrey Dear and Robert McFarland. I published Sir Iain's Report on 1 June 1998, Official Report, columns 42-52. The report was widely and warmly received. It acknowledged the achievements of the CPS including, most importantly, the establishment of an independent, national, prosecution service. However, it also confirmed many of the concerns that had been expressed about the CPS. It made 75 recommendations. I was able to accept immediately the broad thrust of the Report which sets an agenda for re-ordering the priorities of the CPS to focus on the core business of prosecuting. A key recommendation concerned the appointment of a Chief Executive. That was a specific recommendation I was able to accept immediately: Mark Addison was appointed and took up the post within a matter of days. David Calvert-Smith QC was appointed DPP in November 1998. The Director and Chief Executive have together given a strong lead, driving forward the reform of the CPS. While some of the recommendations affect the internal operation of the CPS, other recommendations are relevant to a number of criminal justice agencies, including the Lord Chancellor's Department, the Home Office and the police. These inter-agency recommendations have been taken forward by the relevant agencies working together in co-operation. On 30 November 1998 I was able to announce an interim Government response to the Glidewell Report, 30 November 1998, Official Report, columns 67-70. That interim response identified what had by then been achieved and what remained under consideration. Today, I am able to provide the final Government response to Sir Iain Glidewell's Report. I have placed in the Library of the House a chart which identifies whether the Government accepts or otherwise each individual recommendation. Where necessary, the chart shows how recommendations are planned to be taken forward with a timetable for action. Sixty-four recommendations are shown as accepted, accepted in part or in principle, or implemented. Only two of the recommendations are rejected; these are identified below. The remaining few recommendations are shown as noted or considered. I shall focus on some of the key aspects. On 19 April 1999 I announced a new national framework for Criminal Justice Units building on a key recommendation in the Glidewell Report, 19 April 1999, Official Report, columns 397-98. The Criminal Justice Units will provide joint police/CPS administration, having sole conduct of fast-track cases and responsibility for the prosecution of cases in the magistrates' courts. Chief Crown Prosecutors working together with Chief Constables must produce by the end of November this year joint outline plans for implementing the Criminal Justice Units. Progress will be monitored. I can now announce that CPS Trial Units will also be established, again building on a key recommendation in the Glidewell report. The Trial Units will be responsible for all prosecutions in the Crown Court. They will provide a means by which CPS lawyers can focus on the most serious cases and a structural mechanism through which CPS Higher Court Advocates will be able to exercise their rights of audience to the benefit of the justice system. The creation of Criminal Justice Units and Trial Units will go a long way to defining more clearly the relationship between the key agencies of the police, CPS and courts, as the Glidewell Report recommended. One crucial area of local co-operation concerns the listing of cases at court. The Glidewell Report made recommendations regarding listing practices at both Magistrates' Courts and Crown Court centres. These recommendations have been accepted. Improved case preparation by the CPS and inter-agency moves towards better case management should lead to more effective listing practices which will ensure that cases are prepared and listed for trial more quickly. Work is underway on the preparation of national protocols to guide local arrangements in this respect. Over a period, as a result of fast-tracking and effective listing, the CPS will be able to deploy more lawyers on the more serious cases and thereby achieve the shift in the centre of gravity recommended by the Glidewell Report. After careful consideration, two of the Glidewell Report recommendations have been rejected, though the concerns that prompted the recommendations are being addressed in other ways. First, the Glidewell Report recommended that the CPS install a new costing system. The CPS commissioned an independent consultant to consider this complex area in close detail. As a result, it has been decided that the existing activity based costing system should be retained but improved to reflect the objectives identified by the Glidewell Report. Secondly, the Glidewell Report recommended that as soon as practicable the CPS should take over from the police responsibility for witness warning. The possibility of transferring this responsibility has been considered carefully but is not thought to be a practical option, or a proper reflection of the respective constitutional priorities of the CPS and the police. Though the recommendation is rejected, the new framework for joint CPS/police administration will enable the police and CPS to work together to provide a better service to victims and witnesses by building on established arrangements. Related to this second recommendation is the Glidewell recommendation that responsibility for giving information and explanations to complainants/victims should transfer from the police to the CPS as soon as resources permit. The Government are committed to improving the service that the criminal justice system as a whole provides to victims and the Glidewell recommendation is accepted in principle. The issues raised with implementing this recommendation will be taken forward on a national basis as part of on-going work on the treatment of victims and witnesses. This will involve a scoping/options study, and a detailed analysis of the resource implications. In the meantime, the CPS and criminal justice agencies will consider what immediate action can be taken to improve the current level of service which victims receive. The reforms brought about by the Glidewell Report must be seen alongside the re-structuring of CPS Areas. When this Government came into office, I announced our intention that the CPS national structure should move from the existing 13 geographical Areas to 42 geographical Areas coterminous with police areas (save for London in which the Metropolitan Police Service and the City of London Constabulary should be counted as one CPS Area). This initiative is aimed at enhancing local effectiveness, promoting local inter-agency co-operation and local accountability. It is an initiative which the Glidewell Report endorsed believing it to provide the basis for a genuinely new start for the CPS. In April, the 42 CPS Area structure was implemented. The selection process for the new Chief Crown Prosecutors (CCPs) took into account Sir Iain Glidewell's vision of their role and responsibility as individuals of stature whose competence and integrity would be crucial to the success of the move to a decentralised, locally accountable, national service. The Glidewell Report also recommended that Area Business Managers (ABMs) be appointed to take responsibility for Area management and administration, thereby enabling the CCPs to focus on the business of prosecuting. The CCPs and ABMs are now in post helping to implement locally the reform of the CPS. The move to 42 CPS Areas is an important part of what I intend to be a significant cultural change for the CPS, one which will greatly enhance the public service provided by its staff. There are encouraging signs that the cultural change is well underway with the CPS becoming a more flexible and locally accountable organisation, responsive to local needs and circumstances. In turn, this means a changing role and a changing culture for CPS national headquarters. It will provide the national framework for prosecuting, manage the resources available to the Service as a whole and facilitate the joined-up approach to improving the criminal justice system to which the Government are committed. Its principal role will be to provide support to the Areas, enabling them to deliver a prosecution service locally. The signs are that this new emphasis is already being noticed and welcomed by the Areas. As a public service responsible for spending £0.3 billion of public funds each year and accountable to Parliament there must be accounting and monitoring systems. The DPP and Chief Executive are continuing to work together to ensure that the central demands made of Areas are reviewed and that bureaucracy is minimised. The Glidewell Report acknowledged that there would continue to be a need for a structure separate to the local Areas responsible for handling the most serious and sensitive of cases which require resources not normally available in CPS Areas. The Report recommended two separate but parallel management structures to handle this category of casework. First, a central pool and secondly a national network of CPS staff with a division of the casework between the two and each reporting into CPS headquarters. These recommendations have been accepted in principle but with the CPS taking forward a proposal that there should be a single management structure for this category of casework embracing both the central pool and the national network of CPS staff reporting into CPS headquarters. This will provide a cohesive framework for prosecuting this category of cases with a clear line of responsibility and answerability. The move to 42 CPS Areas coterminous with police force areas is a significant opportunity for the CPS and other criminal justice agencies to work together locally to deliver the Government's objectives for the criminal justice system as a whole, namely, to reduce crime and to deliver justice fairly and effectively. The structure of local criminal justice liaison bodies is being revised, as the Glidewell Report recommended, to take account of the 42 Area structure. A joint measure and targets on the timeliness in dealing with cases through the prosecution process are being established to complement existing targets for improving the time taken to prosecute persistent young offenders. Joint targets reinforce the message that agencies must work together to make the whole system more effective, not just to improve individual parts sometimes to the detriment of other agencies. Accepting another of the recommendations, work is progressing to identify common casework statistics so that meaningful comparisons can be made agency-by-agency, facilitating a better understanding of how the system is working. I announced in November that the Glidewell Report recommendations concerning the CPS Inspectorate were accepted with some modifications. I can now announce that the Government propose to put the Inspectorate on an independent statutory basis as soon as the legislative timetable permits. With this in mind, a new Chief Inspector, Stephen Wooler, took up his post in March of this year. He is driving forward the work necessary to the reform of the Inspectorate which will enhance its independence, expand its role and responsibilities and thereby provide the scrutiny of the Service which will support public confidence in the CPS. Two other key initiatives have inter-acted with the Glidewell report. First the Narey reforms for reducing delay in the criminal justice system, and, secondly, the publication of the criminal justice system's Strategic Plan and Business Plan published as a response to the two strategic objectives set by the Government. Additionally, the Glidewell reforms of the CPS must take into account the Government's response to the recommendations contained in Sir William Macpherson's Report of his inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence. This is not the moment to focus on each of these matters. Suffice it to say that they, along with the Glidewell reforms and the move to 42 CPS Areas, represent a key theme of this administration, namely the modernisation of public service by developing a cohesive and coherent approach to policy with agencies and Departments working together for the benefit of the community as a whole. This approach will, I believe, deliver a modern criminal justice system worthy of that title. The cultural, structural and organisational changes that are happening to the CPS must be carefully managed. A lesson of the past is that a rush to change is a recipe for error. Whilst I intend proper progress will be made I also intend the changes to be managed with care, ensuring that we get it right for society as a whole while being sensitive to CPS staff. I am pleased to take this opportunity of commending all those who have worked together so hard to take forward the recommendations. I include, of course, not only members of the CPS but those of other agencies and Government Departments within the criminal justice system. The good-will and determination to work together to make for a better system has enabled brisk progress to be made on what is a substantial initiative within the criminal justice system. As superintending Minister for the CPS I pay particular tribute to all members of CPS staff who have faced a period of uncertainty with professional resolve. The reforms will, I believe, enhance their individual roles, increase their job satisfaction, and lead to improved morale. I believe that the Glidewell reforms have laid a sure foundation for a better Crown Prosecution Service and a better criminal justice system working for the benefit of the community. The CPS has embarked on its new start; by taking forward Sir Iain Glidewell's recommendations it is well on the road to fulfilling what Sir Iain described as its potential to become a lively, successful and esteemed part of the criminal justice system.

Date

28 June 1999

Reference

334 c10-5W; 88910

House

House of Commons

Solicitor-General

To ask Mr Attorney General, what steps have been taken to implement Recommendations 4 and 9 of the Review of the Crown Prosecution Service in respect of research on discontinuances and downgrading of charges by the CPS.

Asked by

Paul Stinchcombe (Labour)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

17 June 1999

Reference

333 c219W; 86908

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

Answered by

Ross Cranston (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Oral answers to questions

Date

20 May 1999

Reference

331 c1209-10

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

To ask Mr Attorney General, What progress has been made in implementing the Glidewell report in London.

Asked by

Nigel Beard (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Oral questions - Lead

Status

Answered

Date

20 May 1999

Reference

331 c1209-10; 83877

House

House of Commons

Solicitor-General

To ask Mr Attorney General, what recent representations he has received on his proposals to reform the Crown Prosecution Service. - Includes figures.

Asked by

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

22 April 1999

Reference

80375; 329 c610W

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

To ask Mr Attorney General, if he will make a statement on progress in implementing the recommendations of the Glidewell review of the Crown Prosecution Service. - Including ref to 30 November 1998, 321 c67-70W and fact that chart setting out position in relation to each recommendation in Library.

Asked by

Lord Blencathra (Conservative)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

16 March 1999

Reference

77020; 327 c572W

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

Answered by

Lord Morris of Aberavon (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Oral answers to questions

Date

4 February 1999

Reference

324 c1074-5

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

To ask Mr Attorney General, What initiatives are being taken forward in order to improve co-operation between the CPS and the police.

Asked by

Kerry Pollard (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Oral questions - Lead

Status

Answered

Date

4 February 1999

Reference

324 c1074-5; 67829

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

To ask Mr Attorney General, what progress has been made in implementing the recommendations of the Glidewell Report in London. - Inc ref to V321 c67-70W and a chart dealing with individual recommendations is in the Library.

Asked by

Nigel Beard (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

26 January 1999

Reference

324 c191W; 65859

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

Statement on what steps have been taken to implement the recommendations of the Report of the Review of the Crown Prosecution Service by the Right Honourable Sir Iain Glidewell. - Including ref to 1 June 1998, 313 c42-52. (In Library as DEP 98/1364).

Asked by

Lord Anderson of Swansea (Labour)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

27 November 1998

For answer on

30 November 1998

Answered on

30 November 1998

Mr. Donald Anderson: To ask the Attorney-General what steps have been taken to implement the recommendations of the report of the Review of the Crown Prosecution Service by the Right Hon. Sir Iain Glidewell. [62017] The Attorney-General: My statement to the House on publication of the Glidewell Report on 1 June 1998, Official Report, column 42, undertook to publish a formal response setting out the Government response to each recommendation, whether it would be implemented and if so, how. I then said that a plan of action would be drawn up and published. A programme of change based on recommendations made by the Glidewell Report and our prior decision to restructure the Crown Prosecution Service into 42 areas is being taken forward briskly under the leadership of Mr. David Calvert-Smith QC, whose appointment as Director of Public Prosecutions took effect on 1 November, and Mr. Mark Addison, who was appointed Chief Executive on 5 June. They expect to take decisions in the near future about the senior management structure within CPS headquarters and an open competition for the appointment of Chief Crown Prosecutors for each of the 42 new areas commenced with the placing of advertisements on 16 November. The selection process for the Area Business Managers recommended by the Glidewell Report is currently under way. All this will be taken forward within the framework of the Government's overall strategy for developing a properly co-ordinated criminal justice system working to a common set of overarching aims and objectives. The emphasis will be on clear central policies for the criminal justice system delivered locally. The objectives set for the change programme are: The organisation should be taken as an opportunity for a fresh start for the CPS, building on the achievements of the past 12 years; The development of a form of CPS management at both national and local levels which reflects the new structure and the demands of a decentralised national service; CPS priorities should be reordered to focus more on the core business of prosecuting, placing greater emphasis on the more serious cases and providing greater separation of management from legal work, greater autonomy for the areas and better prospects for staff; The agencies which make up the criminal justice system should have shared and mutually reinforcing objectives, and should co-operate together to achieve better results across the system as a whole, in accordance with the Government's decisions on the outcome of the cross-cutting spending review of the criminal justice system; Decisions on the Glidewell recommendations should be reached as soon as possible and implementation of those decisions should be rapid and purposeful taking account of the need for phasing to provide a smooth transition and to contain costs. Detailed consideration of the recommendations contained in the Glidewell Report has taken one of two forms. First, the Chief Executive has been energetically pursuing recommendations specific to the CPS with the support of an internal steering group and working parties to consider specific issues. He as also put in place mechanisms for obtaining the views of CPS staff at all levels. This has included work on internal structures, training, career prospects, central and special casework and the development of an independent element for the CPS Inspectorate. Secondly, those recommendations which also affect other criminal justice agencies have been the subject of consideration within existing or specially established inter-departmental groups. The work is being carried forward under the auspices of the Strategic Planning Group which the Home Secretary, myself and the Lord Chancellor established earlier this year to co-ordinate planning within the criminal justice system. I have today placed in the Library of the House a chart setting out the present position in relation to each of the recommendations in the Glidewell Report. It shows those which have been accepted, in whole or in part, and the manner in which consideration of the remaining recommendations is being progressed, together with the anticipated timetable. Of the recommendations internal to the CPS, it is proposed that 39 should be accepted, in whole or in part, with 13 under consideration, considered or noted. Of the 23 inter-agency recommendations, 7 have been accepted, wholly or in part, with 16 remaining under consideration or considered. My statement to the House on 1 June contained an invitation to interested parties to comment on the recommendations made in the Glidewell Report. I am grateful to all those who took the trouble to respond for the care and effort which went into their responses. These have been carefully considered and will continue to inform decisions about those recommendations still under consideration. I draw the attention of my hon. Friend to three specific aspects of the work so far undertaken. First, the recommendations in respect of Criminal Justice Units (recommendations 13-16 and 20) contain some of the most important and sensitive proposals in the Report. It recommended greater priority for all casework and sees the working arrangements between the CPS and the police service as crucial to successful handling of casework and therefore to achieving that priority. Acceptance would lead to major changes in the way in which CPS officers and the police operate. They are being considered by a newly formed Criminal Justice Units Project Group, which is chaired jointly by the CPS and the Association of Chief Police Officers. The issues raised will inevitably take some time to address, but it is hoped conclusions can be reached in the Spring of 1999 so as to provide the new Chief Crown Prosecutors with a firm basis for planning the operations in their areas. The proposal for the establishment of Trial Units (recommendation 18) is so closely linked to the question of Criminal Justice Units that it must remain under consideration until the position in that respect is clearer. Secondly, the Report contains a number of recommendations (recommendations 21, 22 and 26) concerning the CPS's relationship with the courts, and suggests that the CPS should play a greater part in the listing of cases in both the Magistrates' Courts and the Crown Court. These recommendations are accepted. Listing is ultimately the sole responsibility of the courts. The CPS, however, should play a close part in co-operative arrangements among all relevant agencies, necessary to ensure effective listing by the courts. The text of the report makes clear that greater involvement of the CPS in Magistrates' Courts listing would only come about by agreement, at local level, between the courts and the CPS. Although it should not inhibit CPS liaison and closer involvement in the overall listing process, any such agreement must recognise that the courts are the neutral and independent arbiters of the cases brought before them, and that a decision concerning the listing of an individual case is ultimately a judicial function. Co-operation is needed at a local level to ensure that listing practices are effective and bring about significant improvements in, for example, the level of cracked and ineffective trials. In the Crown Court, improved case preparation and inter-agency moves towards better case management should lead to more effective listing practices, ensuring that cases are prepared and listed for trial more quickly. Thirdly, the Glidewell Report made recommendations (68 to 72) for changes to the structure and remit of the CPS Inspectorate to incorporate a greater independent element. Those recommendations are being accepted in principle but with some modifications as to the detail. I propose that in future the CPS Inspectorate should be headed by a Chief Inspector appointed by me who would report to me. I also propose that there should be a non-executive Advisory Board which would include a lay member and that Inspectorate staff would include as well as CPS staff on secondment some individuals from outside the CPS. In addition, I propose that the remit of the Inspectorate should be widened to include performance efficiency and effectiveness so that it examines not only the quality of casework decisions and casework decision-making processes (as it does now), but also any other areas of CPS performance where they impact on issues surrounding casework, excluding financial audit. Consideration will be given to whether these arrangements should be placed on a statutory footing. I take this opportunity to commend all those who have participated in the work so far undertaken, whether within the CPS or in other criminal justice agencies, on the progress made. I am confident that the position we have reached provides a sound basis for the CPS to go forward as a national but decentralised service with effect from April 1999 and so obtain maximum benefit from the "fresh start" which the Glidewell Report advocated. I shall provide the House with a further report in the first half of 1999.

Date

30 November 1998

Reference

62017; 321 c67-70W

House

House of Commons

Attorney General

To ask Mr Attorney General, what progress has been made on implementing the recommendations of the Glidewell Report.

Asked by

Lord Jones of Cheltenham (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Attorney General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

3 November 1998

Reference

318 c540-1W; 57887

House

House of Commons

The review of the Crown Prosecution Service - a report. (Chairman: Sir Iain Glidewell).

Type

Command papers

Notes

Received 01.06.98; Received 01.06.98

Date

1 June 1998

Reference

Cm 3960

House

House of Commons

The review of the Crown Prosecution Service - summary of report with conclusions and recommendations. (Chairman: Sir Iain Glidewell).

Type

Command papers

Notes

Received 01.06.98; Received 01.06.98

Date

1 June 1998

Reference

Cm 3972

House

House of Commons

Statement on the report of the review of the Crown Prosecution Service (Cm 3960)

Statement on the report of the review of the Crown Prosecution Service (Cm 3960). (Chairman: Sir Iain Glidewell).

Lead member

Lord Morris of Aberavon

Department

Attorney General

Type

Ministerial statements

Date

1 June 1998

Reference

313 c42-52

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher