Search Results

1-20 of 23 results for subject:"HMP Elmley"

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask His Majesty's Government how many unaccompanied children have been held at (1) HMP Elmley, Kent, and (2) other adult prisons over the last year, including those determined to be children after local authority age assessments.

Asked by

Bishop of Durham (Bishops (affiliation))

Answering body

Ministry of Justice

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

26 October 2023

Reference

HL10723

House

House of Lords

Asylum: Children

To ask His Majesty's Government how many unaccompanied child asylum seekers have been placed in HMP Elmley in Kent; and how many are still held there.

Asked by

Earl Russell (Liberal Democrat)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

21 September 2023

Reference

HL9991

House

House of Lords

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

I beg to move,

That this House has considered prisons on the Isle of Sheppey.

It is good to see you in the Chair for my first Westminster Hall debate of this Parliament, Mr Hollobone.

My constituency has three prisons: Elmley, which is a category C prison; Standford Hill, which is a category...

Member

Gordon Henderson (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 cc25-6WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this debate. I know that he feels passionately about the three prisons in his constituency. I have had the fortune of spending some time—I hasten to add in a professional capacity—at one of those

prisons, Elmley. Impressive and constructive work was available for...

Member

Gareth Johnson (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 c26WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hollobone. I warmly congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Gordon Henderson) on securing the debate. He has rightly raised very important issues. He started by talking about the fantastic men and women of our Prison...

Member

Andrew Selous (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 cc27-8WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

Will my hon. Friend the Minister accept, with regard to benchmarking, that the prison officers on Sheppey showed a lead and embraced it enthusiastically?

Member

Gordon Henderson (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 c28WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I do accept that. The benchmarking was worked out with the help of the Prison Officers Association and, as he will hear in a second, has had some benefit for two of the prisons in his constituency.

The impact of benchmarking on the...

Member

Andrew Selous (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 cc28-31WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

Yes. It is delightful that among the small number of MPs present for the debate are three Kent MPs. That is probably unique. I do agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Gareth Johnson), but there is another factor. That employment in Elmley and Swaleside is good for...

Member

Gordon Henderson (Conservative)

Type

Proceeding contributions

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 c27WH

House

House of Commons

Isle of Sheppey (Prisons)

Motion that this House has considered prisons on the Isle of Sheppey. Agreed to on question.

Lead member

Gordon Henderson

Answering member

Andrew Selous

Department

Ministry of Justice

Type

Debates

Date

16 June 2015

Reference

597 cc24-9WH

House

House of Commons

Prisons

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prisoners in (a) Chelmsford, (b) Coldingley, (c) Elmley and (d) Rochester prison have tested positive for drugs in each year since 1997.

Asked by

David Amess (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

16 February 2006

Reference

50370; 442 c2354-6W;442 c2354-6W

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will visit prison personnel at HM Prisons (a) Swaleside, (b) Elmley and (c) Standford Hill to discuss the sustainability test; at which other prisons sustainability tests will be conducted following those at HM Prisons Swaleside, Elmley and Standford...

Asked by

Derek Wyatt (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

23 March 2005

For answer on

4 April 2005

Answered on

4 April 2005

Mr. Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will visit prison personnel at HM Prisons (a) Swaleside, (b) Elmley and (c) Standford Hill to discuss the sustainability test; [224063] (2) at which other prisons sustainability tests will be conducted following those at HM Prisons Swaleside, Elmley and Standford Hill; and what implications for terms of employment of prison staff the sustainability test has. [224064] Paul Goggins: I hope to have the opportunity to visit staff at the three prisons on the Isle of Sheppey in the near future. We are announcing one competition relating to prisons at this time. No decision has yet been taken about the future programme. If the public sector Prison Service is successful in its bid for running prisons on the Isle of Sheppey, there will be no changes to terms of employment of prison staff as a result of the competition. Should the public sector Prison Service be unsuccessful in its bid for running prisons on the Isle of Sheppey, then management of the "undertaking" will transfer to the private sector bidder. All staff will form part of the "undertaking" and will therefore transfer to the new employers under the protection of TUPE (Transfer of Undertaking; Protection of Employment Act). TUPE provides that staff will transfer on such existing terms and conditions as those provided by the previous employer and thereafter changes in such terms and conditions will be negotiated directly between the new employer and the employees/recognised trade union as appropriate. Pension arrangements for such staff have to be "broadly comparable" and within guidelines established by the Cabinet Office entitled "Fair Deal on Pensions". Additionally, the recent establishment of the Code of Practice on Two-Tier Workforce, agreed by both the TUC and CBI, now makes provision that any new staff joining the transferred undertaking after the date of transfer must be employed on comparable terms and conditions as the existing workforce, hence creating a "level playing" field in terms of competition between bidders.

Date

4 April 2005

Reference

432 c1131W; 224063;224064

House

House of Commons

Untitled Written statement

Written Statement on the first competition for the management of prisons under the National Offender Management Service.

Member

Paul Goggins (Labour)

Department

Home Office

Type

Written statements

Date

22 March 2005

Reference

432 c61WS

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many prisoners have been transferred to Standford Hill Open Prison from (a) Elmley Prison and (b) Swaleside Prison in each year since 1997; how many prisoners have been transferred to Standford Hill Open Prison from (a) Elmley Prison and...

Asked by

Cheryl Gillan (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

2 February 2005

Reference

430 c976W; 209864;210955

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many prisoners at (a) Elmley Prison and (b) Swaleside Prison have been reclassified from Category C to Category D in each year since 1997. - Inc table.

Asked by

Cheryl Gillan (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

1 February 2005

Reference

209863; 430 c847W

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, on what basis a further Prison Service inquiry is taking place into the case of Gary Rowland, Malcolm Watkins and Shaun Kerry of Elmley Prison.

Asked by

Derek Wyatt (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

15 November 2004

Reference

426 c1118W;426 c1122W; 193014

House

House of Commons

Solicitor-General

To ask the Solicitor General, what the (a) legal costs of the defendants' two trials and (b) total cost to the Crown Prosecution Service were in the case against Prison Officers Rowland, Kerry and Watkins at Elmley Prison. - Inc table.

Asked by

Derek Wyatt (Labour)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

1 April 2004

For answer on

7 September 2004

Answered on

7 September 2004

Mr. Wyatt: To ask the Solicitor-General what the (a) legal costs of the defendants' two trials and (b) total cost to the Crown Prosecution Service were in the case against Prison Officers Rowland, Kerry and Watkins at Elmley Prison. [166226] The Solicitor-General: I can only provide details of the costs incurred by the Crown Prosecution Service, for which both the Attorney and I have ministerial responsibility. The Crown Prosecution Service costs are approximately £146,878.04. However, this figure may be reduced as the Crown Prosecution Service is currently seeking a reduction in the amount of counsel's fees claimed. The prosecution's costs are broken down in the following table: _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Prosecution's costs (£) (a) Counsel's fees: at the magistrates' court to include the old style committal 12,978.35 for the preliminary hearing in 2001 27,766.19 the final invoice (being challenged) to include re-instituting 96,033.50 proceedings and the trial Total 136,778.04 (b) Experts' fees: 1,100.00 (c) charges for enhancement of the recordings of intercepted 9,000.00 telephone calls and for their compilation and indexation on a compact disc: _________________________________________________________________________________________________. The CPS is unable routinely to assess and attribute its own overhead costs to individual cases.

Date

7 September 2004

Reference

166226; 424 c970-1W

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when the prison officers Mr Rowland, Mr Kerry and Mr Watkins will be allowed back to work; for what reason prison officers Mr Rowland, Mr Kerry and Mr Watkins are suspended; and if he will make a statement. (Holding answer...

Asked by

Derek Wyatt (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

10 February 2004

Reference

417 c1433W; 150817;150819

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper DEP 8 [5234]

Report on an unannounced follow-up inspection of HM Prison Elmley by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons. Inspected 12 14 May 2003. Home Office. 2003.

Deposited by

Home Office; HM Inspectorate of Prisons

Type

Deposited papers

Date

17 September 2003

Reference

DEP 8 [5234]

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper DEP 8 [11575]

Report of an announced inspection of HM Prison Elmley by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons. Inspected 30 April - 4 May 2001. Home Office. 2001.

Deposited by

Home Office; HM Inspectorate of Prisons

Type

Deposited papers

Date

28 November 2001

Reference

DEP 8 [11575]

House

House of Commons

Deposited Paper DEP 8 [19421]

Report by HM Chief Inspector of Prisons of an unnanounced short inspection on HM Prison Elmley. Inspected 17-19 November 1998. HO. 1999.

Deposited by

Home Office; HM Inspectorate of Prisons

Type

Deposited papers

Date

22 March 1999

Reference

DEP 8 [19421]

House

House of Commons

	Chelmsford			Coldingley			Elmley		Rochester
	Positive(Number)	Percentage	Positive(Number)	Percentage	Positive(Number)	Percentage	Positive(Number)	Percentage
1996–97	114	34.2	150	36.2	158	20.9	21	5.3
1997–98	75	24.0	141	29.2	145	13.5	21	4.2
1998–99	93	23.1	29	13.7	116	11.8	18	4.2
1999–2000	47	24.5	37	12.2	105	13.7	14	3.0
2000–01	41	16.2	30	7.8	49	8.2	11	2.3
2001–02	56	16.0	50	11.7	78	11.9	11	3.7
2002–03	83	22.9	55	13.1	51	9.9	18	9.7
2003–04	87	25.7	76	16.6	74	11.7	22	9.3
2004–05	37	10.8	71	15.1	79	13.0	17	4.1
2005–06	27	10.3	72	18.6	26	5.4	18	4.8
⁽⁵¹⁾ Year to date (April to December 2005).

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher