Response to Consultation
April 2011
Response to consultation carried out by Her Majesty’s Courts Service (now Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service), part of the Ministry of Justice. This information is also available on the Ministry of Justice website at
About this Consultation
To: / This response is mainly aimed at those who received the initial consultation paper CP15/09Duration: / 13th December 2010 to 5th January 2011
Enquiries (including requests for the paper in an alternative format) to: / Helen Wilkins, Justices’ Clerk’s Office, Sessions House, Lancaster Road, PrestonPR1 2PD
Tel: 01772 272852
Fax: 01772 272821
e-mail:
Contents
Introduction and Contact Details3
Background4
Summary of Responses5
Responses to Specific Questions6
Conclusion and Next Steps8
Consultation Co-ordinator Contact Details9
The Consultation Criteria10
Annex A – List of Respondents11
Annex B - Breakdown of Responses12
Introduction and Contact Details
This document is the additionalconsultation report, following on from the original consultation paper. A further consultation began on 13th December, 2010 entitled Review of Saturday and Bank Holiday Charge Court locations in Lancashire. This was followed by another consultation, which began on the 11th February 2011 with regard to a proposal to bring forward to the commencement times of these courts in Blackpool.
This further consultation report covers asubsequent proposed change to the outcome of the original consultation and a further proposal to facilitate the implementation of any relevant change that has already been approved by the Area Management Board:
It will cover:
- Bringing forward the commencement time for the courts to commence this business from 10.00am to 9.30am.
- Revisiting the decision to alternate the court locations in East Lancashire between Blackburn and Burnley Magistrates’ Courts, with a view to Blackburn Magistrates’ Court being designated the only such location in that part of the county.
Further copies of this report and the consultation paper can be obtained by contacting Helen Wilkinsat the address below:
HMCTS
Justices’ Clerk’s Office
Sessions House
Lancaster Road
Preston
PR1 2PD
Telephone: 01772 272852
Email:
This report is also available on the Ministry’s website:
Alternative format versions of this publication can be requested from – 01772 272852
April 2011
Background
The consultation paper ‘Review of Saturday and Bank Holiday ChargeCourt locations in Lancashire’ was published on 21 August 2009 and republished on 14 December 2009. Following publication of the Response to the Consultation document, further representations were received from the Prison Service, CPS, G4S, PECS and the Lancashire Constabulary, when the logistical difficulties in implementing the expected changes, in accordance with the previously published timetable were considered.
As a result, it was agreed at a meeting, which was convened to consider fully and collectively such representations,that a staged introduction of such changes would be the preferred way forward to overcome such difficulties and facilitate a smooth transition to the new arrangements. In particular, it was agreed that further discussions and or consultation should take place with relevant stakeholders with regard to:
- Bringing forward the commencement time for the courts to commence this business from 10.00am to 9.30am.
- Revisiting the decision to alternate the courts locations in East Lancashire between Blackburn and Burnley Magistrates’ Court, with a view to Blackburn Magistrates’ Court being designated the only such location in that art of the county.
It was accepted that there should be no difficulty in the proposals for the transfer of relevant business from Lancaster to Preston going ahead as planned but the proposals concerning the above alternating arrangements and the transfer of work from South West Lancashire to Preston ought not take place for the time being, pending a review of the efficacy of the changes in arrangements at Preston Magistrates’ Court to accommodate the business from Lancaster, in due course.
The above Criminal Justice agencies’ etc representatives had agreed to meet again on 7th February 2011 to review any such changes and to plan the next phase in the roll-out of the further changes in East Lancashire, which were provisionally timed to take place no earlier than the beginning of March 2011.
Any further changes that were then agreed would, in turn, be subject to a further review at a later date before any further steps are taken to transfer any such custody work from South West Lancashire to Preston, as the provisional final phase of the revised implementation timetable.
The latter timetable has been approved by the Area Director on behalf of the Area Management Board (AMB) for Cumbria and Lancashire.
The additional consultation periods closed on the 5thand the 26thJanuary 2011 respectively.
A further consultation period with regard to the bringing forward of the commencement times for these courts sitting at Blackpool closed on the4th March 2011.
1
Summary of Responses
A total of 73 responses for the proposal to change the start time to 9.30am were received. Of these 63 were from the Magistracy, one on behalf of the CPS, five from defence solicitors, three on behalf of Lancashire Constabulary and one from HMCS Ushers. A total of 34 responses were received in relation to revisiting the decision to alternate between Blackburn and Burnley Magistrates’ Courts. Of these, 31were from the Magistracy, one from the CPS, one from a defence solicitorand one on behalf of Lancashire Constabulary.
When inviting responses to this further consultation, prospective respondents were specifically informed that if they did not respond they would be regarded as having no objections to the further proposals.
Responses to Specific Questions
The responses to the specific questions posed in the consultation paper areset out below:
- Bringing forward the commencement time for the courts to commence this business from 10am to 9.30am.
Of the 73 people who responded to the proposed change of start time 94.52% were clearly in favour of a 9.30am start.
Of the 94.52% who were in favour of the change a total of 12.33%raised concerns over the need to ensure that new cases continue to be accepted up to the original 12 noon timeor that all parties should be ready to start at 9.30am prompt.
Only 1.37% indicated a clear opposition to a 9.30am start time for Saturday and Bank Holiday charge courts.
As a result, we must therefore conclude that those who did not respond to the consultation letter were in favour of at 9.30am start time, which amounts to 99.63%in favour and 0.37% who were against or ambivalent to the proposed change.
- Revisiting the decision to alternate the court locations in East Lancashire between Blackburn and Burnley Magistrates’ Courts, with a view to Blackburn Magistrates’ Court being designated the only such location in that part of the county.
Of the 34 responses to the proposed change 32% supported Blackburn Magistrates’ Court being designated the only Saturday and Bank Holiday location in that part of the county.
A further 62% opposed the change. Comments were made about the consultation period and also the need to maintain justice locally.
Ambivalent comments were made in relation to the proposal accounts for 6%.
However, taking into account those who failed to respond to the letter and consequently the indication that they should be treated as not beingopposed to the useof Blackburn Magistrates’ Court instead of Burnley Magistrates’ Court, the figures change to 96.5% in favour, with 2.5% opposed to the change and 1% having no strong views either way.
A full breakdown of responses is available within Annex B, however topics can be broadly broken down to demonstrate themes relating to providing local justice, Magistrates maintaining their sittings, the facilities in question, travel time and distance, confusion over which court is to be used and the need to share the workload between all Magistrates in the area equally.
Conclusion and Next Steps
Conclusion
The AMB of the Cumbria and Lancashire Area of Her Majesty’s Courts Service (now Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service) is very grateful to those persons who have responded to the further Consultation. All the responses have been collated and were fully taken into consideration by the AMB. The AMB concludes the next steps to be as follows:
Next Steps
The AMB confirms its intention to:
- To bring forward the start times for Saturday and Bank Holiday charge courts in Lancashire to 9.30am
- Revert to its original proposal to use Blackburn Magistrates’ Court as the only such location for Saturday and Bank Holiday charge courts in East Lancashire
Post Implementation Review
A review of the above changes will form part of the post implementation review which is scheduled to take place six months from the date of the original consultation in May 2011. As before, this decision is deemed appropriate notwithstanding that there has been a full and lengthy consultation in advance of any decisions being taken. Although the AMB is satisfied that these operational changes will contribute to the efficient running of HMCTSbusiness in Lancashire it is felt that such a review will be beneficial and inform any necessary adjustments to the arrangements that will be put in place to support the forthcoming changes.
Consultation Co-ordinator Contact Details
If you have any complaints or comments about the consultation process rather than about the topic covered by this paper, you should contact Sheila Morson, Ministry of Justice Consultation Co-ordinator, on 02033344498, or email her at .
Alternatively, you may wish to write to the address below:
Sheila Morson
Consultation Co-ordinator
Ministry of Justice
7th Floor, Pillar 7:02
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
If your complaints or comments refer to the topic covered by this paper rather than the consultation process, please direct them to the contact given under the How to respond section of this paper at page3.
The Consultation Criteria
The seven consultation criteria are as follows:
- When to consult – Formal consultations should take place at a stage where there is scope to influence the policy outcome.
- Duration of consultation exercises – Consultations should normally last for at least 12 weeks with consideration given to longer timescales where feasible and sensible.
- Clarity of scope and impact – Consultation documents should be clear about the consultation process, what is being proposed, the scope to influence and the expected costs and benefits of the proposals.
- Accessibility of consultation exercises – Consultation exercises should be designed to be accessible to, and clearly targeted at, those people the exercise is intended to reach.
- The burden of consultation – Keeping the burden of consultation to a minimum is essential if consultations are to be effective and if consultees’ buy-in to the process is to be obtained.
- Responsiveness of consultation exercises – Consultation responses should be analysed carefully and clear feedback should be provided to participants following the consultation.
- Capacity to consult – Officials running consultations should seek guidance in how to run an effective consultation exercise and share what they have learned from the experience.
These criteria must be reproduced within all consultation documents.
Annex A – List of Respondents
Crown Prosecution Service x1LancashirePolice x3
Magistrates x63
HMCS Ushers x 1
Defence Solicitor x 5
Annex B – Breakdown ofResponses(AMB’s response initalics)
Issues relating to a 9.30am Start Times Raised
Agency Co-operationWill Solicitors bring forward their start time?
No point unless all parties are ready to go at that time / 7
3
It is accepted that, if the start time is brought forward, the parties and their legal representatives will be expected to attend at court in good time to facilitate a prompt commencement of the court’s business.
Issues Relating to use of Blackburn Magistrates’ Court Times Raised
Justice and Justices- Justice should be local and the proposal defies this principle
- Saturday sittings required to achieve sitting requirements
- If Blackburn Court is designated, Pennine Justices could be given the option of joining that Rota
- No mention made of the extra travel/sitting time for magistrates
7
1
3
Although this may involve extra travelling and sitting time for such Magistrates, the agreement of the respective Bench Chairman will be sought for there to be a combined rota of Magistrates that deal with such business, comprising the Blackburn, Darwen & Ribble Valley, Burnley, Pendle & Rossendale and Hyndburn Benches. Such combined rota would be drawn up from volunteer Magistrates, who sit on these Benches.
Although some Magistrates may have come to rely on such sittings to meet their minimum obligations, it is accepted that the above change will inevitably lead to a reduction in such opportunities in the future. Nevertheless, such Magistrates will need to liaise with the relevant court staff, who will be as flexible as possible in accommodating their individual needs to make up any projected shortfall in their attendances.
If such a joint rota is established the Magistrates sitting on such matters will bring their local knowledge to bear and thus the principles of local justice will be observed, wherever an alleged offence has been committed in East Lancashire.
Facilities- Burnley custody suite has been recently extended and modernised
- If the facilities at Blackburn Magistrates Court and Greenbank Police Station are superior, this also applies throughout the week – but there is no suggestion that those cases be moved to Blackburn
- Might a future proposal be that all courts are held in Blackburn or that the Courts in Pennine be closed
- If no-one has thought of improving the custody facilities at Burnley and they are good enough during the week, they cannot be so bad that they cannot be used for a couple of hours on Saturday mornings
- If there is no national minimum standard for holding and interviewing prisoners prior to court, Burnley must have equal status to Blackburn
1
2
1
1
Whilst the above points have been taken into consideration, the AMB has accepted the view of the Lancashire Constabulary, which has been fully supported by G4S that the holding facilities at Greenbank Police Station in Blackburn are far superior to those at Burnley Magistrates’ Court. In addition, the AMB accepts that the interviewing facilitates at Blackburn Magistrates’ Court are also superior to those at Burnley Magistrates’ Court. The simultaneous interviewing of prisoners in adjacent interview rooms at Blackburn Magistrates’ Court will facilitate better the expeditious transaction of the court’s business and, therefore, reduce the risk of late finishes further, despite the fact that such courts will be dealing routinely with the business that is presently dealt with at two separate locations.
It is unfortunate that the facilitates at Burnley Magistrates’ Court are inferior for the above purposes but they are adequate to deal with the volume of business that is dealt with each weekday there, when the custody work may be dealt with throughout the day in two courtrooms, as opposed to just one courtroom being used for just the morning, in accordance with this latest proposal.
There is no plan to close Burnley Magistrates’ Court nor is there any plan to close the custody facilities at that court and transfer such business to Blackburn Magistrates’ Court on weekdays.
Travelling- Travel time between Burnley & Preston Prison (via M65) and Blackburn & Preston prison (via Preston New Road) not that different
- Distance between Burnley and Blackburn accepted as adequate for accident & emergency so must be acceptable for prisoner transit times
- Unreasonable to expect or difficult for defendants to return home from release in Blackburn. Could lead to further crime.
2
6
The above arguments have been rejected in favour of the evidence, which is fully endorsed by G4S, the service provider, that the travelling time from Blackburn Magistrates’ Court to relevant prison establishments in Lancashire and Styal are less than the equivalent times from Burnley.
As such, this should reduce the risk of late arrivals at prison establishment from the court and the inherent difficulties, which would ensue and which the AMB would wish to keep to a bare minimum.
The travelling time between the respective Lancashire Hospitals is considered irrelevant, for the present purposes.
Defendants, who are released from Blackburn Magistrates’ Court and need to return to their residence in Burnley, Pendle & Rossendale, will be eligible to receive a travel warrant on request.
Confusion- If there is confusion over which site is to be used then peoples’ employment status should be reconsidered
- It can’t be that difficult
- No explanation of the confusion: hypothetical obstacles rather than workable solutions and co-operation between the two courts
1
1
It is accepted that, had the original proposal gone ahead, any confusion about the venue for the hearing of such a matter would not afford any reasonable excuse. However, the determination that there should only be one such venue will in fact avoid any such confusion.
Workload- The workload should be shared equally between magistrates representing each participating area
This is addressed in the response under the heading “Justice and Justices” above.
Specific Issues raised by Messrs Southerns Solicitors in relation to a 9.30am start time – Southern’s ‘whole heartedly support an earlier start time’. However the concerns raised in relation to this are as follows:- The need to ensure that CPS Lawyers make all paperwork available and easily accessible 1 hour before court starts. In turn the police would need to ensure the files are made available to the Crown in sufficient time for this to be done.
- Courts will run into the afternoon which will add to CPS expenses, Defence expenses and inconvenience to all concerned – will clearly ‘eat’ into the proposed savings that the Court Service will make.
- How will G4S make savings?
- The original proposal was advanced on the basis that a second Court would be convened if run over was anticipated. Was that ever a realistic prospect or just ‘a sweetener’?
- Understand that the decision to choose Blackburn arises from pressure from Prison Governors. Clearly if the original criteria were followed and a second court was to be convened, then this would not be an issue. The fact that it is an issue must mean that the original suggestion was always a non-starter. Clearly to run two courts where one is on standby would take away the majority of the potential savings whilst still adding expense elsewhere.
- The facilities at Greenbank are irrelevant. No courts are held there whereas at Burnley Police Station there is an integrated Court building. It is, however, accepted that there are less interview facilities at Burnley.
- It would there appear that the u-turn is based on the fact that the court never had any intention of convening a second court and that the risk of courts running way beyond 1:00pm must be a very real concern. That would suggest that the consultation process started with a misleading and potentially flawed proposal.
- It is suggested that attempts will be made to persuade the police to bail more prisoners on a Friday. Custody Sergeants rarely change their view on bail and the Bail Act would have to be changed before most would feel that the fact that its Friday mean a person should be bailed.
- It is noted that every attempt will be made to bring prisoners before the Friday afternoon courts but recent experience would suggest that that is not working. On the 21st a client of this firm was interviewed at 10:00am and, following a wait of 5 ½ hours, was then advised that they would go before the Saturday Court. It seems that the bureaucracy involved in obtaining a charging decision is likely to defeat any good intentions.
- The question of priority has arisen. This is fine in principle to try to assist the Prison Governors but does not take into account the fact that youths often cannot be dealt with until such time as appropriate adults and/or the Youth Offending Team arrive. Delays are much more likely to occur with, to take the extreme examples, parents travelling from Barnoldswick to Blackburn or, alternatively, from Darwen to Burnley. If the prison logic is followed, female prisoners should be dealt with at Burnley because Styal Prison can be accessed more quickly from Burnley than Blackburn.
- Why should people who are to be released i.e. non-contentious bail cases have to wait in custody for hours when it’s accepted that they should not be there? Surely those people should be amongst the first to be released.
All agencies are working together and meeting regularly to ensure workable solutions are found to issues.