Children (Crime) (Hansard, 21 January 1998)

§ Mr. Clappison
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many children, aged(a) 10 and (b) 11 were convicted of offences which would be punishable with imprisonment in the case of a person aged 21 years or over in (i) the last year for which figures are available and (ii) each of the preceding 10 years. [23966]
579W

§ Mr. Michael
The information is given in the table.

Number of children aged 10 and 11 respectively, convicted at all
courts of an offence which is punishable with a custodial penalty¹
by type of offence, 1986–1996

England and Wales

Convictions by type of offence carrying a custodial penalty¹

Year Age Indictable offences² Summary non-motoring offences Summary motoring offences Total all offences

1986 10 142 33 13 188

11 590 59 33 682

1987 10 76 17 3 96

11 445 53 2 500

1988 10 78 13 3 94

11 345 41 6 392

1989 10 67 12 1 80

11 263 52 — 315

1990 10 61 14 5 80

11 276 52 8 336

1991 10 32 12 2 46

11 237 54 4 295

1992 10 48 12 — 100

11 266 62 4 332

1993 10 45 9 — 54

11 271 56 — 327

1994 10 41 6 — 49

11 242 40 3 285

1995 10 40 10 1 51

11 259 80 1 340

1996 10 25 14 — 39

11 221 60 — 281

¹ Under the Criminal Justice Act 1991 custodial penalties are available from the common minimum age of 15 for both boys and girls (previously the minimum age was 14 for boys and 15 for girls).

² Children aged 10 and 11 convicted at the Crown Court may be sentenced to be detained for up to the adult maximum, including life,under section 53 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, as amended by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.

§ Mr. Clappison
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the names of the respondents to his Tackling Youth Crime consultation paper who(a) were in favour of the local child curfew scheme, (b) were against the local child curfew scheme and (c) commented that the age range for the scheme should not be limited to those below 10 years of age. [23971]

§ Mr. Michael
In responding to the consultation paper, "Tackling Youth Crime" by 8 December 1997, organisations commented on the nature and details of proposals to introduce local child curfew schemes. Overall, the responses from the following organisations and individuals(a) were broadly in favour of the principle of introducing local child curfews schemes.

Salford City Council

Stockton on Tees Borough Council

Leicestershire County Council

Adhocracy Ltd.
580
Rossendale Council

Berkshire Youth Justice Service

Berkshire Probation Service

Canterbury City Council

Lancashire Police Authority

Rugby Borough Council

North Tyneside Council

Inner London Magistrates Youth Panel

West Sussex County Council

Hereford and Worcester County Council

Sheffield Social Services

Stockton on Tees Borough Council

National Association of Social Workers in Education

Newark and Sherwood District Council

Tendring District Council

West Yorkshire Magistrates' Association

Lee Westlake

Torfaen County Borough

South Shropshire District Council

North Hertfordshire District Council

Surrey Police Authority

Pembrokeshire County Council

Dartford Borough Council

North East Derbyshire District Council

Harrogate and Ripon Magistrates' Courts

Cheshire County Council

Warwickshire Probation Service

Nottinghamshire Magistrates' Courts Service

Middlesbrough Borough Council

West Yorkshire Probation Service

Justices' Clerk's Society

NCH Action for Children

City and County of Swansea

Forest of Dean District Council

Sheffield Magistrates' Court

K. Lucy

Slough Borough Council

Kent County Council

Hyndburn Borough Council

North Somerset County Council

Standing Conference of Principal Youth and Community

H. Morgan

Erewash Borough Council

Inner London Probation Service

Bristol City Council

Bromsgrove District Council

East Hampshire District Council

Ryedale District Council

New Forest District Council

Church of England

City of Westminster London Borough

Children's Society

Vale of Glamorgan Council

Walsall Social Services

Public Constituency Consultation by Lorna Fitzsimmon.

(b) were largely against the principle of introducing local child curfew schemes.

Manchester Youth Justice Service

Hertfordshire Police Authority

National Council of Voluntary Child Care Organisation

City of Coventry

Dudley Metropolitan Borough

Hampshire Youth Justice Committee

Cheshire County Council Youth Justice Team

Children's Play Council

National Children's Bureau

Crime Concern

London Association for Youth Justice

Brighton and Hove Council

Corporation of London

Legal Committee of Council of Her Majesty's Stipendiary Magistrates

London Borough of Harrow

Association of Teachers and Lecturers

Birmingham City Council
581
Gwent County Borough Council

British Youth Council

Inner London Magistrates' Court Service

Wandsworth London Borough

National Association of Probation Officers

East Riding of Yorkshire Council

D. Parish

Merton Borough Management Team for Youth Justice

Society of Education Officers

Sunderland Social Services

Somerset County Council

Halton Intermediate Treatment Scheme

Save the Children

Divert Trust

Dorset Police

Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council

Hackney London Borough

Derby City Council

Kingston upon Hull City Council

North East Lincolnshire Council

Standing Committee for Youth Justice

Redcar and Cleveland Council

Hertfordshire County Council

University College of London

Royal Philanthropic Society

Surrey Youth Justice Team

Nottinghamshire County Council

North West Surrey Youth Panel

Redbridge Youth Justice Team

Bolton Social Services

Criminal Bar Association

Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council

Association of Chief Officers of Probation.

(c) commented that the age for the scheme should not be limited to those below 10 years of age.

Rugby Borough Council

Labour Lawyers (Crime)

Adhocracy Ltd.

City of Coventry

NCH Action for Children

Chelmsford Borough Council

Nottinghamshire County Council

Dartford Borough Council

West Sussex County Council

Harrogate and Ripon Magistrates' Courts

Nottinghamshire Magistrates' Courts Service

West Sussex County Council

Sussex Police Authority

Aylesbury Vale District Council

Rossendale Council

Slough Borough Council

Tonbridge and Mailing Borough Council

Merton Borough Management Team for Youth Justice

London Borough of Hounslow

Middlesbrough Borough Council.

§ Mr. Clappison
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what research has been carried out or commissioned by his Department into(a) the need for, and (b) the effects of the imposition of custodial sentences on children aged (a) 10 and (b) 11 years; [23967]
(2) what representations he has received in favour of the introduction of custodial sentences for children aged (a) 10 and (b) 11 years. [23968]

§ Mr. Michael
The Government's proposals to reform custodial arrangements for 10 to 17–year-olds are set out in the White Paper, "No More Excuses—A new approach to tackling youth crime in England and Wales" (Cmnd 3809). These proposals will provide for a more coherent and effective custodial framework for the sentencing and remand of young offenders, where this is necessary and appropriate.
582W
The proposals include a new constructive and more flexible custodial sentence for 10 to 17–year-olds, the Detention and Training Order, which will replace the Sentences of Detention in a Young Offender Institution (for 15 to 17–year-olds) and the Secure Training Order. The Government do not propose to change the existing provisions under section 53 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933 to impose custodial sentences on 10 to 17–year-olds convicted of "grave crimes". The new Order will be introduced only for 12 to 17–year-olds in the first place. The Government will introduce the Detention and Training Order for 10 and 11–year-olds only should it prove necessary or desirable to do so; this will be subject to Parliamentary approval. The new Detention and Training Order will provide a clear focus on preventing offending in line with proposed new statutory aim for the youth justice system. It will allow young offenders to be placed in secure accommodation appropriate to their age and maturity.
In developing their proposals on the Detention and Training Order, the Government have taken advice from my right hon. Friend's Task Force on Youth Justice, which is composed of experts with experience of youth justice. A summary of the Task Force's advice was placed in the Library on 2 December.
There is no Home Office research on the effect of custodial sentences on children of 10 and 11 years old, partly because of the very small number of children in this age group who are sentenced to custody under the existing provisions.

Number of children aged 10 and 11 respectively, convicted at all courts of an offence which is punishable with a custodial penalty¹ by type of offence, 1986–1996
England and Wales
	Convictions by type of offence carrying a custodial penalty¹
Year	Age	Indictable offences²	Summary non-motoring offences	Summary motoring offences	Total all offences
1986	10	142	33	13	188
	11	590	59	33	682
1987	10	76	17	3	96
	11	445	53	2	500
1988	10	78	13	3	94
	11	345	41	6	392
1989	10	67	12	1	80
	11	263	52	—	315
1990	10	61	14	5	80
	11	276	52	8	336
1991	10	32	12	2	46
	11	237	54	4	295
1992	10	48	12	—	100
	11	266	62	4	332
1993	10	45	9	—	54
	11	271	56	—	327
1994	10	41	6	—	49
	11	242	40	3	285
1995	10	40	10	1	51
	11	259	80	1	340
1996	10	25	14	—	39
	11	221	60	—	281
¹ Under the Criminal Justice Act 1991 custodial penalties are available from the common minimum age of 15 for both boys and girls (previously the minimum age was 14 for boys and 15 for girls).
² Children aged 10 and 11 convicted at the Crown Court may be sentenced to be detained for up to the adult maximum, including life,under section 53 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, as amended by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.