Previous Section Home Page

National Lottery

Mr. Chris Smith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what arrangements are in place for the timing of payments of 12 per cent. tax to the Exchequer by the organisers of the national lottery; and what provision has been made of the payment of interest to the Exchequer.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory: Payments of lottery duty are made on the 15th of the month following the month in which the liabilities arises. There are no arrangements for the payment of interest to the Exchequer in relation to the lottery duty.

Civil Service Job Losses

Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of job losses in the civil service in the next two years.

Sir George Young: The statistical supplement to the "Financial Statement and Budget Report", published on 24 February, shows Departments' civil service staff plans as follows:


Outturn          Planned Figures                

1993-94 |1994-95|1995-96|1996-97|1997-98        

------------------------------------------------

548,000 |527,000|516,000|494,000|477,000        

This accords with the expectation, announced in the civil service White Paper--Cm 2627--that numbers would fall significantly below 500, 000 in the next few years.

Customs and Excise

Mr. Ainger: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what changes he plans to implement in the number and the location of Customs and Excise officers in Wales; and if he will make a statement;

(2) how many Customs and Excise officers were based in Wales dealing with (a) VAT, (b) import controls, including checking passengers at airports and ports, (c) coastal surveillance and (d) general intelligence in September 1979, September 1990 and September 1994; and what is the planned number in September 1995.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory [holding answer 24 February 1995]: As part of the implementation of the fundamental expenditure review, Customs and Excise currently plans the following changes in Wales which will take place over the next five years:


Column 399


                      |Officers at     |Officers at                      

Locations             |23 February 1995|31 March 2000                    

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cardiff               |205             |275                              

Merthyr               |22              |0                                

Newport               |17              |0                                

Swansea               |96              |40                               

Haverfordwest         |12              |0                                

Carmarthen            |49              |79.5                             

Bangor                |0               |18                               

Colwyn Bay            |26              |0                                

Pembroke Dock Excise  |7               |0                                

Aberystwyth           |5               |4                                

Newtown               |6               |0                                

Customs               |98              |47.5                             

                                                                         

Total                 |543             |464                              

Over recent years, customs enforcement strategy has progressively moved away from a static presence at all ports and airports towards more flexible, better targeted checks operated by fast response teams. Accordingly, customs staff are deployed flexibly throughout Wales and it would not be in the public interest to identify their location in greater detail.

Customs and Excise does not keep reports of local resource deployment for 1979. Its planning system does not easily allow it to identify staffing levels at a mid-point in the year and the figures in the schedule are, therefore, for fiscal years. The import control figures in the schedule include a small element of export freight resources which cannot easily be identified and excluded. Coastal surveillance is not a separately identified activity within Customs and Excise's operational planning system, so the figures requested under categories (c) and (d) are included as a global figure headed "Intelligence" in the schedule.


Customs and Excise officers based in Wales         

                   |1990-91|1994-95|1995-96        

---------------------------------------------------

VAT                |357.0  |306.0  |256.5          

Import controls<1> |186.0  |88.5   |70.5           

Intelligence<2>    |16.0   |29.0   |51.0           

<1> Includes a small element of export freight     

resources                                          

<2> Includes both coastal and other intelligence.  

Fraud

Mr. Milburn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to his answer of 14 February, Official Report , column 576 , if he will itemise by year the level and number of frauds from each Department, indicating those involving (a) agencies and (b) non-departmental public bodies.

Mr. Aitken [holding answer 23 February 1995]: The data which are gathered centrally on fraud are used primarily as a means of promoting awareness of fraud risks, and to identify trends in the types of fraud committed. The data are not kept in the form requested in the question.


Column 400

NORTHERN IRELAND

Banbridge Sewage Treatment Works

Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the nature of and the need for the proposed remedial work to Banbridge sewage treatment works contained in the May 1993 programme of the water service; and what is the current cost of that remedial work and the date on which the work is planned to start and be completed.

Mr. Moss: Two stages of improvements to Banbridge sewage treatment works were contained in the May 1993 programme.

The first stage, costing an estimated £450,000, involves construction of a new inlet works and improvements to treatment units and the outfall. This work will commence in mid-March 1995 and is due for completion in early 1996. These planned improvements are required to replace and upgrade plant and to cater for increased loading on the works.

The second stage will involve a further increase in the capacity of the works. This stage is currently programmed to commence in late 1997. The contract period is likely to be 1 year and current estimated cost is £500,000.

Small Firms Employment Scheme

Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, pursuant to his answer of 15 February, Official Report , column 679 80 , on what basis consultants were selected for the small firms employment scheme; and if he will list the experience and qualifications of those consultants.

Mr. Ancram: The Fair Employment Commission formed a panel of consultants who were engaged under the small firms employment scheme to provide consultancy advice to companies. Applications for inclusion on the panel were invited from established management consultants or consultancy firms who had at least five years proven experience in human resources/personnel consultancy with specific expertise in one or more of the following areas: selection and recruitment systems; use of psychometric instruments; and promotion of equality of opportunity in employment.

Applicants were also required to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Acts and the Fair Employment in Northern Ireland code of practice.

Although information regarding the experience and qualifications of individual consultants is available, it could be provided in the form requested only at disproportionate cost.

Northern Ireland Boundary Commission

Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, pursuant to his answer of 7 February, Official Report , columns 167 68 , and the answer of 1 December 1994 given by the Minister of State--the hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram)--to the hon. Member for Fermanagh and South Tyrone (Mr. Maginnis), Official Report , column 1326 , if he will clarify the number of occasions on which Irish Government Ministers sought to influence the work of the Northern Ireland Boundary


Column 401

Commission, and the dates on which any meetings took place.

Sir Patrick Mayhew [holding answer 15 February 1995]: My answer of 7 February explained that at the intergovernmental conference held on 28 January 1994 the Irish side was advised that there were statutory procedures for interested parties to make representations in respect of the Boundary Commission's published provisional recommendations. The Government's practice is that details of their exchanges with the Irish Government remain confidential, but I can confirm that when the Irish side referred again to the issue at the intergovernmental conference held on 10 March 1994 they were reminded of the independence of the Boundary Commission. My hon. Friend the Minister's answer referred to both these occasions.

Mr. Trimble: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, pursuant to his answer of 7 February, Official Report , column 167 , if he will list the occasions on which Northern Ireland constituency boundaries were raised by the Irish members of the Anglo-Irish intergovernmental secretariat after the publication of the provisional recommendations of the Northern Ireland Boundary Commission.

Sir Patrick Mayhew [holding answer 15 February 1995]: The Government's practice is that details of its exchanges with the Irish Government remain confidential. As is reflected by the communique issued following the intergovernmental conference on 28 January 1994, the Irish have been consistently advised that there are statutory procedures for interested parties to make representations in respect of the Boundary Commission's published provisional recommendations.

Abattoirs

Mr. Morley: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the throughput of abattoirs in each year since 1990, showing (a) overall units, (b) sheep, (c) pigs, (d) calves under six months and (e) bovines over six months.

Mr. Ancram [holding answer 22 February 1995]: The information requested is as follows:


                                        |Bovines            

          |Livestock                    |over six           

Year      |units    |Sheep    |Pigs     |months             

------------------------------------------------------------

1990      |968,400  |754,608  |1,085,647|498,717            

1991      |941,285  |631,494  |1,034,357|506,286            

1992      |958,569  |970,891  |963,914  |498,565            

1993      |935,759  |1,003,623|1,079,172|432,660            

1994      |922,269  |803,472  |1,089,777|444,229            

Throughput of calves under six months was negligible. (     

Council directive 91/497/EEC).                              

Note:                                                       

1. Livestock unit = one bovine, seven sheep or three pigs.  

HOME DEPARTMENT

National Lottery

Mr. Hardy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will consider the position of those charities which appear not to be approved in the


Column 402

disbursement of the moneys provided from that part of the receipts of the national lottery available for the support of good causes.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: No. Within the framework of my general directions on the matters that should be taken into account, it is for the National Lottery Charities Board to determine its own priorities in relation to individual charities.

Deregulation

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will ensure that the enforcement provisions contained in the Deregulation and Contracting Out Act 1994 apply to all regulations for which his Department is responsible, past, present and future; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to him today by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs in response to a similar question.

Statutory Instruments

Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the statutory instruments which his Department has sponsored in the last 12 months.

Mr. Howard: A list of the 102 statutory instruments sponsored by the Home Office in the 12 months from February 1994 to January 1995 has been placed in the Library.

Data Protection

Mr. Bermingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions have been undertaken under the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1984 for the last five years for which figures are available.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: The number of prosecutions brought by the Data Protection Registrar for alleged offences under the Data Protection Act 1984 is as follows:


Year   |Number       

---------------------

1990   |30           

1991   |17           

1992   |27           

1993   |68           

1994   |32           

Note:                

Year ending 31 May   

Asylum Seekers

Mr. Austin-Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for asylum were received from citizens of the Ivory Coast in each month of 1994; how many have been (a) granted asylum and (b) refused; of those refused, how many have been given exceptional leave to remain; and how many are still awaiting determination.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: The available information on nationals from the Ivory Coast is provided in the table. As at 31 December 1994, an estimated 1,150 applications for asylum from the Ivory Coast were outstanding.


Applications received for asylum in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, by location of application, and decisions, nationals of the                                                                   

Ivory Coast, January to December 1994.                                                                                                                                                                      

Number of principal applicants                                                                                                                                                                              

                  Applications                                       Decisions                                                                                                                              

                  received                                                                                                                                                                                  

                                                                                                                        Refusals                                                                            

                                                                                                      |Not                                                                                                  

                                                                                                      |recognised                                                         |Refused                          

                                                                                                      |as a refugee                     |Refused asylum  |Refused on      |under para.                      

                                                                                     |Recognised as   |but granted                      |and exceptional |safe third      |180F of                          

                 |Total           |Applied         |Applied in      |Total           |a refugee and   |exceptional     |Total           |leave after full|country         |Immigration                      

                 |applications    |at port         |country         |decisions       |granted asylum  |leave           |refused         |consideration   |grounds         |Rules<4>                         

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1994                                                                                                                                                                                                        

January          |25              |15              |10              |20              |-               |-               |20              |20              |-               |*                                

February         |45              |10              |35              |10              |-               |-               |10              |5               |*               |*                                

March            |40              |25              |15              |15              |-               |-               |15              |10              |-               |5                                

April            |70              |50              |20              |20              |-               |-               |20              |15              |*               |*                                

May              |65              |50              |20              |25              |-               |-               |25              |15              |5               |5                                

June             |95              |55              |40              |25              |-               |-               |25              |25              |*               |*                                

July             |50              |35              |15              |20              |-               |-               |20              |15              |*               |-                                

August           |110             |80              |30              |35              |-               |-               |35              |25              |*               |10                               

September        |135             |95              |40              |35              |*               |-               |35              |20              |*               |10                               

October          |30              |5               |25              |35              |-               |-               |35              |20              |5               |10                               

November         |25              |5               |20              |45              |-               |-               |45              |40              |-               |10                               

December         |10              |-               |10              |30              |-               |-               |30              |25              |-               |10                               

                                                                                                                                                                                                            

Total            |705             |425             |280             |320             |*               |-               |320             |240             |20              |60                               

<1> Provisional and estimated figures rounded to the nearest 5 with `*'= 1 or 2.                                                                                                                            

<2> Information is of initial determination decisions, excluding the outcome of appeals or other subsequent decisions.                                                                                      

<3> Decisions do not necessarily relate to applications made in the same period.                                                                                                                            

<4> For failure to provide evidence to support the asylum claim within a reasonable period.                                                                                                                 

Electronic Surveillance

Mr. Bermingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures are in place within the European Community for the protection of employees in the workplace who may be subject to electronic surveillance without their prior authorisation or consent; and what legislation relates to the unlawful use of electronic monitoring equipment with respect to privacy and data protection.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: As to the first part of the question, I am aware of no such measures. As to the second part, I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to a question from him on 21 February, Official Report , column 158 .

Mr. Bermingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what investigations have been undertaken in relation to organisations involved in electronic bugging of offices or other workplace premises in the last 10 years.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: No such records are held.

Mr. Bermingham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 21 February, Official Report , columns 158 59 , if he will outline the nature and extent of complaints lodged with his Department in relation to the operation and practices of companies or organisations involving electronic surveillance services.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: Advertisements offering information-gathering services, which may or may not involve electronic surveillance devices, attracted about 40 letters of complaint from hon. Members and others in 1994. The main point of concern was that confidential personal information could be obtained without authority and advertised for sale. The amendment to the Data Protection Act 1984 made by section 161 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 addresses this concern.


Column 404

Mr. Colin Dunning

Mr. Maclennan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will release to solicitors acting for Mr. Colin Ivor Dunning the expert evidence referred to in the letter dated 11 January from his Under- Secretary of State to the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: I am arranging for this evidence to be sent to Mr. Dunning's solicitors without further delay.

Theft

Mr. Michael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the value of property stolen in theft by an employee in 1992, excluding the offence involving a pension fund referred to in table 2.20 of the 1992 "Criminal Statistics for England and Wales" Cm 2410 .

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Excluding the offence involving the pension fund, the value of property stolen was £55.7 million.

Campsfield House

Mr. Austin-Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many detainees at Campsfield house detention centre are currently on hunger strike; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: On 23 February 1995, two detainees at Campsfield house were refusing meals; both were taking milk and water.

Mr. Fisher: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the annual cost to Her Majesty's Government of Campsfield detention centre.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: The total cost to the immigration service of running its detention accommodation at Campsfield house in the financial year 1993 94 was £1,913,872.


Column 405

Miscarriages of Justice

Mr. Maclennan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 7 February, Official Report , columns 214-15 , how many of the 188 cases under consideration at the beginning of 1995 had been with C3 division for (a) six months, (b) 12 months and (c) 18 months or longer.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: Of the 188 cases under consideration with C3 at the beginning of 1995, 106 had been with the division for over six months, 38 for over 12 months, and 25 for over 18 months.

Drug-related Deaths

Mr. David Nicholson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many deaths in the United Kingdom resulted directly from addiction to (a) heroin and (b) other drugs in each year since 1985.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: The only clearly identifiable direct cause of death from addiction to drugs is from overdose, and the relevant information is contained in table 14 of the Home Office "Statistical Bulletin" entitled "Statistics of drug addicts notified to the Home Office, United Kingdom, 1993", a copy of which is in the Library.

Gloucestershire Police

Mr. Nigel Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what factors were taken into account before refusing a special grant to the chief constable of Gloucestershire for the exceptional costs of the Cromwell Street inquiry; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Applications for special grant are considered against the following criteria: the expenditure must be exceptional, unforseen and of a scale likely to threaten the efficiency of the force.

The application by Gloucestershire police authority was carefully considered against these criteria, taking into account advice from Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary, but was not judged to meet the criteria.

Drug Action Teams

Mr. Elletson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made in setting up regional drug action teams as set out in "Tackling Drugs Together".

Mr. Michael Forsyth: "Tackling Drugs Together" is a consultation document. The Government are considering the responses to its proposals, which include the setting up of local drug action teams in 1995 96. Definite proposals will be published in a White Paper in the spring.

Football Spectators

Mr. Pendry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many restriction orders have been made under the Football Spectators Act 1989 in each year since its introduction.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Part II of the 1989 Football Spectators Act, which provided the courts with the power to make restriction orders to prevent certain convicted hooligans from travelling to key football matches outside England and Wales, came into force on 24 April 1990. The number of restriction orders is as follows:


Column 406


Year             |Number of orders                 

---------------------------------------------------

1990             |19                               

1991             |4                                

1992             |2                                

1993             |0                                

1994             |1                                

Mr. Pendry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many restriction orders made under section 15 of the Football Spectators Act 1989 were enforced with regard to the Ireland v. England football match of 15 February.

Mr. Michael Forsyth : Two.

Mr. Madden: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what powers exist to enable him to restrain within the United Kingdom people subject to a restriction order preventing them from attending certain sporting events in the United Kingdom or overseas who seeks to breach that order even though they are not suspected of committing any other offence.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Section 15 of the Football Spectators Act 1989 gave the courts power to impose restriction orders on those convicted of football-related offences to prevent them from attending key matches outside England and Wales. Those subject to such orders are required to report to a police station--of their choice--usually at a time when such a match is taking place. It is an offence to fail to do so without good reason. There is no separate power to prevent a person subject to a restriction order from leaving the country at the stipulated time.

Mr. Pendry: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what action was taken by the football unit of the national criminal intelligence service to reduce the likelihood of crowd violence in advance of the Ireland v. England football match on 15 February.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: I refer the hon. Member to my written reply of 22 February, Official Report, column 234.

Immigration (Non-NATO Forces)

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what records are kept, and what approval procedures are required, for the entry into the United Kingdom of members of non-NATO armed forces.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: Separate records are not kept of the entry of members of non-NATO armed forces. Those coming for official duties or training who are subject to control under the Immigration Act must satisfy the immigration officer that they qualify under the immigration rules.

Prisons (Drugs)

Mr. Frank Cook: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the extent of drug abuse in prisons.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.


Column 407

Letter from Derek Lewis to Mr. Frank Cook, dated 27 February 1995:

I have been asked to reply to your recent Question on the extent of drug abuse in prisons.

The information currently available on prisoners is limited to that provided by the Home Office Addicts Index which relates to those assessed as being addicted to Class A drugs. During 1993, 3,764 drug addicts were identified by prison medical officers in England, Scotland and Wales. Not all of these prisoners were, however, necessarily misusing drugs while in prison. In addition, it is known that a significant number of prisoners use Class B drugs but no statistical information is currently available.

However, this year the Prison Service will be introducing a mandatory drug testing programme for prisoners. As part of the programme prisoners will be required to participate in random drug testing. This will provide a better indication of the extent of drug misuse in prison and the Service will be able to use this information to monitor the effectiveness of local drug strategies.

The presence of drugs in prison is unacceptable and tackling drug misuse is a high priority for the Service.

A new prison Service drugs strategy has been developed as part of the Government's strategy against the misues of drugs, as set out in the Green Paper "Tackling Drugs Together". The new strategy will be issued to all Prison Service establishments in the near future. The reduction in the level of drug misuse will be achieved through the implementation of local drug strategies which will have the objective of reducing the supply of drugs; reducing the demand for drugs; rehabilitating drug misusers; and reducing the potential for damage to health arising from the misuse of drugs.

Mandatory drug testing is an important part of the strategy. The first phase of implementation has already started in eight establishments. This will be carefully monitored and evaluated and the results will provide the basis for testing throughout the Prison Service. Prisoners who test positive will be liable to the usual range of disciplinary action on adjudication including additional days, loss of privileges and fines. Other measures to be taken will include imposition of closed visits and removal of home leave. Prisoners who test positive will be offered treatment for their drug misuse problem.

The strategy also contains measures to prevent drugs entering prisons. These include the increased use of drug dogs; more effective searching of prisoners, staff and visitors; the use of closed-circuit television cameras during visits; and the imposition of closed visits for prisoners found guilty of drug offences in prison.

The Prison Service will also be substantially expanding the number and type of drug treatment programmes available to prisoners. Careful monitoring and evaluation of these programmes will help to determine the development of drug treatment in other establishments.

Greater Manchester Probation Service

Miss Lestor: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many staff were employed and at what grades by the Greater Manchester probation service on 30 June 1992, 30 June 1993 and 30 June 1994;

(2) how many court reports were completed by the Greater Manchester probation service during 1992 and 1993;

(3) how many offenders were supervised by the Greater Manchester probation service on 30 June 1994.

Mr. Nicholas Baker: I refer the hon. Member to the reply that I gave to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshaw (Mr. Morris) and the hon. Member for Rochdale (Dr. Clark) on 21 February 1995, Official Report, column 157.

Ernest Saunders

Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 14 February,


Column 408

Official Report, column 585, what reasons the parole board gave for its recommendation to release Ernest Saunders.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Under the parole arrangements existing at the time when Mr. Saunders was released, the parole board was not required to give reasons for its recommendations.

Prisons (Alcohol)

Dr. Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many finds of illicit alcohol were made in gaols in England and Wales for each year since 1990.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.

Letter from Derek Lewis to Dr. Lynne Jones, dated27 February 1995:

The Home Secretary has asked me to reply to your recent Question about how many finds of illicit alcohol were made in jails in England and Wales for each year since 1990.

This information is not routinely kept by the Prison Service.

Non-departmental Public Bodies (Pay)

Mr. McAllion: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the non-departmental public bodies sponsored by his Department which will (a) follow the pay arrangements of the sponsoring Department and (b) pursue an independent and separate route under the delegated pay option (i) from April 1995 and (ii) from April 1996.


Next Section

  Home Page