| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Knives
Mr. David Young: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will ban the free sale of (a) hunting knives, (b) bayonets, (c) commando knives and (d) other war memorabilia that may be used for illegal purposes; and if he will make a statement. [6010]
Mr. Maclean [holding answer 14 December 1995]: My right hon. and learned Friend will consider adding to the list of knives and other weapons, the sale of which is
18 Dec 1995 : Column: 963
already prohibited, any knife which has no legitimate use and which can be defined in law in a way which satisfactorily distinguishes it from knives which do have a legitimate purpose. So far as war memorabilia are concerned, firearms and ammunition are subject to the normal licensing requirements of the firearms legislation.
Self-confessed Murderers
Ms Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many self-confessed murderers remain at large whose precise location are known to his office, the Crown Prosecution Service and the police. [6891]
Mr. Kirkhope: The statistics the hon. Member seeks are not available.
Ms Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with the family of Anthony Robin Fletcher, murdered in London in 1967, about the consequences of their knowing the identity and whereabouts of the murderer. [6886]
Mr. Kirkhope: The Home Office has been in contact a number of times with Mr. Fletcher's son. Officials have discussed the case at length with him and are aware of, and sympathetic to, the family's situation.
Ms Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he last met his United States counterpart to discuss the extradition of a self-confessed murderer from the United States of America to stand trial in the United Kingdom. [6892]
Mr. Kirkhope: I will write to the hon. Member.
Commission for Racial Equality
Mrs. Ann Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases have been brought or supported by the Commission for Racial Equality in the last year for which figures are available in cases where bias in favour of (a) white applicants by white employers, (b) black applicants by black employers and (c) Asian applicants by Asian employers was alleged; and if he will make a statement. [6942]
Mr. Kirkhope: This information is not recorded centrally by the Commission for Racial Equality and could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.
Mrs. Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will name the members of the Commission for Racial Equality; if he will indicate in each case the date and duration of appointment and the ethnic background; and if he will make a statement on the qualities, experience or other position which made the individual suitable for such appointment. [6940]
Mr. Kirkhope: The posts of commissioner at the Commission for Racial Equality are the personal appointment of my right hon. and learned Friend. They are initially appointed for a two-year period with the possibility of further extensions up to a total of five years.
The current commissioners are:
| Name | Appointed | Until |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Herman Ouseley | 19 April 1993 | 18 April 1998 |
| Dr. Raj Chandran | 1 January 1993 | 31 December 1996 |
| Mr. Michael Hastings | 1 May 1993 | 30 April 1997 |
| Mr. Bob Purkiss | 1 May 1993 | 30 April 1997 |
| Dr. Dwain Neil | 1 May 1993 | 30 April 1997 |
| Mrs. Marie Cunnigham | 1 May 1993 | 30 April 1997 |
| Dr. Zaka Khan | 1 May 1993 | 30 April 1997 |
| Mrs. Zahida Manzoor | 22 November 1993 | 31 March 1997 |
| Mr. Moussa Jogee | 1 September 1994 | 31 August 1997 |
| Mrs. Julie Mellor | 31 October 1995 | 30 October 1997 |
| Mr. Hugh Harris | 1 January 1995 | 31 December 1996 |
| Mrs. Jaslien Singh | 1 January 1995 | 31 December 1996 |
18 Dec 1995 : Column: 964
Details of commissioners' backgrounds are set out in the Commission for Racial Equality's annual report, the most recent copy of which was published on 6 June 1995; a copy has been placed in the Library.
Mrs. Winterton:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 22 November, Official Report, column 215, about the ethnic profile of employees of the Commission for Racial Equality, what assessment he has made of the consistency of that profile with a policy of appointment by merit in the context of statistical likelihood. [6943]
Mr. Kirkhope:
I have no reason to think that the current profile is inconsistent with the commission's equal opportunities policy towards the job applications it receives.
Mrs. Winterton:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases have been brought or supported by the Commission for Racial Equality in the last year for which figures are available against employers on the basis that the ethnic profile of their employees was such as to be inconsistent with the appointments made purely on merit; in how many other cases such a profile was a significant factor in the commission's case; and if he will make a statement. [6941]
Mr. Kirkhope:
None of the cases brought or supported by the commission against employers in the last year was on the basis that the ethnic profile of their employees was such as to be inconsistent with appointments made purely on merit.
Information on whether such a profile has been a significant factor in other cases could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.
Mr. Winnick:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will reply to the letter of 9 November, ref 2120/95. [6691]
Miss Widdecombe:
Responsibility for this matter has been delegated to the temporary Director General of the Prison Service, who has been asked to arrange for a reply to be given.
Letter from A. J. Pearson to Mr. David Winnick, dated 18 December 1995:
18 Dec 1995 : Column: 965
Mr. Parry:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the reasons for refusing the application for entry into the United Kingdom of Choi Chang Hun from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. [6816]
Mr. Kirkhope:
Mr. Choi's visa application was refused on the ground that his exclusion from the United Kingdom was conducive to the public good for reasons of national security.
Mrs. Bridget Prentice:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the main responsibilities and duties of inspectors working under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. [6063]
Mr. Sackville:
The duties are set out in section 18 of the Act.
Mrs. Prentice:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many project licences were granted in each severity banding in 1994 under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986; and how the bandings are defined. [6067]
Mr. Sackville:
Severity limits are allocated to individual procedures within project licences. Each severity limit is an agreed assessment of the maximum level of pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm likely to be associated with the procedure, taking into account any action planned to mitigate these adverse effects. Limits are selected from a three-band scale of mild, moderate and substantial severity. Procedures in which the animal is unconscious throughout are regarded as unclassified.
The assessment of the overall severity of a project uses the same three-band scale but takes into account the cumulative effect of each procedure; the number of animals to be used in each procedure; the proportion of animals expected to be exposed to the upper limits of severity in each procedure and the length of time that the animals might be exposed to the upper limits of severity.
The overall severity of project licences granted in 1994 was:
Mrs. Prentice:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many visits by inspectors working under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 were (a) announced and (b) unannounced in each year since 1990. [6064]
18 Dec 1995 : Column: 966
The Home Secretary has asked me, in the absence of the Director General from the office, to reply to your recent Question about when you will receive a reply to your letter of 9 November.
Your letter was passed to the Director General for reply as he has operational responsibility for the Prison Service. Richard Tilt sent a reply on 11 December.
Mrs. Prentice:
To ask the Secretary of Stae for the Home Department what plans he has to reduce the current number of inspectors working under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. [6065]
substantial: 9 moderate: 513 mild: 395 unclassified: 38
| Total visits to establishments | Visits of inspection to establishments | Visits to departments within establishments (a) announced (b) unannounced | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | (b) | |||
| 1990 | 2,829 | 2,533 | 1,744 | 4,703 |
| 1991 | 2,933 | 2,533 | 1,809 | 4,920 |
| 1992 | 3,299 | 2,784 | 2,302 | 4,638 |
| 1993 | 2,984 | 2,507 | 2,082 | 4,157 |
| 1994 | 2,726 | 2,319 | 1,535 | 4,348 |
| 1995 (January- October) | 2,390 | 2,063 | 1,122 | 3,877 |
1. The difference between Columns A and B reflects the fact that some visits may be unconnected with inspection per se--for example for the maintenance of scientific or professional skills. 2. The term "departments" at C includes the various units within each establishment visited.
Mrs. Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how consistency is ensured throughout the inspectorate when assessing the costs and benefits of animal research procedures. [6066]
Mr. Sackville: The report of the Animal Procedures Committee for 1993 sets out in the appendix II a note by the chief inspector, animals (scientific procedures) inspectorate, indicating how the assessment of benefit and severity is made. A small group chaired by the chief inspector also reviews licences for consistency.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |