House of Commons - Home Affairs - Minutes of Evidence

Select Committee on Home Affairs Minutes of Evidence

Annex B

Supplementary notes by the Home Office

NATIONAL DATABASE OF CONVICTIONS

Question 10: Mr Ross Cranston asked the Home Secretary about the provision of a national database of convictions.

Databases of national conviction information already exist on the Police National Computer (PNC) and on the Home Office Offenders Index (OI). Probation services and others have some access to these sources but we are seeking to improve present arrangements.

Until recently, probation services relied on local arrangements with the police and the Crown Prosecution Service to obtain pre-conviction information held on the PNC. However, from February this year more formal arrangements have been introduced whereby probation services can promptly obtain printouts containing conviction data direct from the PNC, via their local police, in order to assist pre-sentence report writers and supervising officers. In addition, under the National Probation Service information Systems Strategy, the Home Office Probation Unit is working with the unit responsible for Co-ordination of Computerisation in the Criminal Justice System (the CCCJS) and the Police Information Technology Organisation (PITO) to develop an automatic interface between the probation service CRAMS computer system and the PNC in order to allow ready access to conviction and other data: (early findings of a pilot project which provided the West Midlands Probation Service with a PNC terminal allowing them to make their own enquiries are encouraging).

The Home Office Research and Statistics Directorate (RSD) have provided criminal career information relating to individual offenders to several probation services on request from the OI for research purposes. The OI contains information on all convictions for "standard list" offences (i.e. all indictable offences and some of the more serious summary offences) recorded since 1963. RSD are now supplying information about local reconviction rates for community penalties to probation services on request. It is intended that local information will be published later this year as part of a Probation Performance Monitor.

DIVERSION FROM OFFENDING

Question 18: The Home Secretary was asked by the Chairman and Mr Richard Allan about Government plans for funding programmes aimed at diverting people from crime.

Since coming into office, the Government have taken a number of steps to reinforce efforts to reduce crime rather than simply dealing with its consequences. This is partly about actions which can be taken by the Home Office, but also very much about getting a range of other Government Departments and Agencies to recognise the impact which their own social and economic policies have on the causes of crime. Thus, for example, the single regeneration budget challenge fund has, since its creation, succeeded in channelling substantial amounts of money at areas with multiple problems, which often include high levels of crime and drug misuse. But the Government concluded that even more could be done if regeneration partnerships were required to give higher priority to people-related objectives, including community safety. As a result, the guidelines for the fourth round of the challenge funding which Richard Caborn, Minister of State at the Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions, issued last July encouraged applicants to come forward with bids which went with the grain of Government policies, including those relating to employment, crime and education. The funding decisions which were announced on 30 March include a substantial number of schemes which will help reduce criminality and drug misuse.

By getting more young people into work and improving their employability, the New Deal will create new hope and opportunities for a large number of youngsters, some of whom might otherwise have drifted into crime or antisocial behaviour. In addition, the Government have sought to construct the programme in a way which ensures that it benefits those who are already at risk of offending or have acquired a record. The Government have been keen to ensure, therefore, that the Gateway is able to provide the intensive help needed by those with a serious range of social problems. During the Budget Statement, the Chancellor announced an additional £50 million to enhance the advice available through the Gateway to the most disadvantaged young people and to create a national network of mentors to help advise and motivate young people to get back to work. The Home Secretary also announced on 3 February that about £1.5m of windfall tax money would be devoted to helping over two thousand eighteen to twenty-four year old prisoners based in eleven prisons and young offender institutions so that, on release, they could gain maximum and immediate benefit from the New Deal.

The need to tie in a wide range of interests and agencies to an effective crime reduction strategy applies as much at local level as nationally. There is, of course, a good deal of local activity already involving criminal justice and other agencies working together to very good effect. But the Government believe this needs added focus and impetus. That is why in the Crime and Disorder Bill the Home Secretary is seeking to place a statutory duty on the police and local authorities to work together in partnership. This is designed to ensure that tackling crime is seen to be about much more than enforcement. That is a message which the Home Office have sought to reinforce in two other ways. First, the key objectives for the police service for 1998-99 shift the emphasis from crime detection to crime reduction. Of course, effective investigatory work has a central role to play in tackling crime but a shift in balance was overdue. Second, Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary's thematic inspection report which was published on 10 February set out a new framework and best practice guide to police forces for bringing down crime levels.

Reforms to the youth justice system are also centred on the idea of partnership between all the relevant local agencies. As the Audit Commission report of November 1996 on "Misspent Youth" made clear, there have been a number of imaginative local projects to tackle youth offending, including some for which the Home Office has provided funding directly (for example the Dalston Youth Project) and others which have now proved their worth over a number of years (for example the Northamptonshire diversion scheme). But the Youth Justice Board and the local youth offending teams will provide a new focus for work to prevent young people offending. Youth Offending teams will bring together representatives from youth justice agencies and from health and education authorities in new partnership arrangements. The aim is to get the Youth Justice Board, and youth offending teams, up and running as soon as possible.

The Government have also appointed Keith Hellawell to be the first national anti-drugs co-ordinator. While it would be wrong to anticipate details of his new strategy, Mr Hellawell is understood to be keen to find ways of shifting expenditure away from the cost consequence of the drugs problem to the resource opportunities in preventing it. The drug treatment and testing orders proposed in the Crime and Disorder Bill are designed to provide a more effective means of dealing with those offenders with serious addiction problems.

Home Office officials have been taking an active part in the three Social Exclusion Unit studies of school exclusions and truancies, rough sleeping, and the problems of the worst estates. These, together with the inter-departmental work which the Home Secretary is leading on to improve support for the family, will have an important contribution to make to tackling some of the underlying causes of crime.

The important work which Alun Michael, Minister of State at the Home Office, is doing on the promotion of more active communities and the strengthening of the voluntary sector and of volunteering is also part of the wider agenda. For example, volunteers have had a key role to play in those diversion projects which have involved providing at risk youngsters with older mentors.

In conclusion, there is much work already in hand to broaden and deepen our approach to reducing criminality. Within the framework of the Comprehensive Spending Review, the Home Office has been reviewing the evidence for the effectiveness of various interventions aimed at preventing offending behaviour. Over the next few months the Home Secretary hopes to be able to come forward with some further proposals for a strategy which will underpin the efforts across Government over the coming years.

TERRORIST SUSPECT INTERVIEWS

Question 58: The Chairman asked the Home Secretary about recording of interviews with terrorist suspects.

The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisons) Act 1996 required Silent Video Recording (SVR) of all terrorist suspect interviews in Northern Ireland. The provision came into force on 10 March this year—a pilot scheme has been running from the beginning of 1998.

While there is no legal requirement to audio tape interviews with terrorist suspects in England and Wales, we understand that, in practice, they are all taped. The Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Bill [currently before Parliament] provides for the audio taping of terrorist suspect interviews in Northern Ireland.

The whole issue of recording terrorist suspect interviews will be looked at in the context of the forthcoming consultation paper on permanent United Kingdom-wide counter-terrorist legislation.

EUROPEAN/THIRD PILLAR MATTERS

Question 91: The Chairman asked the Home Secretary if the United Kingdom would have full speaking rights and access to papers in respect of measures transferred to the First Pillar from which we have secured an opt-out.

The United Kingdom will have the right to participate fully in the discussion of, and receive papers relating to, subject areas which will be transferred to the First Pillar under the terms of the Amsterdam Treaty.

Question 107: Mr Humfrey Malins asked the Home Secretary about staffing levels for Europol.

At the moment, the Europol Drugs Unit (EDU) has 93 employees, 10 of whom are from the United Kingdom. In addition, there are 42 Europol Liaison Officers seconded from the member states, including two from the United Kingdom.

The extent to which the number of staff may increase in the future depends on a number of factors. At the moment the mandate of the EDU covers five principal areas of criminality: unlawful drug trafficking; trafficking in nuclear and radioactive substances; illegal immigrant smuggling; trade in human beings; motor vehicle crime; and related money-laundering. Annex 2 to the Europol Convention (copy attached)* envisages this expanding to a number of areas of transnational organised crime. The Amsterdam Treaty also envisages a developing role for Europol. So, we can expect expansion as the organisation establishes itself. However, it remains to be seen what resources can be devoted to it by member states. Of course, its size should reflect its role as an organisation operating in support of the law enforcement agencies of member states within clearly defined areas of activity.

Within the National Criminal Intelligence Service in London, there are seven officers who have a liaison role with Europol.

Question 113: Mr Ross Cranston asked about work in the cross-Pillar Horizontal Drugs Group on implementation of the Joint Action on the approximation of drugs laws and practices.

The United Kingdom's concern has been to avoid approximation of laws for its own sake (we believe that a commitment to overhaul the Misuse of Drugs Act and related legislation without clear benefit would be unwelcome). We have therefore taken the position that any proposals calling for approximation of laws at the level of the European Union must demonstrate real added value in achieving the elimination of drug misuse and combating drug trafficking.

As Presidency, the United Kingdom has invited those member states who have previously made suggestions in this area to set out their proposals in more detail. These will be considered by the Horizontal Drugs Group, with a view to considering appropriate priorities for action.

The Joint Action also promoted the establishment of a rapid information system to help identify new synthetic drugs as they come onto the illicit market. In pursuing this remit the United Kingdom is also taking further forward implementation of the Joint Action negotiated subsequently under the Dutch Presidency, which established an early warning and risk assessment mechanism for new synthetic drugs. Under the terms of this Joint Action, the United Kingdom Presidency, on behalf of all member states, referred at the end of February the new synthetic drug MBDB (already subject to control in the United Kingdom, but not in all member states) to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) for risk assessment.

*Not printed.

Question 115: The Home Secretary undertook to provide the Committtee with a list of the action points contained in the High Level Group's report on Organised Crime.

These are as follows:

1. Co-ordination, at a national level, of the fight against organised crime. Collection and analysis of data on organised crime activity.

2. Pre-accession pact with the EU on co-operation against crime for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic States.

3. Development of closer relationships in the fight against organised crime between EU and other third countries and international organisations.

4. Study on high technology crime.

5. Development of comprehensive policy against corruption.

6. Tighter control over the participation in public tender procedures.

7. Greater protection of "legal persons".

8. Use of structural funds to combat organised crime.

9. Fraud against the Community Budget.

10. Multi-annual programme to combat organised crime.

11. Prevention of exploitation of vulnerable professions by organised crime.