| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Correspondence
Sir Brian Mawhinney: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the right hon. Member for North-West Cambridgeshire can expect a reply to his letter of 3 February to the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. O'Brien), on behalf of his constituent Mr. Perry. [79168]
Mr. Mike O'Brien: A reply to the right hon. Member's letter of 3 February will be sent this week.
Special Adjudicators
Mr. Clappison:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many of the appeal cases before a special adjudicator a certificate was issued by him and on what grounds, in the last year for which figures are available. [78684]
29 Mar 1999 : Column: 555
Mr. Mike O'Brien:
The information requested is given in the table.
| Certified category | |
|---|---|
| Para 5(2) | 3,075 |
| Para 5(3)a | 420 |
| Para 5(3)b | 810 |
| Para 5(4)a | 205 |
| Para 5(4)b | 35 |
| Para 5(4)c | 225 |
| Para 5(4)d | 5 |
| Para 5(4)e | 20 |
| Total | 4,790 |
(40) Figures rounded to nearest 5.
(41) Figures are estimates based on cases for which information is records.
Key to category codes
Para 5(2) Designated country of destination
Para 5(3)a Failure to produce without reasonable explanation, a passport on arrival
Para 5(3)b Applicant gained or attempted entry using a false passport
Para 5(4)a Claim did not show fear of persecution
Para 5(4)b Claim was manifestly unfounded or where grounds have fallen away
Para 5(4)c Claim was made after refusal of leave to enter
Para 5(4)d Claim was manifestly fraudulent/evidence was manifestly false
Para 5(4)e Claim was frivolous or vexatious
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what was the average time taken for an adjudicator to determine an appeal against refusal of leave to enter in each of the last three years; [78623]
- (2) what is the average waiting time for an appeal to a special adjudicator in an asylum case between when the claim is refused to the determination of the appeal, according to the most recent figures. [78625]
Mr. Mike O'Brien: The available information is that, on average, the waiting time, over the last six months, for a special adjudicator to determine an asylum appeal is estimated to be 13 months. This relates to the date of the receipt of the appeal at the Independent Appellant Authority not the date of the refusal as requested. Information on non-asylum appeals is not recorded centrally.
Drugs Prevention Initiative
Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will publish a report on the progress of his Department's Drugs Prevention Initiative. [79552]
Mr. George Howarth: I am publishing on 30 March, the Home Office Drugs Prevention Initiative's (DPI) eighth and final progress report.
This report reflects the Initiative's valuable contribution to advancing the case for effective community based drugs prevention over the last 9 years. That contribution was fully recognised in the Government's White Paper on Drugs, "Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain", published in April last year. The work of the Initiative, in terms of its good practice findings from its rigorously
29 Mar 1999 : Column: 556
evaluated demonstration projects, has helped influence thinking and improve the evidence base for drugs prevention.
The Initiative reaches its planned conclusion on 31 March 1999. The White Paper recognised the need for successor arrangements to the Initiative, to support the Government's 10 year anti-drugs strategy. I am pleased to announce that the Home Office Drugs Prevention Advisory Service (DPAS) will replace the DPI from 1 April 1999. The new service will cover the whole of England and will work closely with all Drug Action Teams to encourage good drugs prevention practice and to support their work in delivering the national strategy.
I am placing a copy of the final DPI report in the Library tomorrow at 10.30 am.
Angela Smith:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the outcome of the joint Prison Service and NHS Executive review on the future organisation of prisoners' health care; and if he will make a statement. [79553]
Mr. Straw:
A copy of the Report by the Joint Prison Service and NHS Executive Working Group on the future organisation of prisoners' health care has been placed in the Library, along with a Table giving a detailed response to the recommendations and action points.
The Report identifies a range of weaknesses with the current organisation and provision of healthcare to prisoners. While there is good work being done, looked at as a whole, there is considerable variation in the organisation, funding, delivery and quality of prisoner health care, with variable links to the NHS. The Report makes clear that this situation is largely the product of a historic legacy of ad hoc development and relative isolation from the NHS. This means that, on the whole, prison health care is reactive rather that proactive; and well developed primary care teams, health needs assessments and appropriately planned services, are the exception rather than the rule.
The Government accept the recommendations and action points set out in the Report and reaffirm the existing aim of prison health care to give prisoners access to the same quality and range of health services as the general public receives from the NHS. The reform of prison healthcare poses problems and issues of a complex nature and will take place against the background of NHS reform. This means that change must be carried out in stages. The Government's response combines immediate action to improve service delivery, with a joint approach to future policy development and further work on identification of prisoner needs, priorities, timescales for improvement and organisation.
First, the Report has identified a number of areas where priority action is needed, and which can begin to be addressed within the existing comprehensive spending settlement. As a start, the Government intend that, by the end of 1999, work will have been carried out to pilot a new prison reception health screening tool. This will help staff more effectively to identify the health needs and status of each individual prisoner and plan how to meet their individual treatment needs. In parallel with this
29 Mar 1999 : Column: 557
work, a health needs assessment template will be developed to help prisoners and health authorities determine the health needs of their prison population.
With immediate effect, doctors newly appointed to undertake any kind of primary care in prisons will be required to hold a certificate from the Joint Committee on Postgraduate Training for General Practice (JCPTGP) or have recognised equivalent accreditation to practice primary care medicine. Doctors currently providing primary care services who do not hold the JCPTGP certificate will be encouraged to work towards obtaining it. The Government also accept the case made in the Report that nursing care in prisons should be under the direction of registered nurses. Where this is not the case, Prison Service establishments will work towards achieving it as soon as possible.
The Report draws particular attention to the needs of the large number of prisoners with mental health problems. Within the framework of radical reform set out in the Government's White Paper "Modernising Mental Health Services--Safe, sound and supportive", published in December 1998, the needs of prisons will be taken into account when planning all inpatient mental health services including high and medium secure services. And, in order to support prisoners for whom a transfer to hospital would not be appropriate, Health Authorities will ensure that service agreements with NHS Trusts include outreach services for prisoners. These services will aim to provide appropriate mental health care for persons in prison custody and to achieve continuity of care when moving between secure prison accommodation and community mental health services.
Secondly, the Government in particular welcome the proposal for greater joint working between the Prison Service and the NHS. This is in keeping with the Government's broader policy initiative, "Modernising Government", by removing barriers and disincentives to cross-departmental working where that is necessary for the delivery of better and more effective services.
Ministerial and departmental accountabilities will remain as now: the Prison Service being accountable for the provision of primary care and the NHS for specialist services and for care provided in NHS hospitals. But future planning and delivery of prisoner health care will be underpinned by joint working and planning at national, regional and local levels. Practical benefits on the ground are likely to include the proper integration of health promotion and health care into prison regimes, and arrangements to ensure continuity of health care on receipt into custody, transfer to hospital, or on release back to the community. Health improvement programmes will be expected to reflect these objectives.
In order to put the joint organisation and planning of prison health care on a firm footing, the Chief Executive of the NHS Executive and the Director General of the Prison Service, will, as recommended in the Report,
29 Mar 1999 : Column: 558
establish in the course of 1999 a Joint Prison Health Policy Unit and a Joint Prison Health Care Task Force. These Units, working with the Prison Service and the NHS will lead and manage the process of change.
The Joint Prison Health Policy Unit will be expected to set overall standards and policy, provide clear strategic direction for prison healthcare, and to advise both Home Office and Health Ministers. This Unit will replace the current Prison Service Directorate of Healthcare and will be physically located in the NHS Executive in the Department of Health. The Prison Healthcare Task Force will draw on staff of appropriate experience from the Prison Service, the NHS and other organisations. Its principal roles will be to offer expert advice and support the joint work that prisons and health authorities will need to do in identifying and implementing plans to improve health services to prisoners and in making the best use of available resources. The publication of this Report signals the importance that the Government attach to establishing joint working arrangements between each prison and their local health authority. Prisons and health authorities will be asked to start their joint work in the course of this summer.
Thirdly, this reorganisation will not only greatly strengthen the co-ordination of prison health care, but form the basis for further work, including an assessment of how budget-setting might best reinforce effective care, the identification of prisoner health needs, the formulation of improvement plans and consequent financial implications, and advice on priorities so as to achieve the effective use of resources.