|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Vernon Coaker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make it his policy that adults working with vulnerable adults are police checked prior to commencing employment in this sector; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Denham: Once part VII of the Care Standards Act 2000 is implemented, anyone being considered for a care position, within the terms of that Act, working with vulnerable adults will have to be the subject of a higher-level check via the Criminal Records Bureau. This will include both police records and the new list provided for under the Act of persons considered unsuitable to work with vulnerable adults.
18 Jul 2002 : Column 564W
Rachel Squire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress the Prison Service has made in the last year towards improving its environmental performance; and if he will make a statement. 
Hilary Benn: The Prison Service continues to make progress in this area. During the last year there have been a number of achievements as regards biodiversity, energy efficiency, procurement, transport and waste management. These are described in the service's second annual environmental report published today, a copy of which has been placed in the Library.
In introducing a formal greening operations policy in March 2000, the Director General of the Prison Service made clear his own personal commitment to improving the environmental performance of the service. A challenging programme of work in line with that commitment, and detailed in the report, has been set for the current year.
Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Passport Agency will respond to the letter of 27 February from the hon. Member for Christchurch, concerning the case of Mr. Bevis and Miss Biddiscombe. 
Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Chief Executive of the Integrated Casework Directorate (Nationality) will respond to the letter of the hon. Member for Christchurch sent on 17 June. 
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the mandate of the Committee for the implementation of the Community action programme on preventive measures to fight violence against children, young persons and women (Daphne) is; how many times it has met over the last 12 months; what the UK representation on it is; what the annual cost of its work is to public funds; if he will list the items currently under its consideration; if he will take steps to increase its accountability and transparency to Parliament; and if he will make a statement. 
18 Jul 2002 : Column 565W
Mr. Denham: The Daphne Committee assists the European Commission in the management and implementation of a programme which co-funds projects to promote the protection of children, young persons and women from violence and abuse. It normally meets twice a year, initially to agree the annual work programme and criteria for evaluating the selecting bids for funding and subsequently to discuss the bids which have been received and to agree the allocation of funds to successful projects.
The United Kingdom is represented on the Committee by a Home Office official (for issues concerning domestic violence and violence against women), an official from the Department of Health (for child protection issues) and an official from the United Kingdom Permanent Representation in Brussels.
The Daphne programme is funded by the European Community budget and travel costs to attend Committee meetings are met by the European Commission. The Home Office pays a subsistence allowance to cover attendance at a Committee meeting.
The Commission is required to prepare reports on the implementation of the programme in its second and final years which will be submitted to the Council and European Parliament. The reports will also be published in the EUROPA internet website. I do not see a need for further measures to increase the Committee's accountability and transparency.
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many statutory instruments have been (a) introduced, (b) removed and (c) amended by his Department since 1 January; and what the (i) cost and (ii) saving has been in each case. 
Beverley Hughes: 57 statutory instruments have been made by Home Office Ministers since 1 January 2002. Three have been revoked. Information is not available about the costs and savings of implementation and repeal and could not be made available other than at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Gummer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer of 5 February 2002, Official Report, column 882W, if he will place in the Library a full description of the network information database. 
Beverley Hughes: I presume that the right hon. Member is referring to the Case Information Database (CID), which was developed and implemented during 200102 as the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND's) main database system.
The functionality and data management is subject to continual revision. In that connection, a significant enhancement programme is currently under way to enable the implementation of many IND policy initiatives and
18 Jul 2002 : Column 566W
process improvements planned for the next two years. It is considered that the work required in maintaining a "full description" of the database would prove disproportionate.
Mr. Gummer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, (1) pursuant to his answer of 5 February 2002, Official Report, column 882W, if he will place in the Library an explanation of how the database will be used to monitor the Department's performance; 
It is not intended to place in the Library an explanation specifically of how CID is used to monitor performance. The means by which IND monitors its business and it's approach to performance management generally are described within documents such as IND's Business Plan and the plans of individual units within IND.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the procedure is relating to the production of documents at a police station within seven days of being stopped in a motor vehicle; and whether a receipt or NCR copy should be provided on production of an HORT2 form. 
Mr. Denham [holding answer 10 June 2002]: Police officers are entitled under the Road Traffic Act 1988 to require motorists to produce a range of driver and vehicle related documents for inspection. A motorist failing to produce such documents on request is guilty of an offence, unless he produces them at a police station of his nomination within seven days.
If any of the required documents cannot be made available at the time of the police request, the motorist is issued with a form HORT 1. This formally notifies him that within the specified time he must present the documents at a police station of his choice, which is recorded on the form.
The HORT 1 is in two parts. The top copy is issued to the driver, the bottom is retained within the issuing force to monitor and control the subsequent presentation of the documents. Upon their presentation, staff at the nominated police station inspect them and record the necessary details on a two part document known as the HORT 2. One part of the HORT 2 is then retained by the nominated police station and the second part sent to the originating police force so that they can verify compliance with the original request.
The HORT system has no statutory basis. It is operated by the police for administrative convenience without any direct Government involvement. In 1996 an Association of Chief Police Officers Working Group considered whether the system should include the issue of a receipt for documents produced. The Group unanimously concluded that the costs incurred would far exceed any benefit.