| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11 Dec 2002 : Column 359W—continued
HOME DEPARTMENT
Antisocial Behaviour
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many court actions have taken place against offenders who have broken the terms of their antisocial behaviour order; and if he will list the range of penalties imposed. [86428]
Mr. Denham [holding answer 9 December 2002]: The available information, relating to breaches of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) in England and Wales, covers the period 1 June 2000 to 31 December 2001 and is shown in the table. The analysis covers only those breaches by persons issued with ASBOs during this period and notified to the Home Office.
Note:
Figures cover only those proceedings relating to persons issued with ASBOs between 1 June 2000 and 31 December 2001 and notified to the Home Office.
Persons are counted only once even if they breached the same order on more than one occasion.
Conditional discharge is not available for breach of an ASBO under section 1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998; instances where a conditional discharge may have been given are being investigated.
11 Dec 2002 : Column 360W
11 Dec 2002 : Column 361W
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the (a) remit, (b) composition and (c) work programme of the Home Office Anti-Social Behaviour Unit. [84309]
Mr. Denham [holding answer 2 December 2002]: We are committed to reducing anti-social behaviour. The Anti-Social Behaviour Unit will act as a catalyst to drive the Government's cross-cutting agenda. The unit will be headed by Louise Casey. Once fully recruited, it will comprise of staff drawn from across Government and from outside organisations. It will develop strategy and focus on implementation of existing initiatives and legislation, and the preparation of the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill, which was announced in the Queen's speech.
Asylum Applications
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he plans to issue to clarify the circumstances in which an in-country asylum applicant should be considered to have made their claim within a 'reasonably practicable period' for the purposes of determining whether they are entitled to support by the National Asylum Support Service; whether asylum seekers will be exempt from having to show that they have made their claim as soon as reasonably practicable if they are in-county applicants who (a) suffer from a recognised disability, (b) suffer from a serious physical, mental or psychological illness, (c) are pregnant, (d) suffer from serious trauma, (e) have been subject to human rights abuse, (f) are drug or alcohol dependent, and (g) are over the age of 60; and if he will make a statement. [85819]
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 10 December 2002]: Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 which comes into force on 8 January 2003, will prevent the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) from providing support unless the Secretary of State is satisfied that the person applied for asylum as soon as reasonably practicable after arrival in the United Kingdom.
Case-workers in NASS will receive training on how this new measure should be applied. In addition guidance will also be issued to local authorities.
I can confirm that in practice, if an applicant makes a claim immediately on arrival at the port then they will be able to access asylum support, provided they otherwise
11 Dec 2002 : Column 362W
qualify. If the person fails, without good reason, to make an asylum claim immediately at the port of arrival then support will be refused.
Families with children will, however, receive asylum support even if they did not apply as soon as reasonably practicable.
In addition, those who claim asylum in-country following a significant change in circumstances in their country of origin (provided they make their asylum claim at the earliest possible opportunity following that change of circumstance) will be supported by NASS.
In addition asylum seekers who successfully show that a refusal of support by NASS will result, for example, in a breach of Article 3 European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) will be granted support by NASS.
Local authorities will continue to be able to provide support to asylum seekers under the National Assistance Act 1948 (or in Scotland the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968) but only where they are presently empowered to do so, ie where special needs have been identified so as to engage those provisions.
Whether the particular types of case which are referred to will be eligible for support will depend on whether, on the particular facts of the case, the claim for asylum has been made as soon as reasonably practicable and, if not, whether the case falls within one of the exceptions referred to above.
Mr. Coleman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers from (a) Somalia and (b) Iraq have had their applications (i) approved and (ii) refused in each of the last 12 months. [85676]
Beverley Hughes: The tables show asylum applications and initial decisions and appeal outcomes for each of the last 12 months. Data on initial decisions are independent of applications data, and do not necessarily relate to applications made in the same period. Appeal outcomes in any given time period do not necessarily relate to initial decisions made in the same period.
Information on asylum applications and initial decisions is published quarterly. The next publication will be available from 28 February 2003 on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
(4) Figures rounded to nearest 5, with '*' = 1 or 2.
(5) Information is of initial determination decisions, excluding the outcome of appeals or other subsequent decisions.
(6) Provisional data.
11 Dec 2002 : Column 363W
| Somalia | Iraq | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | Allowed | Dismissed | Withdrawn(8) | Total | Allowed | Dismissed | Withdrawn(8) | |
| 2001 | ||||||||
| October | 90 | 15 | 55 | 20 | 255 | 60 | 175 | 25 |
| November | 90 | 30 | 50 | 15 | 280 | 60 | 185 | 35 |
| December | 100 | 20 | 65 | 15 | 230 | 40 | 165 | 25 |
| 2002 | ||||||||
| January | 100 | 20 | 65 | 15 | 325 | 65 | 220 | 40 |
| February | 130 | 35 | 80 | 10 | 390 | 105 | 255 | 25 |
| March | 180 | 60 | 105 | 15 | 430 | 105 | 285 | 40 |
| April | 210 | 75 | 115 | 25 | 495 | 135 | 320 | 40 |
| May | 270 | 90 | 155 | 25 | 470 | 130 | 300 | 40 |
| June | 260 | 90 | 130 | 35 | 320 | 80 | 210 | 30 |
| July | 360 | 135 | 175 | 50 | 380 | 65 | 280 | 35 |
| August | 325 | 140 | 150 | 30 | 420 | 90 | 280 | 45 |
| September | 290 | 110 | 155 | 30 | 395 | 100 | 255 | 40 |
| Total | 2,405 | 810 | 1,305 | 285 | 4,390 | 1,035 | 2,940 | 420 |
(7) Provisional figures rounded to the nearest 5. Appeals do not necessarily relate to initial Home Office decisions in the same month.
(8) Figures include cases withdrawn by the Home Office as well as the appellant.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |