|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
18 Mar 2003 : Column 701Wcontinued
Mrs. Calton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what emergency planning has been undertaken in preparation for a chemical or biological attack in the UK; and if he will make a statement about the state of preparedness of the (a) emergency services and (b) local authority services. 
18 Mar 2003 : Column 702W
Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what evaluation has been made of the impact of the detonation of a dirty radiological bomb in a city centre; what assessment has been made of the ways in which decontamination needed can be carried out; and what calculation has been made of the likely consequential costs of such a dirty bomb being used. 
Mr. Blunkett: The United Kingdom has well tried and tested contingency plansdeveloped over many yearsfor responding to a wide range of terrorist threats, including those which might involve the threatened or actual use of radiological materials.
At a national level, existing contingency plans for dealing with the aftermath of radiological emergencies arising from nuclear and other incidents have been reviewed and adapted to cater for the deliberate release of radioactivity, or 'dirty bombs' into the environment. The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) takes the lead in maintaining these plans.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Southampton, Itchen (John Denham), published the Strategic National Guidance for the Decontamination of People Exposed To Chemical, Biological, Radiological or Nuclear (CBRN) Substances or Material on 3 February 2003 which contains ways in which the decontamination of people is carried out. This is an approach which provides simple but effective decontamination for chemical, biological or radiological contaminants.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures are in place to prevent illegal immigrants being used by terrorists to introduce dangerous pathogens into the UK. 
Beverley Hughes: Clandestine illegal entrants detected in Kent are transferred to the Dover Asylum Screening Centre and they and their baggage are searched thoroughly as part of the screening process.
The terrorist threat remains real, and serious. As recent events have shown, no country is immune from attack, and it simply is not possible to guarantee against more attacks in the future. However, this Government are resolute in their determination to defeat terrorism regardless of its source.
The average time between application and initial decision was six months for initial decisions made in 2002. This has been calculated using all cases for which data are available, including older cases decided as part of the reduction of the backlog, as well as new cases. This compares to 20 months in 1997.
18 Mar 2003 : Column 703W
Mr. Blunkett: Our defence against bioterrorism takes account of the possibility of terrorists seeking to use a wide range of pathogens and toxins. Schedule 5 to the Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 lists 47 such agents for which security arrangements must be made.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the detection technologies available to each of the emergency services for use in incidents where terrorist threat surveillance may be appropriate. 
Mr. Blunkett: The Fire Service has access to radiological survey meters and, in appropriate circumstances, personal radiation dosimeters. In addition, all brigades have access to explosive atmosphere monitors and local scientific advice.
Mr. Blunkett: Operational responsibility for security within the parliamentary estate rests with the Serjeant-at-Arms. Outside the estate's boundaries, operational responsibility falls to the Metropolitan Police Service. For security reasons, I cannot comment on the detail of the measures in place to protect against potential terrorist or other forms of attack.
Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the level of preparedness amongst voluntary organisations of the United Kingdom to respond to a major terrorist attack; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Blunkett: The degree of preparedness of any voluntary organisation judged competent to work with the statutory agencies in handling the consequences of any civil emergency is a matter for assessment by the local authority and/or emergency service through which the voluntary organisation is registered and operates. The Government have published clear guidance on the use and training of volunteers and voluntary organisations in the following core guidance publications: 'Dealing With Disaster' (3rd edition), England and Wales (chapter 6); 'Dealing With Disaster Together', Scottish Executive (chapter 7); 'A Guide to Emergency Planning in Northern Ireland' (annex C).
18 Mar 2003 : Column 704W
Matthew Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which contingent liabilities for which his Department has responsibility have matured in each of the last five financial years; and if he will make a statement. 
Between 199899 and 200102, payments were made against only one contingent liability. This arose from section 27 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. It related to the cost of re-funding charges for travel documents issued between January 1994 and February 1999. By the end of the year 200102, the liability had reduced to below the £100,000 reporting threshold.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Immigration and Nationality Directorate will reply to letters from the hon. Member for Vauxhall dated 25 March 2002, 19 June 2002, 21 October 2002 and 16 December 2002 about a constituent, reference number M61644. 
Mr. Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to reply to the letter to him dated 3 January from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton with regard to Mr. B. Padya. 
Mrs. Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what meetings have been held between Home Office and Department of Health officials following the judgment in R (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department. 
Hilary Benn: Following the High Court judgement, Prison Service Officials have had a series of three meetings so far with Department of Health and Youth Justice Board officials to consider the implications of Justice Munby's judgement. The meetings are looking at the possible need for further guidance.
Kevin Brennan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of children and young people who will be sentenced annually under each of the new proposals in the Criminal Justice Bill to (a) detention for life, (b) detention for public protection and (c) extended sentences. 
18 Mar 2003 : Column 705W
Hilary Benn: The Criminal Justice Bill provides new mandatory sentences for offenders who commit a specified violent or sexual offence and who, in the opinion of the court, present a serious risk to members of the public of serious harm commissioned by the offender of further specified offences.
Relevant juveniles convicted of an offence which carries a maximum penalty of detention for life under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, will receive detention for life under section 91.
The provisions aim to protect the public from the very small minority of juveniles who present a serious risk and to enable those offenders to be detained until their risk has been reduced. We anticipate their being used infrequently. We estimate that under them around 30 juveniles a year are likely to receive detention for life, around 10 the extended sentence and one or two detention for public protection.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|