| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
3 Jun 2003 : Column 137W—continued
Ali Serir
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 15 May, Official Report, column 430W, on Ali Serir, on what basis Mr. Ali Serir's application was refused. [115704]
Beverley Hughes: Mr Serir's application was refused as Mr Serir failed to meet the requirements set out under Rule 284 of the Immigration Rules, namely that an applicant must have limited leave to remain in the UK.
British Citizens
Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what regulations under subsection (1) (ba) or (bb) of the British Nationality Act 1981 have been published since the passing of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002; and if he will place copies in the Library. [115216]
Beverley Hughes: The subsections of the British Nationality Act referred to in the question relate to the standard of English and knowledge about life in the UK to be attained by those applying for naturalisation.
My right hon. Friend, the Home Secretary appointed the "Life in the UK" Advisory Group chaired by Professor Sir Bernard Crick, to look at the content, conduct and implementation of programmes of study for potential citizens. It is expected to publish its final report shortly.
Once the recommendations in the report have been considered the regulations will be drafted and published.
Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons have become (a) registered and (b) naturalised as British citizens since the passing of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. [115217]
Beverley Hughes: The latest available figures for registration and naturalisation as a British Citizen are for 2001, published in the Home Office statistical Bulletin "Persons Granted British Citizenship, United Kingdom, 2001". A copy has been placed in the Library.
Figures for 2002 will be published in the next Bulletin, due in August 2003.
Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons have been deprived of citizenship under the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. [115218]
3 Jun 2003 : Column 138W
Beverley Hughes: The provisions of the Act came into force on 1 April 2003. There are now two possible grounds for deprivation: that the individual obtained the citizenship by deception or (provided he or she would not be left stateless) that the person has done something seriously prejucicial to the vital interests of the United Kingdom or of a British overseas territory. Notice of a decision to make a deprivation order has been made in one case.
Children's Rights Commissioner for London
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Office of the Children's Rights Commissioner for London. [115523]
Mr. Charles Clarke: I have been asked to reply.
The Government welcomes the contribution of the Office of the Children's Rights Commissioner for London to the debate about the value of a children's commissioner for England. We have received a copy of the final report entitled 'A Legacy and a Challenge for London: Office of the Children's Rights Commissioner for London—a Three-year Demonstration Project' (2003), and are considering with interest the report's assessment of the work of the Office over the past three years.
Corporate Manslaughter
Mr. Stringer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if the proposed new offence of corporate manslaughter will apply to (a) Crown properties and (b) Government departments. [115283]
Paul Goggins [holding answer 22 May 2003]: As we announced during the Report stage of the Criminal Justice Bill, we intend to legislate to ensure that companies where a death has occurred due to gross negligence by the organisation as a whole are liable for manslaughter under the criminal law. The legislation will be targeted at companies, not individual directors. We will announce further details of the proposals, including the position of Crown bodies in respect of the legislation, before the end of the year.
Correctional Services
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the terms of reference of the review looking into corrections policy; and what progress is being made in producing a report. [115434]
Paul Goggins: A Review of Correctional Services was announced in July 2002 in the White Paper "Justice for All".
The first phase of the review has concentrated on the short term demands on the correctional services and was carried out by the Home Office. The second phase of the review is being led independently by Patrick Carter and will consider a strategy for correctional services over the Spending Review 2004 period to meet the Government's objectives of protecting the public, reducing crime and sustaining public confidence, in ways which are cost effective and financially sustainable. Patrick Carter is due to report his findings to Ministers in the autumn.
3 Jun 2003 : Column 139W
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the Government's policy is towards corrective procedures; and what steps he is taking to encourage greater co-ordination between police, probation, criminal services and the legal system. [115430]
Paul Goggins: The White Paper "Justice for All" set out a wide-ranging programme of reform for the criminal justice system (CJS) including the correctional services in England and Wales. This Government is determined to create a criminal justice system that meets the needs of society and wins the trust of citizens by convicting the guilty, acquitting the innocent and reducing offending and re-offending.
The Prison and Probation Services already work closely together in managing the supervision of licensed offenders and are increasingly engaged in joint work in meeting the target on reducing re-offending.
The need for greater co-ordination between the various parts of the criminal justice system underpins the changes we have made to structures at both the national and local levels. Most critically the formation of a National Criminal Justice Board and 42 Local Criminal Justice Boards (one for each CJS area) will help to give a formal framework for the pursuit of shared aims and objectives.
3 Jun 2003 : Column 140W
The National Board will bring together Ministers, senior policy officials and Service Heads from all the main criminal justice departments and will give direction and drive to the delivery of the key CJS targets. Locally the Boards will consist of Chief Officers from the Police, Crown Prosecution Service, Prisons, Courts (Crown and Magistrates), Probation Service and Youth Offending Teams.
Criminal Records Bureau
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what service levels were achieved by the Criminal Records Bureau in 2002–03; and what service levels were specified in the contract with Capita. [112033]
Paul Goggins: The service levels achieved by the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) against their published service standards between August 2002 and March 2003 are as follows (there are no figures available prior to August 2002):
- Standard Disclosures—19.4 per cent issued within one week (against a target of 95 per cent)
- Enhanced Disclosures—52.4 per cent issued within three weeks (against a target of 90 per cent.)
Turnaround times have improved as the joint service improvement plan has taken effect. Some 90 per cent of Standard Disclosures and 70 per cent of Enhanced Disclosures are now being issued within three weeks.
The following relevant service standards are set out in the contract between the Capita and the CRB:
| Service Element | Service Measure | Service Level |
|---|---|---|
| (A2) New registration | Percentage of instances performed within five days elapsed time | 95.0 |
| (A3) Registration changes (including additional or replacement counter-signatory) | Percentage of instances performed within three days elapsed time | 98.0 |
| Service Element | Service Measure | Service Level |
|---|---|---|
| (Bl) Invalid application for CCC or HLC | Percentage of instances performed within two days elapsed time | 98.0 |
| (B3) Telephone Application for HLC: up to issue of application form for signature and counter-signature | Percentage of instances performed within one day elapsed time | 99.0 |
| (B4) Valid application for CRC: up to despatch of certificate | Percentage of instances performed within three days elapsed time | 98.0 |
| (B5) Valid application for ECRC: up to despatch of certificate | Percentage of instances performed within four days elapsed time | 98.0 |
Elapsed time—The aggregate of the elapsed times of the Activities (or Business Processes) (for which responsibility is assigned, in Schedule 2 or otherwise, to the Contractor) performed in the provision of a Service Element, such elapsed times (a) being measured from the Service Start Point to the Service end Point and recorded on a 24 hours clock, seven days a week. Elapsed time measures expressed as a number of days shall be construed as meaning that number of days multiplied by 24 hours. For the avoidance of doubt, Elapsed time shall exclude the duration of cheque clearance processing.
Criminal Conviction Certificate (CCC)—Basic
Disclosure (not yet available)
Criminal Record Certificates (CRC)—Standard Disclosure
Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate (ECRC)—Enhanced Disclosure
Higher Level Certificate (HLC)—Standard and Enhanced Disclosures.
The details of Capita's performance against the above service standards are commercial in confidence and accordingly would normally come within exemption 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government
3 Jun 2003 : Column 141W
Information. However, I have concluded that in this instance it would be in the public interest not to continue to use the exemption.
3 Jun 2003 : Column 142W
Capita's performance against the contractual service standards between August 2002 and March 2003 is as follows:
| New Registrations(A2) | Registration Changes (A3) | Invalid Application (B1) | Telephone Application (B3) | Valid Application for Standards (B4) | Valid Application for Enhanced (B5) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39.0 | 8.7 | 6.5 | 99.3 | 8.0 | 18.0 |
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much it cost to appoint an independent negotiator in respect of Capita's Criminal Record Bureau contract; and who will bear the cost. [112035]
Paul Goggins: The cost of procuring an independent negotiator at the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) was approximately £2,600 arising from existing staff time and effort in the Passport and Records Agency (PRA) and the CRB. The CRB will bear this cost.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many free disclosures for volunteers the Criminal Records Bureau has issued in each month since its launch; and how much they have cost. [112036]
Paul Goggins: As at 31 March 2003 the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) has issued 1,442,000 disclosures. Out of this cumulative total 202,000 disclosures were issued free of charge to volunteers, which equates to 14 per cent. of all disclosures issued.
The cost of these free disclosures will calculate to £2,424,000, which represents a considerable saving to the voluntary sector.
There are no IT procedures at present to obtain numbers of applications from volunteers by month since launch, from the CRB database. It is expected that these enhancements will be available in subsequent system releases.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate his Department made of the unit costs in (a) 2002–03 and (b) 2003–04 of (i) standard, (ii) enhanced and (iii) basic disclosure by the Criminal Records Bureau using the (A) paper-based, (B) telephone-based and (C) electronic-based application routes; and what the actual unit costs were in 2002–03. [112041]
Paul Goggins: The table shows the unit costs for paper and telephone based applications for each type of disclosure.
| 2002–03 estimate unit costs | 2003–04 estimate unit cost | 2002–03 actual unit costs | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard | Paper | 13.6 | 12.38 | 36 |
| Telephone | 13.6 | 12.38 | 31 | |
| Enhanced | Paper | 13.6 | 12.38 | 41 |
| Telephone | 13.6 | 12.38 | 36 | |
| Basic | Telephone | 13.6 | 12.38 | N/a |
The estimates were prepared before "go live" in Winter 2001–02 and published in the Corporate Business Plan 2002–07 in April 2002 as an average across Disclosure types and application channels.
It should be noted Basic Disclosures were only going to be available using the telephone and electronic based application routes. Electronic applications are not applicable for 2002–03. Actual costs are estimates, subject to audit and reflect lower than expected production volumes.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the system supplied by Capita for the Criminal Records Bureau is capable of extracting data concerning individual applications that have experienced delays outside the performance standards. [112042]
Paul Goggins: The system supplied by Capita for the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) is capable of extracting data concerning individual applications that have experienced delays outside the performance standards. The CRB database records when an application was submitted and can be interrogated to establish whether and for how long, if at all, it had been outstanding. This can be achieved when an individual or a counter-signatory contacts the CRB to establish whether an application had been delayed.
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his statement of 30 April 2003, Official Report, column 119WH, on the Criminal Records Bureau, if he will make a statement on the ways in which the system failed to meet the specification; if he will place in the Library copies of the evaluation produced from the testing prior to launch; and when the decision to accept the system was made, and by which minister. [112066]
Paul Goggins: Under the terms of the Contract it was for Capita to prepare and run, with the oversight and involvement of the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) Agency staff, an end-to-end acceptance test. This test was designed to ensure that the system processes would run without critical failure. Through programme reporting, the CRB was assured that the technical tests, which were completely within their management domain, had been run in accordance to an agreed testing strategy, to ensure that system modules performed to specification.
The end-to end acceptance test was run during November 2001 and the Capita Programme Director provided a joint test report to the CRB Board, which also took account of the Model Office and Pilot phases, on 4 March 2002. This report recommended that the system was ready for live operation. The report also provided assurance that a programme of enhancements
3 Jun 2003 : Column 143W
was in progress to deal with those functional shortfalls identified during system testing, but not considered critical for initial live operations. This included elements of Management Information Systems, performance of system at maximum loading and elements of workflow management. The Programme Board accepted this recommendation and on 6 March 2002 advised my right hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Bradley) as the minister with responsibility for the CRB at the time.
A copy of the evaluation produced from the testing prior to launch cannot be placed in the Library because the details are commercially sensitive and as such cannot be divulged. I refer to Section 13 of the Code of Practice to Government Information 1997 (Part II), which concerns information including commercial confidences, trade secrets or intellectual property whose unwarranted disclosure would harm the competitive position of a third party.
Mr. Burstow To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the (a) planned and (b) actual completion dates are for each of the stages in the planning and implementation of the electronic-based application route for criminal record checks. [112044]
Paul Goggins: Electronic applications to register with the Criminal Records Bureau were originally expected to be available in August 2001. However, to keep in line with high level disclosures, the implementation date was postponed until 11 March 2002. It was subsequently agreed to move the planned implementation date for electronic based applications to 30 September 2002.
On 6 September 2002, my right hon .Friend, the Home Secretary announced the appointment of an Independent Review Team (IRT) meaning the implementation of the electronic based application route was put on hold to await their findings.
One of the recommendations of the IRT was to introduce a Web-based application system and this features as part of the current renegotiations of the contract with Capita. It is too early to speculate what the outcome of the contract renegotiations will be and the attendant effect on the completion date of the electronic application route.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |