| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
6 Oct 2003 : Column 1230W—continued
Graffiti
Mr. Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the level of graffiti; and what plans he has to reduce it. [125371]
Ms Blears: The British Crime Survey records that, in 2002–03 survey year, over a third of respondents perceived graffiti vandalism and other deliberate damage to property as being a very or fairly big problem.
Graffiti spoils our enjoyment of public places, increases fear of crime and produces an environment where crime and anti-social behaviour can thrive. That is why we are taking action to tackle it in both the Anti-Social Behaviour Bill and the Criminal Justice Bill. We are banning the sale of spray paints to under 18s. We are closing the loophole which prevents the police from searching for items which they suspect may be intended for causing criminal damage, such as spray paints. We are also giving local authorities powers to issue fixed penalty notices for graffiti and to clean graffiti from certain types of property now owned by them.
The Anti-Social Behaviour Unit is also looking at practical ways to reduce further anti-social behaviour, including graffiti.
Gun Control
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what studies he has commissioned of gun control policies in other nations, with particular reference to (a) the United States and (b) other EU member states; and what conclusions he has drawn. [130051]
Caroline Flint: I have not received recent studies. In developing our approach to gun control we pay broad regard to aspects of controls in other countries and to our European Union and international obligations. But ultimately United Kingdom legislation has to be framed in the context of domestic requirements. We have one of the toughest frameworks of control in the world, and we consider it right that we should. However, although controlling legal firearms is important in helping to prevent guns falling into the wrong hands, it does not obviate the need for other measures to deal with armed crime. This needs to be addressed in the context of all violent crime and other activities such as drug dealing, as well as the emergence of a gang culture in some areas, and in the light of what we can learn from police best practice, both here and abroad. The experience of the police in Boston, for example, is already being taken into account by police forces in the United Kingdom.
Gurkhas
Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the basis is for the policy that wives of Gurkha soldiers who hold British overseas passports are refused visas to join their husbands in this country where the soldiers have six months or less to serve. [130179]
6 Oct 2003 : Column 1231W
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 16 September 2003]: British overseas citizens do not have right of abode in the United Kingdom and are subject to immigration control. There is no provision within the immigration rules for dependants of members of the armed forces to enter or remain in the United Kingdom. Under a concession outside the rules dependants are normally granted leave for the duration of the principal member's posting, up to a maximum of three years, on conditions permitting employment.
Gurkhas are discharged in Nepal and Gurkhas often return to Nepal, with their personal possessions, six months prior to their official discharge in order to undertake pre-retirement courses and take leave. During this time, the basis of any leave in the United Kingdom granted to the dependant wife of such a Gurkha no longer exists, as the Gurkha is no longer in the United Kingdom, and she may be refused entry.
An application for a visa to enter the United Kingdom may also be refused for the same reason.
Miss Widdecombe: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made with the review into policy governing the right of Gurkhas to return to this country after completion of service; and when he expects to report on its findings. [130180]
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 16 September 2003]: Officials from the Immigration and Nationality Directorate met with officials from the Ministry of Defence on Friday 12 September as part of their review of immigration issues affecting Gurkhas and other foreign and commonwealth personnel in the armed forces. Their discussion included access to settlement, work permits, naturalisation and welfare issues, including those affecting dependants. They are aiming to conclude their review and report their findings by Christmas.
Hearsay
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what safeguards exist to deal with the risks of hearsay evidence of an unrecorded cell confession; and if he will make a statement. [130432]
Paul Goggins: The Government set out its position on these issues in its response, published in March 2003 this year, to the 2nd Report of the Home Affairs Committee (Session 2002–2003) Criminal Justice Bill:
- In relation to the admissibility in criminal proceedings of confessions made to third parties, judges already have discretion to exclude evidence if it appears to the court that the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it. When considering exercising this discretion the court would have regard for all the circumstances of the case, including the circumstances in which the evidence was obtained. [Ref: Section 78 Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)].
Judges also have the discretion to exclude evidence where its prejudicial effect would outweigh any probative value. [Ref: Section 82(3) of PACE].
6 Oct 2003 : Column 1232W
The Royal Commission on Criminal Justice considered this issue in 1993 and made no recommendation for change. It was considered again by the Law Commission as part of its review of the hearsay laws in 1997. It concluded that confessions should continue to be admissible against their makers, subject to the discretions in PACE and in common law to exclude them. This view was supported on consultation.
Home Security
Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the impact of the security improvements for homes in high crime areas. [130512]
Ms Blears: I assume that the hon. Member is referring to the Locks for Pensioners scheme, a two-year programme funded under the Crime Reduction Programme to provide home security upgrades for low income pensioners in areas with burglary rates above the national average. The scheme ran from July 2000 to June 2002 in conjunction with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA's) Warm Front scheme.
The scheme is being evaluated and the report of the evaluation, covering both processes and outcomes, is expected to be published early in 2004.
Immigration
Mr. Viggers: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what extra resources have been provided in the last three years to police authorities to enable them to deal with the policing of immigrants. [131264]
Ms Blears: Expenditure on policing supported by Government has increased by 25 per cent. in the past three years. It is a matter for each police authority to match resources to local policing requirements.
Mr. Viggers: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what statistics are maintained on the criminal activities of (a) illegal immigrants and (b) seekers of political asylum. [131265]
Beverley Hughes: The statistics referred to are not available from existing data collection systems and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Details of the nationality and immigration status of suspects or of those convicted of crimes are not collated centrally as part of the recorded crime statistics and are not necessarily recorded by individual police forces.
Information on asylum applications is published quarterly on the Home Office website at: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html. The next publication will be available from the end of November and will cover the third quarter of 2003.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases in each of the last 12 months have been (a) sent to the Appeals Processing Centre and (b) despatched to the Immigration Appellate Authority. [130611]
Beverley Hughes: The available information is shown in the table.
6 Oct 2003 : Column 1233W
| Month | Asylum appeals received by the Home Office(61) | Asylum Appeals received by the IAA(61),(62) |
|---|---|---|
| July 2002 | 4,565 | 4,500 |
| August 2002 | 3,960 | 4,510 |
| September 2002 | 3,905 | 9,635 |
| October 2002 | 4,965 | 4,475 |
| November 2002 | 3,740 | 6,080 |
| December 2002 | 3,575 | 6,110 |
| January 2003 | (63)3,400 | 6,015 |
| February 2003 | (63)4,000 | 6,025 |
| March 2003 | (63)5,200 | 6,045 |
| April 2003 | (63)3,700 | 5,825 |
| May 2003 | (63)3,400 | 6,025 |
| June 2003 | (63)3,600 | 5,985 |
(61) Figures rounded to the nearest five, and are provisional.
(62) Based on information supplied by the Department for Constitutional Affairs.
(63) Figures rounded to the nearest 100, and subject to later revision.
Information on the number of asylum appeals received by the Home Office, and the number of appeals received by the Immigration Appellate Authority (IAA), is published quarterly on the Home Office website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |