---

12 Jan 2004 : Column 500W—continued

Sewage Treatment Works

Ann Keen: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the progress of the consultation on Statutory Control of Odour and Other Nuisances from Sewage Treatment Works; and when the White paper will be published. [146322]

Alun Michael: The Government is awaiting the outcome of the House of Lords appeal case following a High Court ruling that odours from sewage treatment works can be dealt with as a statutory nuisance under the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

The Government will announce its response to the consultation and its approach following the House of Lords ruling and the outcome of the concurrent National Assembly of Wales consultation regarding sewage treatment works. There are no plans to issue a White paper on this matter.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Asylum

Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum appeals determined by adjudicators in the second quarter of 2003 were dismissed; and how many of those whose appeals were dismissed have been removed from the UK. [140572]

Beverley Hughes [holding answer 1 December 2003]: The available information requested is given in the following table and relates to appeals determined at the Immigration Appellate Authority. Some applicants whose appeal is dismissed may still be awaiting the outcome of further appeals—some appellants apply for

12 Jan 2004 : Column 501W

leave to appeal to the Tribunal, and a proportion of these are granted leave followed by determinations by the Tribunal. Data on the number who have been removed after their appeals rights have been exhausted is only available at a disproportionate cost by examination of individual case files.

12 Jan 2004 : Column 502W

Information on asylum applications and other asylum statistics is published quarterly. The most recent publication covering the third quarter of 2003 is now available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate website at http://www. homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html

Asylum appeals determined by adjudicators of the Immigration appellate authority, excluding dependants^(2),(3)Number of principal appellants

	Appeals determined by adjudicators
			Allowed(4)		Dismissed(4)		Withdrawn(4)
	Total determined(5)	Total	As percentage of total determined	Total	As percentage of total determined	Total	As percentage of total determined
2002
Q1	14,010	3,165	23	10,500	75	340	2
Q2	15,525	3,450	22	11,715	75	360	2
03	18,260	3,935	22	13,825	76	495	3
Q4	16,615	3,320	20	12,805	77	490	3
2002 total	64,405	13,875	22	48,845	76	1,685	3
2003
01	20,595	3,480	17	16,445	80	670	3
Q2	19,345	4,060	21	14,875	77	415	2
Q3	21,500	4,270	20	16,805	78	420	2
	Most recent three months
July	8,195	1,655	20	6,375	78	165	2
August	6,740	1,320	20	5,275	78	145	2
September	6,565	1,295	20	5,155	79	110	2

⁽²⁾ Figures (other than percentages) rounded to the nearest five. Numbers might not add up due to rounding.

⁽³⁾ Data for 2002 and 2003 are provisional.

⁽⁴⁾ Based on data supplied from the Presenting Officers Unit within the Home Office.

⁽⁵⁾ Based on information supplied by the Department for Constitutional Affairs. Determinations do not necessarily relate to appeals received in the same period.

Cheadle Royal Hospital

Mrs. Calton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, before laying the statutory instrument relating to Cheadle Royal hospital which is being prepared in his Department, he will take steps to satisfy himself that all the income received by the charity has been applied to the properly authorised charitable purposes. [145328]

Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 5 January 2003]: I confirmed in my answer of 8 December 2003, Official Report, column 766W, that neither the Charity Commission nor the Greater Manchester police have found evidence of charitable income or assets being inappropriately used by the trustees of Cheadle Royal Hospital. A copy of the proposed new statutory instrument has been forwarded to the hon. Member and her comments requested by 9 January to support the progress of the instrument and enable the release of the funds of the charity to be used for the public benefit.

Mrs. Calton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if, before laying the statutory instrument relating to Cheadle Royal hospital which is being prepared in his Department, he will take steps to satisfy himself that all the assets of this charity have been sold or reassigned in accordance with charity law, and in particular with section 36(8) of the Charities Act 1993. [145773]

Fiona Mactaggart: I confirmed in my answer of 8 December 2003, Official Report, column 766W, that neither the Charity Commission nor the Greater Manchester police have found evidence of charitable assets being inappropriately used by the trustees of Cheadle Royal hospital.

Church of England

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what power the Charity Commission has to remove charitable status from Church of England bodies; and in what circumstances this would apply. [146235]

Fiona Mactaggart: This is a matter for the Charity Commission as the government department responsible for the regulation of charities in England and Wales. The Chief Charity Commissioner will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.

Correspondence

Mr. Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intends to reply to the letter dated 18 September from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton, with regard to Mr. M. J. Sattler, transferred from the Secretary of State for the Home Department to the Office for National Statistics. [141583]

Mr. Blunkett: I replied to my right hon. Friend on 8 January 2004.

12 Jan 2004 : Column 503W

Documents

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what definition he will use of the term reasonable explanation for failing to produce documents; and whether he intends to include a definition in relevant legislation. [143473]

Beverley Hughes: Ultimately it will be for the courts to define what constitutes a reasonable excuse for the purpose of the offence set out in clause 2 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of claimants etc) Bill. However, the offence explicitly rules out certain defences which are not to be considered as reasonable causes for no longer being in possession of a document. The defence does not include reference to other legislation.

DORE Achievement Centres

Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the results of the DORE achievement centres and dyslexia, dyspraxia and attention deficit treatment programme at Balsall Common School; and what plans he has to extend the programme to other schools. [146171]

Margaret Hodge: The dyslexia, dyspraxia and attention disorder treatment (DDAT) is one of a number of commercially available programmes designed to support children with specific learning difficulties. It is for parents, individual schools and local education authorities to decide whether a given technique has something to offer an individual child in the light of his or her particular needs. The Department has no plans to extend the programme to other schools but officials are meeting with representatives of the Dore achievement centres/DDAT to receive an update.

Foreign Language Students (Fees)

Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under what circumstances foreign language students on (a) part-time and (b) full-time English language courses will be required to pay the proposed surcharge; and if he will make a statement. [143839]

Beverley Hughes: No decisions have yet been made about the level of the fees. The Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) is required to provide a range of fees for indicative purposes only. The upper limit of that range, £500, does not signify that the Government intends, as some newspapers suggested, to set fees at that level.

The enabling power is the first stage of a two-stage process. The second part of the process is to undertake a full Regulatory Impact Assessment and wider consultation with key stakeholders. Following this consultation, decisions regarding fee levels, scope and timing of introduction can then be made taking these views fully into account.

Any foreign language student, full or part-time, who currently pays a fee would be required to pay charges at whatever level they may be set.

12 Jan 2004 : Column 504W

---