---

17 Nov 2004 : Column 1568W—continued

Personal Injury Claims

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what assessment he has made of the impact of conditional fees in personal injury cases on (a) the setting-up of specialist personal injury solicitors firms to pursue claims and (b) the willingness of claims-handling businesses to pursue claims; and if he will make a statement. [198410]

Mr. Lammy: In 1998 we commissioned KPMG to construct a business case showing whether a move from legal aid to Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) in a range of personal injury cases could result over a 10 year period in financial viability. The work suggested all law firms could maintain their business using CFAs subject to their management skills and that firms might do well if they specialised. Since then we have focused our research on the outcome for consumers of using CFAs as a form of litigation funding and a new report by Professor Fenn, Dr. Gray and Dr. Rickman is due in early 2005.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what discussions he has had with (a) the Law Society, (b) the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers, (c) the Bar, (d) the Association of British Insurers and (e) others over the pursuit of unmeritorious personal injury claims; and if he will make a statement. [198412]

Mr. Lammy: Discussions have taken place with a range of bodies in formulating the Government's response to the Better Regulations Task Force (BRTF) report, and will continue as work is taken forward.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what the evidential basis was for his statement on 10 November that (a) personal injury solicitors and (b) claims-handling businesses are improperly pursuing personal injury cases lacking in merit; and if he will make a statement. [198413]

Mr. Lammy: The contents of the Government's statement reflected the evidence presented in the Better Regulation Task Force (BRTF) report.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what consideration he has given to regulating advertising for personal injury cases by (a) claims-handling businesses and (b) solicitors; and if he will make a statement. [198414]

Mr. Lammy: The Government believes that there is no place for advertising that raises false expectations or promotes the bringing of frivolous claims. We believe that the Advertising Standards Authority and OFCOM advertising codes and the Law Society publicity code must be adhered to rigorously and will support any further action needed to help achieve this.
 
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1569W
 

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what consideration he has given to regulating claims-handling businesses, in relation to personal injury claims; and if he will make a statement. [198415]

Mr. Lammy: The Government wants to see the claims management sector regulated properly, and the sector has a last opportunity to do so itself. If it does not do this, the Government will consider how new formal regulation could be introduced, taking into account the recommendations of Sir David Clementi's review of the legal services regulatory framework.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps he proposes to take to inform the public on the correct legal principles behind personal injury claims; and if he will make a statement. [198416]

Mr. Lammy: How best to provide information of this sort will be taken forward in consultation with the various sectors, and is an issue which we will be asking the proposed Action Group of stakeholders to consider.

HOME DEPARTMENT

Graffiti Removal Notices

Mr. Byrne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many graffiti removal notices have been served under the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003; [197240]

(2) what assessment he has made of the efficacy of graffiti removal notices; [197241]

(3) what duties are incumbent on local authorities to remove graffiti from local authority owned premises and facilities; and what steps local communities can take to enforce such action. [197242]

Ms Blears: Graffiti is a serious issue that makes areas look run down and can often lead to an increase in crime and the fear of crime.

That is why we introduced Graffiti Removal Notices in the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 to ensure rapid removal of graffiti on street furniture, educational institutes and statutory undertakers' property. These provisions are being piloted in 12 sites in England. No notices have been served to date since strong and effective partnership arrangements have been established between local authorities and the telecommunications industry and others making the sanction of notices unnecessary to date. We are currently undertaking a Regulatory Impact Assessment to determine the impact and cost of improved graffiti removal arrangements with the partners in the pilots and are seeking comments up until 31 December 2004. After that date we will determine the efficacy of the scheme.

There is no specific duty on local authorities to remove graffiti from all of their properties. However, many already remove it speedily because of the negative messages uncleaned graffiti sends out to a community. Local authorities typically require the removal of
 
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1570W
 
graffiti through their cleansing contracts and normally respond to racist, homophobic and other offensive graffiti within 24 hours of reports being received.

Local communities have a vital role to play in ensuring local authorities respond to a range of antisocial behaviour priorities. However, since there is currently no requirement on local authorities to remove graffiti, active engagement with the local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership and relevant functions at the local authority is the best way for local communities to register concerns about graffiti.

Anglia Water

Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many complaints have been received from probation areas in respect of Anglia Water Group's contract for approved premises over the past 18 months. [194320]

Fiona Mactaggart [holding answer 28 October 2004]: There have been 1,853 complaints in the 18 months between April 2003 and September 2004. This averages just over one complaint per month per premise. However, the level of complaints has been falling consistently following the introduction of an improvement plan.

Animal Experiments

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he makes of the percentage of animals bred for possible experimentation purposes which are subsequently not used for these purposes. [197888]

Caroline Flint [holding answer 16 November 2004]: The Home Office does not collect this information centrally.

However, the Animal Procedures Committee has recently investigated the production of conventional animals for use in scientific procedures, focussing specifically on rats, mice, dogs, cats and non-human primates, all of which are listed in schedule two of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and are required to be obtained from designated breeding or supplying establishments. The Committee published its report in September 2004 as Annex G to its Annual Report for 2003 (HC 1017). Their review was based on surveys carried out by the Laboratory Animals Science Association. The Committee concluded that overbreeding of conventional animals is not a significant problem. This conclusion is supported by the observations of Home Office Inspectors who visit designated breeding establishments.

Anti-crime Measures (Newcastle-under-Lyme)

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) community support officers and (b) street wardens have been introduced in Newcastle-under-Lyme. [198585]

Ms Blears: I am informed by the Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police that there are six Community Support Officers and two street wardens currently deployed in Newcastle-under-Lyme.
 
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1571W
 

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps are being taken to increase the numbers of special constables assisting the police. [198587]

Ms Blears: The White Paper "Building Communities, Beating Crime" reaffirms the Government's commitment to increasing the number and the effectiveness of special constables.

The Home Office announced in December 2003 the provision of funding of up to £70,000 for each of the 43 police forces in England and Wales under the Special Constabulary Capacity Building Scheme for dedicated staff and/or initiatives. The funding will assist forces implement good practice, improving the recruitment, management and deployment of specials.

In addition, the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) have brought out Good Practice Guidance designed to help all forces attract and hold on to specials, ensuring their time and skills are properly valued and used to best effect.

In February this year we launched the "Could You Volunteer?" advertising campaign to raise awareness of the Special Constabulary and generate interest in their voluntary work. There followed a significant increase in expressions of interest in the specials.

The campaign was timed to coincide with the second annual "National Specials Weekend" held on 28–29 February 2004, with all 43 Forces in England and Wales working to raise the profile of the Special Constabulary. We are planning to hold another such weekend in 2005.

We are working with businesses to encourage their support for specials in their employment and establish crime reduction partnerships with the police. For instance, the Shopwatch scheme originally launched by the Metropolitan police in Camden was recently extended to include Oxford Street and Regent Street.

Paul Farrelly: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government have taken to (a) punish and (b) rehabilitate persistent offenders in Newcastle-under-Lyme since 1997. [198589]

Paul Goggins: The Newcastle-under-Lyme Prolific Offenders project was set up in 1997 and was one of the first such projects in the country. It focused on those offenders known or believed to be committing large amounts of crime, and in particular burglary, in order to fund Class A drug dependencies. The project team comprises both police and probation officers and has access to an NHS specialist drugs nurse. The supervision by the probation officer includes home visits, support with finding accommodation or employment, developing support networks and drug testing.

An evaluation undertaken by Keele University praised the strong multi-agency working arrangements which had developed and were a very strong factor in the success of the project. The project represented the UK at the European Crime Prevention Awards in 2001, where it finished runner-up.

The project is one of many that contributed to the Government's national Persistent Offender Scheme in 2003–04 and the Prolific and other Priority Offender
 
17 Nov 2004 : Column 1572W
 
(PPO) Strategy that succeeded it in September 2004. The aims of these initiatives included a strong focus on catching and convicting persistent and prolific offenders and applying multi-agency interventions to rehabilitate them. The PPO strategy also includes a "Prevent and Deter" strand aimed to prevent young people at risk from developing into the prolific offenders of the future.

---