| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
23 Feb 2005 : Column 718W—continued
Forensic Medical Examiners
Vera Baird: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of forensic medical examiners are women (a) in England and Wales, (b) in the Cleveland Police area and (c) in the north-east of England. [215573]
Paul Goggins: This information is not held centrally.
Imitation Firearms
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many individuals have been (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted for possession of an imitation firearm in a public place under section 37 of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. [217389]
Ms Blears:
Offences under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003, Section 37 came into force on 20 January 2004. Statistics of court proceedings for 2004 will be published in the autumn of 2005.
23 Feb 2005 : Column 719W
Immigration Status (Notification)
Mr. Collins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects Mrs. Moreton of Carr Bank, Milnthorpe, Cumbria to receive written notification of her immigration status and the return of her passport and other personal documentation as undertaken in letters from the Immigration Minister to the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale dated 17 November 2004 and 4 February 2005; and if he will make a statement. [216843]
Mr. Browne: Written confirmation of Mrs. Shoreton's immigration status was sent to her on 8 February. Her passport and personal documentation were enclosed.
Intercept Evidence
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on his decision not to bring forward proposals to allow the use in court of intercept evidence. [216695]
Mr. Charles Clarke: I refer my hon. Friend to the written statement I laid before the House on 26 January 2005, Official Report, column 19WS.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether an assessment has been made of the (a) nature and (b) extent of intercept evidence in the cases of the Belmarsh detainees. [216696]
Mr. Charles Clarke: As stated in my written statement on 26 January 2005, Official Report, column 19WS, the Home Office-led review concluded that intercept would not have made a critical difference in bringing prosecutions against the Belmarsh detainees. It would not be appropriate to disclose details of any intercept relating to the Belmarsh detainees.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment his Department has made of the use made of intercept evidence in court in other countries. [216697]
Mr. Charles Clarke: The Home Office-led review looked at the experience of a range of other countries, all of which regard intercept product as a valuable contribution to evidence used in their courts. However, the review found that there was no evidence that other countries do better than the UK in securing the convictions of terrorists or serious criminals through the use of intercept as evidence.
The review found that the United Kingdom could not simply transplant the evidential regimes of other countries because our legal system is very different, being both adversarial and subject to ECHR considerations. No other country examined had a statutory basis for intelligence agencies to assist law enforcement agencies as is the case in the United Kingdom. The review underlined the importance and value of the unparalleled co-operation between the United Kingdom's intelligence and law enforcement agencies but noted that this would
23 Feb 2005 : Column 720W
be at risk, in a way that did not apply to the same extent to other jurisdictions, if there was a possibility that sensitive capabilities and techniques might be exposed.
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of whether special court procedures could be introduced to enable intercept evidence to be used in court. [216698]
Mr. Charles Clarke: I am not at present persuaded that special court procedures would significantly alter the balance of risks and benefits of using intercept evidence in court.
Kimberley Quinn
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he requested that a policeman be stationed outside Kimberley Quinn's home. [203227]
Mr. Charles Clarke: I have not issued any instructions surrounding this matter. My right hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Brightside (Mr. Blunkett), the former Home Secretary has stated that he too did not issue operational instructions to the Met Police and has never had a conversation about this with them.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will publish details of the occasions on which Mrs. Quinn visited his Department. [203248]
Mr. Charles Clarke: There are no records of any occasions when Mrs. Quinn visited the Department.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions Mrs. Quinn travelled in the Home Secretary's car without him; if he will list the (a) origin, (b) distance and (c) destination of those trips; on how many of these occasions documents were also taken in the car; and whether those documents were of time-sensitive importance. [203249]
Mr. Charles Clarke: The Home Office holds no record of Mrs. Quinn travelling in the former Home Secretary's car.
Licensing Act
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted under (i) section 172, (ii) section 172A and (iii) section 173 of the Licensing Act 1964 in each year since 1997; how many landlords have had their licences revoked due to breach of these provisions; and if he will make a statement. [212060]
Ms Blears: Statistics from the Home Office Court Proceedings Database on the number of people prosecuted and convicted under sections 172, 172A and 173 of the Licensing Act 1964, England and Wales, 1997–2003 is contained in the following table.
Statistics for 2004 will be available in the autumn.
No central data are available on the reasons why a justices' licence is revoked by the licensing justices. Statistics on revocations are also only collected triennially. The numbers of revocations since 1997 is therefore as follows.
23 Feb 2005 : Column 721W
(16)These data are on the principal offence basis.
Source:
Department of Culture, Media and Sport
23 Feb 2005 : Column 723W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |