---

29 Jun 2005 : Column 1571W—continued

Permanent Secretary

Mr. Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the reasons were for the decision by his Department in February to delay the appointment of a permanent secretary until later in the year; whether this decision was announced publicly; and when he expects to announce the appointment of a new permanent secretary. [6639]

Mr. Hutton: I have been asked to reply.

The decision not to appoint was taken in light of the need to consider the broader picture of permanent secretary moves over the summer including the retirement of Sir Andrew Turnbull. Both No. 10 and Department of Trade and Industry issued press notices on 8 February 2005. The appointment will be settled in the next few months.

HOME OFFICE

Crime (Middlesbrough)

Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases of identity fraud have been recorded in Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland constituency in each of the last three years. [5903]

Andy Burnham: Offences of identity fraud cannot be separately identified in the recorded crime series and the information requested is therefore not available centrally.

Identity Cards Bill

David Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether a registered person would
 
29 Jun 2005 : Column 1572W
 
have the right to see the audit trail of information held on him under Schedule 1, paragraph 9 of the Identity Cards Bill. [6785]

Andy Burnham [holding answer 23 June 2005]: Schedule 1, paragraph 9 of the Identity Cards Bill allows for a record of every occasion on which information has been provided to a third party, and details of who that third party was, to be kept on the National Identity Register.

Private organisations requesting verification of identity from the National Identity Register can only do so with the consent of the registered individual. Information can only be supplied without consent in the specific circumstances outlined in CI. 19–23 of the Identity Cards Bill.

The individual will always have subject access rights under the Data Protection Act 1998, subject to any exemptions within that Act, to information in their entry. This would include the information held on that individual under Schedule 1, paragraph 9 of the Identity Cards Bill.

David Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what percentage of persons registered in the National Identity Register he estimates (a) no biometric information and (b) no biometric information other than the face biometric would be recorded, broken down by (i) ethnicity, (ii) socio-economic group, (iii) occupation and (iv) age. [6786]

Andy Burnham: As biometric technology is constantly evolving and improving, it is not possible to give a precise estimate until technology performance requirements are established and equipment is procured for the Identity Card Scheme. The most recent research figures are from the UKPS biometric trial. However, this was not intended as a test of technology and the equipment used will have evolved significantly by the time the Identity Cards Scheme is introduced. Nevertheless, the trial did demonstrate that the number unable to record any biometric information is statistically small and special arrangements, including improved enrolment facilities are being considered for this group. Specifically, the result of this trial demonstrated that, of the total sample, 99.954 per cent. of participants could successfully record at least one biometric successfully. 0.29 per cent. of the entire sample were only able to record the facial biometric on its own. The following tables show the enrolment rates broken down by ethnicity, age and socio-economic group. References in the tables to the face failure rate refers only to the first attempt—virtually all individuals were successful after multiple attempts but these figures are not available in the report. The iris and fingerprint figures were for multiple attempts. In addition, the trial results provided some breakdowns for successful enrolment of each individual biometric by ethnicity, socio-economic group and age, although no breakdown provided for the provision of all three and there is no breakdown by occupation. Nor were there breakdowns for the requested groups for those who could provide no biometric information other than face. The relevant information which was recorded during the trial is shown in the following tables. Reference to face failure
 
29 Jun 2005 : Column 1573W
 
rate refers to only the first attempt—virtually all were successful after multiple attempts but no figures were provided in the evaluation report.
Successful enrolment rates

	Percentage
Ethnicity	Fingerprint	Iris	Face
Asian	99.07	88.09	96.91
Black	97.72	81.01	93.06
Chinese/East Asian	100.00	85.05	95.50
White	99.37	91.33	95.24
Other	99.25	90.11	96.22

Note:
Figures from Quota and Opportunistic Groups

	Percentage
Age	Fingerprint	Iris	Face
18–24	98.96	90.89	97.63
25–34	99.10	93.48	97.16
35–44	99.46	94.41	95.89
45–54	99.46	92.23	95.58
55–59	99.07	91.31	95.06
60–64	99.41	86.81	94.92
65 plus	99.32	78.27	95.95

Note:
Figures from Quota and Opportunistic Groups

Socio-economic group	Fingerprint percentage
A	100.00
B	98.70
C1	98.39
C2	99.48
D	98.00
E	97.30

Notes:
1. Figures for Quota Group only.
2. Iris and face successful enrolment rates broken down by socio-economic group were not part of the terms of reference for this part of the study.





Unsuccessful enrolment rates

	Percentage
Ethnicity	Fingerprint	Iris	Face
Asian	0.93	11.91	3.09
Black	2.28	18.99	6.94
Chinese/East Asian	0.00	13.95	4.50
White	0.63	8.67	4.76
Other	0.75	9.89	3.78

Note:
Figures from Quota and Opportunistic Groups.

	Percentage
Age	Fingerprint	Iris	Face
18–24	1.04	9.11	2.37
25–34	0.90	6.52	2.84
35–44	0.54	5.59	4.11
45–54	0.54	7.77	4.42
55–59	0.93	8.69	4.94
60–64	0.59	13.19	5.08
65 plus	0.68	21.73	4.05

Note:
Figures from Quota and Opportunistic Groups





 
29 Jun 2005 : Column 1574W
 

Mobile Fingerprint Technology

Ms Butler: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans the Department has to enable the police to fit mobile fingerprint technology to their vehicles. [4411]

Hazel Blears: Work on introducing mobile fingerprint technology and fitting them to police vehicles is being taken forward by the Police Information Technology Organisation (PITO) in conjunction with the police service. At present an operational demonstrator has been fitted to a number of vehicles in a pilot force.

Muggings

John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people in each year since the introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 in each age cohort under the age of 18 have been issued with reprimands or final warnings for muggings; and how many of those have later been convicted of another offence. [3796]

Hazel Blears: It is not possible to distinguish 'muggings' from other forms of robbery. Available information from the Home Office Court Proceedings database on the number of persons in each age cohort under the age of 18 who have been issued with a reprimand or final warning since the introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, for robbery are contained in the table. It is not possible to identify those offenders who have then later been convicted of another offence. Statistics for 2004 will be available in the autumn.
Number of juveniles issued with a reprimand or final warning for robbery, by age cohort, England and Wales 1999–2003⁽⁸⁾

	Age cohorts
Offence: Robbery Statute: Theft Act 1968 Sec 8	10–11 years	12–14 years	15–17 years
1999	53	233	191
2000	66	266	187
2001	39	228	195
2002	36	182	121
2003	44	188	128

⁽⁸⁾These data are on the principal offence basis

---