|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers are resident in (a) Sandwell, (b) Dudley, (c) Wolverhampton, (d) Walsall, (e) Birmingham, (f) Solihull and (g) Coventry borough. 
Mr. McNulty: Statistics on the location of asylum seekers in the UK are linked to the available information on the support that the asylum seeker receives. The number of asylum seekers supported by the National Asylum Support Service (NASS) are published on a quarterly and annual basis, broken down by local authority. The most recent publication covering the third quarter of 2005, and further historical publications are available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1 .html.
Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the Answer of 9 January 2006, to Question 38216, how long each of the 11 people who had their National Asylum Support Service support stopped in Leeds, North West following a final negative decision on their claim for asylum waited before they were deported. 
Mr. McNulty: Of the 11 people referred to in my earlier reply one has been removed from the United Kingdom. The removal took place four months 27 days after their most recent asylum claim was fully determined.
Paul Goggins: The Serious Organised Crime (SOCA), as the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) did before it, will continue to gather and analyse intelligence at a strategic level. SOCA will be targeting criminals based on an assessment of the harm they cause and the impact that can be achieved. This may result in SOCA taking action; or action may be taken by local police forces who will be able to seek assistance from SOCA if they judge they require it.
Mr. Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is Government policy that the IT company who designed and maintains the Child Support Agency (CSA) Case Management System is responsible for determining whether an individual's case is eligible for a manual calculation if their case cannot be logged onto the CSA computer system. 
You asked the Secretary of State for the Home Office, whether it is Government policy that the IT company who designed and maintains the Child Support Agency (CSA) Case Management system is responsible for determining whether an individual's case if eligible for a manual calculation if their case cannot be logged onto the CSA computer system.
It is not Government policy to allow the IT company who designed and maintains the Agency's Case Management system to determine whether an individual's case is managed 'clerically'. Technical expertise from the supplier will be used to inform a decision, but the decision itself is made by the Agency.
Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) when his Department will reply to the letter of 5 July 2005 from the right hon. Member for Warley regarding Mr. and Mrs. Ergonul of Siwell Road, Smethwick; 
Dr. Strang: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what methods his Department employs to ensure that its data is up-to-date, with particular reference to information on people who have (a) moved house and (b) died. 
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been imprisoned for defaulting on the payment of a fixed penalty notice given for a disorder offence in each of the last two years. 
Andy Burnham: Neither the Home Office nor the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) are aware of any police officers having been investigated for improperly taking DNA samples for adding to the National DNA Database. The IPCC has not investigated any such incidents to date. Nor are we aware of any police force in England and Wales having carried out an internal investigation into such a case.
The recent establishment of the Forensic Science Service (FSS) as a Government owned company, undertaken at the direction of the Secretary of State, was designed to provide the FSS with the
18 Jan 2006 : Column 1424W
freedoms, flexibility, structures and resources to better respond to customer needs in terms of balancing capacity and demand and in addressing timeliness of service requirements in support of the Criminal Justice System.
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects to reach a decision on whether to extradite Haroon Rashid Aswat to the US; what the considerations are on which his decision will be based; and whether Mr. Aswat has been questioned regarding any information he might have about the London bombings of 7 and 21 July 2005. 
Andy Burnham: Under the terms of the Extradition Act 2003 ("The 2003 Act"), this case was sent by a District Judge to the Secretary of State, on 5 January 2006, for the latter's decision as to whether Mr. Aswat is to be extradited. Under section 93 of the 2003 Act, Mr. Aswat has six weeks, starting with 5 January 2006, within which to make representations against his extradition. The Secretary of State will make his decision as soon as possible after that time has passed. The exact date is likely to depend upon the time needed for due consideration of any representations that may be received.
While the case remains before the Secretary of State for decision, I cannot comment upon it. In all cases heard under part two of the 2003 Act the law requires the Secretary of State to decide whether he is prohibited from ordering a person's extradition under any of the following sections of the 2003 Act: (a) section 94 (death penalty); (b) section 95 (speciality); or (c) s.96 (earlier extradition to the UK from another territory). The full text of the 2003 Act may be obtained from HMSO (Her Majesty's Stationary Office) or found at:
As to whether Mr. Aswat has been questioned, regarding any information he might have about the London bombings of 7 July 2005 and the failed bombings of 21 July 2005, it is not appropriate to comment on ongoing investigations.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|