---

6 Feb 2006 : Column 925W—continued

HOME DEPARTMENT

Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what occasions he has referred matters to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. [47804]

Paul Goggins: Since becoming Home Secretary in December 2004, I have referred three matters to the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD).

1. In March 2005, I asked the Council to review the classification of cannabis products that are controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. The Council's report was published on 19 January 2006.

2. In March 2005 the then Minister responsible for drugs, Caroline Flint asked the ACMD on my behalf to consider evidence relating to khat, including two pieces of research commissioned by the Home Office and carried out by Turning Point and NACRO respectively. The Council's report was also published on 19 January.

3. In January 2006 I asked the ACMD to review the classification of the so called 'date rape drugs', including GHB and Rohypnol. A time frame for reporting on these drugs is in the process of being agreed with the ACMD.

Antisocial Behaviour Orders

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders were issued in each London borough in each of the last three years for which figures are available. [46738]

Hazel Blears: A table giving a breakdown by the criminal justice system area and local government authority area in which prohibitions are imposed within antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) is available on the crime reduction website at www.crimereduction.gov.uk. This table gives data by year since ASBOs were introduced up to 30 June 2005 (latest available).

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what methodology his Department uses to measure the effectiveness of antisocial behaviour orders. [48577]

Hazel Blears: In 2002 we published a research paper entitled A review of antisocial behaviour orders" (commonly referred to as the Campbell review) which followed a commitment made during the passage through Parliament of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. ASBOs have now reached sufficient numbers to necessitate further research.
 
6 Feb 2006 : Column 926W
 

The Home Office is conducting an evaluation of ASBOs, the findings of which will be available in spring 2006 and will provide information on the effectiveness of ASBOs in tackling antisocial behaviour within our neighbourhoods and communities. In addition, the Home Affairs Select Committee, in their report on antisocial behaviour published last year, recommended that research was necessary to establish the reasons for any inappropriate issuing of ASBOs or the issuing of ASBOs with inappropriate conditions. We are currently considering the best way to meet this recommendation. The Youth Justice Board has also commissioned research and we are awaiting the findings.

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many appeals against antisocial behaviour orders there have been in the last 12 months; and what the outcome was in each case. [45720]

Hazel Blears: From 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 (latest available) the Home Office has been notified of 37 cases, in which an antisocial behaviour order had been issued, going to appeal. As a result, 32 orders were varied, four discharged and one appeal was dismissed.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what services are available for victims of antisocial behaviour where an order is subsequently made in (a) the community and (b) court. [47975]

Hazel Blears: The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 introduced special measures for witnesses in proceedings for antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs). These measures were introduced to address concerns about the protection of vulnerable and intimidated witnesses. The measures include screening witnesses from the defendants, giving evidence through video link or in private, and the use of video recorded evidence. This makes it easier for witnesses to give evidence in the Crown and magistrates court during an ASBO hearing. Antisocial behaviour response courts have been established in magistrates courts sitting in their civil capacity to ensure that witness issues are addressed and the respect action plan announced plans to establish similar arrangements for county courts. There are also plans to introduce the same measures for ASBO victims in civil hearings as for victims in criminal cases. The Home Office has issued a good practice guide to practitioners on how best to support a witness.

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the conditions attached to antisocial behaviour orders issued during 2004. [47976]

Hazel Blears: We are notified by the courts of the numbers of ASBOs issued and these data are published quarterly. However information is not collected centrally on the conditions attached to antisocial behaviour orders. The Home Office is conducting an evaluation of ASBOs, the findings of which will be available in spring 2006 and will provide information on the effectiveness of ASBOs in tackling antisocial behaviour within our neighbourhoods and communities.

Asylum Applicants

Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many asylum applicants have
 
6 Feb 2006 : Column 927W
 
been returned to the UK from other EU countries under the terms of the Dublin Regulations since their introduction. [47490]

Mr. McNulty [holding answer 31 January 2006]: A total of approximately 300 asylum seekers have been returned to the UK from other EU countries under the provisions of the Dublin II Regulations since its introduction on the 1 September 2003.

Analyses of these totals are based on internal management information and as such are not of sufficient quality to be published as national statistics.

Cannabis

Mr. Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his oral statement on the regulation of cannabis of 19 January 2006, Official Report, columns 982–4, what evidence he relied upon in his statement that cannabis use among 16 to 24-year-olds has fallen by four per cent. since 1998; and what sample (a) size and (b) range was used in making the calculation. [47238]

Paul Goggins: The figures used in the Home Secretary's statement come from the British Crime Survey (BCS) which, as stated, shows that use of cannabis in the past year was reported by 28 per cent. of 16 to 24-year-olds in 1998 and 24 per cent. of the same age group in 2004–05, a decrease of four percentage points.

The BCS is a large nationally representative survey of adults living in private households in England and Wales. It has included a comparable set of self completion questions on drug use since 1996. In 1998, 1,295 16 to 24-year-olds answered the drugs questions, while in 2004–05, 6,287 16 to 24-year-olds did so. More details of the survey methods and findings are available in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin No. 16/05 Drug Misuse Declared: Findings from the 2004/05 British Crime Survey" which is available on the Home Office website and in the Library of the House.

Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs recommended that cannabis be reclassified to a Class C drug prior to 1999. [47805]

Paul Goggins: In the period prior to 1999, the Chair of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) did not put any firm recommendations to the Secretary of State for the Home Department that cannabis be reclassified to a class C drug. However, in December 1978 the ACMD produced a report on a review of the classification of controlled drugs and of penalties under schedule two and four of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. This covered a number of recommendations on classifications and penalties, including one that cannabis and cannabis resin should be transferred to class C.

However, in the then chair's covering letter to the Home Secretary he points out that there was a division of opinion within the council and no endorsement, or otherwise, of the recommendation was offered. In November 1981 the ACMD's Report of the Expert Group on the effects of Cannabis Use maintained that the recommendations of the 1978 Report, including that
 
6 Feb 2006 : Column 928W
 
on cannabis classification, remained valid. But again, the chair's covering letter to the Secretary of State did not offer a clear recommendation on cannabis classification.

---