|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Sutcliffe: The total number of education hours undertaken by prisoners during each of the last two years is shown in the table. Data for 2005-06 is provisional subject to end-of-year validations by establishments.
|Hours of education undertaken by prisoners in England and Wales|
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many young people in Peterborough constituency have been subject to the Prolific and Priority Offender Strategy; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: Currently, 32 young people under the age of 18 are being targeted. This comprises 28 under the Prevent and Deter and four in the Catch and Convict and Rehabilitate and Resettle strands. Peterborough is one of 39 schemes in the eastern region that is helping to deliver the Government's national Prolific and Priority Offender programme which uses a multi-agency approach to target those offenders causing a disproportionate amount of harm to their communities through a range of interventions to reduce their offending.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans the Government have to place the (a) Saved Sect and (b) al-Ghurabaa groups on his Departments list of proscribed terrorist organisations. 
Mr. Byrne: Section 21 of the terrorism Act 2006, which came into force on 13 April, expanded the criteria for proscription. All possible candidates for proscription will be assessed against these widened criteria.
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many racially motivated attacks took place in (a) England and Wales, (b) Leicester and (c) London in each of the last 24 months for which figures are available. 
Mr. Byrne: Information is collected in the form of racially or religiously aggravated less serious wounding and racially or religiously aggravated common assault. Data for the period April 2003 to March 2005 are given in the table.
|Racially or religiously aggravated less serious wounding and common assault|
|Month/Year||Leicester crime and disorder reduction partnership||Metropolitan and City of London police force areas||England and Wales|
Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the research studies commissioned by his Department in each of the last five years where a decision was taken not to publish the results of the research after it was completed. 47563]
Mr. Byrne: Not every piece of research that is commissioned is published by the Home Office. The Chief Scientific Adviser may decide not to publish in a Home Office series on the grounds of inadequate scientific quality following external peer review, as the results are out of date or for operational reasons. In these circumstances, the researcher is usually released to publish the results through other means. We do not have a record centrally of which reports released in this way have subsequently been published in scientific journals or other non-HO publications.
In other cases, the Department decides to publish only a summary of research and allow the more detailed report to be made available separately. A list of research findings can be found on the Home Office website.
1. That a decision is taken that any dissemination of the research should have a limited distribution for reasons such as security considerations or practical operational reasons.
2. That the research is commissioned, but during the course of the project a decision is made to re-prioritise work to other areas, before there are publishable results.
3. There are a very limited number of projects where no suitable publication date was found for release by the Home Office. We have found one such instance in the last five years.
4. The Home Offices Communications Directorate conducts market research to help develop and evaluate public information campaigns. The research is not peer reviewed and therefore has not been considered appropriate for official Home Office publication although details are available on request.
A table showing the available information on research projects commissioned in the last five years where the above circumstances apply has been collated into a table that has been placed in the House of Commons Library.
Mr. Byrne: The Government are satisfied that these provisions operate effectively to regulate road use. These provisions of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 provide for the making of traffic regulation orders outside Greater London and of similar orders within Greater London. The orders are made by local authorities or the Secretary of State according to the type of road and can make a wide range of provisions as to how the road is to be used. The orders are made in the interests of avoiding danger, preventing damage, facilitating passage along the road, preventing vehicular use of the road in a way that is unsuitable for the road or surrounding area, preserving the character of a road and preserving or improving local amenities.
Mr. Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the procedure is for registered sex offenders who have been fully rehabilitated to apply to have their name removed from the register. 
Mr. Coaker: Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 provides for the notification requirements on offenders who receive convictions or cautions for certain sexual offences. These notification requirements are often known as the sex offenders register. The notification requirements apply for a fixed period as set out in the 2003 Act (see following table) and include lifetime registration for those sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 30 months or more or admitted to a hospital subject to a restriction order.
The only exception relates to those offenders who were made subject to the requirements because they were convicted for a homosexual offence that has now been abolished. These offenders may make an application to end the notification requirements placed upon them.
|Description of relevant offender||Notification period|
Ms Abbott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will assess the merits of introducing legislation similar to that protecting against incitement to racial hatred to protect women from sexually objectifying material. 
Mr. Coaker: I share the hon. Members concern at the portrayal of women in some parts of the media. However, I believe there is a significant difference between material which is intended or is likely to stir up hatred and material which may objectify a person and it would be a very large step to criminalise material in the second group. Moreover, in practical terms, hatred is a concept well understood by the courtsit includes behaviour which is likely directly to drive up violence and the fear of violence. It is less clear what sexually objectifying material is and what the direct effects of such material would be. I believe there would be genuine difficulties for the courts in defining sexually objectifying material. This could cover a very wide range of material including much that is commonly available through the media, works of art and comedy material.
Legislation, including the Obscene Publications Act 1959, the Indecent Displays (Control) Act 1981 and the Video Recordings Act 1984 already exists to protect people against illegal and harmful sexual material.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|