|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many arrests have been made in West Lancashire under the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 since its introduction. 
The new powers of arrest, which were created under section 10(1) of the Act were repealed in January 2006 by the introduction of section 110 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, which made all offences arrestable. As section 10(1) of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act had not been implemented, data on the number of arrests for domestic violence related incidents under these powers are not available centrally.
However, data from January 2006 to March 2006 on domestic violence arrests for all police forces, covering the extended powers of arrest, will be published this autumn and data from April 2006 to March 2007 will be published in autumn 2007.
|Government funding for Dorset 1997-98 to 2006-07|
|General grant( 1)||Capital provision, specific grants and special formula grant||Total|
|(1) Total government grants includes general grant (Home Office police grant, DCLG/Welsh Assembly Government Revenue Support Grant and National Non-Domestic Rates). It also includes specific grants: Crime Fighting Fund, Rural Policing Fund, Basic Command Unit funding, Community Support Officers funding, Neighbourhood Policing Fund, Airwave, DNA Expansion Programme, Special Priority Payments and capital grants. Pensions deficit grant and Dedicated Security Posts funding is included for 2006-07. Special formula grant in 2006-07 comprises the former specific grants Rural Policing Fund, Special Priority payments, DNA grant and South East/London allowances. (2) Figures 2001-02 not directly comparable with 2002-03 due to transfer of funding for NCS/NCIS from police authorities to Home Office. Adjusted figures are comparable with subsequent years. (3) Figures for 2006-07 are not directly comparable with 2005-06 owing to the transfer from general to specific grant of pensions and security grant. The adjustments to 2005-06 render them comparable with those for 2006-07. (4) General grant allocations are net of Amending Report adjustments for 2004-05 and 2005-06 that took account of ONS population data changes and some pensions data changes.|
Mr. Coaker: Since coming into post the Home Secretary has not had the opportunity to decide how to proceed with the matter. In any event, it is sensible to take into account the conclusions drawn by the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee in its inquiry into Scientific advice, risk and evidence: how Government handles them which is using the classification of illegal drugs as one of its case studies.
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 14 July 2006]: There are no central guidelines on the disposal of firearms except where firearms seized in respect of criminal offences. In such cases an order for their disposal are normally sought from the trial judge or magistrate. In these circumstances, the forfeiture and/or destruction order (as applicable) is actioned locally, at force level.
Disposal is also undertaken locally in cases where firearms are seized by the police from licensed firearms holders as a result of a breach of licence conditions or where the person is no longer considered to be fit and proper to hold the weapon; or where members of the public surrender firearms voluntarily to the police.
The only exception is where firearms are considered to have historical significance or instructional value for training. In such cases the weapons may be retained in liaison with a museum or the Royal Armouries or by the police in secure conditions as instructional aids.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many shooting incidents there have been in (a) Southend-on-Sea, (b) Essex, (c) Hertfordshire, (d) the Metropolitan police area of London, (e) City of London police area and (f) England and Wales in each year since 1986 in which (i) legally held and (ii) illegally held weapons were used against the police. 
Mr. McNulty: The Policing Bureaucracy Taskforce recommended in its report published in July 2002 that greater use should be made of prisoner processing units (PPUs) to handle and interview suspects and to complete initial case preparation with a view to freeing up patrol officer time.
The use of PPUs, also referred to as Investigation and Detainee Handling Centres (IDHCs) helps provide an appropriate level of expertise in dealing with volume crime arrests and to enable designated police staff to be employed flexibly within such units. The performance drive and focus is in line with Office for Criminal Justice Reforms objective to bring more offences to justice through a more modern and efficient justice process by supporting all criminal justice agencies in working together to provide an improved service for the public.
The provision of detention facilities within each force area is an operational matter for the chief officer of the force concerned. Information is not held centrally on the number of units or centres. objective to bring more offences to justice through a more modern and efficient justice process by supporting all criminal justice agencies in working together to provide an improved service for the public. The provision of detention facilities within each force area is an operational matter for the chief officer of the force concerned. Information is not held centrally on the number of units or centres.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which pathologists in Haringey Coroner Services (a) are and (b) are not accredited by his Department; and how many of these pathologists are over the normal retirement age. 
Joan Ryan: The Home Office does not hold information on (a) the pathologists instructed by specific coroners, (b) the coroners instructing forensic pathologists on the Home Office Register or (c) the age of the pathologists on the Home Office Register. I am therefore unable to provide the information requested.
Mr. Coaker: Although the homicide figures record where a knife or other sharp instrument has been used, other crimes specifically involving the use of a knife cannot be separately identified in the recorded crime statistics or the court proceedings data.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of the murders committed in England and Wales over each of the last 10 years were committed within the extended family; and what estimate he has made of the numbers of murders in which alcohol was a contributory factor. 
Mr. McNulty: The information available centrally relates to homicides recorded by the police in England and Wales for each year between 1995 and 2004-05 where there was a family relationship between victim and suspect. Figures are also provided for this period where the suspect was known to be intoxicated at the time of the offence, but as they are based on information notified to the Home Office, rather than the actual case files held by the police or the court records, it may understate the true position. Figures are contained in the table.
|Offences currently recorded( 1) as homicide by the police in England and Wales, 1995 to 2004-05|
|Extended family relationship( 2)||Alcohol related( 3)|
|(1) As at 28 November 2005; figures are subject to revision as cases are dealt with by the police and by the courts, or as further information becomes available. (2) From the information notified to the Home Office, the relationship between victim and suspect is known to be within the following categories: Son, daughter (including adopted) Stepson, stepdaughter (including child of suspect's cohabitant/lover Spouse Ex-spouse, estranged spouse Cohabitant, common law spouse Ex-cohabitant, ex-common law spouse Lover, mistress Ex-lover, ex-mistress Lover's spouse, spouse's lover, cohabitant's spouse or lover, lover's lover Homosexual/ex-homosexual relationshiplong-term Homosexual relationshipcasual Other family (including foster children). (3) From the information notified to the Home Office, the suspect is known to have been intoxicated at the time of the offence, or on drink and drugs. The drink and drugs related cases may include those where drink was not the primary factor. The figures are affected by recording changes, most notably in 2001-02 when some forces introduced a new notification system.|
|Offences initially recorded( 1) by the Metropolitan police as homicide by London borough 2000-01 to 2004-05|
|Period offence initially recorded|
|(1) This measure is the one used generally for recorded crime statistics. It differs from the more commonly used currently recorded homicide measure, which excludes cases where a suspect has been acquitted or convicted of a lesser offence. Figures using this measure are not available below police force area level.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|