|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Q1 2005( 6)||Q2 2005( 6)||Q3 2005( 6)||Q4 2005( 6)||Total 2005( 6)|
|(1) Includes enforced removals, persons departing voluntarily following enforcement action initiated against them, and persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organisation for Migration. (2) Figures rounded to the nearest five, with * = 1 or 2, and may not sum due to rounding. (3) Provisional figures. (4) People recorded as being under 18 on the date of their removal from the UK. (5) People whose date of birth is not recorded on the source database. (6) Removals include those who it is established have left the UK without informing the immigration authorities (470 asylum applicants, including dependants, in 2005).|
Mr. Byrne: Figures on the numbers in excepted categories who have lodged or may lodge an application for indefinite leave to remain and are in receipt of state benefits are not available. With some limited exceptions, migrants who do not have indefinite leave to remain are ineligible to receive public funds until such time as they are given permission to remain permanently in the United Kingdom.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reasons were for the time taken for the publication of the most recent report by the Independent Monitor (Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002) submitted to Government in November 2005. 
Mr. Byrne: The final agreed version of the 2005 Annual report of the Monitor of certification of claims as unfounded under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 was formally submitted to the Home Office on 6 April 2006. The report was published on 27 April. The document submitted to the Home Office on 29 November 2005 was the first draft of the Monitors annual report. This document was then subject to a period of consultation and discussion prior to being submitted to the Secretary of State. This included the provision of further information requested by the Monitor to enable her to complete the report and the correction of factual errors.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date each of the reports by the Independent Monitor (Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002) were received by the Home Office; and what the date of publication was in each case. 
Mr. Byrne: The Independent Monitor of certification of claims as unfounded under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 has published two annual reports, covering 2004 and 2005 respectively. The final version of the 2004 annual report was received by the Home Office on 1 June 2005 and published on 21 July. The final version of the 2005 report was received on 6 April 2006 and published on 27 April.
Mr. Pelling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reasons were for changing the initial decision under the New Asylum Model to place eight caseworker teams in Croydon and instead to place these teams in Central London. 
Mr. Byrne: By April 2007, all new asylum claims will be managed as part of the New Asylum Model (NAM). NAM is an integrated process and this therefore points to the need to be close both to reporting centres and to hearing centres. Analysis of the geographical locations of asylum claimants in the London area showed two large clusters of claimants in North Central London and in West London. This was a reasonable fit with the locations of IND reporting centres: at Communications House in Central London and at Eaton House in West London, near Heathrow; as well as with the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal hearing centres in London EC1 and at Feltham in Middlesex. It was accordingly decided that it would be most efficient to locate the Asylum Teams as close to the reporting centres as possible. We have now found and signed leases on buildings in both locations. The experience of the first NAM team which was set up in Croydon in June 2005 was that few of the claimants lived in the Croydon area and were having to travel a long way to report to their case owners and this validated the decision we made.
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the number of foreign nationals illegally in the country; and on what statistical evidence such estimates are based. 
Mr. Carswell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many illegal immigrants who have been released from prison and not detained have subsequently been convicted of armed robbery in the past two years. 
Mr. Byrne: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary updated the House in a written ministerial statement on 29 June 2006, Official Report, column 19WS, regarding the release of foreign national prisoners without deportation consideration. The director-general of the immigration and nationality directorate (IND) wrote on the same date to the chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee on the number of cases where foreign national prisoners were released without proper deportation consideration. A copy of this letter is available in both Libraries. Previous updates have also been provided to the House on the number of cases where foreign national prisoners were released without proper deportation consideration. In particular I refer the hon. Gentleman to the written ministerial statements of 15 May 2006, Official Report, columns 40-41WS, and 23 May 2006, Official Report, columns 77-81WS.
Mr. Leigh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many employers (a) between 27 January 1997 and 10 February 2003 and (b) since 10 February 2003, have been investigated for consideration of prosecution by his Department or by any police force or other public authority for offences in any way related to or arising from the employers' alleged, intended or actual employment of illegal workers or facilitation of illegal immigration or other immigration-related offences alleged to have been committed by employers (i) under the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996, (ii) under the Nationality, Asylum and Immigration Act 2002 and (iii) under any other legislation; of these employers, how many were prosecuted and, of those employers prosecuted, how many were convicted; and, as regards the convictions, what were the minimum, average and maximum sentences imposed, both in total and broken down by legal characterisation of the offences. 
Mr. Byrne: There are no centrally collated reports on how many employers have been investigated for consideration of prosecution action by the UK Immigration Service, the police or other public authorities as decisions on whether or not to prosecute are made by individual departmental prosecution sections, as well as the Crown Prosecution Service. However, statistical information on those employers successfully prosecuted for such offences is published in the Home Office Command Papers Control of Immigration: StatisticsUnited Kingdom 2005 and Control of Immigration: StatisticsUnited Kingdom 2004. These papers are available on the Home Office's Research Development and Statistics website: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will estimate the number of illegal immigrants entering the United Kingdom in 2005; and how many have since been deported. 
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were bailed without being charged in the last period for which figures are available; under what circumstances this occurs; and if he will make a statement. 
preparation for the addition of a second biometric in the UK ePassport;
Identity Cards programme in support of the national identity scheme;
UKvisas Biometric programme to ensure that all UK issued visas will use biometric identifiers by the end of 2007 or early 2008;
Biometric travel documents;
Biometric residence permit to be developed in line with common EU standards;
IAFS+, extension of IAFS (Immigration and Asylum Fingerprints System) to accommodate the biometric visas and biometric residence permits;
e-Borders programme, delivering a modernised border control, which is fundamentally more effective, efficient and secure to meet the future operational needs of UK border, law enforcement and intelligence agencies;
FIND national database of facial images managed by the Police Information TechnologyOrganisation, PITO;
PITO project to use face recognition to support FIND;
LANTERN, a mobile fingerprint system under development by PITO.
IDENT1 UK police platform for fingerprints and palmprints;
UK ePassport: completion of its rollout scheduled for third quarter of 2006;
IAFS (Immigration and Asylum Fingerprint System), database of biometric data relating to immigration cases and asylum seekers;
ARC (application registration cards) and the use of mobile quick check readers. ARC is a credit card sized plastic credential which contains fingerprint details of asylum claimants and others;
RepARC (Reporting with ARC) programme to require asylum claimants to produce their ARC card at each reporting event;
ISRP (Immigration Stateless Refugee Project) to collect fingerprint details from holders of the 1951 UN Convention Travel Document;
VIAFSVisa Immigration and Asylum Fingerprint System, collecting fingerprints of visa applicants from certain countries;
EURODACEuropean-wide system in support of the Dublin Convention uses fingerprint data in order that member states can determine whether an asylum-seeker or a foreign national found present within a member state has previously claimed asylum in another member state;
IRIS (Iris Recognition Immigration System), a free and voluntary way for air passengers to clear immigration utilising their iris image to verify their identity;
Systems in prisons to prevent escapes by prisoners exchanging places with visitors;
C-NOMIS (Custody-National Offender Management Information System). Fingerprint based for confirmation of prisoner identity against IDENT1 and PNC;
Pilot of a Methadone dispensing system using iris recognition, at HMP Eastwood Park;
Trial of fingerprint based access control to IT systems in prisons.
The Prison Service has full, step-by-step procedural guidelines set out in the National
Security Framework, accessible to all staff, on how rubdown searches must be conducted. In a standard level rubdown search the officer rubs down the upper and lower areas of the front and back of the body. Higher-level searches additionally include searching hair, feet and footwear. The power to search a passenger is contained in the Immigration Act 1971, Schedule 2 and in the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004. However, this power is used sparingly and only in exceptional circumstances. An immigration officer, or a customs or police officer conducting the search under his direction, may invite any person to empty their pockets voluntarily as part of a search for documents. Detainee custody officers have a power under Schedule 11 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 to undertake a clothed body search of a detained person at an immigration removal centre or a short term holding facility, including a holding room at a port of entry.
Mr. Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 19 December 2005, Official Report, column 2353W, on British citizenship, what the percentage breakdown is by country of origin of applicants for each of the last five years. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 12 January 2006]: The information is presented in the following table. (This information has not been quality assured and is not a National Statistic. It should be treated as provisional management information and may be subject to change.)
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|