|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who is responsible under the Identity Cards Act 2006 for (a) notifying him of an individuals death and (b) returning the deceaseds identity card; and what the penalty will be for the failure to comply with those requirements. 
John Reid: Specific arrangements for dealing with identity cards of deceased persons have yet to be decided. However, we intend to work closely with the General Registrar Offices to ensure that the notification of death and return of the ID card can be done in a sensitive manner, without causing undue distress to the bereaved. For example, GROs guidance on death registration is likely to include instructions on what to do with passports, ID cards and other documents. Although the Act does not require anyone to report the death of an individual who is registered, the powers under section 9 allow data to be disclosed for the purposes of verifying the information held on the Register. This could also include data collected by the Registrars General on those who have died and thus avoid the need to report a death on two occasions.
While section 11(3) states that a person who is knowingly in possession of an ID card without the lawful authority of the individual to whom it was issued or the permission of the Secretary of State must surrender the card as soon as it is practicable to do so, this is intended to prevent the misuse of cards and not directed at bereaved relatives of the deceased.
Joan Ryan: Fines relating to the criminal offences set out in sections 25 to 30 of the Identity Cards Act may be imposed by a criminal court in the normal way. With the exception of the offence of providing false information when applying to be entered on the National Identity Register, the criminal sanctions in the Act are not targeted at people registered on the scheme. The Act provides for civil penalties not criminal sanctions in cases such as failing to surrender an invalid ID card.
John Reid: Applicants for identity cards will be asked for information about their current principal address, together with current alternative addresses and previous addresses. Details of which addresses an individual is required to register will be set out nearer to the beginning of the identity cards scheme. Subsection 42(10) of the Identity Cards Act allows the Secretary of State to make regulations to specify in detail exactly what will be regarded as a place where a person resides or as his principal place of residence.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many cases intercept evidence was admitted in court under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in each year since the entry into force of that Act; and under which sections of the Act it was admitted in each case. 
Mr. Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Assets Recovery Agency recognises the International GCSE as an acceptable substitute for a GCSE for the purposes of recruitment. 
Mr. Coaker: The Assets Recovery Agency recognises the International GCSE for recruitment purposes. The Agencys recruitment policy is that if a role requires specific qualifications, the need for them has to be justified in objective terms. It is made clear to potential applicants that equivalent or similar level alternative qualifications will be considered. The Agency considers that it is important not to exclude candidates with relevant experience from applying for a role.
Mr. Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the contingency plans that are in place to cover police officers who exercise their right not to accept additional jailer duties under Operation Safeguard. 
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what complaints were received by the director general of the Prison Service about (a) the director general and (b) his organisation in October and November 2006. 
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what instructions were given (a) verbally and (b) in writing to the director general of the Prison Service by Ministers in October 2002 on control of a riot at Lincoln jail; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: There are no written records within the Home Office of discussions between the then Home Secretary and the then director general of the Prison Service about the disturbance at Lincoln prison on 23 October 2002.
Mr. Sutcliffe: Information on the ethnic make-up of the prison population can be found in table 2.11 of the Offender Management Caseload Statistics Quarterly Brief for October to December 2005, and can be found at the following website:
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system, and although shown to the last individual, the figures may not be accurate to that level.
Mr. Sutcliffe: The Home Secretary announced in the CJS Review on 20 July 2006 that NOMS will deliver a building programme of 8,000 prison places, including a number of new prisons, by 2012. No decisions have yet been taken on the location or timing of the building of these prisons, but the areas of greatest strategic need are the south-east, the north-west, south Wales and the west midlands.
Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 5 December 2006]: The Home Secretary announced in the CJS Review on 20 July 2006 that NOMS will deliver a building programme of 8,000 prison places, including a number of new prisons, by 2012. No decisions have yet been taken on the location or timing of the building of these prisons, but the areas of greatest strategic need are the south-east, the north-west, south Wales and the west midlands.
Mr. Sutcliffe: The advantages of contracting-out more of the probation budget were assessed in the light of efficiencies gained following the contracting-out of areas of activity on the custodial side of the National Offender Management Service. Estimated savings were modelled in the range of 3.5 per cent. to 8.5 per cent., in line with the savings delivered after those earlier contracting-out exercises. No additional research evidence was used to quantify the potential benefits of contracting-out.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many targets his Department has set for the National Probation Service; and whether those targets were met in the latest period for which figures were available. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: The National Probation Service has been set a total of 14 performance targets for 2006-07. The targets cover the key objectives of protecting the public and reducing re-offending whilst reflecting the priority given to work with offenders on matters such as accommodation, education, training and employment, health, drugs and alcohol, as well as addressing the needs of victims.
Details of the performance of the 42 probation areas in England and Wales against the performance targets and measures set for the service are published on a quarterly basis in National Probation Service performance reports. The reports are public documents and are posted on the NPS website:
The latest report (22) shows that the National Probation Service had met or exceeded nine of the 13 performance targets for the first six months of 2006-07. Data on the regionally set employment targets for minority ethnic staff will not be available until the new year when the census returns are made. This target has been met in each of the previous years since monitoring began and it is envisaged that it will be met again this year.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost was of running the Prospect Hostel in Exeter in 2005-06; how many residents there were at the hostel at the most recent date for which figures are available; whether the contract for the hostel in Exeter has been terminated early; and whether his Department has a contract with Langley House for the supply of secure beds. 
The National Probation Directorate has had in place a service level agreement (SLA) with Langley House Trust since February 2003. Under the terms of the SLA, places are available across 15 projects, some of which have 24-hour staffing cover, as well as nine enhanced supervision beds.
Mr. Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drivers have been prosecuted for offences contrary to sections (a) 3 and (b) 34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 in each of the last eight years, broken down by police force area. 
Mr. McNulty: Available information taken from the Court Proceedings Database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform covering offences under s.3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 from 1997 to 2004 (latest available) are given in the following table.
|Proceedings at magistrates courts for the offence of driving without due care and attention( 1 ) by police force area, England and Wales, 1997 to 2004|
|Number of offences|
|(1) Offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s.3|
1. Offences contrary to s.34 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 cannot be identified separately from other summary motoring offences.
2. It is known that for some police force areas, the reporting of court proceedings in particular those relating to summary motoring offences, may be less than complete. Work is underway to ensure that the magistrates courts' case management system currently being implemented by the Department for Constitutional Affairs reports all motoring offences to the Office for Criminal Justice Reform. This will enable more complete figures to be disseminated.
3. Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when these data are used.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|