|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Since 2001, DFID has had two three year pay agreements for staff below the SCScovering the periods August 2001 to July 2004, and August 2004 to July 2007. The effective date of the award is set at 1 August each year. The actual implementation date in each of last five years was as follows:
Mr. Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions in the last three years the police have been obliged by the 28-day or 14-day limit to release terrorist suspects whom they wished to continue to detain beyond those limits for further investigation; and what the (a) date and (b) circumstances were of each such case which is not subject to ongoing legal proceedings. 
Mr. McNulty: The police do not centrally hold information on the release of terrorist suspects who they might wish to detain beyond the pre-charge detention period set out in legislation or the detailed circumstances of each case where a suspect is not charged.
The 14 day detention period came into effect on 20 January 2004. Until 25 July 2006 (the date the 28 day detention period came into effect), 15 people were held for a maximum of 13-14 days. Of these 15 individuals, one was released without charge.
The maximum period of detention pre-charge was extended to 28 days with effect from 25 July 2006. Until 30 September 2006, 10 people were held for longer than 14 days. Of these 10 individuals one was held for 14-15 days, three were held for 19-20 days and six were held for 27-28 days. Of the six individuals held for 27-28 days, three were released without charge.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time taken was to process an arrest that did not subsequently lead to the person being charged or cautioned with any offence in each police authority area in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Binley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the review of the practice of giving two months discretionary leave to remain (DLR) to regularise the stay of people who claim they have indefinite leave to remain but cannot provide evidence of this at a port of entry to report; and how many applications for DLR in these circumstances are on hold pending the review being completed. 
Mr. Byrne: A review of the guidance for UK immigration officers when dealing with passengers who are unable to provide evidence of their existing leave conditions at port will shortly be completed and the revised guidance will be published on the Home Office website early in the new year. Applications for leave to enter or for leave to remain are not on hold pending this review.
Mr. Byrne: Data from a specific area or region (of a country) of origin of asylum seekers are not collated centrally and are therefore not available, the number of those who applied would only be available by examination of individual case-files at disproportionate cost.
Information on asylum applications, by nationality, is published in quarterly web pages and in the annual statistical bulletin Asylum Statistics United Kingdom. Copies of these publications and others relating to general immigration to the UK are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office research development and statistics directorate website at:
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what systems have been put in place by his Department to assess the safety and well being of failed Darfuri asylum applicants who are returned to Sudan. 
Mr. Byrne: We do not routinely monitor the return of individual failed asylum seekers and others who are removed from the UK. The asylum decision-making and independent appeals process exists to ensure that those who are at risk of persecution or serious mistreatment in their country of origin will not be removed there. However, if specific allegations are made that any returnee has experienced ill-treatment on return from the UK, these will be followed up through the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as a matter of urgency.
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with the Department of Health on the effect on children's social care services of supporting children from families with no recourse to public funds as a consequence of the implementation of section 54 of and schedule 3 to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and section 9 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004. 
[holding answer 12 December 2006]: No discussions have been held with the Department of Health to discuss childrens social care services and supporting children in connection with schedule 3 to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002including the provision added to schedule 3 by
section 9 of the 2004 Act. Policy for childrens social care services is the responsibility of the Department for Education and Skills.
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many families he estimates are in Great Britain without recourse to public funds because of the implementation of section 54 of and schedule 3 to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and section 9 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 2004. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 12 December 2006]: We estimate 30 families have had their asylum support withdrawn under the provisions of schedule 3 to the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2003. Support continues to be available to minor dependants under sections 17 or 20 of the Children Act, and to families if there would otherwise be a breach of their human rights. There are no barriers to any affected families leaving the UK voluntarily.
Nick Herbert: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he made of the numbers of community support officers (CSOs) each police force in England and Wales would have employed by March 2008 had his national target of 24,000 CSOs remained in place. 
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 12 December 2006]: The following table gives the estimated number each force would have employed by March 2008 to achieve a national target of 24,000 CSOs. A written ministerial statement on 27 November announced changes to this plan in the light of the progress that the police service has made towards delivering neighbourhood policing and requests from the service for greater flexibility.
|PCSOs||March 2008 target|
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the most recent evaluation of the effectiveness of police community support officers was published by his Department; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 22 November 2006]: We published Home Office Research Study 297, A national evaluation of Community Support Officers on 26 January 2006. The study showed that Police Community Support Officers are an important part of the extended police family and are key to the successful delivery of neighbourhood policing. By focusing on low level crime and antisocial behaviour they are improving residents quality of life and restoring respect to local communities.
Mr. Byrne: There is no central record for the Department and to examine all individual pieces of consultancy dating back to 1997 would incur a disproportionate cost. Requirements for consultants are subject to value for money reviews at the point of purchase.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he will reply to the letter of 16 October from the hon. Member for Buckingham on the case of Mr. Pshteuin Mohammed and Mrs. Ozlen Mohammed. 
Mr. Byrne: In a written statement to the House on 12 June 2006, a new set of sustainable operational targets for the central Government estate were announced. The new targets, to which the Home Office is committed, include a specific commitment for a carbon neutral Government office estate by 2012 and to reduce carbon emissions from offices by 30 per cent. by 2020.
Carbon neutrality is about having zero net carbon dioxide emissions. This is achieved through a combination of reducing carbon dioxide emissions, using renewable energy and offsetting the remaining balance. Carbon offsets are purchased to cover unavoidable emissions that result after all economically viable carbon savings have been made.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|