|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
17 Jan 2007 : Column 1187Wcontinued
The revised policy document was published on the Home Office website. A letter outlining the principal changes was circulated to stakeholders, including the main representatives organisations.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers accommodated in (a) England, (b) Cambridgeshire, (c) Peterborough city council unitary authority and (d) Peterborough constituency were granted (i) asylum and (ii) indefinite leave to remain in each of the last 10 years; and how many illegal immigrants who had been accommodated in each area were deported in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr. Byrne: Information on numbers of asylum applications and decision outcomes relating to asylum seekers in particular areas of the UK is unavailable, as are statistics regarding the location of asylum seekers not in receipt of support from IND. The number of illegal immigrants deported from each area in the last 10 years is not available.
The numbers of asylum seekers in receipt of support from IND, broken down by Government office region and local authority, are published on a quarterly and annual basis, as are asylum decisions in the UK as a whole. The latest publication covering the third quarter of 2006 is available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html. Further breakdowns, of those in receipt of support from IND, by parliamentary constituency are also available from the Library of the House.
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many outgoing requests for mutual legal assistance from the UK have been transmitted to (a) Saudi Arabia, (b) Chile, (c) Romania, (d) Tanzania and (e) South Africa as part of investigations into BAE Systems; 
(2) what the originating legal authority in the UK was of each outgoing mutual legal request relating to BAE Systems; what the date was of each request; to which country each request was sent; and how long it took for each request to be completed and returned to the originating authority. 
Joan Ryan: Correspondence between the UK and other countries relating to mutual legal assistance is by its very nature confidential in order to protect the integrity of any ongoing criminal investigation. It therefore follows that the Home Office can neither confirm nor deny that such requests have been received, considered or made by UK authorities.
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for citizenship were received from members of Commonwealth countries while serving in UK armed forces in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr. Byrne: Statistics on applications for British citizenship are not collated in such a way as to enable me to provide this information; and this information could only be obtained by the examination of individual case records at disproportionate costs.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Immigration and Nationality Department MPs Parliamentary Business Unit will respond to the letter of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West of 10 October on his constituent, Ms Husniye Mecit, ref. H1099905. 
Mr. Byrne: I wrote to the hon. Member on 11 December.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many reported incidences there have been of staff using legitimate access to databases to browse data for which they had no business requirement in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 18 December 2006]: The following figures depict recorded instances of staff using their database access for reasons for which they had no business requirements:
Responsibility for dealing with misconduct rests largely with line managers, who can deal with minor acts of misconduct informally or commission investigations, and if appropriate take formal disciplinary action, such as issuing warnings and authorising dismissal, for more serious acts. Such incidents may not be recorded centrally.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance his Department has issued to police forces on the use of penalty notices for disorder in preference to other means of disposing of a particular offence. 
Mr. Coaker: Under powers given by section 6 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001, the Secretary of State has issued operational guidance on penalty notices for disorder (PND) to all police forces in England and Wales. The guidance sets out, among other things, the circumstances in which it is appropriate to issue a PND and where it is not, for example when a victim may wish to seek compensation through the criminal courts. Although it is not legally binding, it is expected that officers will adhere to this guidance when considering whether or not to issue a PND.
In addition, there is separate guidance to forces on the issue of PNDs to young persons aged 16-17 years. There is also guidance for community support officers and for accredited persons on their powers to issue PNDS.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were sentenced to (a) a fine, (b) a term of imprisonment and (c) some other form of sanction for breach of a penalty notice for disorder in each of the last four years for which figures are available. 
Mr. Coaker [holding answer 18 January 2007]: Penalty notices for disorder (PNDs) were introduced under the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001. Under the PND scheme, police may issue a fixed penalty of either £50 or £80 for a range of minor disorder offences. The recipient of a PND has 21 days from the date of issue in which either to pay the fine or to request a court hearing. Failure to do either will normally result in the PND being registered as a fine against the recipient at one and a half times the penalty amount or, in exceptional circumstances, in proceedings against them for the penalty offence. No other sanction is currently available to deal with non-compliance of a PND.
As the PND scheme was introduced during 2004, data are only available for 2004 and 2005. In 2004, 63,639 PNDs were issued of which 28,180 were registered as fines. In 2005, 146,481 PNDs were issued of which 62,174 were registered as fines.
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many and what percentage of criminal cases familial searching of the National DNA Database was conducted in 2006. 
Joan Ryan: One hundred and fifteen familial searches were run on the National DNA Database in 2006. The number of cases is 113, as in two operations, two familial searches were carried out. The number of offences recorded for the year 2006 is not yet available. The number recorded in England and Wales for the year April 2005 to March 2006 is 5,742,600, so the percentage of cases in which familial searching is used is very small.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of offenders convicted of an offence in each year since 1995 have their profile on the National DNA Database. 
John Reid: I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answers I gave to his questions numbered 108679 and 108680 on 9 January 2007, Official Report, columns 540W and 541W respectively.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) prosecutions have been made and (b) fixed penalty notices have been issued by each local authority in Gloucestershire for (i) dog fouling and (ii) dropping of litter in each of the last three years. 
Mr. Coaker [holding answer 11 January 2007]: Data from the court proceedings database held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform on the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts in the Gloucestershire police force area for offences relating to the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996, and the offence of depositing litter, for the years 2002 to 2005, are provided in Table 1. This information is not collected at local authority level.
The number of fixed penalty notices issued for the offence of dog fouling and dropping litter in all local authorities in Gloucestershire is provided in Table 3. These data are submitted on an annual basis by local authorities to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
In addition, the penalty notice for disorder (PND) scheme was introduced in England and Wales in 2004. Under the scheme the police are able to issue persons suspected of committing specified minor offences, including littering, with a fixed penalty notice of £50. No admission of guilt is required and payment of the penalty discharges all liability to conviction for the offence. The number of PNDs issued for littering in Gloucestershire police force area for the years 2004-06 (January to June 2006 provisional data) can be found in Table 2. PNDs cannot currently be issued for the offence of dog fouling.
|Number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts for offences relating to Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act 1996 in Gloucestershire police force area, 2003 -05( 1 ,2)|
Dog defecates on designated land and person in charge of dog fails to remove faeces from land forthwith.
|1 These data are on the principal offence basis. 2 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 those data are used. Note: Court proceedings database is unable to separately identify those offences which relate to murder, manslaughter, common assault and battery to children or young persons under the age of 18.|
|Number of Penalty Notices for Disorder issued for depositing and leaving litter in Gloucestershire police force area, 2004-06|
|Depositing and leaving litter|
|Number of Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) issued by Gloucestershire for dog fouling offences under the Dogs Fouling of Land Act 1996 and for Litter under the Environmental Protection Act 1990|
|Local authority||Dog Fouling||Litter|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|