|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Trespassing on a railway||Throwing stones at a train/railway||Drunk in a highway||Consumption of alcohol in public place||Depositing and leaving litter||Consumption of alcohol by under 18 on licensed premises||Allowing consumption of alcohol by under 18 in licensed premises||Buying alcohol by under 18|
|January to June 2006 provisional figures|
|Total PNDs issued||Wasting police time||Misuse of public telecommunications system||Giving false alarm to fire and rescue authority||Causing harassment, alarm or distress||Throwing fireworks||Drunk and disorderly||Criminal damage (under £500)||Theft (retail under £200)|
|Breach of fireworks curfew||Possession of category 4 firework||Possession by a person under 18 of adult firework||Sale of alcohol to drunken person||Supply of alcohol to person under 18||Sale of alcohol to person under 18||Purchase alcohol for person under 18||Purchase alcohol for person under 18 for consumption on premises||Delivery of alcohol to person under 18 or allowing such delivery|
|Trespass on a railway||Throwing stones at a train/railway||Drunk in a highway||Consumption of alcohol in public place||Depositing and leaving litter||Consumption of alcohol by under 18 on relevant premises||Allowing consumption of alcohol by under 18 on relevant premises||Buying or attempting to buy alcohol by person under 1 18|
|(1) 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 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.|
(2) Offence added with effect from 1 November 2004.
(3) Offence added with effect from 11 October 2004.
(4) Offence added with effect from 4 April 2005.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether there are any offences which require a defendant to prove innocence rather than the prosecution having to prove guilt. 
Mr. McNulty: A person may only be convicted of an offence if the prosecution proves his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It is a fundamental principle, enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998, that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. In certain circumstances, a defendant who seeks to rely on a particular defence has the burden of raising or establishing the defence. For example, at common law, there is a presumption of sanity and the onus is on the defendant to establish the defence of insanity. Some statutory offences are phrased so that it is for the defendant to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that he has a defence for behaviour which would otherwise be criminal. However, that is unusual, and such defences are usually ones where the facts of the defence would only be known to the defendant.
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 19 February 2007]: As the Government have said on previous occasions, we believe that without this reservation the interpretation of the UNCRC might come into conflict with the UK's own domestic legislation on immigration. For this reason we think that it is right to retain the reservation as presently worded. The retention of the reservation, however, does not mean that vulnerable children do not have the protection of the UK's own laws. We are satisfied that asylum-seeking children in the UK receive adequate care, protection and support. In addition, domestic legislation also provides protection under the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Children Act 2004.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will remove the requirement for individuals who have been checked by the Criminal Records Bureau for employment in one organisation to undergo additional checks when applying for employment in other organisations; 
(2) what assessment he has made of the (a) time taken to perform and (b) cost of additional checks carried out by the Criminal Records Bureau under the requirement for individuals to be checked for each application they make to different organisations. 
Joan Ryan: The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) does not place a requirement on individuals to undergo additional checks when applying for different employment positions. Disclosures are primarily designed to be used by an employer at the point of recruitment for a particular position. Ultimately it is for each employer and not the CRB to decide whether a fresh disclosure should be applied for, bearing in mind their legal and other responsibilities and subject to any statutory requirements.
No assessment has been made of the time taken or the costs involved in performing additional checks. The CRB completes all applications in the order in which they are received and does not monitor repeat applications.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|