|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Derek Twigg: Awards for gallantry and meritorious service on operations are published routinely in the Defence Supplement of the London Gazette, copies of which are available in the Library of the House. The relevant references from 2003 to date are as follows:
Mr. Byrne: The process for removing failed asylum seeker families is set out in the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) Family Removals Policy notice (EPU 2/06), and the Operational Enforcement Manual chapter 58Family Detention Visits, both of which are publicly available on the IND website.
Mr. Sutcliffe: The Home Office employs approximately 78,000 officials. Identifying who would have access to each official's diary would be a disproportionate cost. Access to ministerial diaries is limited to those persons who support Ministers in performing their ministerial duties.
Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 26 March 2007]: Home Office Ministers meet regularly with ministerial colleagues and former ministerial colleagues in the course of performing their ministerial duties. In so doing, each acts in accordance with the ministerial code.
Mr. Byrne: The Home Office is committed to meeting all the targets for Sustainable Operations on the Government estate, which include targets to reduce waste and increase recycling. Actions that have been taken specifically on paper include the purchase of recycled paper as standard for internal printing and photocopying, and the setting of many printers to automatically print double-sided. We have also run articles on the Home Office intranet advising staff about reducing paper wastage by, for example, not printing off e-mails. Staff are also encouraged to re-use paper as scrap, where possible, before putting it in the recycling facilities.
Capital projectsinformation technology, lands and buildings, on a private finance initiative basis or otherwise£100,000,000;
Disposal of fixed assets£5,000,000;
Gifts (cash or assets)£100,000
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment his Department has made of the security situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo before deporting foreign nationals to that country; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: Every asylum and human rights claim is considered on its individual merits in accordance with our international obligations and taking full account of conditions in the country concerned as they impact on the individual claimant. Information about the conditions in the Democratic Republic of Congo, including the security situation, is obtained from a wide range of governmental and non-governmental sources, human rights organisations and the media. This information is published in regularly updated Home Office Country of Origin Information Reports. The latest Country of Origin Information Report on the Democratic Republic of Congo was published on 14 February 2007, and can be accessed on the Home Office website at:
It is important for the integrity of our asylum system and to prevent unfounded applications that we are able to enforce the return of those who have no right to remain in the UK. The asylum decision making and independent appeals system exist to consider in each case whether the individual claimant would be at risk in their country of origin and we will only seek to return those who have been found not to need our protection.
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been deported from the UK since 24 August 2005 on the ground that their presence is not conducive to the public good due to their involvement in fomenting or provoking others to commit acts of terrorism. 
Mr. Byrne: Since 24 August 2005 no individuals have been deported from the UK specifically on the ground of involvement in fomenting or provoking others to commit acts of terrorism. However, such acts come within the scope of the power to deport a person because their presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good and are listed under the unacceptable behaviour (UB) provisions announced on 24 August 2005. To date there has been one deportation on UB grounds.
Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consultations his Department held with community representatives before he announced the proposed new levels of fees for visas and in-country fee levels. 
Mr. Byrne: A public consultation was conducted for an eight week period between 30 October and 22 December. The consultation document was available on the Home Office website and over 3,000 copies were sent to individuals and organisations. Almost 300 documents were sent to community representatives and another 180 were sent to foreign embassies and missions.
In addition, we ran 13 sector based stakeholder events with over 400 participants. These included key stakeholders in the heath and social care, education and business sectors, as well as diplomats and representatives of the travel and tourism sector.
Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 26 March 2007]: A review of ministerial diaries has indicated that no current Home Office Minister has met with representatives of Golden Arrow Communications in their official capacity. The Home Office employs approximately 78,000 officials. Identifying which of these officials have held meetings with representatives from Golden Arrow Communications could be done only at disproportionate cost.
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigration control staff are deployed in each Northern Ireland airport; where those staff are based; and what arrangements are in place for transporting such staff to their places of work. 
Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has received on the treatment of rape victims in immigration appeal hearings; what guidelines are in place for immigration judges in considering such claims; if he will commission research into this matter; and if he will make a statement. 
The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) has considered the recent report Misjudging Rape: Breaching Gender Guidelines and International Law in Asylum Appeals published by the Black Women's Rape Action Project (BWRAP) and Women Against Rape. Additionally, it has recently received representations on similar issues from stakeholders groups such as Asylum Aid and the Medical Foundation for the Victims of Torture.
The BWRAP report recommended that the Asylum Gender Guidelines (2000) be applied by immigration judges in all asylum appeals where rape is cited in the grounds of appeal. The guidelines never had binding authority on the tribunal and are out of date in respect of current law. The guidelines are framed very much as a statement of what the law is on particular aspects of a refugee claim. It is not the role of the tribunal to make statements on the law, save through its jurisprudence.
Immigration judges are independent members of the judiciary who determine cases on the evidence that is placed before them. Judicial training is facilitated by senior and experienced members of the judiciary. All immigration judges receive training in diversity and refugee law and are encouraged to keep up to date with legal developments both in the UK and nationally. All judiciary have access to the Judicial Studies Board (JSB) Equal Treatment Benchbook as well as country guidance determinations, Home Office country reports and wider information, and case law of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and higher courts.
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) arrests were made and (b) convictions were secured by the National Crime Squad in each year since 1998, broken down by offence. 
|National crime squadperformance data|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|