|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Sandra Gidley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how much funding has been allocated to (a) primary care trusts, (b) acute hospital trusts, (c) strategic health authorities, (d) mental health trusts, (e) ambulance trusts and (f) local authorities to implement the smoking ban provisions of the Health Act 2006; and how spending of this funding is being monitored. 
Caroline Flint: The national health service has been smokefree since 1 January 2007, in line with commitments set out in the Choosing Health White Paper published in 2004. The Department has, therefore, not identified any specific funding for NHS bodies to implement the smokefree requirements set out in the Health Act 2006. NHS bodies will receive materials from the Department to support them in preparing for the introduction of smokefree legislation.
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Primary Care Trust's, or its predecessors', budget was for each year from 2001; and what departmental funding was
provided each year over the same period for adult social care in Cornwall. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis [holding answer 29 March 2007]: The total resource limit, which is made up of revenue and capital for each of the financial years from 2001-02 to 2005-06 for the predecessors of the Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Primary Care Trust (PCT) is shown in table one. The most recent period for which figures are available is 2005-06. The figures have been extracted from the audited final accounts of the relevant PCTs. Central Cornwall PCT and North and East Cornwall PCT were established in 2001-02 but did not become operational until 1 April 2002. Therefore, no final accounts were submitted for 2001-02. Central Cornwall PCT was the successor to Carrick PCT therefore figures for Carrick PCT for 2001-02 have been included.
The majority of Cornwalls social care spending is funded from the formula grant which contributes to all local government services. Specific grant funding from the Department for social care from 2001-02 to 2005-06 is shown in table two.
|Table one: Primary care trust (pct) total (revenue and capital) resource limits 2001 to 2006|
|Total resource limit|
Audited PCT Summarisation Schedules (ASFs)
|Table two: Revenue grants to Cornwall from the Department|
|Total (£ million)|
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many overseas establishments in the (a) EU and (b) USA are approved by his Department as sources of primates imported for research; and how many of these establishments comply fully with International Primatological Society guidelines for the acquisition, care and breeding of non-human primates; 
(2) which overseas establishments outside the EU and USA are approved by his Department as sources of primates imported for research; and how many of these establishments comply fully with International Primatological Society guidelines for the acquisition, care and breeding of non-human primates. 
Joan Ryan: There are two breeding and supply centres within the European Union that are accepted as suitable sources of non-human primates intended for use in scientific procedures in the United Kingdom, none in the USA, and five outside the European Union. It is not Home Office policy to name overseas supply centres.
The guiding principle applied in appraising overseas breeding and supply centres is that they should meet the relevant standards set out in the Home Office code of practice for the housing and care of animals in designated breeding and supplying establishments at least in respect of animals destined for the United Kingdom. Minor deviations from those standards, such as minor variations in cage heights, may be acceptable provided that they do not have adverse consequences for the welfare of the animals at the centre.
The International Primatological Society (IPS) guidelines for the acquisition, care and breeding of non-human primates are not a set of minimum compliance criteria for supplying animals for use in the United Kingdom. Rather, they are considered to provide guidance on good practice to which all breeders of non-human primates should aspire. Except where they differ from the requirements of the United Kingdom code of practice, Home Office policy is that compliance by overseas centres with the IPS guidelines is generally expected and overseas centres are required to identify any areas in which they do not meet the standards of the IPS guidelines when seeking acceptance as suppliers to the United Kingdom. However, not all of the IPS guidelines are appropriate in all circumstances. For example, providing a fixed light-dark cycle cannot apply where, as is the case in many source countries, animals experience natural daylight/day length throughout the year.
Providing that any deviation from the UK code of practice provisions does not have a material adverse effect on animal welfare, centres may be deemed acceptable as overseas sources. On this basis, all of the overseas supply centres currently accepted by the Home Office as suitable sources of non-human primates are judged to have appropriate animal welfare standards, even though they do not comply with every provision of the code of practice and IPS guidelines.
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases have been resolved from the backlog of asylum seekers whose cases have failed since July 2006; and what his most recent estimate is of the backlog of such cases. 
Mr. Byrne: Information on asylum applications, initial decisions and appeals by nationality are published quarterly and annually. Copies of these publications are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics website at:
The Chief Executive of the Border and Immigration Agency wrote to the Home Affairs Committee on 19 February with an update on the Legacy Programme
announced by the Home Secretary in his statement to Parliament on 19 July 2006. A copy of the letter is in the Library.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what package of assistance has been provided by the Government for failed Iraqi asylum applicants under the UK enforced returns programme in each year since 2004. 
Mr. Byrne: Enforced returns to Iraq commenced in accordance with the memorandum of understanding in 2005. The package of support provided includes a small cash sum in pocket money, onward ground transportation to peoples home towns or villages, and the opportunity to participate in a re-skilling programme designed to fit them for employment in Iraq.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what representations he has had from (a) the United Nations, (b) other international organisations and (c) the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government on the consequences of returning Iraqi asylum seekers in the UK to Iraq; what responses he has made; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: UNHCR in their December 2006 position paper advised that no Iraqi from southern or central Iraq should be forcibly returned to Iraq until such time as there is substantial improvement in the security and human rights situation in the country. When considering the return of Iraqis from the three northern governorates of Iraq, UNHCR advise that returns should be conducted in a phased and orderly manner, closely co-ordinated with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) authorities. At present we are enforcing the removal of only those individuals who are from the KRG area of Iraq, which is in line with the UNHCR position.
Ministers and officials from the Home Office and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office have discussed the issue of returning Iraqi failed asylum seekers to Iraq with the Kurdish Regional Government on a number of occasions.
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what monitoring mechanism has been put in place of failed Iraqi asylum applicants returned to Iraq under the UK voluntary returns programme since 2004. 
Mr. Byrne: For those Iraqis returning under the Voluntary Assisted Return and Reintegration Programme (VARRP) and availing themselves of reintegration assistance, there is a monitoring exercise that takes place three months, six months and 12 months into the implementation of their reintegration activity.
Anne Snelgrove: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time taken to process travel documents for asylum seekers with exceptional leave to remain in the UK when applying for permission to leave and return to the United Kingdom was in the last period for which figures are available. 
Mr. Byrne: The information requested is not available and could be obtained only by interrogating individual records to establish a breakdown of decisions by document type, which would incur disproportionate cost. The performance targets for processing all types of travel document applications are:
70 per cent. dispatched in 20 working days; and
90 per cent. dispatched in 70 working days.
91 per cent. dispatched in 20 working days; and
95 per cent. dispatched in 70 working days.
Mrs. May: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on which occasions the Chancellor of the Exchequer consulted him before making his speech on requiring immigrants to complete community service before becoming British citizens. 
Paul Rowen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many driving offences were tried in (a) magistrates courts and (b) Crown courts in each of the last five years; and what average penalty was handed down in each case. 
Mr. Coaker [holding answer 26 March 2007]: Information on proceedings, convictions and sentences imposed at criminal courts for motoring offences can be found in the annual Home Office publication Offences relating to motor vehicles, England and Wales, Supplementary tables (latest available covers 2004). Copies are available in the Library. The publication is available on the Research Development and Statistics (RDS) website.
The commissioning for residential rehabilitation is carried out at local level and the funding for it comes via a number of streams. It is therefore not possible to identify how much of the pooled treatment budget is spent on residential rehabilitation beds.
Mr. Byrne: Figures showing the numbers of (a) non-British European Union nationals and (b) non-European Union foreign national prisoners held in all prisons in England and Wales on 31 January 2007 can be found in the following table.
|Non-British European Union nationals and non-European foreign national prisoners held in prison establishments in England and Wales as at 31 January 2007|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|