|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Alan Simpson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has happened to the (a) signed poster designed by Banksy and (b) other materials seized from Brian Haw by the Metropolitan police on his removal from Parliament Square. 
Mr. Coaker: Following a police operation on 23 May 2006 a quantity of property, including banners and posters, was taken by the Metropolitan Police Service from the site of Mr. Haws demonstration in Parliament Square. Mr. Haw has subsequently collected some of his property.
Mr. Haw has been advised by the Metropolitan Police Service that he may take possession of the remainder of his property at any time provided it is not used to breach the conditions currently imposed upon his demonstration.
Mr. Coaker: Difficulties with drivers avoiding prosecution do not come primarily from their being untraceable to an address. In 97.5 per cent. of cases, it is possible to trace a vehicle from the database maintained by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). The DVLA has firm measures in place to guard against the inclusion of false details. Of those it is not possible to trace, not all will be deliberately seeking to avoid detection.
Any problem is rather with the difficulty of identifying the person driving a vehicle at the time of an alleged offence. The Road Safety Act 2006 increases the penalty for a vehicle keepers failure to identify the driver to six penalty points.
The key to tackling offending driver behaviour is effective police enforcement, including targeting suspect vehicles, individuals and sites and the use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition Technology to detect vehicles of interest.
The police can then take immediate action using the existing powers we have given them. These include the power to seize vehicles being driven antisocially, or without appropriate licence or insurance and the powers to arrest for any offence if necessary to confirm name and address or to prevent hindrance of a prosecution by the disappearance of the suspected offender.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 16 May 2007, Official Report, column 803W, on the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP), what the DIP budget
allocation was for each intensive DIP area in (a) 2003-04, (b) 2004-05 and (c) 2005-06. 
Mr. Coaker: My reply of 16 May referred to the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) Main Grant allocations for 2007-08. As the DIP has evolved, there have been changes to the funding mechanisms each year. These changes have reflected some short-term funding streams and also some integration of separate funding streams to make administration easier at local level.
Similarly, unlike the constituency of my hon. Friend, not all the areas named in my reply have been part of the programme since 2003. It is accordingly not possible, except at disproportionate cost, to provide DIP budget allocations for each intensive area for (a) 2003-04, (b) 2004-05 and (c) 2005-06 comparable to that in my reply of 16 May.
But allocations to areas such as the constituency of my hon. Friend have been based on the same criteria and I shall be writing to her with a more detailed explanation of the processes and to see if my officials are able to assist her with the purpose of her inquiry.
Lorely Burt: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many children in Solihull have their DNA stored on a database; and how many of those have been charged with committing a criminal offence. 
Joan Ryan: As of 6 June 2007, there were an estimated 229,389 individuals with a DNA profile on the National DNA Database (NDNAD) taken by West Midlands police, of which 19,380 were under 18 years of age at that date. Information held on the NDNAD is available on a police force area basis only. Although the DNA sample in these cases was taken by West Midlands police, the individuals to whom the sample relates will not necessarily be resident in the West Midlands police area.
The purpose of the National DNA Database is to hold a record of a persons DNA which can be matched against DNA taken from crime scenes. It does not hold data on arrests, charges and convictionsthat is held on the Police National Computer. Information on whether under 18s whose DNA has been sampled by the West Midlands police have been charged could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by cross-searching the NDNAD profiles against records held on the Police National Computer.
Mr. Coaker: Reflex, the multi-agency Government taskforce on organised immigration crime was set up in March 2000 and has been successful at disrupting organised immigration crime gangs leading to a large number of arrests and seizure of criminal assets. The co-ordination of enforcement work on human trafficking has now moved on with the establishment of the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) and the UK Human Trafficking Centre in 2006.
Reflex under SOCA continues to result in the disruption of organised crime gangs involved in trafficking women for sexual exploitation and has a number of multi-agency programmes of activity in this area. These programmes build on the strategies developed under Reflex. Organised Immigration Crime is SOCAs second priority after drug trafficking.
The Government have funded the POPPY project since March 2003 to provide safe shelter and support to assist in the recovery of adult female victims who have been trafficked into the UK for the purposes of sexual exploitation.
The Governments strategy to prevent human trafficking has a number of different elements. These include research and intelligence gathering to improve our knowledge and understanding of the scale and nature of human trafficking in the UK; awareness raising and capacity building in source and transit countries; and measures designed to address the demand for trafficked persons.
The Government are also working with source countries to tackle the problem of trafficking at its root. We have provided funds for various anti-trafficking projects in the Western Balkans region, West Africa (including Benin, Burkina Faso, Gabon, Ghana, Niger and Togo) and in the Greater Mekong region (parts of Cambodia, China, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam).
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate the Government have made of the number of women trafficked into the UK in 2006 for the purpose of sexual exploitation. 
Mr. Coaker: The majority of our knowledge regarding the extent of human trafficking in the UK relates to trafficking for sexual exploitation. It remains difficult to make an accurate assessment of the extent of the problem although intelligence suggests there has been an increase in the trafficking problem over the last two or three years. The findings from a Home Office research paper suggests that at any one time in 2003 there were in the region of 4,000 victims of trafficking for prostitution in the UK. In 2006, a police led multi agency operation on trafficking for sexual exploitation led to the identification of 87 victims from 22 different countries, predominantly from Eastern Europe, China/South-East Asia, Africa or Brazil.
Published statistics are not available for the period requested; the latest 12 month period for which information can be provided is 2005. In 2005, 23 employers were proceeded against under section 8 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 (employing a person aged 16 or above subject to immigration control and who is not entitled to work in the UK or to undertake the employment in question) in the magistrates courts. No persons were tried for the same offence at the Crown court in 2005.
We recognise that the number of prosecutions under section 8 is low, and that is why we have committed to bring forward the introduction of measures contained in the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 to tackle illegal migrant working, which will provide the Border and Immigration Agency with a range of tools with which to tackle non-compliance. The 2006 Act introduces a system of civil penalties for employers who through negligence employ illegal migrant workers, alongside a tough new offence for those knowingly employing illegal workers, which will carry a maximum two year prison sentence and/or an unlimited fine. These new measures will come into force in late 2007.
On 15 May 2007 the Border and Immigration Agency published Prevention of illegal working; Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006; Consultation on the implementation of new powers to prevent illegal migrant working in the UK. This document contains our action plan for tackling illegal working. Copies have been placed in the House Library and can be downloaded from the Border and Immigration Agency website at:
Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average time a Home Office presenting officer spent on (a) a deportation appeal, (b) an asylum appeal and (c) an immigration appeal, excluding the time spent travelling and waiting for, and presenting, an appeal hearing, over the last 12 months. 
According to the records kept by the Treasury Solicitor's Department, the average time spent when instructed in Asylum and Immigration Tribunal appeals for the financial year 2006-07 was 21.6 hours per case. The Treasury Solicitor's Department does not keep records that differentiate between the time spent on different types of appeals heard before the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and therefore cannot state the average time spent on each of the categories of appeal set out in the question.
Mr. McNulty: Since 2003, crime has fallen by 10 per cent; since 2002, the rate of offences brought to justice has increased by 39.6 per cent.; and sanction detection rates have increased from 19 per cent. in 2003-04 to 24 per cent. in 2005-06.
Over the past three years, the Home Office has commissioned Her Majestys Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) to audit the quality of police detection data recording, and the results are used to improve administration and record-keeping.
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and what percentage of police officer recruits left the police force within two years of joining in each of the last 10 years. 
|Number of police officers leaving( 1) within 2 years of joining the service, from 2002-03 to 2005-06|
|Number of officers leaving within two years||Percentage of officers leaving within two years from total number of leavers|
|(1) Includes transfers to other England and Wales forces but does not include officers leaving after a period of secondment.|
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers there are (a) in the North East, (b) on Teesside and (c) in the area corresponding as closely as possible to Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland; and how many there were in 1997. 
Mr. McNulty: The corresponding data for the requested areas are: (a) the North East Government Region (encompassing Cleveland, Durham and Northumbria police force areas); (b) the Cleveland police force area; and (c) the Basic Command Units (BCUs) within the Cleveland police force area, namely Hartlepool, Langbaurgh, Middlesbrough and Stockton.
|1. Police officer strength (FTE)( 1) in the North East Government region as at 31 March 1997 and 31 March 2006|
|31 March 1997||31 March 2006|
|(1) Full-time equivalent figures rounded to the nearest whole number. All officers excluding those staff on career breaks or maternity/paternity leave (comparable with previously published figures). Because of rounding, there may be an apparent discrepancy between totals and the sums of the constituent items.|
|2. Police officer strength (FTE)( 1) in Cleveland police force area as at 31 March 1997 and 31 March 2006|
|31 March 1997||31 March 2006|
|1. Full-time equivalent figures rounded to the nearest whole number. All officers excluding those staff on career breaks or maternity/paternity leave (comparable with previously published figures). Because of rounding, there may be an apparent discrepancy between totals and the sums of the constituent items.|
|3. Police officer strength (FTE)( 1) in the Basic Command Units within Cleveland police force area as at 31 March 1997 and 31 March 2006( 2)|
|31 March 2006|
|(1) Full-time equivalent figures rounded to the nearest whole number. All officers including those staff on career breaks or maternity/paternity leave. Because of rounding, there may be an apparent discrepancy between totals and the sums of the constituent items. (2) Basic Command Unit data are not available for 1997.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|