Previous Section Index Home Page

27 Jun 2007 : Column 765W—continued



27 Jun 2007 : Column 766W
Police staff (FTE)( 1) whose main function is control room (call handlers)( 2) (2004-05-2005-06)( 3)
2005 2006

Avon and Somerset

324

358

Bedfordshire

97

102

Cambridgeshire

125

112

Cheshire

193

184

Cleveland

10

9

Cumbria

111

108

Derbyshire

205

209

Devon and Cornwall

307

306

Dorset

125

132

Durham

107

109

Essex

223

216

Gloucestershire

110

n/a

Greater Manchester

522

503

Hampshire

291

355

Hertfordshire

208

256

Humberside

139

154

Kent

383

412

Lancashire

349

347

Leicestershire

182

153

Lincolnshire

146

n/a

London, City of

28

27

Merseyside

293

203

Metropolitan Police

1682

1684

Norfolk

131

137

Northamptonshire

138

145

Northumbria

226

227

North Yorkshire

158

181

Nottinghamshire

232

233

South Yorkshire

301

331

Staffordshire

252

178

Suffolk

113

130

Surrey

288

280

Sussex

271

263

Thames Valley

456

528

Warwickshire

104

97

West Mercia

281

235

West Midlands

307

n/a

West Yorkshire

317

347

Wiltshire

122

134

Dyfed-Powys

43

58

Gwent

110

113

North Wales

95

n/a

South Wales

218

222

(1) This table contains full-time equivalent figures that have been rounded to the nearest whole number. Because of rounding, there may be an apparent discrepancy between the totals in this table and totals in similar published tables.
(2) Staff with multiple responsibilities (or designations) are recorded under their primary role or function. The deployment of police officers is an operational matter for individual chief constables. This function includes those staff who are predominately employed as control room operatives, in either force or area control rooms including officers employed as telephonists.
(3) Data are not available for 2002-03 to 2003-04.

Entry Clearances

Mr. Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the unit cost is of dealing with each category of in-country application. [127402]

Mr. Byrne: Following a public consultation at the end of 2006, we set out in a written ministerial statement and formal response to the consultation the intention to move away from a simple cost recovery model for immigration and nationality fees from this April to a model where categories of leave are priced on
27 Jun 2007 : Column 767W
the basis of their value to the applicant. This allows us to adopt a more flexible approach and can keep fees low for particular groups.

The projected unit costs on which the fees which took effect on 2 April 2007 were calculated are as follows. The actual costs of processing the applications will be reported in the accounts of the Border and Immigration Agency in the usual way following the end of the financial year.

Application type Projected cost 2007-08 (£)

Settlement/Nationality

Indefinite leave to remain

450

Nationality—Right Of Abode

135

Nationality—Naturalisation

206

Nationality—Adult Registration

156

Nationality—Minor single and multiple registration

190

Nationality—Adult registration under s.1 of the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1997

120

Nationality—Minor registration under s.1 of the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1997

200

Nationality—renunciation

385

Nationality—Citizenship Ceremony Fee

80

Nationality—supply of a certified copy of a notice

20

Nationality—Administration of a citizenship oath (not at a ceremony)

5

Work

Highly Skilled Migrant Programme

167

HSMP Leave to Remain

258

Work Permits

98

Work Permit Leave to Remain

288

Business Case Unit Leave to Remain

358

WRS

125

SAWS

12

LTR Other

Leave to Remain (non-student)

395

Certificate of Approval

295

Transfer of Conditions

302

Adult Travel Documents (CID)

210

Child Travel Documents (CID)

130

Adult Travel Documents (CTD)

121

Child Travel Documents (CTD)

450

Student

Student Leave to Remain

451


Entry Clearances: USA

Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with the United States Department for Homeland Security on limits to the visa waiver programme for security purposes; and whether exclusions based on (a) ethnic and (b) behavioural profiling have been discussed. [141354]


27 Jun 2007 : Column 768W

John Reid: There have been discussions on several occasions with Secretary Chrertoff on how to enhance co-operation on border security, including the Visa Waiver programme. At no stage has ethnic profiling been requested, countenanced or discussed other than in addressing misleading press reports, which were dismissed by both sides.

Immigration

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average response time has been to an immigration enquiry from an hon. Member in 2007; and what the equivalent figure was in (a) 2006 and (b) 2005. [145493]

Mr. Byrne: In 2005 letters from hon. Members were answered within an average of 32.8 working days. In 2006 letters from hon. Members were answered within an average of 23.56 working days.

Figures for the average number of days to respond to a hon. Member’s letters in 2007 are not currently available.

Immigration Asylum and Nationality Act 2006: Prosecutions

Mr. Malins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been prosecuted under section 34 (3) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. [143457]

Mr. McNulty: The Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 received Royal Assent on the 30 March 2006. Section 34(3) provides an offence where a person fails to provide information in response to a requirement under section 32 (2) or (3) or 33(2) of that Act.

We are currently engaged in consultation with industry on implementation of these sections, which will influence when these sections will commence. To date, there have been no prosecutions under section 34(3) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006.

Immigration Controls

David Heyes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what procedure (a) is followed by Border Control and Immigration Agency officers in relation to cases defined as ‘work in progress hold’ and (b) determines the order in which such cases are dealt with; and what the average length of time taken was to deal with such cases in the latest period for which figures are available. [140653]

Mr. Byrne: The document Fair, Effective, Transparent and Trusted: Rebuilding Confidence in our Immigration System, published in July 2006, lays out the order of priorities for legacy asylum cases. We will consider first those who may pose a risk to the public, and then those more easily removed, those receiving support, and those who may be granted leave. All cases are dealt with on their individual merits.


Next Section Index Home Page