|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
3 Sep 2007 : Column 1837Wcontinued
Mr. Clegg: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what legislative provisions introduced by her Department since 1997 have not yet been brought into force; 
(2) what legislative provisions introduced by her Department's predecessors since 1997 have been repealed. 
Jacqui Smith: Of the legislation introduced by the Home Office since 1 May 1997, for which Home Office Ministers retain responsibility, only one Act (the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1998) has been totally repealed. Many of the others have been repealed or amended in part (as is normal in the ongoing legislative process). But a list of all the provisions repealed since 1997 is not held centrally, and the information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
The following table lists provisions of Acts for which the Home Office currently has policy responsibility which received Royal Assent since 1 May 1997 which have not yet been brought into force.
|Act||Sections not in force|
Asylum and Immigration(Treatment of (Claimants, etc.) Act 2004
1(1)-(4), 1(5)-(8), 2-24, 27-29, 30, 31-34, 35, 39, 41, 42, 43, Sch 1
10(5)(a), 17 and 18 (for certain purposes), 19-34, 35(1) (a)-(g)(i) and (2) and (3), 36, 37, 39, 40(2) and (3), 41(2) and (3), 44-47, 51 to 53, 124
7(1), 14, 7, 19(1)-(9) and (11), 20, 21, 34-38, 39(1)-(3), (5)-(7), 40(l)-(3), (5)-(7), 41 (in part), 43(1), 46 (part) and Schedules three, eight, nine, 11 and 12, and Schedules one, two, five, 13, 14, and 15 (all in part)
120, 114(9), 117(part), 162(3), Sch four (part), Sch four(part), Sch nine (part), Sch 10 (part), Sch 14 (part)
l-14, 15-20, 21-22, 27, 31-34, 36-39, 40-41, 43-44, 47, 50 (part, 59, 61, 64, Sch two (part), Sch five (part)
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) which Bills introduced by her Department in the last five years have contained sunset clauses; and what plans she has for the future use of such clauses; 
(2) which Bills introduced by her Department in the last five years did not contain sunset clauses; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty: The following Acts were introduced during the last five years and are still the responsibility of the Home Office:
Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
Sexual Offences Act 2003
Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003
Extradition Act 2003
Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003
Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004
Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
Drugs Act 2005
Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006
Identity Cards Act 2006
Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006
Terrorism Act 2006
Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006
Police and Justice Act 2006.
Of these, the following contained sunset clauses (i.e. provisions that the proposed legislation or part thereof would cease to have effect automatically after a particular period):
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (section 13)
Terrorism Act 2006 (section 25).
As regards the use of such clauses in future: the appropriateness of a sunset clause for the whole or part of any proposed legislation is considered on a case by case basis. It is also addressed when a regulatory impact assessment relating to legislation is being prepared.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the impact of her Departments practice of holding
passports in files for periods of time on the owners of those passports. 
Mr. Byrne: Passports are required to establish the identity and status of the applicant and so that the immigration decision can be securely placed into the document. Every effort is made to make decisions accurately and speedily. Applicants who require their documents back urgently will be treated sympathetically. Applicants making a straight-forward application who do not wish to be without their documents can use our same day premium service available at Public Enquiry Offices.
Under section 17 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004, documents may be retained where it is suspected that the person to whom the document relates is liable to be removed from the United Kingdom. The document may be retained to facilitate their removala necessary requirement for effective immigration control.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was spent by her Department on redundancy payments in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Byrne: The Home Office does not maintain a central record of costs incurred in contesting employment tribunals (formerly industrial tribunals). The information required could be obtained only at a disproportionate cost.
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reasons the Russian arrested on 21 June on suspicion of conspiracy to murder was deported; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 24 July 2007]: We do not comment on individual cases.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions there have been of uninsured drivers by the West Midlands police force in each of the last 10 years; and what the average penalty was in each case. 
Mr. Coaker: The information requested is set out in the following table.
|Proceedings at magistrates courts for the offence of using a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks( 1) , and average fine imposed, West Midlands police force area, 1997-2004|
|Total proceedings||Average fine(£)|
|(1) An offence under the Road Traffic Act 1988 s. 143 (2). (2) As from 1 June 2003, 'driving a motor vehicle while uninsured against third party risks' became a fixed penalty offence. Notes:|
1. It is known that for some police force areas, the reporting of court proceedings in particular those relating to summary motoring offences may be less than complete. Work is underway to ensure that the magistrates' courts case management system currently being implemented by the Ministry of Justice reports all motoring offences to the Office for Criminal Justice Reform. This will enable more complete figures to be disseminated. 2: 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 the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their limitations are taken into account when those data are used. Source: Court Proceedings Database held by OCJR.
Mike Wood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many drivers were stopped for using mobile telephones while driving in the latest period for which figures are available; how many subsequent prosecutions there were; and what the outcome was of those prosecutions. 
Mr. Coaker: Information on the number of drivers stopped for using hand held mobile phones while driving is not collected centrally.
The latest figures for prosecutions and outcomes are for 2004. These show that for England and Wales there were 789 prosecutions and 641 convictions for using a hand-held mobile phone while driving. This offence can also be dealt with by the offer of a fixed penalty and there were in addition 73,796 tickets paid.
2005 data will be available later this year.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how section 41D of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is being enforced; what training has been provided for the (a) police and (b) judiciary; how the Government are monitoring its effectiveness; what guidance has been given to the courts on enforcement issues; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Coaker: Enforcement of offences is an operational matter for individual chief officers of police enforcement of road traffic. Section 41D, Road Traffic Act 1988 consists of failing to have proper control of a vehicle and using a mobile phone while driving. The likelihood of detection of such offences has increased through the increasing numbers of police, including the deployment on roads of teams involved in the use of automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) equipment. They can stop vehicles as a result of direct observation, as well as an ANPR hit. Otherwise, the police enforce as operationally appropriate, taking into account other demands on their resources. Training for roads policing duties including the enforcement of Section 41D offences is a matter for individual chief officers.
Section 41D is an offence to do with vehicle construction and use. All such offences are only triable summarily. All magistrates receive training in road traffic offences as they constitute a large part of the work of the magistrates court. While there has been no direct training in s41D, the construction and use provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provide the basis of part of the Judicial Studies Board induction training for magistrates about sentencing in road traffic cases. Magistrates also receive advice in court from the clerks and legal advisers.
For monitoring purposes, the Department for Transport undertakes observational surveys of the number of drivers using mobile phones while driving on a regular basis. The survey for 2007 is under way at the moment and the results will be published later this year. The most recent survey published in August 2006 is TRL Leaflet 2100 which is available online at:
Mr. Burrowes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will take steps to increase the number of roadside breath tests by police forces. 
Mr. Coaker: Deployment of resources is an operational matter for individual chief officers of police. In January 2005, however, the Home Office, together with the Department for Transport (DfT) and Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), issued a jointly agreed statement of Roads Policing Strategy. This included as one of its five key actions the reduction of road casualties. The strategy identified drink driving as one of the key behaviours contributing to avoidable casualties and committed the police to tackling it by increasing the risk of detection. Home Office and DfT Ministers wrote to chief officers in January this year to stress the Governments continuing commitment to the Roads Policing Strategy and the importance of effective enforcement of road traffic law. Drink driving was highlighted as an area of offending where there is a need for positive police activity nationally.
ACPO is due to launch a new enforcement campaign at the end of July to complement the Governments new multi-media anti-drink driving publicity campaign which began on 20 July.
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many young people under 16 were arrested for (a) driving whilst under the influence of (i) drugs and (ii) alcohol and (b) drink-related offences in each of the last three years. 
Mr. Coaker: Centrally held arrest statistics relate to those arrested for recorded crimes (notifiable offences) only. Summary offences such as driving after consuming alcohol, etc. and drink related offences are not notifiable.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|