|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what new (a) cluster munitions and (b) weapons employing explosive submunitions the Government are in the process of (i) developing and (ii) procuring. 
Mr. Bob Ainsworth: There is no internationally recognised definition for a cluster munition; this is the subject of ongoing negotiations under UN auspices. However, we have no plans to develop or procure new munitions falling under the UKs current working definition of a cluster munition.
In terms of new weapons that employ submunitions technology, we are developing a Ballistic Sensor Fused Munitiona 155 mm gun-launched shell containing two explosive sub-munitions, each having target detecting sensors and a self-destruct system.
Mr. Rob Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) acceptable behaviour contracts and (b) parenting orders were issued in (i) Reading, (ii) Wokingham and (iii) Berkshire in each year since their introduction. 
Mr. Coaker: Data on acceptable behaviour contracts (ABCs) are not collected by the Home Office as they are voluntary agreements and therefore not suitable for central data collection. However, surveys of crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs) indicate that over 25,000 ABCs have been made since October 2003. The Home Office recently issued updated and comprehensive guidance for practitioners on the use of ABCs.
Parenting orders are a matter for the Ministry of Justice. However I understand that they were piloted between 30 September 1998 and 31 March 2000 but data showing the breakdown by area are not available for that period. Parenting orders were commenced in England and Wales in June 2000. The Youth Justice Board (YJB) has since April 2000 collected the number
of parenting orders by youth offending team ("YOT") area, as reported to it by youth offending teams including education-related orders where the YOT has been involved.
Until April 2007, one YOT covered Reading and Wokingham. Four other YOTs cover the rest of Berkshire. Since September 2004, the Department for Children, Schools and Families has collected data on the number of parenting orders in England related to non-attendance of children at school and exclusion from school at local authority level.
Four parenting orders were made in Berkshire following truancy prosecution between 1 September 2004 and 13 April 2007: two in Reading between 2 September and 31 December 2006; one in West Berkshire between 22 April and 1 September 2006 and one between 2 September and 31 December 2006.
|Table A: Parenting orders related to youth offending or anti-social behaviour reported by Berkshire YOTs|
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps she plans to take to provide security for the Appleby Horse Fair in future; what the outcome of inquiries into events at the last fair have been; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Coaker: The policing of the Appleby Horse Fair is an operational matter for the chief constable of Cumbria constabulary. In regard to the drowning of a horse in the River Eden on the first day of the Fair, I understand that this incident is currently being investigated by the RSPCA who are still trying to trace the individual responsible.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what assessment she has made of whether the threshold of moderate pain in animal experimentation is being adhered to; 
Meg Hillier: The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 makes provision for the protection of animals used for experimental or other scientific purposes which may have the effect of causing pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm.
Projects licensed under the 1986 Act specify protocols which are the means by which the project will be carried out. Each protocol is assigned a severity limit in one of four categories, unclassified, mild, moderate or substantial. The severity limit for each protocol is determined by the upper limit of the expected adverse effects that may be encountered by a protected animal, taking into account the measures specified in the licence for avoiding and controlling adverse effects. It represents the worst potential outcome for any animal subjected to the protocol, even if it may only be experienced by a small number of the animals to be used.
A detailed description of each category of severity limit is set out in paragraph 5.42 of the published Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (HC 321). In general terms, the moderate category is reserved for protocols in which suffering is effectively controlled or terminated before the animal shows more severe effects. In the case of animals experiencing pain in such protocols, effective analgesia is provided or the protocol is terminated before the animals show more severe effects.
Under standard project licence condition eight, set out in Appendix D to the Home Office Guidance, it is the responsibility of the project licence holder to ensure adherence to the severity limits and if these constraints appear to have been, or are likely to be, breached, the project licence holder must ensure that the Secretary of
State is notified as soon as possible. Veterinary surgeons and animal care staff skilled in the recognition of the severity of signs of suffering or distress in animals are available at each establishment to advise the licensees on when an animal is experiencing or liable to experience more than moderate pain.
The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Inspectorate also visit designated establishments where animal experiments are being carried out to determine whether the conditions of licences are being complied with. Inspectors report to the Secretary of State any case in which any provision of the 1986 Act or any condition of a licence or certificate under the 1986 Act has not been or is not being complied with and advise on the action to be taken in any such case. Home Office records show that non-compliance with severity limits is rare.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what research has been (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated by her Department into the numbers of children arrested for alleged violence against another child; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: All allegations of assault are investigated by a team of trained and experienced Border and Immigration Agency (BIA) investigators and are automatically referred to the police. In the event that any allegations of assault are upheld, we would expect the police to pursue criminal charges. The staff concerned would also be subject to disciplinary action by their employers and would have their accreditation as Detention Custody Officers revoked by BIA.
We asked the Independent newspaper for sight of the dossier on so that a thorough investigation can be carried out. Despite several follow-up requests, this still has not been passed to us. We continue to press the newspaper.
Mr. Byrne: Statistics on the location of asylum seekers in the UK are linked to the available information on those asylum seekers who are in receipt of support. The number of asylum seekers in receipt of support are available broken down by Government office region, local authority and parliamentary constituency.
As at the end of June 2007, there were 435 asylum seekers supported in accommodation and 50 in receipt of subsistence only support in Sandwell. These figures exclude any asylum seekers who may be living in Sandwell but are not receiving support, for whom figures are not held.
The number of asylum seekers in receipt of support, broken down by Government office region and local authority, are published on a quarterly and annual basis. Copies of these publications are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics website at:
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the most recent percentage failure rates are for biometric (a) fingerprint, (b) iris scan and (c) facial recognition data. 
Meg Hillier [holding answer 10 September 2007]: In biometric systems, the term failure can be defined in many different ways depending on the specific application. As a result, it is difficult to give a definitive answer to a question such as this.
For instance, in a fully automated biometric access control application it may be preferable to configure the system such that there is a possibility of occasionally allowing access to some unauthorised individuals (false match) than to risk rejecting those who are entitled to it (false non-match).
|Fee breakdown 2007|
From 2006, BIA began recouping more of the costs of the immigration system from visa charges. Visas that are particularly valuable therefore saw price increases commeasurable with their value. Comprehensive research and consultation demonstrated that British nationality brings many benefits that applicants value very highly, such as, the right to vote in general elections and eligibility to apply for a British passport which provides the holder with the right of free movement throughout the European Union, removing the necessity to apply and pay for visas to visit those countries. We believe this justifies the fact that the fees charged for applications under this route should be greater than for some other routes.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|