|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
and the advancement of knowledge in biological or behavioural sciences.
Any projects using animals involving the use of so-called recreational drugs would have had to satisfy one or more of these requirements. The 1986 Act regulates only the use of live animals and this is only licensed by the Home Office when no other research method would satisfy the research objectives.
Studies involving such drugs may provide valuable new information about the modes of action of the individual drugs and drug addiction and abuse in general, their short and long-term adverse effects, and how these can be avoided or managed. Such insights are essential to better inform the prevention and treatment of these activities and conditions. Many such drugs are also currently used or are being further evaluated, for legitimate clinical use.
The Home Office does not commission any work where recreational drugs are tested on human subjects, i.e. non-animal testing. Samples have been and will soon be taken again from people who already use drugs to test for the presence of drugs/metabolites in their body fluids. These people take the drugs of their own free will. We are not testing the effect of the drugs on the people but researching or evaluating methods of detecting use. This work is undertaken on behalf of Road Policing and Drug Intervention Programme policies.
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many votes took place at the European Justice and Home Affairs Council in each of the last 12 months; which of these votes were under the (a) qualified majority voting and (b) unanimity procedure; how many times the British Government (i) applied a veto, (ii) voted negatively and (iii) abstained in such votes in each month; and if she will make a statement. 
The Government do not hold statistics on the number of votes held at the Justice and Home
Affairs (JHA) Council. The JHA Council, like other sectoral Councils, adopts proposals both in its own field of JHA matters and in other areas. Data specific to a particular Council formation would not therefore be an accurate guide to voting patterns in particular subject areas.
The Government do hold statistics on UK votes against and abstentions on final legislative acts in the Council as a whole (across the different formations). These show that for 2006, the UK voted against two proposals and abstained on a further two. For the period to May 2007, the UK voted against three proposals and abstained on one. It is not possible to keep records of vetoes, because no decision is adopted and there is therefore no formal vote.
Meg Hillier: Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, the police have the power to take DNA and fingerprints from anyone arrested for a recordable offence and detained in a police station, and retain them indefinitely, regardless of whether the person is then charged or convicted.
In practice, the police follow retention guidelines issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) which state that records will normally be retained for 100 years from the persons date of birth, regardless of whether they are still alive.
ACPO also issued guidance to chief officers on the consideration of applications for removal at the end of January 2006. The ACPO guidelines envisage that DNA and fingerprints which have been taken lawfully will be removed only in exceptional cases, though discretion remains with the chief officer. The then Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department my right hon. Friend the Member for Leigh (Andy Burnham) made a written ministerial statement announcing the issue of these ACPO guidelines on 16 February 2006, Official Report, column 119WS.
A public consultation exercise has been carried out, and final proposals will be submitted to Ministers in January 2008 following completion of the next phase of the consultation process, with stakeholders and practitioner, during the autumn.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people on the police criminal records database have neither been convicted nor voluntarily accepted a police caution. 
Meg Hillier: The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) is responsible for the delivery of national DNA database (NDNAD) operational services. Currently, these services are delivered under contract to the NPIA by the Forensic Science Service. The contract also includes provision for development of the NDNAD and work in this area includes: automation of the end-to-end NDNAD process from police sampling to match report transmission, as well as enhancement to NDNAD management information and data integrity. The NPIA is also working on a strategy for the future management and development of the national DNA database beyond the end of the current contract.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what financial and other assistance she plans to offer to Cambridgeshire constabulary to tackle the implications of human trafficking for Peterborough and Cambridgeshire; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Coaker: Police forces receive over £11 billion in grant annually. Human trafficking is core police business and all forces including Cambridgeshire Constabulary should now have the capacity to deal with trafficking problems in their area. Human trafficking involves serious criminality and is often committed by organised criminal groups. The UK Human Trafficking Centre was established to assist in the development of law enforcement expertise and operational co-ordination across the UK.
Operation Pentameter 2 a UK wide operation which aims to rescue and protect victims of human trafficking for sexual exploitation and to identify, disrupt, arrest and bring to justice those involved in criminal activity was launched on the 3 October. This operation follows on from the successful operation run last year which rescued 88 victims. The operation provides another opportunity to increase expertise among law enforcement and to encourage the proactive policing of human trafficking.
Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate she has made of (a) the cost of (i) introducing and (ii) operating an identity card scheme and (b) the cost of (i) introducing and (ii) operating biometric passports. 
Since the merger of the Home Office Identity Cards Programme and the UK Passport Service to create the Identity and Passport Service on the 1 April 2006, projects to deliver passports including facial images and fingerprints, identity cards and other improvements have been necessarily combined. As much of the technology and operational processes needed to implement identity cards is also required for the implementation of these new passports, this is the most cost-effective way to deliver these initiatives.
Much of the work conducted by Identity and Passport Service cannot be categorised, both financially and operationally, as contributing towards either the introduction of passports with facial images and fingerprints or identity cards alone. The work is accounted for as future development projects which in the 2006-07 financial year amounted to £30.9 million.
Section 37 of the Identity Cards Act 2006 requires the Secretary of State to lay a report before Parliament every six months which details an updated figure for the cost of the National Identity Scheme over the following 10 years. The latest cost report was laid before Parliament on the 10 May 2007, Official Report, column 24WS, and can be found at:
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what estimate she has made of the costs of the identity cards programme to her Department during the initial setup period of the programme; 
Since the merger of the Home Office identity cards programme and the UK Passport Service to create the Identity and Passport Service on 1 of April 2006, projects to deliver biometric passports, identity cards and other improvements have been necessarily combined. As much of the functionality needed to implement identity cards is also required for the implementation of biometric passports, this is the most cost-effective way to deliver these initiatives.
Much of the work conducted by Identity and Passport Service cannot be categorised, both financially and operationally, as contributing towards either the introduction of biometric passports or identity cards alone. The work is accounted for as future development projects which in the 2006-07 financial year amounted to £30.9 million.
Section 37 of the Identity Cards Act 2006 requires the Secretary of State to lay a report before Parliament every six months which details an updated figure for the cost of the national identity scheme over the following 10 years. The latest cost report was laid before Parliament on 10 May 2007, Official Report, column 24W) and can be found at:
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate she has made of the number of people who entered the UK illegally in 2006; what discussions she has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the effect of those entrants on the UK economy; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: No Government has ever been able to produce an accurate figure for the number of people who have entered the country illegally. By its very nature it is impossible to quantify accurately, and that remains the case.
Ministers routinely discuss matters that may be of interest across their respective Departments. In addition, the Government have set up the Migration Impacts Forum to provide evidence to Government on the impacts of migration and produce best practice in dealing with these impacts. This forum is chaired jointly by Ministers from the Home Office and the Department for Communities and Local Government.
The number of foreign national prisoners who will be detained pending their removal in 2008 will
depend on a number of factors throughout the criminal justice system, including the sentencing of foreign nationals and agreement from Parliament on the current provisions on automatic deportation contained in the current UK Borders Bill.
Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which European Economic Area law, as referred to in fax reference M1016235 dated 18 April 2007 from the Border and Immigration Agency MPs hotline to the hon. Member for Cheltenham, regulates the processing of leave to remain applications; what the maximum time allowed under this law is for an application to be processed; whether this law requires passports to be processed within the specified time; and how many applications have taken longer than the specified time in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 25 June 2007]: Directive 2004/38/EC regulates the processing of any application by a family member of an European Economic Area (EEA) National who is a third country national for a residence card or a permanent residence card.
In order to process an application the Applicant needs to provide the documentation essential to that application, however if an applicant fails to provide documentation essential to the application it may not be possible to complete the case within the specified time limit.
|Case creation date for non-charged non EEA family members (period 1 January 2002 to 31 December 2006|
|Number cases created||Number of cases made target||Made 6 months target (Percentage)||Number of cases missed||Missed 6 months target (Percentage )|
|(1 )Reliable data for this year is not available.|
1. Increase due to rising intake, different counting arrangements and additional measures to tackle abuse.
2. The data is not provided under National Statistic protocols. It has been derived from local management information and is therefore provisional and subject to change.
The figures provided above are taken from G-CID. The 6 months turnaround times based on 136 working days.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|