|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Pope: To ask the Leader of the House what the names and local authorities are of the schools whose holiday dates were analysed in her preparation of the proposed House of Commons calendar of sittings for 2007-08. 
Mr. Coaker: Data are provided on a voluntary basis by Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships. According to the CDRP voluntary survey, 10 crack house closures have been issued to date in Hertfordshire, four in 2005-06 and six so far in 2006-07.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) acceptable behaviour orders and (b) parenting orders were issued in (i) Peterborough and (ii) Cambridgeshire in each year since their introduction; and if she will make a statement. 
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 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 collected the number of parenting orders by Youth Offending Team (YOT) area since April 2000, as reported to it by YOTs including education-related orders where the YOT has been involved.
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.
The numbers of parenting orders relating to crime or antisocial behaviour from April 2000 until March 2007 and those related to non-attendance of children at school until March 2004 reported to the YJB by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough YOTs are shown in table A: The number of parenting orders made following truancy prosecution between 1 September 2004 and 13 April 2007 is shown in table B:
|Table A: Parenting orders related to youth offending or antisocial behaviour and non-attendance reported by Cambridgeshire and Peterborough YOT|
|Cambridgeshire YOT||Peterborough YOT||Total|
|Youth offending or antisocial behaviour||Non-attendance where YOT involved||Youth offending or antisocial behaviour||Non-attendance where YOT involved|
|(1) See table B|
|Table B: Parenting orders made following truancy prosecution between one September 2004 and 13 April 2007|
|School year||Parenting orders for truancy|
|Number of work cards issued|
As at 12 November, there were 15,089 applications at various processing stages. This includes applications that cannot be processed until additional information is received. The SIA does not record applications by type of licence until processing is complete and a decision has been taken.
The postal strikes in October caused some delays in the receipt, return and processing of applications. All licences issued during the strike should now have been received by the applicants. Processing times for applications sent to the SIA during the strike may continue to be affected, and delays of one or two weeks may be experienced.
Mr. Brazier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of likely (a) insured and (b) uninsured costs to (i) London and (ii) any other UK cities of a terrorist attack similar to that which took place in New York on 11 September 2001. 
Mr. McNulty: An economic impact assessment alongside social and other impacts to the UK of a range of possible terrorist and non-terrorist events forms part of the UK resilience planning process. This assessment does not distinguish between insured and uninsured costs.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been detained without charge on suspicion of terrorist offences for 28 days; and how many of these were (a) charged and (b) released without charge. 
Jacqui Smith [holding answer 13 November 2007]: The maximum period of detention pre-charge was extended to 28 days with effect from 25 July 2006. Statistics compiled from police records show that to date six people have been held for 27 to 28 days. Of these, three individuals were charged and three were released without charge.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any suspects detained without charge on suspicion of terrorist offences for 28 days and then released without charge have been subsequently re-arrested and charged with a terrorist offence. 
Jacqui Smith [holding answer 13 November 2007]: The maximum period of detention pre-charge was extended to 28 days with effect from 25 July 2006. Statistics compiled from police records show that to date six people have been held for 27 to 28 days. Of these three individuals were released without charge. We do not keep figures on re-arrests.
Roger Berry: To ask the Solicitor-General whether investigators from the (a) US Department of Justice and (b) other US officials have held meetings with (i) her Department and (ii) staff from the Serious Fraud Office with regard to allegations of misconduct involving BAE Systems in relation to Saudi Arabia. 
The Solicitor-General: Since the decision to discontinue the investigation into BAe Systems plc in relation to Saudi Arabia on 14 December 2006 there has been one meeting between staff from the Serious Fraud Office and officials from the US Department of Justice and other officials.
Mr. Laxton: To ask the Solicitor-General what steps she is taking in relation to Mohammed Salih from Iraq, wanted in the UK in connection with the killing of Banaz Mahmood; and if she will make a statement. 
The Solicitor-General: It would be inappropriate to comment on specific cases where extradition proceedings may or may not be pending. In general, extradition arrangements do exist between the UK and Iraq and the UK is a party to an extradition treaty with Iraq.
Mr. Burrowes: To ask the Solicitor-General what the policy of the Crown Prosecution Service is on financial penalties for juvenile offenders where a parent of the offender was the victim of the offence. 
The Solicitor-General: The Crown Prosecution Service has no specific policy on financial penalties for youth offenders. The imposition of a fine is a matter for the court that sentences the youth offender.
The prosecutors role in the sentencing process is detailed in the 'Attorney-General's Guidelines on the Acceptance of Pleas and the Prosecutors Role in Sentencing'. These guidelines state that during sentencing the prosecutor must represent the public interest as well as the specific interests of victims. Prosecutors must be ready to assist the court by placing before it relevant information concerning the impact of the offending on the victim and the community, as well as relevant statutory provisions, sentencing guidelines and case law. In carrying out their function, prosecutors must also consider whether to apply for compensation for the victim, or another suitable ancillary order.
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what departmental assets are planned to be sold in each financial year from 2007-08 to 2010-11; what the (a) description and (b) book value of each such asset is; what the expected revenue from each such sale is; and if she will make a statement. 
Dr. Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what efficiency savings projects her Department put in place under the Spending Review 2004 targets; on what date each was initiated; how much each was expected to contribute to the target; how much was saved by each; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Dhanda: The details of the workstreams within our efficiency programme, including how much each was predicted to contribute towards the SR04 target are contained within the efficiency technical note published in December 2005 by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
The Department regularly publishes details on the progress made on meeting its efficiency target, including a breakdown of efficiency savings made in each workstream, in both its annual report and autumn performance report.
Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government with reference to the answer of 18 April 2006, Official Report, column 105W, on homelessness, when she expects to publish the research commissioned from Herriot Watt University to evaluate the range of homelessness prevention initiatives in case study local authorities. 
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what progress is being made on the self-financing Housing Revenue Account pilot scheme; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Iain Wright: Modelling work by a group of local authorities and arms length management organisations has identified potentially significant benefits from allowing some local authorities to leave the Housing Revenue Account subsidy system. This is however a complex matter and any changes must not disadvantage those councils who depend on the redistributive system to subsidise their housing services. The Housing Green Paper, Homes for the future: more affordable, more sustainable, published in July, confirmed that we would set out our conclusions and next steps in the autumn.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|