|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) on what date her Department received the original mutual legal assistance request from the US Department of Justice on BAE Systems; what representations her Department has received from (a) the US Administration, (b) BAE Systems, (c) other Government Departments and (d) other persons about the progress of the mutual legal assistance request; and on what dates these representations were made; 
(2) whether her Department has forwarded a copy of the US Department of Justices mutual legal assistance request on BAE Systems to (a) the Serious Fraud Office and (b) another law enforcement agency. 
Meg Hillier: I refer the hon. Member to previous answers provided on this matter. I can confirm that the Home Office received a request for assistance from the USA in respect of corruption allegations concerning BAE Systems on 23 June 2007. The request is being dealt with in accordance with the bi-lateral treaty on mutual legal assistance between the UK and the USA. It would be inappropriate to comment further.
Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the answer of 19 July 2007, Official Report, column 504W, on BAE Systems inquiry, what protocols are encompassed by the phrase considered in the usual way. 
Meg Hillier: Requests for mutual legal assistance are received by the UK central authority within the Home Office. They are considered under the relevant UK legislation, namely the Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003, in conjunction with international convention or treaty obligations that may be pertinent. The central authority receives approximately 5,000 such requests from other states per annum.
Requests are checked to ensure that they come from a competent judicial authority and that they relate to criminal investigations or proceedings being conducted by the requesting state. Checks are also conducted on the requests to ensure there are no issues relating to double jeopardy or human rights considerations such as the death penalty.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans her Department has to act upon the recommendations made by the National Audit Office in its report, The cancellation of Bicester Accommodation Centre; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: I welcome the NAOs report into the Bicester Accommodation Centre. The report made six recommendations about the project management approach to major projects. The report also acknowledges both the dynamic context of the project and the system and process improvements that have been made since the Accommodation Centre Project began. In particular:
the Home Office has a senior board to scrutinise all major investment decisions which is now firmly embedded as part of the Home Office operating model. This has developed alongside the wider project management capability with the Department;
the Border and Immigration Agency has a senior Approvals Committee which acts as an initial scrutiny chamber, approving all BIA projects over £1 million. Costs and benefits are challenged as part of this process;
new processes have been introduced to ensure that business cases are assessed for their strategic fit with existing operations and future business change programmes; and
the agency now routinely identifies and monitors dependencies, risks and issues, both at individual project and programme level and across business change programmes, and flags concerns as necessary in monthly reporting to its board and Ministers.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she plans to publish the Border and Immigration Agencys strategy on mitigating risk from the common travel area; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: We are currently reviewing the rules and operation of the common travel area as set out in the Securing the UK Border strategy (March 2007). We will consult common travel area interests as this review is taken forward. The results of the review will be announced in due course.
The cost of police at ports is met by police authorities as part of their forces' overall policing duties, but in some cases, such as where an airport is designated under the terms of the Aviation Security Act 1982, contributions are provided by airport operators. No central record is kept of these costs.
A contribution to the cost of special branch officers at ports is made by the Home Office through dedicated security post grants. A total of £212.5 million is being
paid to police forces for these and other posts under this mechanism in 2007-08. For security reasons, we do not disclose the breakdown of this grant between different security functions.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cases the Case Resolution Directorate is dealing with; and how many of these have been brought by residents in Vauxhall constituency. 
Mr. Byrne: In his statement on 19 July 2006, my right hon. Friend the previous Home Secretary advised that the Border and Immigration Agency would resolve its backlog of electronic and paper records relating to unresolved asylum cases in five years or less. The chief executive of the Border and Immigration Agency has given an undertaking to update the Home Affairs Committee before the end of December and this will include information on the progress of this work up to the present time.
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 11 December 2007]: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I have regular meetings with the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police and they discuss a variety of topics.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she expects the amendments to the Computer Misuse Act 1990 made by the Police and Justice Act 2006 to become effective; and what guidance has been published in relation to the new offences created thereby. 
[holding answer 13 December 2007]: Section 96 of the Police Act 1996 placed a statutory duty on police authorities to make arrangements for obtaining the views of people in the force area about matters concerning the policing of the area. It is for police authorities to determine locally the methods they adopt to consult with the community. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 established partnerships
between police, local authorities, fire and rescue authorities, Primary Care Trusts in England and Local Health Boards in Wales and police authorities. Under new regulations that came into effect in August 2007, partnerships are required to consult and engage with their communities to identify local crime and disorder priorities, as part of a new set of minimum standards. Partnerships are also required to identify ways in which their communities can support the delivery of those priorities. These new requirements will ensure that local communities are able to influence, and be involved in, crime reduction work at the local level.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 5 December 2007, Official Report, column 1218W, on crimes of violence, when she expects the operating model informing proposals to deal with gang membership will be completed. 
Mr. Coaker: As stated in the previous reply, the Metropolitan police may be looking to develop this model as part of their work to tackle gangs through the five boroughs alliance. In Boston the model took some 18 months to put together, and it is considered critical that all the relevant elements are fully in place before the London model is launched, in order to ensure its effectiveness.
Mr. Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department recycled in terms of (a) volume of total waste and (b) percentage of total waste in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Byrne: The following table provides departmental data from 2002-03 until 2005-06, the latest year for which figures have been published. The figures include data from some office properties on the Borders and Immigration Agency and Identity and Passport Service estates. It also includes figures from the public sector prison estate which was part of the Home Office estate until May 2007. The table shows an increase in the amount of waste arisings year on year, which reflects an increase in the total number of properties reported on.
|Total waste arisings||Percentage of total waste recycled|
|(1 )Not yet published|
The Home Office continues to explore opportunities to increase further the amount of waste recycled and to identify opportunities for waste minimisation. These initiatives will be supported by more reliable data systems that will be realised through our new shared service operations, as well as by procurement initiatives.
Mr. Byrne: Details of the cost of overseas travel, including the cost of travel and accommodation are contained in the Overseas Travel by Cabinet Ministers list. The latest list for the period 1 April 2006-31 March 2007 was published on 25 July 2007. Details for the 2007-08 financial year will be published as soon as possible after the end of the financial year. All travel is made in accordance with the ministerial code.
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum claimants whose claims have failed have been deported or otherwise removed from the UK since 1 April 2003. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 10 December 2007]: Between April 2003 and September 2007, inclusive, a total of 72,550 asylum applicants have been removed from the UK; 62,020 of these had claimed asylum at some stage as principal applicants and 10,530 were dependants of asylum applicants. These figures have been rounded to the nearest five and are provisional.
These figures include enforced removals, persons refused entry at port and subsequently removed (including cases dealt with at juxtaposed controls), persons leaving voluntarily after enforcement action had been initiated against them and persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organization for Migration. Removals since January 2005 also include those who it is established have left the UK without informing the immigration authorities.
Persons departing voluntarily can leave the UK at any time without informing the authorities. The Border and Immigration Agency often learns of such people departing after they have left the UK, and hence, it is not always possible to say when they left. Since voluntary departures are included in figures on removals it is therefore not possible to say at what stage in the asylum process people are removed.
The following table shows the total number of Sudanese nationals removed to Sudan between January 2004 and June 2007, broken down into asylum applicants and non-asylum cases. Information on the total number of persons (including non-asylum cases) removed from the UK in 2007 is not
currently available. Information on the destination of persons removed from the UK has been recorded only since the start of 2004.
|Removals, voluntary departures and assisted returns( 1) , nationals of Sudan, to Sudan, January 2004 to June 2007( 2, 3)|
|Number of removals|
|Period||2004||2005||2006( 3)||January to June 2007( 3)|
|n/a = Figures are not available.( 1) Includes enforced removals, persons refused entry at port and subsequently removed (including cases dealt with at juxtaposed controls), persons departing voluntarily after enforcement action had been initiated against them, persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organization for Migration and since January 2005 those who it is established have left the UK without informing the immigration authorities. (2) Figures rounded to the nearest five and may not sum to the totals shown because of independent rounding. (3) Provisional figures. (4) Persons who had sought asylum at some stage, including dependants.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|