Mr. McNulty: The Cabinet Office, on an annual basis, publishes a report to Parliament on the performance of Departments in replying to Members/Peers correspondence. Information relating to 2007 will be published as soon as it has been collated. The report for 2006 was published on 28 March 2007, Official Report, columns 101-04WS. Reports for earlier years are available in the Library of the House.
We know from the police and other public and private sector partners on the Identity Fraud Steering Committee (IFSC) that personal details for use in identity fraud are obtained in a variety of ways. The IFSC has produced the website www.identity theft.org.uk to advise the public on how to reduce the risk of becoming a victim of identity fraud, warning signs to look out for, and what someone should do if they do fall victim.
On 9 October 2007 the Attorney-General announced that funding had been approved for the proposals arising from the Government's fraud review. This includes the development of a National Fraud Strategic Authority, together with a National Fraud Reporting Centre, the establishment of the City of London police as the lead force on fraud, and proposals for measurement of fraud. These measures will help to tackle fraud in general and increase our understanding of the nature and extent of the problem.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her policy is on the maximum distance persons in police custody should be transported between the place of arrest and a custody suite. 
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will make a statement on the development and provision of electronic custody systems for the police; when such systems are planned
to be available; what the expected cost of such systems is expected to be; what the cost of their development to date has been; and what the original planned date for such systems to be available was. 
Mr. McNulty: All police forces now have an approved electronic custody system. 40 police forces are live at all sites. The remaining three police forces are live in at least one site, but still in the process of implementation in their remaining sites. Implementation will be complete in all forces at all sites by mid-2008. The total cost of implementing the electronic custody systems is not available, as these systems have usually been implemented as part of a suite of other systems (including records management, case preparation and crime and intelligence). It was originally planned that all forces would be live by 31 March 2006.
Although this target was not achieved, all these electronic custody systems are now providing a significant contribution to the reduction in bureaucracy in the police service and wider criminal justice system.
Mr. Boris Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many police officers in (a) England and (b) London were aged (a) 18 to 25, (b) 26 to 30, (c) 31 to 35, (d) 36 to 40, (e) 41 to 45, (f) 46 to 50, (g) 51 to 55, (h) 56 to 60, (i) 61 to 65 and (j) over 65 years in the last period for which figures are available, broken down by (i) sex and (ii) ethnicity. 
Mr. McNulty: Figures collected by the Home Office on age of officer are broken down by four age groupings and appear in the following table for 31 March 2007. The collection does not extend to gender and ethnicity breakdowns.
|Numbers of police officers( 1) in post on 31 March 2007 by age group, London and England
|Age on 31 March 2007
|25 and under
|26 to 40
|41 to 55
|(1) Figures for police officers are on a head count basis, which means both full-time and part-time officers are counted individually as one officer. This differs from the main officer count which is on a full-time equivalent basis. The figures include officers on career breaks and maternity/paternity leave.
(2) Includes officers in both the Metropolitan police and City of London police
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate she has made of the time it takes for a police officer to complete the stop and account form after detaining an individual. 
Mr. McNulty: The Interim Report of the The Review of Policing published by Sir Ronnie Flanagan in September 2007 provides an example showing that the average time taken for completing and processing a stop and account form is 25 minutes. The pilot study carried out by British Transport police on the use of electronic hand held devices to record encounters showed that the average taken to complete and process a stop and account form was six minutes.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the Gershon efficiency savings to be achieved by the police were; and if she will make a statement on progress towards achieving efficiency savings by the police. 
Mr. McNulty: The efficiency target set for the police service in the spending review 2004, taking into account the Gershon review, was for the 43 police authorities and forces in England and Wales to deliver aggregate value for money gains of 3 per cent. of net revenue expenditure per annum. Half of the total gains were required to be cashable, and forces and authorities were expected to achieve cumulative total gains of £1,060 million (£518 million cashable) over the four years 2004-05 to 2007-08.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was spent by the police in (a) England and Wales and (b) each police force area in each of the last five years on (i) stationery and (ii) IT equipment. 
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many own-branded plastic bags (a) the Assets Recovery Agency and (b) the Serious Organised Crime Agency has procured in the last 24 months for which figures are available; and at what cost. 
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to her Departments Modernising Police Powers, Review of the Police and Criminal Evidence 1984, Consultation Paper of March 2007; if she will list, in relation to street bail, the pilots of electronic stop and search records referred to in Chapter 3; and what the location was of each. 
Mr. McNulty: The Explanatory Memorandum to the SI 2006/2165 sets out the provision for the use of electronic receipts for stop and search records to officers from the British Transport Police operating from offices in West Ham, Wembley and Hammersmith. The use of street bail is an operational matter for the chief officer of each force area and not subject to pilot studies.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much has been recovered under the Confiscation of Criminal Assets Act 2003 (a) in total and (b) in each police authority area, listed in descending order by amount recovered in each year since its introduction; and how much is in the process of being recovered. 
The total amount of confiscation orders and cash forfeiture orders obtained by all agencies in April-November 2007 is £172.26 million. These orders are in the process of being enforced, along with orders made in previous years.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the terms of reference are of the review into the right to gain entry; and whether the review will consider the right to gain entry by public authorities other than the police. 
Mr. McNulty: The review will examine all powers of entry with a view to: producing a comprehensive list of powers of entry, inspection, search and seizure; considering a statutory framework for all such powers and scrutiny criteria for all proposed new powers; and development of information material for the public to raise awareness for businesses and individuals of their rights and remedies.
Mr. Kidney: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment the Government has made of the effect of (a) recent and (b) proposed anti-terrorism legislation on civil liberties and human rights. 
We believe that our recent and proposed counter-terrorism legislation is compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. It will continue to be the case that all of our counter-terrorism
measures have to be set in the context of our general commitment to human rights and the protection of individual freedoms. We strive to achieve the appropriate balance between the measures necessary to deal with the very real threat to national security posed by terrorism and the need to avoid diminishing the civil and human rights of the population.
Mr. McNulty: We are not prepared to say how many people who have been acquitted of terrorism charges are subject to control orders restricting their movements. This is because of the need to protect controlled persons identities (most controlled persons are subject to an anonymity order imposed by the court which prohibits us from publishing information that would allow the public to identify him as being subject to a control order) and the national security sensitivity of individual cases.
Dawn Primarolo [holding answer 17 December 2007]: The Government launched the Know Your Limits campaign in 2006, which targets binge drinkers. This campaign will be renewed in 2008 and will continue to challenge behaviour associated with drunkenness. The campaign has been supported by comprehensive public relations and stakeholder programmes, with sources of help and information provided via a new dedicated campaign website, as well as the Drinkline phoneline and a suite of new campaign literature.
Mr. Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many finished consultant episodes relating to alcohol there were in each strategic health authority area in England for (a) patients aged under 18 years and (b) patients aged 18 years and over in each year from 1997-98 to 2006-07; and how many admissions to hospitals via accident and emergency departments in each strategic health authority area had an alcohol-related diagnosis for (i) those aged 18 years and over and (ii) those aged under 18 years in each of those years. 
Mr. Jim Cunningham:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Government have taken to
educate young people about the long-term effects of alcohol abuse since 1997. 
The Government are committed to reducing substance misuse among young people, including that relating to alcohol. Educating young people about the long and short-term effects of alcohol misuse is a vital part of this.
Since 1997, efforts have been made to continually strengthen our approach to alcohol education in schools. The Department has issued several guidance documents to schools on drug (including alcohol) education. This includes 'Circular 4/95: Drug Prevention and Schools' and, in 1998, 'Protecting Young People: Good practice in Drug Education in Schools and the Youth Service'. In 2002, curriculum guidance on drug, alcohol and tobacco education was produced and issued to schools by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. Most recently, in 2004, the Department refreshed all existing guidance for schools by issuing a single document, 'Drugs: Guidance for Schools'. This made clear our intention for pupils to be educated about alcohol and its effects in primary school before drinking patterns become established and for this to be revisited in secondary school. It is important that our approach to alcohol education in schools is robust and, for this reason, next year, my Department will undertake a review into the effectiveness of alcohol education and we will strengthen our approach if necessary.
It is clear, however, that young people need more than drug education in school to inform them about the health harms associated with alcohol misuse. As part of the updated Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy: Safe. Sensible. Social. (2007), the Department for Children, Schools and Families has convened a panel of paediatricians, psychologists and epidemiologists who will produce authoritative, accessible guidance about what is and is not safe and sensible in the light of the latest available evidence from the UK and abroad. This guidance will be issued to young people and their parents to help them make informed decisions about alcohol. Next year, we will also deliver a social marketing campaign in order to foster a culture where it is socially acceptable for young people to choose not to drink and, if they do, to do so later and more safely.