|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were arrested for bringing drugs into the UK from (a) Jamaica, (b) Trinidad and Tobago, (c) Nigeria, (d) Ghana and (e) elsewhere in the world in each of the last three years. 
Mr. Coaker [holding answer 31 March 2008]: I understand that the Ministry of Justice provides data on persons arrested for recorded crime (notifiable offences) only, by age group, gender, ethnicity, and main offence group, i.e. robbery, burglary, drugs offences etc. From data reported centrally they are not able to identify specific offences from within the main offence groups nor the circumstances behind an arrest.
The Home Secretary has the power to exclude individuals from the UK where she judges, on a case-by-case basis, that it is right to do so. There are no plans to target these powers against any denominational group within Islam.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for which offences fixed penalty notices may be imposed; and what guidance has been issued by her Department on circumstances in which such notices may be imposed. 
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what resources her Department has allocated to the support of victims of forced marriage for 2008-09; and what plans she has for funding in the next two financial years. 
Mr. Coaker: During 2008-09 the Home Office will provide £121,100 to support the operation and running of the joint Home Office and Foreign and Commonwealth Office Forced Marriage Unit (FMU). This is an increase of £71,100 on previous years' funding. In addition the Home Office will also provide funding for the series of regional events focused on so-called honour based violence planned to take place between May and July.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of those who were granted visas as migrant domestic workers applied to change their employers after they arrived in the UK in each of the last three years. 
Mr. Byrne [holding answer 2 April 2008]: In 2005 the UK Border Agency received 228 notifications of overseas domestic workers (ODWs) changing employer. In 2006 we received 126 notifications and in 2007 we received 289.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what advice her Department has given to police forces and police authorities on the procurement of forensic science services. 
Meg Hillier [holding answer 2 April 2008]: The procurement of forensic services is a matter for individual police forces. The National Policing Improvement Agency is, however, taking forward work to reform the procurement practices for forensic analysis services within the police service to assist forces.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her Department's policy is on the compulsory registration of forensic science practitioners; and if she will make a statement. 
Meg Hillier: Mandatory registration with the Council for the Registration of Forensic Practitioners was recommended in the House of Commons Select Committee on Science and Technology Report Forensic Science on Trial (see recommendation 43 at paragraph 139), published 29 March 2005. The response of Her Majesty's Government to that recommendation was as follows:
It would not be appropriate for the Government to mandate registration with a private organisation. The criminal justice system must have access to appropriate expert testimony to ensure it reaches the correct decision. The use of a mandatory registration scheme would prevent appropriate experts from giving testimony in a number of circumstances, for example where the required expert does not normally work within the forensic arena and is therefore not registered. Another example might be that the required expert may work within the forensic arena but, perhaps due to working in research and development, does not carry out sufficient casework to be registered. The required expert may not work within the UK, or expertise may be required in a subject which rarely comes before the court. It therefore seems more sensible to have a scheme whereby the registration is voluntary. Where someone seeks to appear as an expert witness in an area where registration is available but they are not registered, this will highlight to the judge the need to consider carefully whether their testimony should be admitted and, if so, on what basis.
My right hon. Friend, the Home Secretary, continues to endorse this view and has recently appointed Mr Andrew Rennison as the Forensic Science Regulator. The Regulator will provide advice on issues surrounding individual competence for forensic science practitionersincluding registration. The Government will review the position in due course.
Meg Hillier: The taking and retention of DNA samples are subject to the provisions contained in Part V of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984. PACE provides that samples may be retained for persons who have been arrested and detained at the police station for a recordable offence; and that profiles taken from these samples and placed on the database may be subject to speculative search. We consider that is a proportionate and effective threshold to help eliminate the innocent during the course of an investigation as well contributing to the detection and conviction of the guilty.
Mrs. James: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration she gives to the UKs responsibilities under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in her determination of immigration policy. 
Mr. Byrne: The Home Secretary takes the UKs responsibilities towards safeguarding the rights of all children very seriously. The Government have fully and actively supported the principles of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child since the UK became a signatory in 1991. UK domestic law represents a well-developed framework based upon the importance of the welfare of the child. The Home Secretary announced on 14 January our intention to review the UKs immigration based reservation on the Convention, which is being carried out in the light of developments in child safeguarding policy and practice over recent years and the Governments intention to ratify Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Human Trafficking later this year.
Mr. Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 25 March 2008, Official Report, column 73W, on MI5, if she will instigate a practice of clearing the (a) timing and (b) content of speeches to be made by the Director General of the Security Service before delivery. 
Mr. Coaker: Due to the nature of the internet, it is impossible to give an accurate assessment of how much internet-related crime originates in a particular country. In the main, internet-related crime is facilitated by bogus websites and software and law enforcement experience is that most activity takes place in the United States and Eastern Europe.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many British police officers are seconded to (a) Iraq and (b) Afghanistan; what their expected tour of duty is; and what arrangements have been made to cover their operational duties in the UK during their absence overseas. 
Mr. McNulty: There are currently nine serving and six retired UK civilian police officers seconded to Iraq and nine serving and one retired UK civilian police officers seconded to Afghanistan, where they are working in advisory, mentoring and training capacities. The serving officers are from forces in England and Wales, the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Ministry of Defence police. The length of their deployments varies from 12 to 18 months.
All the serving officers are volunteers who have gone to Iraq and Afghanistan with the consent of their chief constables, who will have been satisfied that their own operational requirements can be fully met during the officers absence before agreeing to release them for overseas service.
Dr. Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what guidance she has issued on Trusted Partners consulted by the Metropolitan Police Service National Community Tension Team; 
(2) what checks are made by the relevant authorities on potential links between Trusted Partners and foreign governments; and what risk assessment is made in each case in relation to the sharing of confidential information; 
(3) in relation to the Trusted Partner consulted in advance of the attempted arrest of General Almog in
September 2005, what investigation has been conducted into the potential communication of information to Israeli diplomats by that Trusted Partner; 
(4) whether (a) her Department and (b) the Metropolitan Police have obtained assurances from the Israeli authorities on the co-operation of armed Israeli air marshals with UK police officers in the lawful execution of their duty on aircraft on British soil; 
(5) pursuant to the Answer of 4 March 2008, Official Report, column 2357W, on Israel, whether representations were made by (a) her Department and (b) the Metropolitan Police to the Israeli authorities following the attempted arrest of General Almog in September 2005 on the denial of police access to the El Al aeroplane at Heathrow Airport. 
Mr. McNulty: The Home Office has not made any representations on the issues raised. The operational issues surrounding events in September 2005, including whether any consultation with members of the community or community representatives took place, are matters for the police.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the rate of Metropolitan Police officer abstractions was from each London borough for (a) counter-terrorism, (b) special operations and (c) public order event policing work in each of the last three years; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty: The Home Office does not hold any information centrally on the number of Metropolitan Police officer abstractions from (a) counter-terrorism, (b) special operations and (c) public order event policing work. Such data could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many searches of (a) persons and (b) vehicles under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 were carried out by each Metropolitan Police division in each of the last five years; and how many arrests were made as a result in each division for (i) possession of offensive weapons and (ii) other offences. 
Mr. Coaker: Data collected centrally, by the Ministry of Justice, under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 are available at police force area level only. Information is given in the following table.
|Searches of persons and vehicles( 1) separately under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 and resultant arrests, carried out by the Metropolitan police force, 2001-02 to 2005-06 (latest available)|
|Persons only||Vehicles only( 1)|
|Resultant arrests:||Resultant arrests:|
|Period||Total searches||Searched||For offensive weapons||For other reasons||Searched||For offensive weapons||For other reasons|
|(1) Searches may be conducted on vehicles only, occupants only or both may be searched. Where a vehicle and driver occupier are searched simultaneously the search is recorded against the driver (occupant). Any other passengers searched are recorded as occupants. Data given in the table are where a vehicle only has been searched.|
Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when these data are used.
Stops/Searches collection held by the Office for Criminal Justice Reform.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|