|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. McNulty: The Home Office is not aware of any recent representations made on neighbourhood policing in North Yorkshire specifically. However, neighbourhood policing has now been successfully rolled out across North Yorkshire with 45 dedicated teams providing visible and accessible local policing.
Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many crimes of violence against the person have been recorded in each constituency in Sussex in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Coaker: Statistics are not collected specifically on a constituency basis. The Home Office does publish statistics at crime and disorder reduction partnership (CDRP) area level. The number of offences of violence against the person for each of the last five years by CDRP is available on the Home Office website at:
Also available is a look-up table that identifies which constituencies are associated with CDRPs. In many instances, a CDRP may comprise of more than one constituency. Conversely, some constituencies will come within two or more CDRPs, either wholly or partially. The look-up table is available at:
Mr. Coaker [holding answer 23 April 2008]: The Home Office is responsible for the police recorded statistics. Statistics are collected on the number of racially or religiously aggravated offences but no information is available on those offences which are specifically disability hate crimes.
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many violent crimes were committed by people undergoing treatment by out-patient psychiatric services in each of the last five years. 
Mr. Byrne: The most recent redevelopment/redesign of the Home Office website was in 2005. Costs were embedded in the business as usual costs for that year and could be extracted only at disproportionate cost.
Jacqui Smith: Legislative provisions creating criminal offences are sometimes amended or repealed and re-enacted in modified form, to reflect changes in the law, or to restate the law more conveniently, without significantly altering the underlying legal rule. There are examples of this in legislation passed since May 1997 for which the Home Office retains responsibility, but no examples have been found of criminal offences which have been completely abolished.
Absconding from detention (section 3)
Assaulting an immigration officer (section 22)
Wrongful disclosure (section 42)
Failing to comply with serious crime prevention order (section 25)
Intentionally encouraging or assisting an offence (section 44)
Encouraging or assisting an offence believing it will be committed (section 45)
Encouraging or assisting offences believing one or more will be committed (section 46)
Offences in relation to disclosures of information (section 69)
Supplementary provision in relation to new powers (section 81)
Mr. Byrne: In the fiscal year 2007-08, the Home Office spent £8,143,961 on advertising and £1,195,743 on publicity. This expenditure covered public facing campaigns on kerb crawling, alcohol harm reduction, mobile phone theft, passport authentication by interview, Frank drugs campaign, immigration, crime reduction advice and community safety.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many officials in her Department were paid gross remuneration of (a) between £50,000 and £75,000, (b) between £75,001 and £100,000, (c) between £100,001 and £125,000, (d) between £125,001 and £150,000, (e) between £150,001 and £175,000, (f) between £175,001 and £200,000 and (g) in excess of £200,000 in each of the last five years. 
Jacqui Smith: Information about the remuneration of senior civil servants in the Home Office is published in the annual departmental report which is available on the Home Office's website. Copies of the report for previous years are available in the House of Commons Library.
Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what her most recent estimate is of the unfunded liability in present value terms of each public sector pension scheme for which her Department is responsible; and on what assumptions for (a) discount and (b) longevity the estimate is based; 
(3) what the (a) rate and (b) cost was of employer contributions for each public sector pension scheme for which her Department has responsibility in each year since 1990-91; and if she will make a statement; 
(4) what the effect on her Departments expenditure would be of increasing the employee contribution to each pension scheme for which her Department is responsible by one per cent.; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty: Individual police authorities rather than the Home Office are required to account for police pension liabilities. Each authoritys liability along with details of certain assumptions used in the calculation of the liability are published by each authority in its annual accounts. Data from those accounts are compiled each year by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA). These are available either for purchase or via subscription on the CIPF website,
The Government Actuarys Department (GAD) has estimated the unfunded liability of the police pension scheme in England and Wales to have been £70 billion as at 31 March 2006, based on data from police authorities published resource accounts. This is part of the figure of £650 billion discussed in box 4.3 of the Long-Term Public Finance Report published in March 2008 and available at:
The earliest comparable estimates of the unfunded liability of the police pension scheme are in the note placed in Library by my right hon. Friend the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 2 March 2006, which gave combined UK wide figures for the police and fire service pension schemes of £64 billion as at 31 March 2004 and £85 billion as at 31 March 2005, based on data from police and fire authorities published resource accounts. The note is available at:
The discount rates used are discussed in that note, but the longevity assumptions used have not generally been disclosed by police authorities. No breakdown of those figures is readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. Although we have previously provided some estimates of the police pension schemes
unfunded liability prior to 2004, they were not based on data from police authorities published resource accounts, and so are not comparable with the aforementioned figures.
There were no employer contributions for police pensions for the years prior to 2006-07 since until this point police authorities had to meet the cost of pensions in payment out of their operating accounts. However, the system for financing police pensions changed on 1 April 2006. Police authorities now have a separate pensions account, into which they pay officers contributions and a new employers contribution. Any shortfall in an authoritys pensions account each year is topped up with a grant from central Government; any surplus is recouped. The employer contribution rate is a combined one for both the Police Pension Scheme 1987 (PPS) and the New Police Pension Scheme 2006 (NPPS). In 2006-07 and 2007-08, the employer contribution rate was 24.6 per cent. of each officers average pensionable pay, and was reduced to 24.2 per cent. with effect from 1 April 2008. Returns from individual authorities show a total employer contribution cost of £1.108 billion for 2006-07 based on forces unaudited accounts, and £1.151 billion for 2007-08 based on forces estimates.
The employee contribution rate for the PPS is currently 11 per cent. of pensionable pay, and 9.5 per cent. for the NPPS. The annual saving from increasing these rates for police officers in England and Wales would be £47 million, based on 1 per cent. of the estimated annual pensionable payroll in 2007-08. Such a change would, in isolation, reduce the call made by police forces on the central Government top-up grant, although this may differ if other changes were introduced at the same time.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which programmes funded by her Department have experienced a real terms reduction in their annual budget for the 2007-08 financial year; and what the budget was in (a) 2006-07 and (b) 2007-08 in each case. 
Mr. McNulty: Budgets reflect internal allocations for both capital and resource expenditure within departmental expenditure limits. For consistency, budgets are stated at their opening position in each year.
Home Office budget plans are reviewed on a regular basis in response to the changing nature of the Department's business. For the financial year 2007-08, security and counter-terrorism, crime and policing, and identity and passports programmes received increased resources.
|2006-07||2007-08||Nominal percentage change|
The costs of the UK Border Agency borne by the taxpayer were reduced in real terms as a result of increases in the level of income generated by managed migration activities. As a result, the Home Office increased its gross expenditure on borders and immigration in 2007-08 compared to 2006-07.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much energy in kilowatt hours was purchased by her Department from renewable sources in each year between 1997-98 and 2005-06. 
Mr. Byrne: Renewable electricity was first purchased by my Department in 2000-01 and the figures up to and including 2005-06, are given in the following table. We do not currently use any other forms of renewable energy.
|kWh renewable electricity purchased|
Mr. Byrne: In order to meet the requirements of the sustainable operations in Government targets, a new sustainable operations policy statement has been prepared and will be issued in the next few months following approval by the relevant Home Office boards.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of memoranda of understanding signed with (a) Libya, (b) Algeria and (c) Jordan. 
Jacqui Smith: The UK has Memoranda of Understanding with Libya, Jordan and Lebanon which make provision for the protection of the human rights of, and set out the arrangements for seeking further assurances in respect of, people facing deportation to those countries. We do not have a Memorandum of Understanding with Algeria on this subject. Separate arrangements for seeking assurances in individual cases apply.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|