| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
30 Apr 2008 : Column 504W—continued
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the (a) sex, (b) ethnicity and (c) age was of each person stopped under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in each year since the relevant provisions came into force. [200343]
Mr. Coaker: The available information held by the Ministry of Justice is given in the following table for the period 1998-99 to 2005-06 which shows the total number of stop and searches of persons by ethnic appearance under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
Information on stop and searches by sex and age is not held centrally by the Ministry of Justice.
| Total stop and searches of persons under s60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in England and Wales, by ethnic appearance, 1998-99 to 2005-06 | ||||||
| Ethnic appearance | ||||||
| White | Black | Asian | Other | Not known | Total | |
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Browne) of 13 November 2007, Official Report, columns 85-6W, on stop and search, how many times the power to authorise stop and search for offensive weapons within a specified area for the period of 24 hours under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 was used by a senior police officer in each year since 2005-06. [201595]
Mr. Coaker: The 2005-06 information given in the answer to the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Browne) of 13 November 2007, Official Report, columns 85-6W, is the most recent available. Data for 2006-07 will be published later this year.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Government (a) has set and (b) plans to set targets for stop and searches by police officers in England and Wales. [201600]
Mr. Coaker: The use of stop and search powers is an operational matter for police officers in light of local policing priorities and individual circumstances, therefore, no Government targets have been set for stop and search and there are no plans to set any.
Surveillance: Members
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions hon. Members who have taken the Oath have been the subject of (a) surveillance, (b) intercept since 1997; on how many occasions hon. Members have been party to conversations or meetings while the other person has been the subject of (a) surveillance and (b) intercept since 1997; and what the terms of the Wilson doctrine are. [189246]
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 26 February 2008]: It has been the longstanding practice for successive Governments not to comment on surveillance or interception operations. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the then Prime Minister Tony Blair’s written answer to Norman Baker MP on the terms of the Wilson Doctrine on 19 December 2001, Official Report, column 367W, and his subsequent confirmation that it continues to apply 30 March 2006, Official Report, columns 95 and 96WS. His earlier written reply to a question by Norman Baker on 4 December 1997, Official Report, column 321W, made it clear that the Wilson Doctrine applied to telephone interception and to the use of electronic surveillance by any of the three security and intelligence agencies. This is still the position.
As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced to the House on 21 February 2008, Official Report, column 539, conversations between Members of Parliament doing their constituency business with their constituents should be considered as “confidential information”, and treated in the same way as other confidential information, such as conversations between a person and their lawyer or Minister of Religion. The relevant Codes of Practice will be amended.
Tobacco: Young People
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) offences were recorded, (b) police cautions have been issued and (c) fines have been imposed on (i) confectioners and tobacconists and (ii) other retailers selling tobacco products to those aged under 16 in each year since 1997; and what the average fine levied in each of those years was. [200252]
Mr. Coaker: Information on the number of recorded offences of retailers selling tobacco products to those aged under 16 years is not collected centrally. This is a summary offence and is not included in the police recorded crime statistics.
Statistics on the number of police cautions issued, the number of fines imposed and the average fines have been provided by the Ministry of Justice and are given in the following table for 1997-2006. No information is collected centrally to distinguish between confectionists, tobacconists and other retailers.
| Offenders( 1) cautioned( 2) and fined for selling tobacco etc. to persons under 16( 3) England and Wales | |||
| Number of police cautions issued | Number of fines imposed | Average fine amount (£) | |
| (1) Companies, public bodies, etc. (2) These data are on a principal offence basis. (3) Children and Young Persons Act 1933 sec. 7 as amended by the Children and Young Persons (Protection from Tobacco) Act 1991 sec. 1 Note: These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Source: Analytical Services, Ministry of Justice. | |||
Video Games: Young People
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many offences (a) in England and Wales and (b) in each police force area were recorded in respect of retailers selling video games or DVDs to underage customers in each year since 1997; how many related police cautions were issued in each of those years; and (i) how many related fines were issued and (ii) what the average fine levied was in each of those years. [200251]
Mr. Coaker: Information on the number of recorded offences of retailers selling video games or DVDs to underage customers is not collected centrally. This is a summary offence and is not included in the police recorded crime statistics.
Statistics on the number of police cautions issued, the number of fines imposed and the average fines have been provided by the Ministry of Justice and are given in the following table for 1997-2006.
| Offenders( 1) cautioned( 2) and fined for supplying video recording of classified work in breach of classification( 3—) England and Wales | |||
| Number of police cautions issued | Number of fines imposed | Average fine amount (£) | |
| (1) Companies, public bodies, etc. (2) These data are on a principal offence basis. (3) Video Recording Act 1984 S.11 as amended by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 S.88 (4) Note: These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. Source: Analytical Services, Ministry of Justice | |||
Video Recordings: Young People
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many test purchases relating to the sale of video works to under age persons (a) were undertaken and (b) led to prosecution in England and Wales in each year since 1997. [191801]
Mr. Coaker: Both the police and Trading Standards can routinely conduct test purchases locally in line with local operational priorities. These details are not centrally collated by the Home Office, so no records of all such test purchases are available.
Data held centrally on prosecutions cannot separately identify “test purchases” or criminal proceedings brought before court as a result of “test purchase” operations.
Justice
Apex Communications
Greg Clark: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what payments were made from the public purse, on what dates, and for what purposes to Euro RSCG Apex Communications in respect of (a) the Carter Review of Prisons and (b) the Review of Funding of Political Parties; and what ongoing financial or contractual arrangements exist in each case. [202266]
Maria Eagle: The responses covering each review are as follows:
Dates of invoices: 30 July 2007, 24 August 2007, 21 September 2007, 22 October 2007, 28 November 2007
Amounts: £2,350.00 per invoice
Total payments: £11,750.00
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |