|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Removals, voluntary departures and assisted returns( 1, 2) of Somali asylum applicants, excluding dependants removed to Somalia, 2004 to 2007( 3)|
|Number of removals|
|Somali asylum applicants removed to Somalia|
|(1 )Includes 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 and persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organization for Migration.|
(2 )Removals since 2005 include those who it is established have left the UK without informing the immigration authorities.
(3 )Persons who had sought asylum at some stage.
(4 )Provisional figures.
Figures are rounded to the nearest five.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum applications the Government has received from citizens of Zimbabwe in each of the last five years; how many of those applications were seeking protection from political persecution in each year; and how many people in both categories were (a) granted and (b) refused leave to remain in Britain. 
Mr. Byrne: The following table shows total Zimbabwean principal asylum applications and initial decisions, for each of the years 2003-07. Initial decisions do not necessarily relate to applications made in the same period. The requested information on those seeking protection from political persecution is unavailable as it is not collated centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by examination of individual case records.
Information on asylum is published annually and quarterly. Copies of asylum publications are available from the Library of the House and from the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate website at:
|Asylum applications( 1) received in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, and initial decisions( 2) on applications, 2003 to 2007, nationals of Zimbabwe|
|Of which :|
|Zimbabwe||Total||Port||In country||Total decision||Grants of asylum||Grants of ELR( 3)||Grants of HP( 3)||Grants of DL( 3)||Refusals|
|n/a = Not applicable.|
(1) Figures rounded to nearest 5, (* = 1 or 2).
(2) Information is of initial decisions, excluding the outcome of appeals or other subsequent decisions.
(3) Humanitarian protection and discretionary leave replaced exceptional leave to remain from 1 April 2003.
(4) Provisional figures.
Immigration Research and Statistics
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what basis those routes and carriers which will utilise other passenger information data through e-Borders were selected. 
Mr. Byrne: The capture of other passenger information (OPI) is determined by multi-agency assessment that analyses the risks posed from a range of different routes. The route selection assessment will also be capable of adapting to and underpinning emerging risks.
Mr. Byrne: Once the first, manual, phase has been implemented, there will be an opportunity to assess the impact and costs, before consideration will be given to seeking the required funding to implement the fully automated response.
Following that consultation, and in due course, the Government will bring forward the regulations required to implement an Authority to Carry scheme under s124 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 for parliamentary approval.
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) on what her Departments share of the pledged £12.5 million to help prevent extremism in communities will be spent; and over what period of time her Departments share of the funding will be spent; 
Mr. McNulty: The £12.5 million from the Home Office to help prevent extremism in communities will be spent on funding projects specifically to support institutions or individuals vulnerable to radicalisation. New schemes will include:
£1 million for the Home Office to extend police-led multi agency projects to identify and support vulnerable individuals at risk of being targeted by violent extremists.
£3.5 million to Youth Offending Teams and Youth Secure Establishments on new work to prevent violent extremism, focused on supporting young individuals who have had contact with the criminal justice system.
£7.25 million to the National Offender Management Service and partner agencies to do further work in prisons and the community to tackle vulnerability to radicalisation among offenders
£750,000 for the Home Office to fund further grassroots projects aimed at tackling radicalisation.
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information she plans to provide to the House under her proposals to detain terrorist suspects for up to 42 days before each decision on a case; and what assessment she has made of the effect of giving such information on national security and the confidentiality of intelligence. 
Mr. McNulty [ h olding answer 10 June 2008] : Under Clause 27 of the Counter-Terrorism Bill, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary must, within two days or as soon as practicable after making an order that the reserve power is exercisable, make a written statement declaring that she is satisfied:
that a grave exceptional terrorist threat has occurred or is occurring;
the reserve power is needed for the purpose of investigating the threat and bringing to justice those responsible;
the need for that power is urgent; and
the provision in the order is compatible with ECHR.
The statement may include any other information relevant to making the order. At the same time the written statement is made, Parliament will receive a copy of the independent legal advice obtained under Clause 25 of the Bill.
On making the order my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary would notify the chairs of the Home Affairs Committee, the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Intelligence and Security Committee and provide them with a copy of the report of the DPP and police on the operational need for the extension and the full legal advice obtained under Clause 25 of the Bill. This would be provided on Privy Council terms.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether her Department was consulted about plans for the national staff dismissal register created by Action Against Business Crime while her Department was part-funding the organisation. 
The Home Office, between 2004 and 2007, provided more than £1 million of funding to the group to set up and maintain 120 business crime reduction partnerships in towns and cities across England and Wales. All Home Office funding ceased in March 2007.
Mr. Coaker: This information is not held centrally. There are a number of published studies on the effectiveness of CCTV in prevention and detection. One study, Effect of urban closed circuit television on assault injury and violence detection (Injury Prevention 2003; 9: 312-316), demonstrates the effectiveness of CCTV in the detection of violent crime. A copy of the paper has been placed in the Library.
We plan to develop standardised national key performance indicators relating to the use of public space CCTV across all associated agencies, including CCTV operators, the police and the courts through the National CCTV Strategy.
Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what applications have been made for authorisation for demonstrations in Parliament Square on 15 June 2008 under section 133 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty [holding answer 13 June 2008]: According to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, there was an application for an authorisation for a demonstration in Parliament Square under section 133 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act on 15 June by the Stop the War Coalition.
Mr. Byrne: The Home Office Land and Buildings assets are restated to current value using professional valuations every five years and in the intervening years by the use of published indices appropriate to the type of land and building. Further information can be found in the notes to the Department's published resource accounts.
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) new builds and (b) major refurbishments were completed by her Department for a cost in excess of £0.5 million in (i) 2005-06, (ii) 2006-07 and (iii) 2007-08 to which the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method or equivalent was applied; how many such buildings were assessed as (A) pass, (B) good, (C) very good and (D) excellent; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Byrne: Records are kept of new builds and major refurbishments above £1 million. There were none in this period. In 2007-08 two new builds were acquired through leases where design and construction was to the Department's specification. One of these was rated BREEAM Excellent, the other Very Good. Both contained leading edge sustainability measures, but one lost points because of the requirement to provide car parking to a large number of operational staff working shifts from a location with limited public transport.
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) new builds and (b) major refurbishments for a cost in excess of £0.5 million were completed by her Department in (i) 2005-06, (ii) 2006-07 and (iii) 2007-08. 
Mr. Byrne: My Department records the number of its new builds and major refurbishments completed that are over £1 million in value. There were no such direct new builds or refurbishments recorded in this period.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the (a) scheduled date and (b) title was of each conference proposed to be hosted by her Department and its agencies which was cancelled before taking place in each of the last 10 years; and what costs were incurred in respect of each. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|