|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on the development of the Channel Project to combat violent extremism. 
My right. hon. Friends the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government meet frequently to discuss progress
on Preventing Violent Extremism. Officials in both departments regularly discuss and review progress on the Channel Project.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what property was (a) lost at and (b) stolen from the UK Border Agency and its predecessors in each year since 1997; and what the cost of replacement was. 
The agency has guidelines which should be followed in the event of a theft or loss. All reported thefts or losses are investigated and appropriate action is taken in the light of these investigations.
|Known values of property lost or stolen|
|Financial year||Lost items||Stolen items|
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and what proportion of record checks processed by the Criminal Records Bureau in each year since 2002 had comments from chief police officers on otherwise clean reports, broken down by police force area. 
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons under the age of 18 years have been the subject of Criminal Records Bureau checks in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mrs. Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many workers, issued with clearance by the Security Industry Authority, but without the right to work in the UK have been found to be working in Wales. 
Fewer than three workers issued with clearance by the Security Industry Authority but without the right to work in the United Kingdom have been
found working in Wales. The data provided is management information. It may be subject to change and does not represent published national statistics.
Our plans for enforcing the immigration laws in the United Kingdom's communities were published on 19 June 2008 in our enforcement business plan. This outlines our programme for delivery and reform in our enforcement business over the next yearremoving those who have no right to be here or pose a threat to the UK, targeting the most harmful.
Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what reports or complaints her Department has been informed of regarding pregnant women at Yarls Wood immigration removal centre receiving inadequate treatment for their condition. 
Mr. Byrne: Statistics indicate that only one official complaint regarding a pregnant woman at Yarls Wood has been received in 2008 and this related to the food provided at the centre. Data is not collected in respect of unofficial reports.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what the average number of days from arrest to sentence in cases involving persistent young offenders was in each police force area in the most recent period for which figures are available; 
(2) how many persistent young offenders were registered in each police force area in each year since 1997; how many offences were recorded in each area where the offender was a persistent young offender in each of those years; and what percentage of total offences this represented in each year, broken down by police force area. 
A persistent young offender (PYO) is a young person aged 10-17 who has been sentenced guilty by any criminal court in the UK on three or more separate occasions for one or more recordable offence, and within three years of the last sentencing occasion is subsequently arrested or has an information laid against them for a further recordable offence.
This definition was designed to monitor the pledge to halve the average time from arrest to sentence for dealing with PYOs in England and Wales from 142 days in 1996 to 71 days. This pledge was first met over a full calendar year in 2002 and has been met in all but one calendar year since then. It is important to note that the definition was not designed to monitor overall levels of youth crime.
Young offenders are now being dealt with twice as quickly as they were prior to 1997, which means that there are much shorter intervals between sentencing occasions for those youths who repeatedly offend. Youth
sentencing is therefore more timely, and for repeat offenders more frequent, than it used to be prior to 1997.
Table 2 shows the total number of notifiable offences brought to justice, and the proportion of them that are attributable to PYOs, for each police force from 2000 to 2006 (the only years for which this data is available).
|Table 1: Number of Persistent Young Offenders (PYOs) and number of offences committed by PYOs, by police force area, 1997 to 2007|
|Number of persistent young offenders|
|Police force area||1997||1998||1999||2000||2001||2002||2003||2004||2005||2006||2007|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|