|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Coaker: Bolton metropolitan borough council (information is not available on a constituency-by-constituency basis) received a total of £729,441 as part of the Home Office Crime and Disorder Reduction Programme, between 1997 and 2003. No other central Government funding for CCTV has been provided since then.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she expects the discussions between the Criminal Records Bureau and the Association of Chief Police Officers on seeking access to (a) European Union and (b) other foreign criminal conviction data to produce an outcome; and if she will make a statement. 
Meg Hillier: The Criminal Records Bureau contacted all member states in 2007 to establish whether there was an opportunity to enter into agreements to exchange data for employment vetting purposes where national laws allowed. To date there have been positive responses from some member statesthe Republic of Ireland, France, Estonia and Poland. Australia has also indicated a willingness to share information.
Even when another jurisdiction is willing to exchange such information, detailed work will still be needed with each overseas jurisdiction on a range of issues, including any legislative and data protection considerations in each country, forming an understanding of offence descriptions which may differ from those used in UK jurisdictions and establishing exchange arrangements where criminal records data are not held centrally in the overseas jurisdiction, or are not held electronically.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people employed by Essex Police Authority of each grade have (a) partial and (b) full access to data held by her Department; what guidance her Department issues to persons seeking access to this data; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McNulty: Eight people employed by the Essex police authority have regular partial access to data held by the Home Office for performance management purposes. The access to those data is subject to terms and conditions of use. More general ad-hoc access to data would be subject to the Home Office Information Charter.
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what her latest estimate is of the number of DNA samples taken and loaded onto the national DNA database since the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 came into force, which would not previously have been taken; and if she will make a statement. 
Meg Hillier: Before 2001, the police could take DNA samples from anyone charged but had to destroy them (and the profiles on the DNA database derived from them) if charges were dropped or the person was found not guilty. The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 changed this so that DNA could be kept from those who had been charged even if they were acquitted. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 (which came into force in 2004) extended the power further so that DNA could be kept from anyone arrested for a recordable offence and held in a police station.
This question therefore relates to the number of people with a record on the national DNA database now, who would not have had a record retained permanently on it under pre-2001 legislation, because they had not been convicted.
It is not possible to say how many people on the NDNAD have not been convicted. This is because the NDNAD itself does not contain any information about criminal records, as this is not necessary for its function of matching DNA from crime scenes with DNA from individuals. To determine whether someone on the NDNAD has been convicted, it is necessary to refer to their record on the police national computer (PNC) which holds criminal record information.
However, before the introduction of the ACPO Criminal Record Retention Guidelines in April 2006, police forces deleted PNC records from some of those convicted of lesser offences after five to 10 years. If the PNC record of someone on the NDNAD no longer exists, it is not possible to determine whether the person has or has not been convicted.
Data obtained from the PNC on 31 March 2008 indicate that 3,832,986 (of the 4,116,713) people had a record retained on the PNC. Of these, 3,259,347 had a conviction, caution, formal warning or reprimand recorded on the PNC.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of the estimated one million people whose records are held on the national DNA database who have not been convicted of any crime are domiciled in Scotland. 
Meg Hillier: Information is not collected by my Department on the number of people domiciled Scotland who have not been convicted of any crime, with records on the national DNA database (NDNAD). Police powers to take and retain DNA are a devolved matter and differ between Scotland, and England and Wales. Also, the NDNAD does not hold information on where people with records on it live; information is categorised on the basis of the police force which added the record.
Mr. Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) children and (b) adults resident in Bexley had their DNA recorded on police records in each of the last five years. 
Information held on the national DNA database (NDNAD) is available on the basis of the police force which added the DNA profile, not the address of the person sampled. Information is not therefore available on the number of residents of Bexley who have had a DNA profile loaded. Information is
however available on the number of profiles loaded by the Metropolitan police in the last five years as shown in Table 1.
The number of profiles is not the same as the number of individuals. This is because a number of subject profiles on the NDNAD are replicates, i.e. a profile for a person has been loaded to the NDNAD on more than one occasion. This may arise for a number of reasons, such as a person giving a different name on different occasions they are arrested, or because of upgrading of profiles from the SGM to the SGM Plus profiling system. It is estimated that 13.3 per cent. of the subject profiles held on the entire NDNAD are replicates. However, this rate may vary between forces, so figures for the number of individuals are not given for particular forces.
|Table 1: Metropolitan police|
|Profiles loaded taken from:|
|All ages||Aged under 18 at time profile loaded||Aged 18 and over at time profile loaded|
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 6 June 2008, Official Report, column 999W, on the national identity register, how many contacts for verification and amendment of records she estimates the Identity and Passport Service will receive in the identity card scheme's first 12 months of operation; and what estimate she has made of this cost. 
Meg Hillier: Act from the second half of 2009, will involve cards issued in limited numbers and so there is likely to be only a small number of subsequent amendments to records required in the first year of operation the cost of which will be incorporated in the overall cost of the initial phase of the scheme.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department under activity-based costing analysis, what the average (a) total direct staff cost, (b) total operational support cost, (c) total business support cost and (d) total cost excluding sustaining overheads was for providing police assistance for a (i) road traffic accident, (ii) public disorder incident, (iii) missing person case, (iv) sudden or suspicious death incident and (v) other non crime incident in each financial year since 2004. 
Mr. McNulty: The police use of sirens is governed by the Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986. These permit the use of sirens only when an emergency service vehicle has to alert other road users that it is present and responding to an urgent incident. Subject to that requirement, the use of sirens is an operational matter for the police.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many registered (a) sex offenders and (b) paedophiles were resident in each police authority area in each of the last five years. 
Dr. Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the reasons for black people to be two and a half times more likely than white people to be stopped by police under stop and account powers. 
Mr. McNulty: The police have been required to record the details of those people who have been stopped and required to account for their presence, behaviour or articles in their possession since April 2005. The first data sets relating to stop and account were formally released this year. The National Policing Improvement Agency is currently engaged in work to reduce disproportionality in both the Stop and Search and 'Stop and Account' procedures.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) cutters, (b) inflatable craft and (c) other boats have been in use with (i) the UK Border Agency and (ii) other agencies undertaking border patrols in each year since 1997. 
Mr. Byrne: As of April 2008, the maritime border patrols and operations became the responsibility of the UK Border Agency. These were previously undertaken by either (a) HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) (from April 2005 until April 2008) or (b) HM Customs and Excise (HMC and E) (prior to April 2005).
Additionally, the UKBA has various craft which are on loan to other agencies which are involved in border activity. There are currently a total of 13 craft on loan to colleagues in other border agencies. This figure can be broken down as follows:
One inflatable craft with Dorset Police
One small craft with Isle of Man Customs
One small craft with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency
One small craft with Essex Police
One small craft with Dover Port Police.
Eight small craft with the Maritime Volunteer Service
Prior to 2001, these vessels were operated by HM Customs and Excise, and were not on loan. No vessels other than those listed above were operated. The main cutter fleet has consistently run with five operational vessels during the period 1997 to date.
Mr. Jamie Reed: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many members of the armed forces recruited in the last five years from (a) Cumbria and (b) Copeland were killed in service in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan; 
(2) how many members of the armed forces recruited in the last five years from (a) Cumbria and (b) Copeland received debilitating wounds whilst on active service in (i) Iraq and (ii) Afghanistan. 
[holding answer 10 September 2008]: Officials are collating the information requested. When
this work is complete, I will write to my hon. Friend and place a copy of my letter in the Library of the House.
Willie Rennie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much of receipts from assets sales his Department has allocated to expenditure on armed forces personnel accommodation in each of the last five years. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 10 September 2008]: As part of the periodic Spending Reviews, the Department agrees with HM Treasury annual targets for receipts from the disposal of surplus assets. Net expenditure budgets are agreed accordingly with receipts contributing to capital investment in infrastructure and the estate. While there is usually no direct link between the receipts from asset sales and expenditure on accommodation, HM Treasury agreed with the Department as part of the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review, that the proceeds from the disposal of Chelsea should be ring-fenced to be invested in service accommodation.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what proportion of (a) all personnel and (b) officers in the army were nationals of overseas countries (A) in 1997, (B) in 2001, (C) in 2005 and (D) at the latest date for which information is available. 
Derek Twigg [holding answer 10 September 2008]: The proportion of all personnel and officers in the regular Army whose nationality was that of an overseas country in 1997, 2001, 2005 and 1 July 2008 are given in the following table:
|Proportion of (i) all regular Army personnel and (ii) Army officers by nationality|
|1 April 1997||1 April 2001||1 April 2005||1 July 2008( 1, 2)|
|Nationality||All personnel||Officers||All personnel||Officers||All personnel||Officers||All Personnel||Officers|
|(1 )2,450 personnel with no nationality marker on JPA have been excluded from 1 July 2008 figures.|
(2. )Due to ongoing validation of data from JPA, Army strength statistics at 1 July 2008 are provisional and subject to review.
(3 )Foreign and Commonwealth personnel include personnel whose nationality was that of Republic of Ireland, Commonwealth (excluding UK), UK dependencies and other countries, as recorded on Record of Service/Joint Personnel Administration System (JPA).
(4 )Denotes provisional.
1. The figures are for regular Army only and therefore exclude Gurkhas, Home Service battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment, Full Time Reserve Service, Mobilised Reserves, TA and all other Reserves. It includes both trained and untrained personnel.
2. Nationality is that recorded on Record of Service/JPA as at the date of strength and is not necessarily the same as at birth or when recruited.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|