|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many seaborne incidents in the Persian Gulf involving coalition forces and (a) armed gangs and (b) the Iranian navy have been recorded since January 2008. 
Mr. Hutton: Since January 2008 there have been no recorded significant seaborne incidents between coalition forces and non-state forces in the Persian Gulf. Coalition ships operating in the Persian Gulf regularly interact with the Iranian navy but since January 2008 there have been no reports of significant incidents of concern.
Willie Rennie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what progress his Department has made in the development of plans for the dismantling and storage of submarines at Plymouth and Rosyth. 
Mr. Quentin Davies: As stated in the answer of 15 July 2008, Official Report, column 312W, to the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter), the ISOLUS project team continues to take forward technical and siting issues in conjunction with stakeholder groups, with a technical options study due to conclude by the end of this year, and the project procurement strategy being developed within the context of the Defence Industrial Strategy. The project remains committed to further public consultation before major decisions are made.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps her Department takes to check members of foreign aircrew landing in the UK for (a) immigration status and (b) criminal offences. 
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 27 October 2008]: Crew members who are based in the United Kingdom and those who arrive as passengers in order to join an aircraft as a member of the crew, are subject to the same controls and checks as other passengers. In line with the Immigration Act 1971, other arriving aircrew are able to enter the UK without leave from an immigration officer, provided they are embarking as crew within seven days.
This concession is monitored through joint operations conducted by the UK Border Agency, HM Revenue and Customs and the police, on a risk-assessed, intelligence-led basis. Close liaison is maintained with the carriers regarding any criminal offences committed by those allowed to operate in this country as aircrew.
In future, e-Borders will require carriers to provide all passenger and crew data to the UK Border Agency, in advance of travel, for journeys to and from the United Kingdom. This data will be checked against watchlists and when a person of interest is identified, the relevant law enforcement agency will be notified. A comprehensive travel history will also be maintained, allowing us to record who has travelled to the United Kingdom, whether as crew or passenger, and when they have left.
Mr. Wareing: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will visit the Croxteth and Norris Green districts of Liverpool in the near future to discuss anti social behaviour with the police and representatives of the local communities. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: My right hon. Friend has no plans to visit the Croxteth and Norris Green districts of Liverpool in the near future. However, we have provided practitioners including the police with a wide range of tools and powers to tackle antisocial behaviour, issue guidance on their use, provide information through a practitioner website and set up a free telephone advice line to provide specific support on individual problems. We also deliver regional workshops to help local practitioners make the best use of the available tools and powers.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the rate of absconding was of (a) single men, (b) single women, (c) families and (d) unaccompanied child asylum seekers who were not held in detention and whose claim for asylum had (i) been refused with removal from the United Kingdom imminent, (ii) been refused and where removal from the United Kingdom was not possible on human rights or humanitarian grounds and (iii) were yet to be processed in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information her Department provides to the authorities in the country of origin of an asylum seeker without documents as part of the re-documentation process. 
Mr. Woolas: In cases where a travel document is required information is exchanged with embassies and high commissions, but this is limited to personal biographical data related to the individual applicant. Information relating to any asylum claim is treated in confidence and is not disclosed to the authorities, unless the claimant has given his consent for the transfer of the data.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration was given to arranging for independent interpreters to be present during all interviews that took place in March and April 2007 between Sudanese officials and Sudanese asylum seekers at her Departments facilities. 
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Sudanese asylum seekers were deported following re-documentation interviews in March and April 2007 were from Darfur. 
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps were taken in response to the complaint made by a Darfuri asylum seeker
against a Sudanese official as part of the re-documentation interviews of March and April 2007. 
Mr. Woolas: Following receipt of a complaint made by an individual regarding the interview conducted by a Sudanese official, the UK Border Agency amended the interview process. Since 22 March 2007 independent interpreters have been present at each interview; the interpreters are required to sign a disclaimer to confirm that discussions at the interview are professional and relevant to the documentation process only.
Sir Peter Soulsby: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what grounds may a work permit be refused to an asylum seeker who has been awaiting a decision upon an asylum application for more than a year. 
Mr. Woolas: An asylum applicant may apply for permission to take up employment if a decision has not been taken on the applicants asylum application within one year of the date on which it was recorded. The application to take employment will only be considered if the delay in reaching a decision cannot be attributed to the applicant.
John Barrett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the parliamentary business unit of the Immigration and Nationality Department plans to respond to the letter from the hon. Member for Edinburgh Wests letter of 17 July 2008 on his constituent Rangarirai Mukora. 
Mr. Woolas: The letter of 17 July was not received in my office however a letter from the hon. Member for Edinburgh West dated 3 October 2008 addressed to the Regional Director in Glasgow regarding the same matter was replied to on 6 October 2008.
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 27 October 2008]: The Government's electronic borders systeme-Bordersallows us to count all passengers and crew in and out of the UK. To date, the e-Borders system has screened over 70 million passengers travelling to and from the UK from approximately 100 carriers on over 150 routes. This has resulted in 30,000 alerts being issued and over 2,500 arrests.
Mr. Woolas: The requirements for naturalisation as a British citizen are as set out in section 6 of and schedule 1 of the British Nationality Act 1981. A person applying for naturalisation must have been lawfully present in the United Kingdom for a period of five years ending on the date of the application. Within that period he or she should not have been outside the United Kingdom for more than 450 days. For a person married to or the civil partner of a British citizen, the residential qualifying period is reduced to three years.
There is discretion to overlook periods of absence from the UK during the five or three year qualifying period. The current policy is to overlook any such absence if it was due to the applicant's (or his or her spouse's or civil partner's) service in the United Kingdom forces. However this discretion is not exercised if, at the time of consideration, the applicant is still serving as a member of the Brigade of Gurkhas.
The difference in treatment between Gurkhas and non-Gurkhas is due to the understanding between the Nepalese and United Kingdom Governments that those serving in the Brigade of Gurkhas should remain Nepalese citizens during their periods of service. Nepalese nationality law provides that any citizen of Nepal who acquires another nationality will automatically lose Nepalese citizenship. It would therefore not be right to bestow British citizenship on Gurkha soldiers since they would, as a result, automatically lose their existing Nepalese citizenship. For this reason, and in order to avoid jeopardising the special relationship that currently exists between the United Kingdom and Nepal, there are no plans to grant British citizenship automatically to serving Gurkha soldiers.
If, however, Gurkhas transfer into other units of the British army on completion of five years service in the Brigade or they become settled in the UK after discharge from service they would then be able to apply for naturalisation as British citizens under section 6 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the same terms as other non-British service personnel.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any officials in (a) her Department and (b) its agencies were disciplined or dismissed for (i) breaches of data protection requirements and (ii) inappropriate use of personal or sensitive data in each of the last three years for which figures are available. 
|Data protection breaches|
|Inappropriate use of personal or sensitive data|
|Data protection breaches|
|Inappropriate use of personal or sensitive data|
|Data protection breaches:|
|Inappropriate use of personal or sensitive data:|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|