|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
It is not possible to answer the question as asked since three of our centres are former prisons i.e. Dover, Haslar and a wing at Lindholme. They are
operated by MOJ with UKBA simply paying the top-up fee for running the centre as Immigration Removal Centre.
Mr. Woolas: This information cannot be given since it is commercial in confidence; revealing details on costs by immigration removal centre will set a precedent, which in turn may jeopardise the tendering process.
Mr. Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many offences of (a) drug and (b) drink driving were recorded in (i) West Chelmsford constituency and (ii) the Chelmsford local authority area in each year since 1997. 
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 4 November 2008]: Offences of driving while unfit through drugs or drink are summary offences and do not feature in the recorded crime statistics collected by the Home Office.
Data on offences of Causing death by dangerous or careless driving (including while under the influence of drink or drugs) have been collected at local authority area level since 2000-01. There was one offence recorded in Chelmsford in 2002-03, one in 2005-06 and four recorded in 2006-07. However, it is not possible to determine from the information held centrally which, if any, of these offences were committed while the offender was under the influence.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what factors the Serious and Organised Crime Agency takes into account when stating that a drugs seizure is attributable to its activities. 
(a) SOCA does not have the power to seize drugs but passes information onto another (usually foreign) law enforcement agency to enable the seizure to be effected; or
(b) for operational reasons SOCA wishes not to reveal its involvement in a drugs seizure.
In these instances the SOCA Officer leading the investigation makes a judgment on whether or not the seizure was made principally as a result of SOCA activity and/or the information supplied by SOCA. When reporting these figures, SOCA does not claim that these seizures are attributable solely to its activities.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment she has made of the capability of UK law enforcement agencies to seize illegal drugs and weapons from vessels in British waters. 
Mr. Woolas: From April 2008, the UK Border Agency (UKBA) took on responsibility for maritime operations which had previously been undertaken by HM Revenue and Customs and were formerly the responsibility of HM Customs and Excise.
UKBA maritime assets, which currently include a fully mobile and flexible cutter fleet, work regularly in support of operations by other law enforcement agencies, to maintain a range of intelligence-led and risk-based controls on all routes of entry to UK, in order to target illicit imports of drugs, weapons and other prohibited and restricted goods.
We are continuously improving our capabilities to seize prohibited and restricted goods from entering the UK and this includes the interception of vessels in British waters. More specifically we intend to review our maritime capability to ensure it supports our objectives to strengthen our border.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of alleged drug smuggling cases referred to the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) by Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs for investigation in each of the last two years have been investigated by SOCA. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: Under arrangements made when SOCA was established, HM Revenue and Customs notify SOCA of relevant commodity seizures at port within a mutually agreed framework. SOCA undertakes systematic checks on every notification, but only investigates where the size of the seizure, significance of the criminals involved and operational opportunity available are assessed as suitable for further effective action, in line with the priorities of the UK Serious Organised Crime Control Strategy.
A refined framework was introduced on 1 September 2006 in order to align notifications to the UK Control Strategy. SOCA received 74 such notifications relating to drugs seizures from 1 September 2006 to 31 August 2007 and undertook investigations in 16 cases. In the year ending 31 August 2008 SOCA received 99 notifications and undertook investigations in 38 cases.
Dr. Starkey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the Answer of 28 October 2008, Official Report, column 820W, on entry clearances: Middle East, if she will give the names of the Israelis refused entry to the UK in the 12 months to September 2008 on the ground that their exclusion was conducive to the public good. 
Mr. Woolas: In our answer of 28 October 2008, Official Report, column 820W, we referred to the number of Israeli and Palestinian citizens who have been refused entry to the UK at the Border, on the grounds that their admittance would be non-conducive to the public good. It is policy that we do not ordinarily comment on individual cases.
There is a distinction between those persons who have been refused entry at the Border by UK Border Agency officers and those who are the subject of exclusion orders, agreed by the Home Secretary. The Home Secretary recently announced that she has reviewed existing policy on the exclusion from the UK of those individuals who encourage violence or hatred in support of their ideology. In particular, the Home Office will consider, in all future cases, whether it would be in the public interest to disclose that an individual has been excluded, with a presumption to inform the public.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people aged (a) between 13 and 18, (b) between 18 and 25 and (c) 25 years and over were arrested for offences related to the misuse of fireworks in each of the last 10 years. 
The arrests collection held by the Home Office covers arrests for recorded crime (notifiable offences) only, broken down at a main offence group level, covering categories such as violence against the person and robbery.
The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 extended the list of offences under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to allow the police to stop and search for prohibited fireworks. From information reported centrally on the number of resultant arrests we are not able to identify specific offences for which an arrest has been made.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she plans to publish her Departments research and analysis on provisions for overseas domestic workers under the points-based system. 
Mr. Woolas: The findings of research are normally published if they meet quality standards and do not present issues of security, operational effectiveness or confidentiality. A publication date will be set once the final report is agreed.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people aged (a) under 10, (b) 10 to 17, (c) 18 to 20 and (d) 21 and over in each ethnic appearance category were registered on the national DNA database in each of the last five years; and how many of those had been (i) arrested but
had no further action taken against them, (ii) charged but later acquitted, (iii) charged where such charges were subsequently dropped and (iv) given a reprimand of final warning in each of those years. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The function of the National DNA Database (NDNAD) is to match DNA profiles taken from crime scenes with those taken from individuals. It does not contain any information on whether those on it have been arrested, charged or given a reprimand or final warning.
Information is available on the number of those whose profiles have been added to the NDNAD by English and Welsh police forces, as at 16 July 2008, broken down by ethnic appearance category and the age groups requested, as given in Table 1. Age is defined as the person's age at the time DNA was taken from them, not their current age. This data could only be
further broken down to show which profiles were added in each of the last five years at disproportionate cost.
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, that is, 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. It is estimated that 13.3 per cent of the subject profiles held on the entire NDNAD are replicates.
Ethnic appearance is based on the judgement of the police officer taking the sample as to which of six broad ethnic appearance categories the person is considered to belong. Unknown' means that no ethnic appearance information was recorded by the officer taking the sample.
|Ethnic appearance||Age range||Number of profiles||Number of individuals using 13.3per cent estimated replication rate|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|