|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The following table gives the percentage of prisoners of all ages held on remand(1) where the outcome of the court proceeding was an immediate custodial sentence. This information is not available for 15 to 17-year-olds separately, and the 2007 data are not yet available.
(1) Includes persons remanded in custody by magistrates during proceedings or on committal.
Mr. Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many persistent young offenders are registered; how many offences have been recorded where the offender was a persistent young offender in each year since 1997; and what percentage of total offences in each police force area in England and Wales this represents. 
Mr. Hanson: Statistics relating to Persistent Young Offenders (PYOs) are designed to measure the speed and efficiency of the youth justice system; through monitoring 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 is because the definition of a PYO relies on there being multiple sentencing occasions for a single offender during a limited time period. 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. Therefore, a side-effect of the Governments success in bringing much swifter justice to young repeat offenders is that more of them end up being defined as PYOs.
There were 15,945 PYOs registered over the last 12 months for which finalised figures are available (September 2007-August 2008). In answer to the remainder of the question, I refer the hon. Member to my reply on 22 July 2008, Official Report, columns 1378-86W.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been prosecuted for selling alcohol to an intoxicated person since the Licensing Act 2003 was implemented. 
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have been fined for refusing (a) to surrender alcohol in a public place and (b) a police officers order to stop drinking in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government have taken to encourage the development of innovative technology to prevent crime; and what steps it intends to take. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The Home Office Scientific Development Branch works to develop innovative scientific and technological responses to help in the prevention and detection of crime, collaborating with industry and academia. The Home Office also recently announced a three year contract with the Design Council to deliver a programme of work to stimulate innovation in industry to design out crime.
Mr. Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Buckingham of 14 October 2008, Official Report, column 1072W, on crimes against humanity, how many of the people whose cases were investigated were refused entry into the UK (a) as a result of the investigation and (b) for other reasons. 
Mr. Woolas: The UK Border Agency War Crimes Team does not collate statistics that relate solely to crimes against humanity. 16 per cent. of cases referred to the War Crimes Team in the last four years have resulted in recommendations for further immigration action. The role of the team is to make inquiries and recommendations for further action on cases referred to it from teams across the Agency. Between 2004 and October 2008 the War Crimes Team has been notified of 138 adverse decisions made following their recommendations. This will include decisions to refuse entry, indefinite leave to remain and naturalisation, and exclusions from refugee protection. It is not possible to break this down further into separate decision categories without incurring disproportionate costs.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 17 September 2008, Official Report, column 2256W, on departmental ICT, what the (a) contents and (b) security classifications were of the lost and stolen laptops. 
Mr. Woolas: Upgrading of the Home Office IT systems is an integral part of the contracts we hold with our IT providers and is not costed separately, hence it is not feasible to provide a total budget figure.
Mr. Woolas: The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) found in a determination dated 18 December 2007 that failed asylum seekers are not at risk of persecution or ill-treatment on return to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). On 23 April 2008, the appellant was granted permission to appeal the AIT determination to the Court of Appeal.
We firmly believe that the AITs determination is correct and that there is no risk in enforcing the return of failed asylum seekers to the DRC. However, after careful consideration of all relevant factors, we have decided to temporarily defer all enforced removals of failed asylum seekers to the DRC until the Court of Appeal have handed down their judgment.
Mr. Woolas: All asylum claims, including those from Somali nationals, are carefully considered on their individual merits in accordance with the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and the European Convention on Human Rights against the background of the latest country information and relevant caselaw.
Mr. Alan Campbell: 1,065 areas were designated under section 30 of the Antisocial Behaviour Act 2003 between 1 January 2004 and 31 March 2006 and this information broken down by police force area is enclosed in the following table. Information on the number of designated areas for the period 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2008 will be published shortly.
|Force||Number of areas designated (January 2004 to March 2006)|
|(1) No areas designated|
(2) No data provided.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|