|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Number of EAWs issued to and by the UK since 1 January 2004|
|Totals by year||2004||2005||2006||2007||2008|
The project costs, including the provision centrally of the held-held fingerprint hardware, software, research and development, service and support to the end of 2007, the latest date for which figures are available, has been £3,350,000.
Mr. Coaker: The anticipated benefits derived from the provision of the handheld fingerprinting devices beyond the current field trials mean that their costs, supporting infrastructure and back-office services should be self-financing. As such, these costs will be met from within existing police force budgets. Other associated costs, for example, procurement, training, and the promulgation of good practice, will be met by the National Policing Improvement Agency.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with the Association of Chief Police Officers on the issuing of new guidelines to take into account the use of handheld fingerprinting devices. 
Mr. Coaker: The Association of Chief Police Officers is represented at board level on the current field trials and procurement activity for future handheld fingerprinting capabilities. These projects will develop the procurement, training, and the promulgation of good practice for the use of mobile fingerprint capabilities. Amendments to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), and the associated code D of its codes of practice, will govern the use of the fingerprint capability.
Mr. Coaker: The use of the handheld fingerprint capability will form part of the stop and search/stop and account processes. As such, data on its use will be captured and reported on as part of the overall data submitted by police forces to the Home Office on these activities.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the implications of the use of handheld fingerprinting devices for the recording of criminal records. 
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of whether handheld fingerprint devices are used in a consistent manner by rural and urban police forces. 
Mr. Coaker: The use of handheld fingerprint devices is a matter for the chief constable of each police force and for the present time requires consent from the individual being sampled. Available data suggest that there is no difference in the use of the devices between police forces, given the nature of the deployment that it is supporting.
The use of the handheld fingerprint capability will form part of the stop and search/stop and account processes. As such, data on its use will be captured and reported on as part of the overall data submitted by police forces to the Home Office on these activities.
Mark Pritchard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reasons she would mandate airport operators to carry out compulsory biometric fingerprinting of UK domestic passengers. 
Mr. Woolas: The Government are considering using powers in paragraph 26(3) of schedule 2 of the Immigration Act 1971 to require operators of certain airports to verify the identity of travellers through biometrics such as fingerprints before boarding, where there is a mixing of domestic and international passengers in a common departure lounge and where this would be a proportionate measure to manage border security.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether her Department has prepared a Code of Practice for disclosure of information to prevent fraud under section 71 of the Serious Crimes Act 2007. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: As required by section 71 of the Serious Crime Act 2007, the Home Office prepared a code of practice for public authorities disclosing information to a specified anti-fraud organisation for the purposes of preventing fraud. The code was laid before Parliament on 6 October.
Since the commencement of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (which came into force on 1 May 2004) to date, there have been 90 convictions for trafficking for sexual exploitation. Details of convictions by year are as follows:
|Number of convictions|
Jacqui Smith: There is no cap on how long a victim of human trafficking can remain in the UK. The length of stay is determined by the individual circumstances of the victim and is decided on a case by case basis.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many convictions there were for human trafficking for the purpose of (a) forced labour and (b) sexual exploitation in each of the last five years. 
Jacqui Smith: Since the commencement of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (which came into force on 1 May 2004) to date, there have been 90 convictions for trafficking for sexual exploitation. Details of convictions by year are as follows:
Mr. Alan Campbell: We have run a number of awareness campaigns with partners. Our approach focuses on the use of the UK Human Trafficking Centre Blue Blindfold awareness campaign, which was launched in January 2008. This campaign has the key message that trafficking is in local communities in the UK and encourages the public to call Crimestoppers with any information. We have also run a targeted campaign aimed at the purchasers of sex about the level and nature of exploitation and trafficking involved in off street prostitution.
All prevention material produced provides details of the bespoke Blue Blindfold websitewww.blueblindfold. co.uk, which contains information on indicators of trafficking and dispelling myths about trafficking for
sexual exploitation as well as providing contact details for local groups who wish to access the prevention material.
Sentencing guidelines issued by the Sentencing Guidelines Council provide adequate advice on sentencing for human trafficking cases, including aggravating and mitigating factors that can inform the judicial decision.
Courts are also guided by case law arising from Court of Appeal decisions on sentencing and the Attorney-General has the power to refer cases to the Court of Appeal where it is believed the sentence passed is unduly lenient.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress has been made towards introducing a 45-day minimum recovery period for all victims of trafficking, as set out in the UK Action Plan on Tackling Human Trafficking 2007. 
Jacqui Smith: The Update to the UK Action Plan on Tackling Human Trafficking, published on 2 July, committed the Government to implement a 45-day reflection and recovery period before 1 April 2009. We are working with partners to finalise formal victim identification arrangements and the training associated with it and are on track to meet this deadline.
Mr. Grieve: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what proportion of respondents to each of the waves of the National Identity Scheme Tracking Research carried out to date said that they did not support the scheme because they were concerned that (a) it would be an infringement of personal freedom, (b) it would not work, (c) it is a waste of money, (d) personal data will be used without their permission and (e) it could be open to abuse; 
(2) what proportion of respondents to each of the waves of the National Identity Scheme Tracking Research carried out to date said they (a) agreed strongly or slightly and (b) disagreed strongly or slightly with the Governments plan to introduce the National Identity Scheme; 
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what contracts have yet to be awarded in relation to the identity card scheme; who has tendered for them; and what the value of each contract is expected to be. 
Jacqui Smith: Currently there are three National Identity Scheme procurements being undertaken with the five Strategic Supplier Group framework suppliers who were appointed following open procurement in June 2008. For each of these procurements, an initial shortlist process has either happened or is planned and was announced in September. Further to this, a separate procurement is being conducted for replacement of a current passport production contract on expiry. This was advertised in the Official Journal of the EU in June 2008 and a shortlist of bidders from those expressing an interest was announced in September.
For all contracts yet to be awarded, no values have been agreed as they are subject to competitive procurement. However, as part of the procurement process, Identity and Passport Service has shared a current view on costs with bidders. This is to inform discussions while balancing the need to retain competition. Figures are derived from those published in the cost report to Parliament required under the Identity Cards Act 2006 and have recently been amended to reflect updates to bidders as part of the procurement process. They are subject to further refinement and discussion throughout the procurement process, so should be treated as indicative only.
|Contract||Capability||Bidders||Value, estimate (£ million )|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|