|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Stephen O'Brien: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to the answer of 30 October 2008, Official Report, columns 321-22W, on foreign workers: health services, how many economic migrants were working in each occupational category at the latest date for which figures are available. 
|Work permit approvals for the period 1 January 2000 to 30 September 2008|
Work permit approvals includes all work permit application typesincluding work permit Extensions, Change of Employment and Technical Changes to existing work permits and therefore does not equate to the number of individuals to whom permits were issued. The figures do not equate to the number of individual nationals because they include those applications approved to extend or amend an existing permit or where the individual has moved to another job with a different employer. Additionally, not all of those who are granted a permit take up the job, some may be refused entry clearance or further leave to remain.
|Worker Registration Scheme certificates granted for the period 1 May 2004 to 30 September 2008|
| = Indicates one or two.|
1. The figures are for initial applications only; they do not include multiple applications, where an individual is doing more than one job simultaneously nor re-registrations, where an individual has changed employers.
2. Data presented up to the same period as the current published Accession Monitoring report.
1. Figures are rounded to nearest five.
2. Because of rounding figures may not add up to totals shown.
The figures quoted are not provided under National Statistics protocols and have been derived from local management information and are therefore provisional and subject to change. The occupational categories used are not compatible with the Standard Occupational Classification.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which former Ministers continue to receive security protection; and how much it has cost to provide this protection, broken down by individual former Ministers, in each year since they left office. 
[holding answer 15 December 2008]: It is our long established policy not to comment on protective security arrangements (and their associated costs) for
any individual. This is because to do so could compromise the integrity of those arrangements and affect the security of the individuals concerned.
Paul Holmes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if she will bring forward proposals to impose time limits on the retention of people's DNA profiles on the national DNA database related to the seriousness of the offence where convicted; 
We are carefully considering the detail of the judgment in the S and Marper case and its implications. DNA is a prime example where benefits to the criminal justice system and the rights of the individual need to be carefully balanced.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will commission research into the proportion of the (a) black and (b) non-black population with DNA samples retained on the national DNA database, and the reasons for any difference in frequency. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) has completed Stage 1 Equality Impact Assessments (EIA) of the National DNA Database (NDNAD) and the Association of Chief Police Officers DNA Good Practice Guide to identify any potential adverse effects or any bias contained within DNA sampling guidance or NDNAD processes. Copies of the two Stage 1 assessments have been placed in the Library.
The work undertaken to date on the Stage 1 EIAs suggests that any bias in proportionality of certain groups reflected on the NDNAD is likely to result from over-representation in the criminal justice system as a whole and is not the result of inherent bias in NDNAD processes.
The Stage 1 EIAs recommend that an analysis be undertaken of DNA subject profiles submitted to the NDNAD by police forces and police force area populations to identify whether any force areas are taking samples and submitting profiles to the NDNAD disproportionately. A working group has been set up to consider and take forward this recommendation. The NPIA is also working on a Stage 2 EIA review process, looking at potential equality issues in greater depth. The Stage 2 assessments will be available in early 2009.
Mr. Gray: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment she has made of the performance of (a) the National DNA Database and (b) the Independent Safeguarding Authority database. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The National DNA Database (NDNAD) is a police intelligence tool which contributes to the efficiency of crime detection. It contributes to detections, eliminates the innocent from inquiries and focuses the direction of inquiries.
The NDNAD provides the police matches with DNA taken from a person with DNA found at the scene of a crime. Police are now being provided with almost 3,100 matches a month. It is estimated that over the period April 1998 to March 2008, there have been over 272,000 detections in which a DNA match was available. DNA evidence will have contributed to solving many of these crimes, but it is not possible to say whether the DNA match was the key factor in solving the crime.
The Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA) maintains a database of information on cases referred by employers under the Protection of Vulnerable Adults, Protection of Children Act, and List 99 barring arrangements, in order to provide advice to Ministers on barring decisions. Any data are held for these purposes. Additional information in respect of these referrals may be sought from the police. When the Authority is fully operational it will also obtain criminal records and other police information from the Criminal Records Bureau. It will also maintain the barred lists in respect of children and vulnerable adults required by the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006. No assessment of effectiveness has yet been made, but performance indicators are being developed for the ISA as a whole.
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 15 December 2008]: Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), the police have the power indefinitely to retain profiles on the National DNA Database (NDNAD) derived from samples taken from persons arrested for a recordable offence and detained in a police station, regardless of whether they are charged or convicted.
While the decision on whether to agree to a request from an individual to have their DNA profile removed from the NDNAD lies with the chief officer of the police force which took the sample, profiles will normally be retained unless there are exceptional circumstances.
Policy on the retention of DNA and fingerprint records is being reviewed in light of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S and Marper. The Government will consider their response to the Judgment in conjunction with the Council of Europes Committee of Ministers and a Government White Paper on Forensics will be published next year on proposals to implement the judgment.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|