Dr. Kumar:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps his Department has taken to reduce the level of credit card fraud in the last 12 months. [285197]
Mr. Alan Campbell:
A great deal of fraud can be prevented if organisations have proper fraud prevention measures in place and if individuals protect their cards and financial details. Prevention initiatives complement fraud investigation and prosecution. The Home Office therefore works closely with the payments card industry and actively supports fraud prevention initiatives introduced by the finance and retail sectors such as the Be Card Smart Online campaign introduced by the payment card industry last year with support from Vernon Coaker. I (Alan Campbell) most recently met with representatives of the payments card industry in March this year to discuss issues around card fraud.
The Government publish fraud prevention advice on the Home Office, Crime Reduction and Consumer Direct websites.
Homophobia: Crime
Andrew Rosindell:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent steps his Department has taken to tackle homophobic crime. [284110]
8 July 2009 : Column 795W
Mr. Alan Campbell:
The ‘Saving Lives, Reducing Harm, Protecting the Public; An Action Plan for Tackling Violence 2008-11’ committed us to producing a dedicated cross-Government action plan to assist local partners in developing their responses to hate crime. This strategic action plan involves a number of actions that will aim to increase victim and community confidence in the criminal justice system, help prevent hate crimes from occurring or escalating in seriousness; and improve access to and take up of victim support. The action plan will be published over the summer.
The Government have also introduced an offence of inciting hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. We expect the provisions on incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation to come into force in the autumn.
Offensive Weapons
Chris Grayling:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were convicted of 8 July 2009 : Column 796W
offences related to possession of a knife in each police force area in each of the last 10 years. [281895]
Alan Johnson:
Information showing the number of persons found guilty at all courts for having an article with a blade or point in a public place or on school premises, in England and Wales, broken down by police force area for 1998 to 2007 (latest available) can be viewed in the following table. Data for 2008 will be available in the autumn of 2009.
The statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offence for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.
Number of persons found guilty at all courts for having an article with a blade or point in a public place or on school premises, England and Wales, 1998 to 2007, broken down by police force area( 1,2)
Police force area
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Avon and Somerset
69
113
87
105
144
152
146
128
168
163
Bedfordshire
36
23
40
32
40
57
68
78
61
62
Cambridgeshire
35
31
15
27
46
34
62
57
67
54
Cheshire
63
52
51
36
54
54
48
82
84
108
City of London
8
4
8
9
17
19
20
18
11
9
Cleveland
31
31
21
42
69
70
81
71
76
90
Cumbria
27
37
27
28
37
45
46
50
41
46
Derbyshire
31
36
40
53
68
82
100
79
77
99
Devon and Cornwall
78
75
70
71
110
129
126
143
120
138
Dorset
41
32
32
32
55
49
59
61
67
63
Durham
30
35
43
35
76
64
68
89
91
92
Essex
97
96
100
99
103
146
201
176
175
160
Gloucestershire
34
18
17
24
26
32
42
39
39
41
Greater Manchester
242
207
222
281
298
304
344
349
393
394
Hampshire
111
93
106
114
113
153
177
162
161
169
Hertfordshire
29
28
27
25
53
83
84
92
84
68
Humberside
45
65
55
46
69
65
106
115
125
147
Kent
73
84
77
76
33
35
13
12
6
5
Lancashire
120
97
87
106
98
136
161
150
144
151
Leicestershire
69
62
54
65
76
91
98
92
113
118
Lincolnshire
40
54
46
41
50
71
65
53
69
47
Merseyside
169
131
124
121
160
165
199
198
218
215
Metropolitan Police
1,327
1,083
1,164
1,507
1,871
1,687
1,615
1,698
1,691
1,459
Norfolk
50
46
36
41
59
69
70
69
62
78
North Yorkshire
34
45
33
45
52
50
69
66
57
52
Northamptonshire
11
14
8
3
2
2
3
6
1
4
Northumbria
101
114
121
153
171
183
211
216
217
259
Nottinghamshire
41
45
47
56
68
85
115
117
144
152
South Yorkshire
58
63
66
114
146
147
117
169
150
138
Staffordshire(3)
39
42
—
34
68
63
71
60
92
86
Suffolk
22
26
30
31
61
52
68
69
106
89
Surrey
13
12
25
32
27
37
40
35
37
42
Sussex
66
92
84
100
127
123
114
121
138
140
Thames Valley
79
75
54
77
85
76
117
145
178
139
Warwickshire
30
24
19
18
26
18
27
23
30
32
West Mercia
38
28
33
45
41
62
82
99
100
100
West Midlands
151
137
204
318
343
327
357
319
383
392
West Yorkshire
38
56
57
87
103
108
172
168
172
190
Wiltshire
35
32
28
36
37
40
50
53
70
48
Dyfed-Powys
23
29
27
31
35
36
39
45
29
35
Gwent
18
20
21
20
33
23
48
36
56
66
8 July 2009 : Column 797W
8 July 2009 : Column 798W
North Wales
55
60
42
51
74
61
67
77
113
89
South Wales
98
101
83
94
114
111
124
120
153
140
Total
3,805
3,548
3,531
4,361
5,338
5,396
5,890
6,005
6,369
6,169
(1) The statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe. (2) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used. (3) Staffordshire police force were only able to submit sample data for persons proceeded against and convicted in the magistrates courts for the year 2000. Although sufficient to estimate higher orders of data, these data are not robust enough at a detailed level and have been excluded from the table. Source:
Evidence and Analysis Unit—Office for Criminal Justice Reform
