|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many offences of (a) less serious wounding, (b) harassment, (c) assault without injury, (d) criminal damage to a dwelling, (e) criminal damage to a building other than a dwelling, (f) criminal damage to a vehicle and (g) other criminal damage which were deemed to be racially or religiously aggravated have been recorded in each police force area in each year since 1997. 
Alan Johnson: The available information is given in the tables placed in the House Library. Racially aggravated offences have been included in the recorded crime series from 1999-2000. Religiously aggravated offences were added in 2002-03.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of violent crime committed in (a) Essex and (b) Castle Point in each of the last 12 months for which figures are available was perpetrated against (i) young people, (ii) families and (iii) pensioners. 
Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much has been paid in compensation to people whose Criminal Records Bureau disclosure was delayed in each year since the inception of the disclosure service. 
Mr. Hanson: The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) makes financial awards to redress customers for its maladministration in accordance with Treasury Policy. It calculates each award on the merit of the claim. Awards range from small consolatory payments for inconvenience, to larger sums representing actual loss. The CRB does not maintain separate statistics which distinguish delay from the other elements which merit an award.
Mr. Alan Campbell: These data are not kept centrally. The Government prosecute crimes on the basis of the offence committed and not the medium used. UK legislation does not distinguish between offences committed online or offline and so there are no estimated costs of e-crime or online fraud as a whole.
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what date (a) he and (b) the Chief Secretary to the Treasury last met Mr. Damian McBride in the course of their official duties. 
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether notice of the Tamil demonstration in Parliament Square and adjacent areas has been given to the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis under section 133 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005; and whether the Commissioner has given authorisation under section 134 of that Act. 
Mr. Hanson: I am informed by the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police that many of those demonstrating in Parliament Square and the adjacent areas did not notify the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police of their intention to demonstrate in accordance with section 133 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005.
On 20 April notice of a demonstration by the British Tamil Student society was given to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in accordance with section
133 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police authorised the demonstration notified to him as required under section 134(2) of the 2005 Act. I am further informed that a condition was placed on the organisers of this demonstration limiting the numbers of participants to 50 people.
Alan Johnson: It is not possible to provide figures going back to 1997 without incurring disproportionate cost owing to a change in accounting systems during the intervening period. Available information on Home Department's consultancy expenditure from 2004-05 is as follows:
|Financial year||Home Department including executive agencies consultancy expenditure|
This expenditure on consultancy services is associated with the high volume of major programmes currently underway across the Department to deliver new technologies and business change, providing skills not readily available within the civil service. Consultancy services are procured under strict oversight from Commercial Directorate and are negotiated and contracted in accordance with Office of Government and Commerce/National Audit Office guidelines.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many flags his Department (a) owns and (b) maintains; and what the cost of maintaining them was in the last 12 months. 
Mr. Woolas: For the Home Office HQ at 2 Marsham street the Department has 10 flags including replacements. Union flag replacements are needed every three to six months according to weather conditions at a cost of around £130 per flag. Flag pole maintenance costs are not held separately as they are part of the building's overall PFI charge. Information on the number and annual cost of flags held across the rest of the Department is not held centrally.
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many employees of his Department have been posted to work in offices of hon. Members of each political party in each of the last five years. 
Civil servants may shadow MPs as part of a programme run by the industry and Parliament Trust. Details on numbers of civil servants from this Department that have had such an attachment are not held centrally.
Kitty Ussher: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many foreign nationals with addresses in Burnley were deported in each of the last five years; and how many of them had committed a crime in the UK. 
Mr. Woolas: The information requested is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The chief executive of the UK Border Agency has regularly written to Home Affairs Select Committee in order to provide them with all the robust and accurate information available relating to foreign national criminals. Copies of these letters are available in the Library of the House.
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many foreign national prisoners who were released from prison between February 1999 and March 2006 have (a) since been deported and (b) remain at large. 
Alan Johnson [ holding answer 14 July 2009]: The Chief Executive of the UK Border Agency has regularly written to the Home Affairs Select Committee in order to provide all of the most robust and accurate information on the removal and deportation of foreign national prisoners, including those released from prison before March 2006. A copy of these letters are available in the Library of the House.
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) how many staff of each organisation authorised to use the national DNA database have been (a) investigated, (b) disciplined and (c) dismissed for unauthorised or improper use of that database in each of the last five years; 
Alan Johnson: Direct access to information on the National DNA Database (NDNAD) is restricted to a limited number of designated personnel under the control of the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), either directly, or under a contract awarded to the Forensic Science Service (FSS) for operation and maintenance of the NDNAD and development of its IT systems. Throughout the lifetime of the contract, the FSS are required to demonstrate compliance with specified security requirements. Police and law enforcement personnel do not have access to the information on the NDNAD, but receive reports from the NDNAD Delivery Unit of matches between DNA taken from crime scenes and that taken from individuals.
In relation to those NPIA and FSS staff, there has been one instance of unauthorised use of the database during the last five years. This involved a contractor working for the FSS who was found to have used an administrator account on the IT system rather than his own. Following an investigation by the NPIA, no evidence of any improper access to database records was found. However, as use of the administrator account was in contravention of security procedures, the individual was removed from further work on the database. No incidents of unauthorised or improper use of match reports by police and law enforcement personnel have been reported to the NDNAD in the last five years.
Since the NDNAD was set up in 1995, two instances of loss of data have been reported. These took place in February 2009 when the FSS faxed DNA reports intended for two police forces to incorrect fax numbers. In both instances, the faxes were either retrieved by the police or destroyed within 36 hours of the event. A thorough investigation was undertaken by the NPIA and reported to the Home Office. No evidence was found of any malicious intent by any individual.
As a result of the investigation into this incident, an existing project to replace use of fax was accelerated. As from 17 April 2009, fax has no longer been used to transmit any DNA reports to forces. They are now sent in line with Cabinet Office guidance over a secure network either by email or as a web service on a secure network.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any (a) data and (b) samples relating to profiles on the National DNA Database have been released to (i) commercial and (ii) research organisations in each of the last three years for which figures are available. 
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 2 July 2009]: Requests for the release of data or samples relating to the DNA profiles held on the National DNA Database (NDNAD) must be approved by the NDNAD Strategy Board. Requests are also considered by the NDNAD Ethics Group, which makes recommendations to the Board on whether the request should be approved. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) lays down that DNA samples and the profiles derived from them can only be used for the purposes of prevention and detection of crime, the investigation of an offence, the conduct of a prosecution or, since April 2005, for the purposes of identifying a deceased person. In accordance with these requirements, the Board does not approve any research unless it has clear operational benefit to the police.
Details of requests from commercial organisations for data or samples relating to profiles held on the NDNAD which have been approved by the NDNAD Strategy Board in each of the last three years and in 2009 to date can be found in the following table. No requests from research organisations have been approved during this time. The information provided from the NDNAD was anonymised (i.e. no details enabling individuals to be identified were supplied to the commercial organisations).
|Details of request|
|(1) As at 30 June 2009|
Mrs. Laing: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for how long records relating to those (a) convicted of an offence and (b) released without charge are kept on the national fingerprint database. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: Fingerprints records are currently retained indefinitely on IDENT1 (the national fingerprint database) for persons arrested for a recordable offence, whether or not subject to a conviction or acquittal or no further action. Proposals on future retention policy are set out in the public consultation paper 'Keeping the right people on the DNA Database' published on 7 May 2009.
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many arrests have been made of people who were matched to a crime using the
national DNA database but who were not subsequently charged with an offence in the latest period for which figures are available. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|