|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
We also believe that anyone seeking asylum should do so at the first available opportunity-this means on arrival at a port of entry. So only those who have failed to claim on arrival will be required to travel to Croydon to make their asylum application. The decision to designate Croydon ASU as the single site for applicants to lodge a claim for asylum reflects this fact. It also reflects the fact that the impact on Croydon is not expected to be dramatic as Croydon ASU has the capacity and existing infrastructure to screen the limited numbers of applicants that are expected to lodge an asylum claim at ASU Croydon once ASU Liverpool is redesignated. Before the change Liverpool ASU were booking on average between five-10 appointments a day. This is the number of extra people who will be expected now to make their claim in Croydon. It is therefore considered that the effects on Croydon would be minimal, particularly as a partial appointment system has been introduced which allows increased opportunity to manage the flow of intake into the ASU.
There are insufficient grounds to allocate Croydon borough council more funds as a very small proportion of those who claim asylum in Croydon will remain there. Those asylum applicants who are destitute will be accommodated away from London and the south-east and there are transitional arrangements to take account of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children claiming in Liverpool. Once these transitional arrangements have ended, there should be minimal financial affect on Croydon borough council as the UK Border Agency fully funds the council on a per day basis for each UASC they are responsible for. Additionally, the numbers of additional UASC claiming asylum at Croydon ASU are not expected to be significant.
Mr. Davidson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many asylum seekers on the list of legacy cases (a) have been granted permission to remain in the United Kingdom and (b) are known to have left the country in (i) the last 12 months and (ii) the most recent period for which statistics are available. 
Mr. Woolas: The UK Border Agency is continuing to clear the backlog of the older asylum cases. Lin Homer, the Chief Executive of the UK Border Agency, writes to the Home Affairs Select Committee every six months with a performance update in the resolution of the older asylum cases. She most recently reported that up to the end of September 2009 the UK Border Agency had granted some form of leave to remain in 74,000 asylum legacy cases and had removed over 30,000 cases. Up until the end of October 2008 the UK Border Agency had granted some form of leave to remain in 51,000 asylum legacy cases and had removed over 23,500 cases. A copy of these letters has been placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of applications for asylum by former Iraqi locally employed civilians were rejected for having failed to amass 12 months' continuous service; and how many such applications fell short by periods of one month or under. 
Over 50 per cent. of all applications received from former members of the locally engaged staff have failed because the applicant did not meet the criteria set out in my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary's written ministerial statement of 30 October 2007, Official Report, column 30WS.
Of these, the majority failed because the applicant had not completed 12 months' continuous service. Other reasons for failure were that the employment was not directly with the Government; the employment did not fall within the stated categories; or the applicant had been dismissed for disciplinary reasons.
The information on numbers of those who failed because they had one month or less required service is not held centrally and would involve searching over 600 paper files held by four employing Departments. This could be done only at disproportionate cost.
These data are normally used for management information only and are not subject to the detailed checks that apply to National Statistics publications. These data are provisional and may be subject to change.
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many officials of the UK Border Agency of each civil service grade are directly employed in making initial decisions on asylum claims. 
Mr. Woolas: All asylum claims are carefully considered on an individual basis and a range of staff across the UK Border Agency may be engaged during the process of reaching any specific decision. For this reason it is not possible to give a definitive figure for the number of UK Border Agency staff of each grade directly involved in making initial asylum decisions.
The main responsibility for initial asylum decision making rests with asylum case owners who manage claims through to their full conclusion of grant of leave to remain or removal. The agency has recently completed the appointment and training of over 250 new asylum case owners in regional teams in order to continue to hit its challenging targets to conclude new asylum claims within six months.
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the oral answer of 26 October 2009, Official Report, column 13, on asylum applications, what change there has been to the number of unaccompanied asylum-seeking young people in Croydon in the last 12 months according to records held by his Department. 
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many vessels were (a) intercepted and (b) boarded by the Royal Navy in UK territorial waters in each of the last 10 years. 
Other than the Fishery Protection Squadron, Royal Navy units do not board vessels in UK territorial waters as a matter of course. The information on boardings of UK and non-UK vessels conducted by the Fishery Protection Squadron in each year since 1997 is provided in the following table.
|Number of b oardings|
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Christmas functions organised by his Department and its agencies (a) his predecessor, (b) officials of his Department and (c) officials of its agencies (i) hosted and (ii) attended in 2008; and if he will make a statement. 
Information showing the number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts, and found guilty at all courts for offences under sections 1, 2, 3 and 3 A of the Computer Misuse Act 1990 in England and Wales from 2004 to 2007 (latest available) is shown in the following table. From the information available on the Ministry of Justice court proceedings database it is not possible to identify if any of the proceedings and convictions resulted from a warrant issued under section 14 of the Computer Misuse Act 1990.
|The number of defendants proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under the Computer Misuse Act 1990, England and Wales, 2004 - 07( 1, 2)|
|Offence||Proceeded against||Found guilty||Proceeded against||Found guilty||Proceeded against||Found guilty||Proceeded against||Found guilty|
|(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.
Justice Statistics Analytical Services-Ministry of Justice.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have received assistance from the Channel project for vulnerable individuals at risk of extremism since 1 January 2009; how many such people were under (a) 16 years and (b) 12 years old; how many such people were not Muslim; what evaluation of the outcomes of the programme has been undertaken; what proportion of people assisted by the Channel project were found to have been at risk of becoming violent extremists; and on what grounds such findings were made. 
228 referrals were made to the Channel project
The known age range of those referred to Channel as potentially vulnerable to violent extremism and in need of multi-agency support was seven-50 years.
The majority of referrals were aged between 15-24 years;
Of those referred to Channel as potentially vulnerable to violent extremism and in need of multi-agency support 93 per cent. were male.
We will be publishing, shortly, a guidance document on Channel for partnerships. This document will include and reflect feedback and the implementation lessons learned from some of the longest running sites.
There is no single profile of a violent extremist. There are a range of factors and vulnerabilities that may facilitate the process of radicalisation. Delivering the Prevent Strategy: An Updated Guide for Local Partners includes a description of the factors that might make a person more susceptible to exploitation by violent extremists. These include: open support for violent extremist causes; possession of violent extremist material and behavioural change. Local partners work together and use their professional judgement to assess an individual's vulnerability to being drawn in to violent extremism.
Mr. Alan Campbell: On 14 September 2009 we launched the Cross-Government hate crime action plan. This brings together the range of work being delivered across Government and criminal justice agencies to tackle all forms of hate crime, including violent hate crime against people with physical or learning disabilities. Action 58 provides for the Department of Health and the Home Office to develop guidance for learning disability partnership boards on effectively preventing and responding to hate crime. The Home Office is also engaged with the Department for Health, Ministry of Justice and Attorney General's Office in the review of the "No Secrets" guidance on safeguarding vulnerable adults.
We have also published a strategy for reducing all forms of violence "Saving lives. Reducing harm. Protecting the public. An Action Plan for Tackling Violence 2008-11" in February 2008 and have recently published an update on progress "An Action Plan for Tackling Violence 2008-11. One Year On". The refreshed document reports on the progress that has been made over the last year and looks at what more can be done to prevent violent crime. This includes exploring opportunities across government for early identification of all forms of violence and abuse, including against people with learning and physical disabilities.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|