|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Touhig: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate his Department has made of the number of British citizens who have been subject to (a) torture and (b) other cruel and degrading punishments consequent upon conviction of criminal offences in overseas jurisdictions. 
Chris Bryant: We are not aware of any British nationals who are currently facing torture or other cruel and degrading punishments consequent upon conviction of criminal offences in overseas jurisdictions. We are opposed to torture and mistreatment in all circumstances. If we have reason to believe that a British national in detention is being mistreated, whether prior to or following conviction, then with the permission of the individual we will take all appropriate action to ensure that mistreatment stops, and that the incident is investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice.
Mr. Touhig: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate his Department has made of the number of British citizens who are under sentence of death in other jurisdictions; and what steps he is taking to assist such individuals. 
Chris Bryant: We are currently aware of eight British nationals sentenced to death and a further 26 facing charges which may attract the death penalty. The Government are strongly opposed to the death penalty. We express our opposition to its use on British nationals at whatever stage and level is judged appropriate from the moment when the imposition of a death sentence becomes a possibility.
Mr. Crabb: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has had with his counterpart in the government of Thailand on its proposals to deport Karen refugees back to Burma. 
The Government are closely monitoring reports about the possible forced return of Karen refugees to Burma. Our ambassador to Thailand has raised our concerns with the Thai Foreign Minister and with the Secretary-General of the National Security Council stressing the importance of adherence to international standards and to Thailand's international obligations. We understand that the Royal Thai Government decided
not to deport the 30 families it had originally identified for removal. We will continue to co-ordinate closely with UN High Commissioner for Refugees, US and EU partners and will continue to raise any concerns with Thai authorities.
Sir Nicholas Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what representations he has received in respect of Mr. David Proctor, a UK citizen who has been refused permission to leave the State of Qatar; 
(2) what representations Her Majesty's Government has made to the Government of the State of Qatar in respect of Mr. David Proctor; what consular assistance has been provided to Mr. Proctor by his Department; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) what investigations have been made by Her Majesty's Government into the circumstances surrounding the detention of Mr. David Proctor by the authorities in the State of Qatar; and if he will make a statement; 
Chris Bryant: Our embassy in Doha are aware of Mr. Proctor's case and have been providing consular assistance. The embassy has also expressed concern about the length of time it is taking to resolve his situation. Since the end of January our ambassador in Qatar has met with Mr. Proctor and has had two subsequent telephone conversations with him. Our consul has also had two separate meetings with him, and Mrs. Proctor had two meetings with consular staff during her recent visit to London. We will continue to stay in touch with Mr. Proctor and the Qatari authorities.
Our embassy in Doha has raised Mr. Proctor's case with the Qatari authorities to establish the nature of the investigation into him and the existence of a ban on his leaving Qatar while the investigation is ongoing. As of 22 February 2010, no charges had been brought against him, but the Public Prosecution Department's investigation into allegations made by his former employer continues.
Mr. Proctor is not being held in detention by the Qatari authorities but the embassy have received confirmation that an administrative travel ban remains in place which will not be lifted until the investigation is resolved. Additionally we understand that there are two separate legal matters running concurrently. The first is a financial dispute between Mr. Proctor and his former employer, the second a labour dispute lodged by Mr. Proctor against his former employer. We are unable to intervene in private legal issues.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many and what proportion of staff in (a) his Department and (b) the
executive agencies for which he is responsible are disabled; and what the average salary in (i) his Department and (ii) the executive agencies is of (A) full-time disabled staff, (B) full-time non-disabled staff, (C) part-time disabled staff and (D) part-time non-disabled staff. 
Chris Bryant: The proportion of Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) staff declaring a disability, and the median earnings of full-time and part-time staff, both disabled and non-disabled, are given in Annexes A and B of the Annual Civil Service Employment Survey statistics published by the Office for National Statistics on 20 January 2010. A copy of the document has been placed in the Library of the House. Separate figures are given for the FCO's executive agency, Wilton Park.
Mr. Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the UK's Ambassador in Tel Aviv has had discussions with the British passport holders named in the Interpol request following the murder of Mr Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai on the circumstances in which their passport details may have been compromised. 
Chris Bryant: The UK is providing support to the British nationals who have been affected by this fraudulent activity. Our officials at the British embassy in Tel Aviv have contacted the affected British nationals, and stand ready to provide them with the support that they need.
Chris Bryant [holding answer 24 February 2010]: I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Hornchurch (James Brokenshire) on 15 May 2009, Official Report, column 1088W, namely that Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) continues to invest to maintain its capabilities in the face of growth in internet-based communications. The use of internet technologies and skills are one of the greatest challenges GCHQ has to master in order to deliver intelligence in accordance with its statutory purposes set out in the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (section 3). In the interests of national security detailed figures on Security and Intelligence Agency expenditure are not made public, but are subject to parliamentary scrutiny through the Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC). The ISC's annual report for 2007-08 was published in March 2009.
Mr. Touhig: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the risk of other countries in the Middle East taking military action against Iran. 
There is widespread speculation about the possibility of military action against Iran as a result of its refusal to engage seriously with the international
community over its nuclear programme. We have made clear that we are totally committed to finding a diplomatic solution to this issue in order to avoid the serious consequences of diplomacy failing. We will continue to work intensively with our partners to that end.
Chris Bryant: The Government continue to pursue the dual track strategy of engagement and pressure to address the issue of Iran's nuclear programme. In that context, the Government support further appropriate use of sanctions designed to influence the regime's decision making on the nuclear file.
Chris Bryant: We remain concerned by Iran's support for groups such as Hamas and Hizballah which threaten regional stability through violence, militia groups in Iraq and the Taleban in Afghanistan. We assess that Iran's ability to create instability in the Middle East would be greatly increased if it had a nuclear weapons capability. This underlines the urgency of finding a diplomatic solution to the issue of Iran's nuclear programme and we are working intensely with international partners to achieve this. Iran needs to engage with the international community and its regional neighbours to restore confidence in its intentions.
Mr. Touhig: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment he has made of (a) the threat posed to the UK by Iran and (b) Iran's capacity to obtain nuclear weapons. 
Chris Bryant: The latest International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report confirms our fears that Iran is acting duplicitously and illegally with its nuclear programme. Iran has ignored IAEA requests for information about the possible military dimension of its programme, has built a secret enrichment plant in Qom, and has enriched uranium up to 20 per cent. despite the IAEA telling it not to do so.
The actions of the Iranian regime threaten the stability of the region as a whole, which has profound implications for the UK and highlights the need for the international community to impose appropriate sanctions in order to bring Iran back to negotiations.
David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many intelligence-led stops have been generated by the Automatic Number Plate Recognition CCTV network in each year since 2006; whether approval under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 was obtained in each case; and whether such approvals have been disclosed in subsequent court proceedings. 
Mr. Hanson: The operation of police-owned Automatic Number Plate Recognition systems is the responsibility of individual chief officers and information relating to intelligence-led stops is not collated centrally.
Margaret Moran: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what reasons a caution was issued in respect of (a) rape and (b) other offences of abuse of a child in the last five years. 
A caution for rape of a child must be sanctioned by the CPS and should only be used by the police in the most exceptional circumstances. It is a function of the police to consider cautions and it is a statutory duty of a Crown Prosecutor to consider whether a prosecution should proceed, taking into account the requirement for a reasonable prospect of conviction and the public interest in the particular prosecution in question.
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 24 February 2010]: The requested information relates to offences of violence against the person recorded in the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) of Sevenoaks. CDRP data are available only since 1999-2000.
|Table 1: Violence against the person, CDRP Sevenoaks, 1999-2000 to 2001-02|
| Note: The data in this table are prior to the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard in April 2002. These figures are not directly comparable with those for later years.|
|Table 2: Violence against the person, CDRP Sevenoaks, 2002-03 to 2008-09|
| Note: The data in this table take account of the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard in April 2002. These figures are not directly comparable with those for earlier years.|
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Identity and Passport Service has made an estimate of the (a) gross annual revenue likely to be generated from fees for the replacement of (i) lost and (ii) stolen identity cards and (b) annual average number of cards per 1,000 identity card holders likely to be (A) lost and (B) stolen. 
Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 25 January 2010, Official Report, column 41WS, on identity cards, how many people aged between 16 and 24 years old registered their interest in a voluntary identity card by 1 January 2010. 
Mr. Maude: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 1 February 2010, Official Report, column 91W, on the national identity register, how many years after the death of an individual, that person's personal data will be removed from the register. 
Meg Hillier: The Identity Cards Act 2006 provides that the date of death may be held on the national identity register. There is no set number of years for which this information may be retained as it will be retained for as long as is necessary, for example to prevent an individual's identity from being stolen after death.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|