|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Information held by the Ministry of Justice deals with court proceedings for drink drive offences. The Ministry of Justice advise that data for 2009 are planned to be published in the autumn, 2010. The number of proceedings at magistrates courts for drink driving offences in 2008 (latest available) can be found in "Criminal Statistics England and Wales 2008" volume 6, table S6.1, supplementary volumes, "Court proceedings offences relating to motor vehicles" published on the Ministry of Justice website. See following link:
Stewart Hosie: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the visa issued on behalf of Mr. Abdul Manan Saleh by the UK Border Agency on 19 November 2009 to be available for collection. 
Mr. Galloway: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what effect the withdrawal of accreditation as a bona fide institution offering courses for overseas students from a private college has upon the immigration status of students studying at that college. 
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 3 February 2010]: Withdrawal of accreditation from a private college that has been granted a Tier 4 Sponsor Licence by the UK Border Agency will lead to the revocation of their Sponsor Licence. Students studying at the college will then be afforded a maximum of 60 calendar days, to find another course with a registered Tier 4 sponsor. If at the end of this period they have not found a place on a new course they will have to leave the United Kingdom or face enforced removal.
Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department who has responsibility for monitoring and enforcing the present 20 hour limit on work by overseas students; who will have the responsibility of monitoring and enforcing the 10 hours limit on work by overseas students proposed to be introduced on 3 March; and whether additional enforcement or monitoring duties will fall on the higher education institution accepting such students following implementation of the proposed changes. 
Mr. Woolas: It is the responsibility of all UK employers to establish that their employees have the legal right to work in the UK and to undertake the work in question before commencing that employment. The responsibility for monitoring the current 20 hour limit and the new 10 hour limit on employment therefore rests with employers who should only employ migrants who have the required permission to work, and employers should not offer employment in excess of an overseas student's permitted hours.
No additional enforcement or monitoring duties fall on the higher education institutions accepting such students, except in the event that they are employers of these overseas students. The new 10 hour work limit will apply to all students following courses of study below degree level, excluding those who are on foundation degree courses, as outlined in the Statement of Changes in Immigration Rules (HC367) laid before the House on 10 February 2010.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have received a student visa sponsored by a language college which has subsequently been identified by his Department as bogus in each year since 2006. 
Mr. Woolas: Prior to the launch of tier 4 on 31 March 2009 educational institutions were not required to be registered as sponsors with the UK Border Agency and it is therefore not possible to say how many bogus language colleges were in existence. Information about the number of overseas students attending such colleges is therefore not available.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people entering the UK on a false student visa have been identified and deported in (a) each of the last three years and (b) 2010 to date. 
Mr. Woolas: Information regarding the number of people attempting to enter the UK by presenting false student visas could be obtained by analysing each individual case record, only at disproportionate cost.
Clare Short: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the refusal rate was for visitor applications from Islamabad in (a) the latest period for which figures are available and (b) each of the last two years. 
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of the recommendations made in the Home Affairs Committee's Sixth Report of Session 2007-08, on Domestic Violence, Forced Marriage and 'Honour-based' Violence, HC 263, were accepted
by the Government; of those accepted by the Government, what proportion have been implemented; by what date he expects those accepted but not yet implemented to be implemented; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The Government's responses (23 July and 30 September 2008) to the recommendations made in the Home Affairs Committee's report on domestic violence, forced marriage and honour-based violence are available at:
We understand that the Committee is reviewing all of the recommendations it has made in the last five years. We have contributed to this exercise and our update reflects the latest information on implementation and progress.
Mr. Alan Campbell: Available data are from the recorded crime series and relate to homicides recorded by the Southend community safety partnership (CSP; formerly known as crime and disorder reduction partnership) and Essex police force area up to and including 2008-09. Recorded crime data at CSP level are only available from 2000-01.
|Recorded offences of homicide, Southend CSP and Essex police force area, 1997-98 to 2008-09|
|Southend CSP( 1)||Essex PFA|
|(1) Community safety partnerships (CSPs) were formerly known as crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs). Data at this level are only available from 2002-03.|
Data are from the recorded crime series and are on a different basis to data held on the Homicide Index.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many persons identified as possible victims of trafficking by the UK Border Agency or by their legal representative were placed in the detention fast-track system between 1 April and 31 December 2009; how many of them were subsequently released; and for what reason each was released. 
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 1 March 2010]: Between 1 April 2009 and 31 December 2009 competent authorities found reasonable grounds to believe nine individuals in the detained fast track system were victims of trafficking. In all of the nine cases the individuals were subsequently taken out of the detained fast track process for this reason.
Legal representatives are not among the group of designated first responders under the National Referral Mechanism and we therefore do not record cases where solely a legal representative considers someone to be a victim of trafficking.
Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment his Department has made of the merits of appointing an independent National Rapporteur on Trafficking with a special focus on children. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: The Government have considered the benefits of appointing an independent national rapporteur for child trafficking but believes the current system of having an Inter-Departmental Ministerial Group on Human Trafficking supported and challenged by the Trafficking NGO Stakeholder Group provide appropriate forums for scrutiny and challenge of both policy and practice of tackling human trafficking and supporting trafficking victims. Child Trafficking features heavily in both these forums and the UK Government's action plan includes 15 child specific actions to improve safeguarding of trafficked children.
Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment his Department has made of the merits of introducing a system of guardianship for child victims of trafficking. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: Protection and support for child trafficking victims is paramount and the Government have considered this issue carefully. However the Government do not believe that guardians for trafficked children would enhance the protection and support available to trafficked children over and above the existing safeguarding and support arrangements that are in place at a local level. The Government believe that this responsibility should remain with the local authorities who have a statutory duty to ensure that they safeguard and promote the welfare of all children under Section 11 of the Children Act 2004, regardless of their immigration status or nationality. This conclusion was recognised and accepted by the Home Affairs Select Committee in its report in May 2009.
Mr. Alan Campbell:
The Government's latest estimate of the numbers of children believed to have been trafficked into the UK is 325. This estimate is taken from the strategic threat analysis carried out by the Child Exploitation
Online Protection Centre (CEOP) and published in its report in April 2009. The estimate is derived from data covering the period 1 March 2007 to 29 February 2008.
Mr. Timpson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for identity cards his Department has received from residents of (a) the county of Cheshire and (b) Crewe and Nantwich constituency since 1 January 2010. 
The Identity and Passport Service is not able to provide information relating to particular constituency or county for identity card applications. However as of 3 March 2010 there have been 4,307
applications for identity cards from people living in the north-west of England, including Greater Manchester, Cheshire, Merseyside, Lancashire and Cumbria.
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many employers hiring illegal immigrants have had the maximum available fine per worker imposed on them in England and Wales in each of the last 10 years. 
In 2009 (1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009) a total of four maximum civil penalties of £10,000 per employee were issued by the UK Border Agency to employers of six illegal migrant workers. The civil penalty issued to one of these employers, which related to two employees, was cancelled at objection.
|Fines imposed for employing illegal workers( 1) , 1998 to 2008|
|(1) Offences under S.8 Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 or S.21 Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006|
(2) The statutory maximum fine for an offender sentenced at the magistrates' court is £5,000
(3) There is no statutory maximum fine for an offender sentenced at the Crown court
1. These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems.
Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system
2. These data are presented on the principal offence basis. Where an offender has been sentenced for more than one offence the principal offence is the one for which the heaviest sentence was imposed. Where the same sentence has been imposed for two or more offences the principal offence is the one for which the statutory maximum is most severe.
Justice Statistics - Analytical Services, Ministry of Justice
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|