|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
8 Dec 2010 : Column 294Wcontinued
Mary Creagh: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the potential savings to the public purse of the reconstitution of the Land Registry in each of the next five years. 
Mr Djanogly: As a trading fund Her Majesty's Land Registry is a self-funding organisation that is not funded by the public purse.
On 17 March Land Registry announced the outcome of a consultation on its Accelerated Transformation Programme. The figures published in the decisions report indicate the following savings over the next five years:
On 14 October it was announced that the Ministry of Justice would be carrying out a feasibility study into private sector involvement in Land Registry, with a range of options being considered. The outcome of the study will be announced in the new year.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effects of reductions in the legal aid budget on families seeking asylum; what plans he has to ensure that asylum-seeking families have access to high-quality legal advice early on in the process; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Djanogly: We propose to continue providing publicly funded legal assistance in asylum cases. We are also working with the UK Border Agency to help improve the quality of asylum decision-making by piloting the provision of legal advice earlier in the asylum process.
Mr Charles Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will bring forward proposals to require the National Offender Management Service to track employment outcomes for offenders (a) six months and (b) one year after release as part of the payment by results system; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Blunt: The Department for Work and Pensions is launching a new approach to improving employment outcomes based on payment by results and has, jointly with the MoJ, set out its intention to incentivise Work programme providers to give employment support to unemployed offenders, including those leaving custody. We are exploring what data will be required as part of these plans.
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many personal injury claims were brought against his Department and its agencies in each of the last three years. 
Mr Djanogly: The information requested for the last three years is set out in the following table:
|MOJ and agencies including NOMS, HMCS, Tribunals and OPG|
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent representations he has received from the Law Commission on the level of general damages in personal injury claims; and what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of that level. 
Mr Djanogly: I have not received any recent representations from the Law Commission on the level of general damages in personal injury claims. The assessment of the appropriate level of general damages is a matter for the courts to decide.
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners (a) of each sex and (b) in each age group received an indeterminate sentence for public
protection in each month between December 2009 and November 2010. 
Mr Blunt: The table shows the reception figures of prisoners on indeterminate sentences for public protection in all prison establishments in England and Wales in each month between December 2009 and June 2010 (latest date for which figures are available).
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
|Receptions of prisoners on indeterminate sentences for public protection, by sex and age group, December 2009 to June 2010|
|All||15 to 17||18 to 20||21 to 24||25 to 29||30 to 39||40 to 49||50 to 59||60 and over|
Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many prisoners serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection on 30 November 2010 were beyond a tariff of (a) two years or less, (b) three years of less, (c) four years or less and (d) five years or less; 
(2) how many prisoners (a) of each sex and (b) in each age band were serving an indeterminate sentence for public protection on 30 November 2010; and how many had (i) exceeded their tariff and (ii) exceeded their tariff and had not completed an offenders' treatment programme. 
Mr Blunt: On 17 November 2010 there were 6,375 offenders in custody (including those serving their sentence in secure mental hospitals) for an indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) or Detention for Public Protection (DPP), of which 3,173 were past tariff (excluding offenders who have been recalled to custody).
Of the 3,173 offenders whose tariff had expired:
(a) 1,432 had a tariff of 730 days or less (approximately two years or less).
(b) 2,601 had a tariff of 1,095 days or less (approximately three years or less).
(c) 3,080 had a tariff of 1,460 days or less (approximately four years or less).
(d) 3,169 had a tariff of 1,825 days or less (approximately five years or less).
The following table presents a breakdown of the population of IPP and DPP prisoners by gender and age-group. This also excludes 41 where there was no tariff expiry date on the Public Protection Unit Database (PPUD) on the 17 November 2010. Of these, 36 offenders were sentenced in 2010.
|Age-group||Total||Past tariff||Total||Past tariff||Total||Past tariff|
The figures above were taken from PPUD in the National Offender Management Service, and, as with any large scale recording system, it is subject to possible errors arising from either data entry or processing. PPUD is a live database, updated on a regular basis. As a result, snapshots taken on consecutive days will contain differences reflecting updates.
On 3 December 2010, there were 498 offenders who were past tariff and had not completed at least one programme, of which 455 were men and 43 were women. It should be noted that some of these offenders had started or started and not completed a programme. An age band (as at 17 November 2010) breakdown is presented in the able below. This information was taken from a database held by the Public Protection and Mental Health Group at the National Offender Management Service.
|Current age||Offender without a complete programme|
Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many prisoners (a) of each sex and (b) in each age band serving indeterminate sentences for public protection have been released on licence in each year since 2005; 
(2) how many prisoners (a) of each sex and (b) in each age band serving indeterminate sentences for public protection have been recalled to prison in each year since 2005. 
Mr Blunt: The number of indeterminate sentence Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) or Detention for Public Protection (DPP) offenders released into the community by year of latest release broken down by gender (Table 1) and current age (Table 2) is presented in the following tables. These include offenders that have been recalled to custody but exclude those who have been deported. Please note that both tables exclude five men where the latest release date was not available.
|Table 1: Offenders released (latest release) broken down by gender|
|Year of latest release||Men||Women||Total|
|Table 2: Offenders released (latest release) broken down by age band|
The number of offenders recalled to prison by year of latest recall broken down by gender (Table 3) and current age (Table 4) is presented in the following tables. For offenders who have been recalled into custody more than once, only the latest recall was considered.
|Table 3: Offenders recalled (latest recall) broken down by gender|
|Year of latest recall||Men||Women||Total|
|Table 4: Offenders recalled (latest recall) broken down by age band|
The figures above were taken from the Public Protection Unit Database (PPUD) in the National Offender Management Service, and, as with any large scale recording system, it is subject to possible errors arising from either data entry or processing. PPUD is a live database, updated on a regular basis. As a result, snapshots taken on consecutive days will contain differences reflecting updates.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) whether he has made an estimate of the number of prisoners who committed suicide within six months of their release from prison in each of the last five years; 
(2) how many prisoners (a) in total and (b) aged 60 years or over died of natural causes in prison in each of the last five years. 
Mr Blunt: The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) systematically records deaths of inmates who are directly in its care. This covers deaths which occur while in direct prison custody or while released on temporary licence for medical reasons. Deaths of those in approved premises are also recorded. NOMS does not collect figures for the number of prisoners who committed suicide after release; that may or may not be under supervision. This information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
The information requested in question two is displayed in table 1 as follows:
|Table 1: Annual totals of natural causes deaths by age: 2005-09( 1) -England and Wales|
|Apparent natural causes|
|All age bands||60 and over|
|(1) From the safety in custody statistics 2010:|
NOMS has a broad, integrated and evidence-based prisoner suicide prevention and self harm management strategy that seeks to reduce the distress of all those in prison. This encompasses a wide spectrum of Prison and Department of Health work around such issues as mental health, substance misuse and resettlement. Any prisoner identified as at risk of suicide or self-harm is cared for using the Assessment, Care in Custody and Teamwork (ACCT) procedures.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners aged 60 years or older there were in each of the last five years. 
Mr Blunt: The following table provides the information requested on the number of prisoners aged 60 years or over in England and Wales as at 30 June in each year from 2006 to 2010.
The data for 2010 are taken from a new source to that used previously and hence are not fully consistent with published data for 2009 or earlier years. However the differences are small-in June 2009 the total prison population was 63 higher in the old source out of a total prison population of just over 85,000.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps are taken to identify language and communication difficulties in respect of offenders before their arrival in prison. 
Mr Blunt: Escort staff bringing prisoners to prisons carry a Person Escort Record form, which includes a reference to any communication difficulties the prisoner may have. All prisoners are interviewed on first arrival in prison to assess whether they have any language or other communication difficulties. Any problems identified must be recorded and the information forwarded to other relevant departments within the prison.
Nick Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what consideration he gave to the merits of including in his Department's Business Plan provision for action to address offenders with alcohol problems. 
Mr Blunt: The MoJ has set out proposals for consultation in its Green Paper aimed to improve access to treatment for drug or mental health problems, which should also help those that have linked alcohol related problems. In addition, the Government will look to explore how payment by results might be extended to cover specialist alcohol treatment for offenders.
John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many former (a) Prison Service employees, (b) Prison Service employees at governor grades, (c) officials in his Department and (d) National Offender Management Service officials each private sector prison operator employs; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Blunt: The National Offender Management Service does not hold centrally information on the numbers of former Prison Service employees (including governor grades), Ministry of Justice employees or National Offender Management Service employees who are employed by private sector prison companies. Staff have the opportunity to complete an exit questionnaire on leaving the National Offender Management Service but this does not record whether or not staff have secured a post with private sector contractors.
Information obtained from contractors indicates that at least 90 former Prison Service, National Offender Management Service or Ministry of Justice staff currently work in private sector prisons. This figure includes 15 former Prison Service governor grades. However, these figures are the best available and may not be complete.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what percentage of children who were remanded in custody were subsequently (a) acquitted or (b) given a community sentence in each of the last five years. 
Mr Blunt: The estimated number and proportion of juveniles remanded in custody at magistrates courts and the Crown court in England and Wales 2005 to 2009 (latest currently available), who were (a) subsequently acquitted or (b) given a community sentence is shown in the following table.
|Estimated number and percentage of juveniles( 1) remanded in custody( 2) who were subsequently acquitted or received a non-custodial sentence( 3) at ma gistrates courts and the Crown c ourt, England and Wales 2005-09|
|(1) Defined as being aged 10 to 17 at the date of appearance in court.|
(2) Includes those remanded in custody at any stage of proceedings at magistrates and the Crown court who may also have been given bail at some stage of those proceedings.
(3) Magistrates courts figures exclude those committed for trial or sentence at the Crown court and those who failed to appear. Non-custodial sentences include discharges, fines, community sentences, and a number of other sentences that do not involve incarceration. Acquitted includes proceedings discontinued, discharged, withdrawn and dismissed.
(4) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July and August 2008.
(5) Percentages here represent the proportions of all juveniles who were remanded in custody, excluding those who failed to appear and where the magistrates court committed the defendant for trial or sentence to the Crown court.
1. 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.
2. It is known that in some police force areas, information on remand decisions is not always readily available to those coding court proceedings returns. In certain cases, the return may be mistakenly coded as if no remand had taken place. For magistrates court proceedings, the number of remands and more importantly, the number which are in custody, are believed to be under-recorded in total. As the breakdown of remands into bail and custody cases for a number of forces is not accurate for a number of forces, estimates have to be made to provide national figures.
3. Some percentages may not sum to 100 due to rounding.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many and what proportion of young offenders completed (a) literacy and (b) numeracy courses in each of the last five years. 
Mr Blunt: The data provided in the following table displays the number of young people who have achieved a qualification in Prison Service Young Offender Institutions.
Comparable data are not available for the academic year 2005-06, or for courses completed in Secure Children's Homes, Secure Training Centres, or privately run prisons.
|Academic year (1 August to 31 July)||Literacy||Numeracy|
Data are not available on the proportion of young offenders who have completed these qualifications because data are collected on the number of episodes started in public YOIs, and not the number of young people. An episode refers to a period a young person has spent in custody and it is possible that one young person can start or finish more than one custodial episode at different points of each year for different offences.
The number of episodes started in the academic year 2006-07 was 9,118 and in 2007-08 was 9308. Data has not yet been published for academic years 2008-09 or 2009-10.
It should be noted that a large number of these episodes are young people who have been remanded to custody, often for very short periods of time. The number of young people remanded in custody in the financial year 2007-08 was 5663 and 2006-07 was 6360.
There has been a significant reduction of the number of young people in custody since 2008.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what specialist accommodation is available for under-18s on bail or remand in the North West. 
Mr Blunt: Young people who are subject to bail or non-secure remand and who are in need of accommodation can be housed in a variety of lodgings. These can be provided by either the local authority or private providers including: foster homes; children's homes; hostels; bed and breakfast accommodation; or accommodation provided by voluntary organisations. Such placements are arranged by a youth offending team worker and social worker, and put before a placement panel. While there is no specific definition of "specialist" accommodation, the underlying principle will be to identify suitable accommodation that would most appropriately meet the needs of the young person, taking into account the nature of the offence and protection of the public.
Young males aged 15 to 17 who are remanded to custody in the North West would normally be placed at HMPYOI Hindley. In a small number of cases where there are specific concerns about an individual's ability to manage in mainstream YOI accommodation, they may be remanded to HMPYOI Wetherby in West Yorkshire, which has additional dedicated accommodation for 15 to 17-year-old males. Females aged 17 who are remanded
to custody would be placed at the Rivendell Unit which is a dedicated young women's unit at HMPYOI New Hall in Wakefield.
All young people aged 12 to 14 and females aged 15 and 16 who are remanded, are subject to a court ordered secure remand. Where a court decides to remand them to secure accommodation they would be placed in either a secure training centre (the nearest to the North West region being Hassockfield in County Durham) or a secure children's home (the two in the North West being Barton Moss in Manchester and Red Bank in Merseyside). Additionally, males aged 15 to 16-who are deemed by a court to meet certain vulnerability criteria-may also be given a court ordered secure remand and may be placed at a secure training centre or secure children's home. Males aged 15 to 17 who are not deemed to be vulnerable, would be remanded to a young offender institution. Children aged between 10 and 12 can be remanded to the local authority and if they meet certain criteria may be placed by the local authority into a secure children's home.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what proportion of inmates at each young offender institution in the North West was able to exercise outside on a daily basis in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Blunt: At HMYOI Lancaster Farms, the only dedicated Young Offender Institution in the North West, all young offenders routinely have the opportunity to exercise in the open air on a daily basis.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what official visits Ministers in his Department have made to UK overseas territories since 1997. 
Mr Duncan: The information requested is as follows:
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State George Foulkes visited Montserrat from 12-13 January 1999.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Gareth Thomas visited Montserrat from 21-22 June 2004.
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Michael Foster visited the Turks and Caicos Islands from 24-28 May 2009, to attend the annual meeting of the Caribbean Development Bank.
Details of all travel costing in excess of £500 by all Cabinet Ministers since 1997, and by all Ministers since 2007, up until May 2010, are available on the Cabinet Office website at:
Details of travel undertaken by Department for International Development (DFID) Ministers since May 2010 are available on DFID's website at:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many of his Department's staff at each civil service grade have experience in
working on matters of agricultural policy; and how many of them are currently working in each division of his Department. 
Mr O'Brien: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 6 December 2010, Official Report, column 36W, to the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Heidi Alexander).
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much his Department spent on grey fleet in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10. 
Mr Duncan: Grey fleet travel refers to mileage in employee-owned vehicles. The Department for International Development (DFID) reimburses employees for private mileage undertaken in the direct implementation of their role at either the standard mileage rate, or the cost of public transport if public transport is less. In order to claim reimbursement at either rate, the employee must have a full comprehensive insurance policy permitting the use of their motor vehicle in connection with DFID business.
DFID is unable to provide the information requested without incurring disproportionate cost. Due to updates in our central accounting system across the Department, DFID will be able to report spend on such reimbursements from 2010-11 onwards.
Mr Andrew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if his Department will provide (a) technical assistance and (b) advice to developing countries to support the elimination of user fees for healthcare for poor people. 
Mr O'Brien: The Department for International Development (DFID) is currently reviewing all its aid programmes, including our support to the health sector, to assess the impact of these programmes, and to ensure UK aid is effective, accelerates progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and represents value for money.
DFID has agreed to provide technical assistance to developing countries wishing to implement pro-poor health financing reforms. This will initially be done through support to the World Health Organisation (WHO) to implement the recommendations of the World Health Report and will be in the form of a senior health economist being seconded to WHO by DFID for two years.
We are also evaluating proposals to provide additional financial resources. These resources will be used to provide direct assistance to developing countries wishing to implement pro-poor health financing reforms. WHO is anticipating a large increase in demand for this type of assistance following the recent publication of the World Health Report, and has approached DFID for this support due to our well-proven and valued track record of providing assistance in this area.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development on what date a comprehensive value for money assessment was last made in respect of each multilateral agency in receipt of funding from his Department. 
Mr Duncan: On 9 June 2010, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development launched the multilateral aid review to ensure maximum value for money from the Department for International Development's (DFID's) contributions to multilateral organisations. The review will look at all organisations to which DFID provides core funding, and will assess the relevance of each organisation to the UK's development objectives, their organisational effectiveness and their ability to deliver results on the ground. This is the first time such a comprehensive value for money assessment, looking across all agencies, has been undertaken by the UK Government. The findings of the review are due to be published in February 2011.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much funding his Department has provided to each multilateral agency since 1997. 
Mr Duncan: Details of the Department for International Development's (DFID's) aid expenditure are published in "Statistics on International Development", which is available in the Library of the House and on DFID's website.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much funding his Department has allocated to the Turks and Caicos Islands in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr Duncan: Details of the Department for International Development's (DFID's) aid expenditure, including in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI), are published in 'Statistics on International Development', which is available in the Library of the House and on DFID's website. Bilateral programme expenditure and imputed expenditure through multilateral organisations in TCI from 2000-01 to 2009-10
are shown in the following table. Figures for 2010-11 will be published in the next addition of 'Statistics on International Development'.
|Financial year||Total DFID bilateral||DFID imputed multilateral shares|
|n-a = not available|
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what support his Department is providing to the interim administration in the Turks and Caicos Islands. 
Mr Duncan: The Department for International Development (DFID) has provided a short-term loan, currently totalling £19.7 million, to help the interim Administration meet unavoidable commitments, including payment of public sector salaries.
DFID is also providing technical assistance, including through funding a chief financial officer who has assumed direct control for all financial decisions.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many officials from his Department are stationed in the Turks and Caicos Islands. 
Mr Duncan: There are no Department for International Development (DFID) staff members permanently stationed in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI). UK-based staff make occasional visits to TCI to provide advice and assistance when necessary.
Ed Balls: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what dates she has discussed air security issues with the Secretary of State for Transport since 11 May 2010. 
Mrs May [holding answer 8 November 2010]: I chair a weekly security meeting bringing together a wide range of Government Departments and agencies which contribute to our counter-terrorism and security work. The Department for Transport is represented at that meeting. Since the attempted terrorist attacks on cargo aircraft on 29 October I have had a number of discussions with the Secretary of State for Transport. We met in COBR on 1 November and 4 November to lead the Government's response to the attempted attacks and continue to meet regularly. Our Departments are working together closely on the review of air freight security which I announced in my statement to the House on 1 November, Official Report, columns 632-634. Our officials meet regularly both bilaterally and with industry to discuss improvements to aviation security.
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether she plans to review her Department's policy on the use of containment in respect of (a) children and (b) adults; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: The use of police tactics, such as containment, is an operational matter for police forces. The courts have ruled that containment is a lawful tactic when used proportionately.
Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department for what period a conviction remains on a criminal record. 
Lynne Featherstone: A conviction held on the police national computer will normally be retained for 100 years from the date of the subject's birth.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Bosworth of 24 November 2010, Official Report, column 257, on what dates she discussed the matter of protesters in Parliament Square with the Mayor of London; what the venue was of each such meeting where this issue was discussed; what the outcome was of each such discussion; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire [holding answer 2 December 2010]: My right hon. Friend, the Prime Minister has regular meetings with ministerial colleagues, officials and others.
The Government have introduced measures in the Police Reform Social and Responsibility Bill to support rights to peaceful protest around Parliament while also tackling encampments and other disruptive activity on Parliament Square.
Lindsay Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions she has had with officials at the UK Border Agency on her Department's policy on the detention of children. 
Damian Green [holding answer 7 December 2010]: The Government are committed to ending the detention of children for immigration purposes. A review is under way to consider how this can be done in a way which protects the welfare of children and ensures that families with no right to be in the UK leave. During the course of that review the Home Secretary and I have had frequent discussions with officials.
Fiona Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what progress she has made on the timetable for the introduction of the Freedom Bill; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: As set out in the Home Office Business Plan (published on 8 November) we will introduce a Freedom Bill by February 2011.
Mr Frank Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what non-governmental organisations she (a) has consulted and (b) plans to consult in
formulating her Department's new priorities for reducing the incidence of human trafficking. 
Damian Green [holding answer 2010]: As part of the new strategy to combat human trafficking, which I announced on 14 October, my officials will be consulting relevant voluntary organisations in due course to ensure that their views are heard. The Home Office will shortly be contacting relevant groups regarding consultation.
Jessica Morden: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions she has had with the First Minister of Wales on the consultation on the proposed closure of Newport Passport Office. 
Damian Green [holding answer 7 December 2010]: The Identity and Passport Service is currently engaged on a formal consultation with the trade unions on the proposed closure of the passport application processing centre at Newport. The First Minister has written a number of letters on the subject.
Mr Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the cost was of IT equipment purchased by or on behalf of the Government in respect of the identity cards scheme; what was done with that equipment when she decided to end that scheme; and how much such equipment will be deployed for other purposes in government. 
Damian Green: The cost of IT equipment purchased was £6.5 million in respect of the Critical Workers Identity Card and Early Interest Scheme. All IT equipment has been withdrawn from operation as part of the ID card decommissioning activities and securely stored. Assets and IT equipment relating to the National Identity Register require disposal/destruction and IPS will ensure that this happens in line with agreed guidelines.
The secure disposal or re-use of new or nearly-new IT equipment is dependant upon the level of protectively marked material or personal data stored on the system. As our IT equipment is generally managed under contract by our IT service providers, they will manage the re-use or disposal according to central Government security policies. The Home Office has a general policy of sharing, re-use and commonality of IT capabilities, in order to increase efficiency, reduce costs and improve environmental sustainability.
Mr Carswell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many illegal immigrants were removed from the UK in (a) July, (b) August and (c) September 2010. 
Damian Green: The following table shows the number of removals and voluntary departures for July to September 2010.
|Removals and voluntary departures( 1, 2) , from the United Kingdom, by type, July to September 2010|
|Number of departures( 3)|
|Enforced removals and voluntary departures|
|Enforced removals and notified voluntary departures( 4)||Assisted voluntary returns( 5)||Other voluntary departures( 6)||Total||Non-asylum cases refused entry at port and subsequently removed( 7)||Grand total|
|(1) Figures are rounded to the nearest five and may not sum to the totals shown because of independent rounding.|
(2) Provisional figures. Figures will under record due to data cleansing and data matching exercises that take place after the extracts are taken.
(3) Removals and voluntary departures recorded on the system as at the dates on which the data extracts were taken.
(4) Includes persons leaving under Facilitated Return Schemes.
(5) Persons leaving under Assisted Voluntary Return Programmes run by the International Organization for Migration. May include some on-entry cases and some cases where enforcement action has been initiated.
(6) Persons who it has been established left the UK without informing the immigration authorities.
(7) Includes removals performed by immigration officers at ports using enforcement powers and cases dealt with at juxtaposed controls.
The Home Office publishes statistics on the number of persons removed or departed voluntarily from the UK on a quarterly and annual basis, which are available from the Home Office's Research, Development and Statistics website at:
A copy of the Control of Immigration: Quarterly Statistical Summary United Kingdom July-September 2010 will be placed in the House Library.
Lindsay Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent estimate she has made of the number of people living illegally in the UK. 
Damian Green [holding answer 7 December 2010]: The UK Border Agency does not capture data relating to the number of people living illegally in the UK, because it is not possible to quantify this number accurately.
Sir Gerald Kaufman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the Minister of State for Borders and Immigration plans to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton dated 20 October 2010 in regard to Mr Muhammad Moazzam Nadeem. 
Damian Green [holding answer 7 December 2010]: I wrote to the right hon. Member on 2 November 2010.
Sir Paul Beresford: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what training ( a) senior investigating officers and (b) other police officers receive on (i) the operation of extraterritorial legislation and (ii) investigation of allegations of child sexual abuse committed overseas. 
James Brokenshire [holding answer 7 December 2010]: The Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre has developed a unique programme of professional development courses. These courses are designed to support professionals working to protect children from sexual abuse and law enforcement officers who work to hold offenders to account.
These include a course on 'Understanding Child Sex Offenders: A Foundation Course in Behavioural Analysis'; a course on the Sexual Offences Act and a piloted course on Travelling Sex Offenders.
CEOP, through its Overseas Tracker Team, also gives tactical and strategic advice to police forces and senior investigating officers in relation to the application of extraterritorial legislation and investigations into child sexual abuse committed overseas.
Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether biometric data must be resubmitted each time a person applies for a visa. 
Damian Green: All visa applicants who are required to submit their biometric data must do so each time they apply for a visa.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with the Metropolitan police on the estimate made of the number of children aged (a) 16 and under and (b) 17 to 18 years who were present at the demonstration in Westminster on Wednesday 24 November 2010 prior to the decision to contain protesters being taken; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: The use of police tactics is an operational matter for local police forces. The Home Office has not held discussions with the Metropolitan police on the numbers of children present at the demonstration in Westminster on 24 November prior to the decision to contain protestors.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what discussions she has had with the Metropolitan police on the decision (a) to use horses to disperse the crowd and (b) to contain protesters during the demonstration in Westminster on Wednesday 24 November 2010; and if she will make a statement; 
(2) whether she has assessed any video recordings of the use of horses at the demonstration in Westminster on Wednesday 24 November 2010; and if she will make a statement; 
(3) what information she has requested from the Metropolitan police on (a) the impact on protesters and (b) the outcome for police operations of the decision to (i) contain protesters and (ii) use horses to disperse the crowds at the demonstration in Westminster on Wednesday 24 November 2010; and if she will make a statement; 
(4) what discussions she has had with the Metropolitan police on the proportionality of decisions (a) to use horses to disperse the crowd and (b) to contain protesters at the demonstration in Westminster on Wednesday 24 November 2010. 
James Brokenshire: My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary routinely discusses a range of policing matters with the commissioner of the Metropolitan police. However, police tactics, including the use of horses and containment, are operational matters for the police. The Home Secretary has not made an assessment of video recordings of police tactics used on 24 November. The Home Secretary has not requested specific information related to the use of containment or police horses but has been provided with an overview of the police operation. The police have to maintain a difficult balance between supporting rights to peaceful protest and ensuring local communities are properly protected, and the Home Secretary has written to the commissioner conveying her support for the police operation on 24 November.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what powers the police have to control and manage street demonstrations; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: The legal framework for policing demonstrations is set out in the Public Order Act 1986 which gives the police powers to place conditions on demonstrations to prevent serious public disorder, serious disruption to the life of the community and serious damage to property. The legal framework for policing static demonstrations in a designated area around Parliament is set out in sections 132-138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 which gives police separate powers to place conditions on static demonstrations.
The police have a range of other powers to deal with any criminal offences which take place at demonstrations.
John Glen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were (a) arrested, (b) proceeded against and (c) found guilty of offences under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 in each year from 2000 to 2009. 
James Brokenshire: The information requested on arrests is not collected centrally.
The arrests collection held by the Home Office covers arrests for recorded crime (notifiable offences) only, broken down at a main offence group level, covering categories such as violence against the person and robbery.
From these centrally reported categories it is not possible to separately identify offences under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986.
The Ministry of Justice have provided data relating to the number of persons proceeded against at magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under section five of the Public Order Act 1986, England and Wales, from 2000 to 2009. This can be viewed in the following table.
|Number of persons proceeded against at the magistrates courts and found guilty at all courts for offences under the Public Order Act 1986, section 5, England and Wales 2000 to 2009( 1, 2)|
|Offence description||Statute||Year||Proceeded against||Found guilty|
Public Order Act 1986, section 5 as amended by Crime and Disorder Act 1998, section 31(1)(c) and (5)
Public Order Act 1986, section 5 as amended by Crime and Disorder Act 1998, section 31(1)(c) and (5)
Racially or religiously aggravated harassment, alarm or distress
Public Order Act 1986, section 5 as amended by Crime and Disorder Act 1998, section 31(1)(c) and (5)
|(1) The figures given in the table on court proceedings 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 it 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.
(4) Excludes data for Cardiff magistrates court for April, July and August 2008.
Justice Statistics Analytical Services-Ministry of Justice.
Mrs Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the likely effects of the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review on the number of staff employed by the UK Border Agency in Liverpool; and if she will make a statement. 
Damian Green [holding answer 2 December 2010]: The spending review settlement for the UK Border Agency will mean that it needs to reduce staff numbers by about 5,200 by the end of the spending review period. This will reduce the work force to around 18,000 by 2015. It is not possible to say what the likely effects of the reductions in staff number in Liverpool are at this stage. The UK Border Agency is still working through detailed planning but will let staff and the public know as soon as the plans are clear. However, the UK Border Agency is committed to discussing work force planning in detail with the unions and our staff before confirming any changes.
On 4 November, the Home Office implemented a new restructuring, redeployment and redundancy policy, based on ACAS best practise, which provides a framework within which to manage down headcount. Compulsory redundancy continues to be a last resort and the UK Border Agency have committed to using a range of redundancy avoidance measures including voluntary early release, a recruitment freeze on external appointments and redeployment to ensure that this is the case.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much has been spent by his Department on outside catering in each of the last five years. 
Alistair Burt: We cannot separate out catering costs from wider official hospitality expenses without incurring disproportionate cost.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate he has made of his Department's expenditure on printing (a) Command Papers, (b) papers laid before Parliament by Act, (c) consultation documents and (d) other papers in each of the last 10 years. 
Alistair Burt: This information is not held in the form requested and is available only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Spellar: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many staff of his Department have (a) been made redundant and (b) accepted redundancy terms since May 2010; and what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of those redundancies. 
Alistair Burt: Since May 2010 the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has not made any permanent member of staff redundant. We have made payments equivalent to statutory redundancy to two non-permanent members of staff who were appointed on fixed term contracts and were entitled to a redundancy payment following expiry of their fixed terms. The cost to the public purse of these payments was £2,850.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much his Department spent on grey fleet in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10. 
Alistair Burt: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) spent the following on grey fleet (re-imbursing mileage expenses) in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10:
(a) £146,557.31. This is made up of £50,949.98 by FCO UK, and £95,607.33 by FCO Services.
(b) £175,999.24. This is made up of £53,925.01 by FCO UK, and £122,074.23 by FCO Services.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in respect of which states his Department has received allegations of human rights abuses in the last 12 months. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office's overseas missions receive information on human rights, including allegations of abuse, from a wide variety of sources. These include local non-governmental organisations, human rights defenders and local media. Our missions use this information in their assessment of the local human rights situation, and raise allegations of human rights abuses with host Governments on a case-by-case basis. We do not centrally hold information on reports of individual cases of human rights abuses, so to answer your question, an FCO-wide search would be required which would incur a disproportionate cost.
Human rights reporting is key to our work to promote and protect human rights around the world. The FCO will publish a command paper in spring 2011 which will detail our human rights work around the world and our assessment of the human rights situation in a number of countries.
Mr Frank Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his foreign policy objectives are in respect of Iran; and what assessment he has made of the implications for those objectives of the recent UN statement on human rights violations in that country. 
Alistair Burt: The central objective of our policy is to stop Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. To this end, my Department is playing a leading diplomatic role in an internationally-agreed strategy of pressure in the form of sanctions, and engagement, to persuade Iran to resolve the concerns over its nuclear programme.
We would also like to see a significant improvement in the human rights situation in Iran. The UK strongly supported the recent UN General Assembly resolution on human rights in Iran and my ministerial colleagues and I take every opportunity to highlight cases of concern.
Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Japanese government on its whaling activities in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: We regularly raise the issue of whaling at ministerial and official level with our Japanese counterparts. Most recently, I raised my Government's concerns about Japanese whaling with the then Deputy Foreign Minister, Takemasa, during my visit to Japan from 9-10 September. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary also raised the issue during his 15-16 July visit to Japan. The Japanese Government are in no doubt as to the strength of feeling in this country about all of Japan's whaling activity. We consider Japan's lethal whaling for 'scientific research' purposes wholly unnecessary.
We remain opposed to all cetacean hunts, and will continue to work to challenge Japan's position and seek a change in their policy.
Mr Frank Roy: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions his Department has had with the government of Pakistan on the Kashmir territorial dispute. 
Alistair Burt: I refer the hon. Member to my response to the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker) on 6 December 2010, Official Report, column 42W.
Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 29 November 2010, Official Report, column 559W, on Western Sahara: violence, what the restrictions on access for international observers are; and by whom these restrictions are imposed. 
Alistair Burt: Our understanding is that there are currently no restrictions on access to Western Sahara and that members of civil society and embassies in Rabat are able to visit.
Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 29 November 2010, Official Report, column 559W, on Western Sahara: violence, if he will instruct HM Ambassador in Rabat to send observers to Western Sahara. 
Alistair Burt: Officials from our embassy in Rabat regularly visit Western Sahara and will continue to do so. I raised the point about Independent monitoring during my recent visit to the region.
Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 29 November 2010, Official Report, column 558W, on Western Sahara: human rights, if the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State will raise with the government of Morocco its duty to protect the citizens of Western Sahara and allow human rights monitoring as a signatory to the Fourth Geneva Convention when he visits Morocco. 
Alistair Burt: I have recently returned from Morocco where I discussed the issue of Western Sahara with my Moroccan interlocutors. During my visit I repeated our wish to see the establishment of an independent monitoring mechanism in Western Sahara.
Ms Bagshawe: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) whether he plans to bring forward proposals to discourage banks from changing the terms of finance for small and medium-sized enterprises at short notice; 
(2) if he will bring forward proposals to discourage banks from changing at short notice their terms relating to (a) finance, (b) credit and (c) overdrafts in respect of small and medium-sized enterprises. 
Mr Hoban: The Government believe that it is in the interest of banks to serve the needs of businesses, to treat customers fairly and support access to finance. Decisions about the terms and conditions of individual loans are a matter for banks to make on a commercial basis and it would be inappropriate for Government to intervene in these decisions.
Earlier this year, the six major UK banks and the British Bankers Association (BBA) established a BBA Taskforce, in response to the Government's Green Paper on business finance. The BBA Taskforce committed to improving customer relationships through a new Lending Code, ensuring better access to finance and promoting better understanding amongst their customers. In order to ensure better access to finance, the BBA Taskforce also committed to establish and invest in a new £1.5 billion Business Growth Fund, which will provide capital to growing businesses.
Further information about the BBA Taskforce is available at:
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|