| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
20 July 2006 : Column WA193
Written Answers
Thursday 20 July 2006
Asylum Seekers
Lord Tebbit asked Her Majesty's Government:
What mechanisms they have put in place to ensure that asylum seekers persuaded to leave the United Kingdom by payments of £3,000 do not subsequently return under other identities to claim a further payment.[HL6396]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): In assessing the eligibility of any applicant for the Voluntary Assisted Return and Reintegration Programme (VARRP) all details are checked on Home Office systems and any duplicate claim made is identified and will be refused. To maintain the integrity of the asylum system, any individual who is found not to be in need of international protection and who does not qualify for leave on another basis is required to leave the United Kingdom. If they have been refused assistance under VARRP and subsequently fail to depart voluntarily, they will face enforced removal.
We are developing procedures to deal with those who might be intending to abuse the system by seeking to return to the United Kingdom under a different identity and then trying to claim asylum again and they include the current capture of visa applicants’ fingerprints that covers 11 countries at present.
The results have shown that the capture of biometrics is helping to counter the return of failed asylum seekers to the UK. The Biometrics Programme in UKvisas, set up in 2005, is however extending the capture of biometrics to all remaining visa-issuing posts from late this summer, with completion aimed around the end of 2007.
As part of the initial asylum process, all asylum applicants are fingerprinted with the exception of those under the age of five.
These prints are stored in the Immigration and Asylum Fingerprint Service (IAFS) database. If a failed asylum seeker applies for a new visa, their fingerprints will be taken, (if they are applying in an overseas post where biometrics are currently captured), and checked by the Immigration Fingerprinting Bureau (IFB) against the IAFS database for possible matches in any identity. If an applicant is shown to have previously claimed asylum in a different identity, the two cases are linked on the Home Office system with alias details being listed on both records.
All asylum claims are determined on their individual merits, including any claims made by those who have previously availed themselves of VARRP.
20 July 2006 : Column WA194
Avian Flu
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they did not support a claim for compensation from United Kingdom poultry producers in relation to avian influenza while supporting claims from poultry producers from 14 other European Union member states; and, if so, why they did not support it.[HL6810]
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): Recent amendments to EU Council Regulations 2777/75 and 2771/75 provide legal powers to make special support measures available to member states in the event of a significant decline in consumer confidence in poultry products as a direct result of avian influenza, causing the market to collapse.
It is a long-established government policy that accommodating market fluctuations is something for the industry to manage. It is principally for this reason that we do not propose to exercise the EC provision to provide these exceptional market support measures.
Birds
Baroness Thomas of Winchester asked Her Majesty's Government:
What action they propose to take to help prevent the trapping and trading of song birds across the European Union.[HL6846]
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): Council Directive 79/409/EEC (the “Birds Directive”) lays down rules for the protection, management and control of all wild birds naturally occurring in the European Union. Member states are already required to have legislation in place that meets the directive's requirements, and ensure it is put into practice effectively.
The “Birds Directive” is available at eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX: 31979L0409: EN: HTML.
The European Commission is responsible for making sure member states comply properly with the legal requirements of the directive.
Child Support Agency
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
To what extent the current Child Support Agency's information technology is working satisfactorily. [HL6875]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): The new child support scheme was introduced on 3 March 2003 and it has been well publicised that there have been a number of technical
20 July 2006 : Column WA195
We are making good progress to remedy the remaining problems with the new computer system and future IT releases are planned. In addition, there are a number of additional enhancements to the computer system that form part of the programme to implement the three-year operational improvement plan.
Civil Service: Northern Ireland
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many of the posts identified in the Northern Ireland Civil Service workforce reduction plan for the period April 2004 to March 2008 were (a) filled by temporary, seconded or casual staff when identified, or were time or policy bound posts; and (b) how many of the total posts were due to disappear in the years ending March 2005 and March 2006; and how many of these posts were abolished in each of those two years respectively.[HL6744]
Lord Rooker: At 1 April 2004, 639 of the posts identified in the Northern Ireland Civil Service workforce reduction plan (ie funded posts within the 11 Northern Ireland departments and their agencies) were filled by casual staff.
Information is not available as to the number of funded posts filled at that date by temporary or seconded staff, or the number of funded posts which were time or policy bound.
The number of planned reductions in funded posts in the 11 Northern Ireland departments and their agencies was 311 in the year ending March 2005, and 763.5 in the year ending March 2006. On the same basis, the actual reductions achieved in each of these two years were 311 and 1,198.5 respectively.
Coalfields: Regeneration
Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract asked Her Majesty's Government:
What progress has been made by the Skillsbuilder programme of the Coalfield Regeneration Trust to secure new jobs for the miners formally employed at the Prince of Wales colliery, Pontefract; and what funding is proposed to facilitate the regeneration of that former coalfield site.[HL6983]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): Skillsbuilder was a programme developed around the Prince of Wales colliery closure. Training supported by a wage subsidy was provided to enable miners to transfer their skills to the constructionand engineering sectors, gaining industry standard qualifications and employment. Up to March 2006, 538 former miners had moved directly into new jobs.
20 July 2006 : Column WA196
The regeneration of this site is being developed by UK Coal (site owners) and Wakefield Metropolitan District Council as part of their “Five Towns” regeneration programme. A master plan for the development of the site, which includes housing, industrial job creation, sports and leisure facilities and public amenities, is at an advanced stage of preparation and discussion, with all parties concerned pulling together in a venture to create a gateway to this strategically located area of West Yorkshire.
Crime: Homicide Figures
Lord Marlesford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will explain the difference between Home Office figures for homicide by shooting for the year ending 2005 as provided in the Written Answer by the Under-Secretary of State for Police and Security (HC Deb, col. 660W) and that provided by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on4 July (Official Report, col. 209) [HL6831]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): The information provided by the Under-Secretary of State for Police and Security (Hansard 29 June 2006, col. 660W) was based on homicide index published figures and showed the apparent method of killing by year of recording, for calendar years 1990 to 1997 and financial years 1997-98 to 2004-05. Figures for shooting include cases where crossbows are used and excludes cases where firearms are used as a blunt instrument.
My reference to a 30 per cent reduction in the number of deaths resulting from the use of firearms, made during the Police and Justice Bill Committee debate on 4 July, related to provisional statistics for the year ending December 2005, published in the latest Home Office Crime in England and Wales quarterly update (Home Office Statistical Bulletin 06/06). On page seven of that document, it indicates that there were 73 offences involving firearms fired or used as a blunt instrument resulting in death between January and December 2004 compared to 51 between January and December 2005.This equates to a 30 per cent reduction.
Defence Research: QinetiQ
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether full open market valuations were applied to properties owned by the Defence Evaluation Research Agency when they were transferred to QinetiQ in 2001; and, if so, which valuer conducted the evaluations.[HL7008]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): In accordance with Financial Reporting Standards, the properties were transferred to QinetiQ at fair acquisition value. This was derived from a valuation carried out by GVA Grimley LLP, with a valuation date of 30 June 2001.
20 July 2006 : Column WA197
Separate clawback arrangements exist to ensure that the taxpayer shares in any excess gains from property disposals. The values used for calculating clawback are based on the unadjusted Grimley valuations and consequently may differ from the valuations used for the transfer of property from DERA to QinetiQ.
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay asked Her Majesty's Government:
What was the rent payable on the South Arm explosion testing facility at Rosyth when it was transferred from the Defence Evaluation Research Agency to QinetiQ in 2001.[HL7009]
Lord Drayson: The Ministry of Defence property at South Arm Rosyth is still owned by the Ministry of Defence and was not transferred to QinetiQ inJune 2001, hence no rent was payable. QinetiQ operates the site to fulfil certain contracts that it has with the MoD.
Energy: Biomass
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the October 2005 report by the Biomass Task Force, whether the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will review the benefits accruing from the installation of a wood-chip boiler at its Worcester office.[HL6932]
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): Yes, we will be reviewing the benefits accruing from the installation of a wood-chip boiler at the Worcester office, as part of our action plan to reduce carbon emissions in line with targets for sustainable operations on the government estate, announced on 12 June.
20 July 2006 : Column WA198
We are required to reduce carbon emissions by12.5 per cent by 2010-11 and 30 per cent by 2020 (against the baseline year 1999-2000). There is also a target for the central government office estate to be carbon neutral by 2012.
As they use low-carbon technology, wood-chip boilers can make a significant contribution to achieving these targets. We are reviewing the efficiency of the Worcester boiler, in particular the flexibility to burn chips of varying moisture content and size, and plan to take forward the lessons learnt from that installation in considering similar projects at other sites on the Defra estate.
Energy: Light Bulbs
Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their assessment of the likelihood of the retail sector promoting increases in the purchase by consumers of 11 watt compact fluorescent lamp light bulbs, which are needed for new energy savings, without government intervention.[HL6815]
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): The Government are already working to raise product standards and encourage consumers to use the most efficient products available. This includes light bulbs.
My department and HM Treasury are working with major retailers and the Energy Saving Trust to introduce voluntary schemes to raise the energy efficiency of the goods they sell. Initially it is expected that these schemes will focus on consumer electronics, but they may be expanded to other products.
Defra's Market Transformation Programme (MTP) supports measures such as the mandatory EU energy labelling scheme (the “A to G label”) which, for domestic light bulbs, has been mandatory since 1 January 2001. Energy labels provide clear and easily recognisable information about the energy consumption and performance of domestic products on a seven-point scale ranging from “A” (most efficient) to “G” (least efficient), thus enabling consumers to make a considered choice when purchasing energy-consuming products.
MTP also works with the Lighting Association, the Lighting Industry Federation, the Energy Saving Trust and the Energy Efficiency Partnership to promote energy-efficient lighting that is both commercially viable and acceptable to consumers.
The Energy Saving Trust endorses and vigorously promotes the best lighting products under its energy efficiency recommended scheme, and building regulations require new housing to have a minimum number of energy-efficient fittings.
Under the energy efficiency commitment, electricity and gas suppliers are required to meet targets for the promotion of improvements in domestic energy efficiency. They do this by encouraging and assisting household consumers to take up energy-efficient measures, including compact fluorescent lamps.
20 July 2006 : Column WA199
Environmental Protection
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
Why it has taken from December 2004 to May 2006 to respond to the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution's 25th report; and why they have not responded to recommendations 66 to 70, 72 and 73.[HL6978]
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): Under the terms of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution's (RCEP) framework agreement with the department, a government response to their reports should be published within one year of publication. We agreed with the Royal Commission a longer timetable for the response in this case. The Royal Commission recognised that the delay enabled the response to reflect developments on the Marine Bill.
The key recommendation in the RCEP report was the need for a new framework for marine management. This could only be addressed in the Government response by including developments on the Marine Bill, after the public consultation on the Bill was launched on 29 March.
The Scottish Executive responded separately to the Royal Commission's report. We agreed that they should respond to recommendations 66 to 70, 72 and 73 on aquaculture as these recommendations were directed specifically to them.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |