| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Immigration: IND Practices
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many staff at the Immigration and Nationality Directorate have been disciplined in the past 12 months for improper practices in the handling of asylum and immigration applications.[HL6885]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): We do not categorise discipline offences in this way, but interpretation of our records shows that, of the 18,064 employed, 16 employees have been disciplined for misconduct related to the improper handling of cases or immigration offences or the provision of unauthorised advice to help individuals to make their applications over the 12 months ending 13 July 2006.
Immigration: Independent Monitor
Baroness Sharp of Guildford asked Her Majesty's Government:
When each of the reports by the Independent Monitor under the Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 was received by the Home Office; and when each report was subsequently published.[HL7350]
Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Independent Monitor of certification of claims as unfounded under Section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 has published two annual reports, covering 2004 and 2005 respectively. The final version of the 2004 annual report was received by the Home Office on 1 June 2005 and published on 21 July. The final version of the 2005 report was received on 6 April 2006 and published on 27 April. In each case the submission by the monitor of the final version of the report was preceded by a period of consultation on draft versions.
Immigration: Independent Monitor
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
What response they have made to the report of the Independent Monitor on Entry Clearance of November 2005, published in July 2006; whether they will retain appeal rights for persons refused under the new points system until the success rate on appeals falls below 10 per cent; whether changes have been made in the criteria towards greater objectivity; and, if so, what these changes are; whether they have issued guidance to entry clearance officers in accordance with paragraph 73 of the report; whether UKvisas has focused resources on posts where substantial queues develop; and whether documentation verification reports now include details on why a document is said to be a forgery.[HL7267]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary wrote on 19 July to formally thank the monitor for her report which contains many constructive recommendations as to how UKvisas can improve its decision quality. UKvisas has already issued guidance to visa sections to implement the agreed recommendations. This was done in July 2006.
Section 4 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 2006 removes the right of appeal from entry clearance applications under the points-based system. Implementation of the Act will be phased in line with the introduction of the points-based-system tiers. An administrative review will give applicants the opportunity to challenge the reasons given for refusal where they believe an error of fact has been made.
Instructions were issued to entry clearance officers on objectively assessing student and visitor applications in March, August and November 2005. These detailed how applications should be considered objectively and that subjective assessments regarding accents were not appropriate. Further guidance regarding visit applications were issued following legal advice in July 2006. All the recommendations in the independent monitor's report at paragraph 73 were covered in these instructions.
Further instructions were issued in October 2005 advising visa sections, where there was more than one full-time entry clearance manager, to review the refusal notice before it was served. Training assessment has been overhauled to provide more transparent and focused feedback to delegates to address concerns with regard to overall and specific areas of performance including quality of decisions. In addition, a new programme of overseas refresher training has been launched for existing entry clearance staff—that includes the importance of objective assessments of applications.
Entry clearance managers at visa sections overseas closely monitor workloads and seasonal variations in demand. UKvisas provides additional staffing on a seasonal basis in order to cope with additional demand. UKvisas also maintains a team of “floaters” who can be deployed overseas at fairly short notice in order to deal with unexpected spikes in demand. Where necessary UKvisas has also increased permanent staff resources.
Documentation verification reports do now include details on why a document is stated to be not genuine.
Inflation
Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay asked Her Majesty's Government:
What would have been the increase in the retail price index and the consumer price index over the past one, three and five years, using equal weights for the expenditure of each household (democratic weights) instead of weights proportional to the expenditure of each household (plutocratic weights).[HL7274]
Lord McKenzie of Luton: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
Letter from the Director of Macroeconomics and Labour Market, Colin Mowl, dated 14 September 2006.
The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question (HL7274) which asked what would have been the increase in the retail prices index and consumer prices index over the past one, three and five years using equal weights for the expenditure of each household (democratic weights) instead of weights proportional to the expenditure of each household (plutocratic weights). I am replying in her absence.
Information in the form requested is not readily available. Calculation of democratic weights for the retail prices index (RPI) would involve a considerable degree of manipulation of data from the Office for National Statistics' (ONS) expenditure and food survey, from which the RPI weights are derived. Specifically, the process would involve returning to the original survey data at household level (that is, each individual response). For each household, actual spending on every commodity would need to be converted into a proportion of the total expenditure incurred by that particular household. These proportions would need to be averaged across all households before using the resultant averages to produce RPI expenditure weights on a democratic basis. Special calculations would also be required to derive the weights for certain housing components whose weights are modelled (that is, mortgage interest payments and depreciation costs). This means that the question can be answered only at disproportionate cost.
However, previously unpublished research by ONS, which is summarised in the table below, gives some indication of the difference between the use of democratic and plutocratic weights in the RPI:
| RPI percentage change over 12 months | |||
| Feb 1999 | Feb 2000 | Feb 2001 | |
Consumer prices index (CPI) weights are derived from whole economy estimates of household expenditure taken from the national accounts. The source data come from a variety of sources, including non-household surveys, and are therefore not amenable to the construction of democratic weights.
Lord Steinberg asked Her Majesty's Government:
What was the overall rate of inflation in 2005; and what is their estimate of the overall rate of inflation in 2006.[HL7357]
Lord McKenzie of Luton: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
Letter from the Director of Macroeconomics and Labour Market, Colin Mowl, dated 14 September 2006.
The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question, concerning what was the overall rate of inflation in 2005; and what is the estimate of the overall rate of inflation in 2006. I am replying in her absence. (HL7357).
There are two main measures of inflation produced by the Office for National Statistics, the consumer prices index (CPI) which forms the basis for the Government's inflation target and the retail prices index (RPI) whose many uses includes indexation of state benefits and pensions. The percentage change over 12 months in the annual average index in 2005 for the CPI is 2.1 per cent. The corresponding figure for the RPI is 2.8 per cent.
The latest estimate of inflation in 2006 is for July when the rate of CPI inflation was 2.4 per cent and the rate of RPI inflation was 3.3 per cent.
International Criminal Tribunal
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Triesman on 6 July (WA 63), what representations they have made to the leaders of the Republika Srpska regarding (a) the obstruction of the implementation of the agreement of police reconstructing; and (b) the lack of process towards full co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.[HL7073]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): Both these issues were discussed during the meeting between the President of the Republika Srpska and my right honourable friend the Minister for Europe on 7 June, and form part of an ongoing dialogue with the leaders of the Republika Srpska through our embassy in Sarajevo and our embassy office in Banja Luka. We have consistently emphasised the importance of implementation of the agreement on police restructuring and full co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia for further progress towards the EU and NATO, and will continue to do so.
Internet
Lord Clement-Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): The Government's current view is that forcing all network providers to allow data traffic to flow freely without discrimination may not necessarily be the correct one. In a competitive market there is an argument for price and access discrimination which can benefit consumers as long as they are aware of what they are paying for and there are procedures in place allowing them to change service provider if they wish to quickly, easily and cheaply.
Lord Clement-Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:
What discussions they have had with telecommunications companies, internet service providers and other interested parties regarding the neutrality of the internet.[HL7316]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government have discussed the issue of net neutrality with telecommunications companies, internet service providers and other interested parties via open stakeholder meetings in preparing the UK response to the EU Commission communication on the review of the European regulatory framework for electronic communication and services.
Details about the preparation of the UK input to the review (including notes of meetings) can be found on the DTI website: http://www.dti.gov.uk/sectors/telecoms/2006review/page26449.html
Lord Clement-Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:
What discussions they have had with (a) the Government of the United States, and (b) the European Commission regarding the neutrality of the internet.[HL7317]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: UK officials have ongoing informal discussions including on network neutrality with US and European Commission officials as well as with counterparts across the EU.
Lord Clement-Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have consulted or intend to consult relevant regulatory bodies on the neutrality of the internet.[HL7318]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government have discussed the issue of net neutrality with Ofcom in ongoing discussions about the UK response to the EU Commission communication on the review of the European regulatory framework for electronic communication and services.
Details about the preparation of the UK input to the review can be found on the DTI website: http://www.dti.gov.uk/sectors/telecoms/2006review/page26449.html
Iran: People's Mujahedin
Baroness Gould of Potternewton asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their response to the declaration concerning the recognition of the legal and political status of the People's Mujahedin of Iran agreed at the congress of Iraqi people held in Ashraf City on 17 June.[HL7058]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): Any statements or declarations made by Iraqi nationals in Iraq about the legal and political status of the “People's Mojahedin Organisation of Iran”, also known as the Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) inside Iraq, are a matter for the Government of Iraq. The MEK is proscribed in the United Kingdom under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Iraq
Baroness Northover asked Her Majesty's Government:
What are the numbers of (a) United Nations; (b) European Union; (c) Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe; and (d) NATO international staff in Iraq; whether United Kingdom officials have been involved in national reconciliation talks; what progress has been made in those talks; and what progress has been made on the constitutional review.[HL7399]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): As of 31 August 2006 there were: 104 United Nations international staff; five European Union international staff; and no NATO international military or civilian staff or international staff from the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in Iraq. The NATO training mission to Iraq consists of approximately 200 personnel contributed by several NATO nations and one non-NATO nation.
Government officials have had no direct involvement in the national reconciliation talks. The Government of Iraq have established a National Reconciliation Committee and thematic sub-committees, and a dialogue process with stakeholders has begun. For example, Prime Minister Maliki addressed a meeting of over 600 tribal leaders in August 2006, at which a 21-point plan supporting the reconciliation process was agreed.
A commitment to have the Council of Representatives review the constitution was key to reaching agreement on the text of the constitution in October 2005. It is now for the council to form a constitution review committee to take the review forward.
Iraq: Constitution
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will seek an extension of the three month time limit for finalising all details of the constitution of Iraq; and whether they will support a unified code on the personal status of women.[HL7147]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): The contents of the Iraqi constitution and the timescale for its review are matters for the Iraqi legislature and people. We continue to press the Government of Iraq to ensure that they comply with their international obligations and are working closely with them to promote the position and well-being of women in Iraq.
Israel and Lebanon: Arms
Baroness Northover asked Her Majesty's Government:
What United Kingdom weaponry, equipment or components were used in the recent conflict in Israel and Lebanon.[HL7398]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): The Government are aware of media reports that British-made night vision goggles were found in Lebanon and have been in close touch with the Israeli Defence Force who have confirmed that this was not the case. There were, however, two pieces of British equipment found. One was a commercially available remote video camera for which no export licence was required. The other was a thermal imaging system that was exported under licence in 1999 for use in a domestic residence. Proper procedures were followed at the time, including making a careful risk assessment. This concluded there was no reason to suspect that the equipment would be used for anything other than its described purpose.
In other respects, we cannot give categorical details of items of UK origin used in the recent conflict. However, all applications for export licences to transfer arms and related weaponry to that region, as with all other regions, are assessed rigorously on a case by case basis against the consolidated criteria, taking full account of the prevailing circumstances at the time of application and other relevant announced government policies. Any application which fails to meet these criteria will be refused.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |