Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

The figures quoted are not provided under National Statistics protocols and have been derived from local management information and are therefore provisional and subject to change.

Asked by Baroness Warsi

Lord West of Spithead: The information requested is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Asked by Baroness Warsi

Lord West of Spithead: An individual does not have to have applied to come to the UK in order to be considered for exclusion. Any person whose presence in the UK is not considered conducive to the public good may be excluded. The 22 individuals excluded by my right honourable friend the Home Secretary between 28 October 2008 and 31 March 2009 were all considered to be engaging in activities set out in the List of Unacceptable Behaviours, published by former Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, in August 2005.

The Home Secretary may personally decide that an individual should be excluded from the UK because she considers that their exclusion is justified. This personal power is normally exercised on the grounds of national security, unacceptable behaviours, public order or relations with a third country, but this is a matter of policy not statute. The power is in fact broad and can be used in any circumstances, provided it is exercised reasonably, proportionately and consistently. An individual excluded by the Home Secretary must be refused entry to the UK, in accordance with paragraph 320(6) of the immigration rules.

Asked by Baroness Warsi

Lord West of Spithead: As announced by my right honourable friend the Home Secretary on 5 May, amendments to the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006 which are expected to take effect from 1 June will enable her to make a personal decision to exclude a European Economic Area (EEA) national whom she considers presents a threat to public policy or public security.

We cannot provide a forecast of the numbers of people who might be excluded under the amended regulations. However, where it is in the public interest, the names of EEA nationals who are excluded on public policy or public security grounds as a result of their involvement in unacceptable behaviours will be disclosed on a quarterly basis, together with the names of non-EEA nationals excluded on unacceptable behaviour grounds.

Asked by Baroness Warsi

Lord West of Spithead: Following an amendment to the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006, which is expected to come into effect on 1 June

1 Jun 2009 : Column WA42

2009, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary will consider whether to exclude certain European Economic Area nationals who are considered a threat to public policy or public security. However, it is our policy not to discuss individual cases before a decision has been made.

Asked by Lady Saltoun of Abernethy

Lord West of Spithead:The court has given the UK Border Agency until May 2009 to implement the judgment handed down on 6 April 2009.

A policy will be published on the UK Border Agency website. This will give full details of how we will treat those affected by the judgment.

Asked by Lord Avebury

Lord West of Spithead: The United Kingdom Border Agency (UKBA) has issued detailed guidance to outline the policy and processes that asylum case owners apply when dealing with cases where the age of the person is in doubt. Consideration is being given to updating that guidance in light of recent developments, for example judicial proceedings in respect of age determination procedures. We will also take into account any revised advice on age determination issued by the Royal College.

Immigration: Deportation


Asked by Baroness Neville-Jones

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): Memoranda of understanding on deportation with assurances have been signed with Jordan, Libya and Lebanon (all in 2005) and with Ethiopia (in 2008). Separate arrangements, set out in an exchange of letters in July 2006, apply in respect of Algeria.

The Government are pursuing agreements regarding deportation with assurances with a number of countries. However, as I explained in my previous reply (22 July 2008, WA 243), identification of the parties would prejudice these negotiations. Copies of any further agreements concluded will be placed in the Library in due course.

No one has been deported to Jordan, Libya, Lebanon or Ethiopia on grounds of national security during the period for which information is sought. Over the same period, eight men have been deported to Algeria on national security grounds.

There are 14 cases where a proposed deportation to one of these five countries on national security grounds has been discontinued.

Twelve cases are at various stages in the appeal process, including one where the person concerned has applied to the European Court of Human Rights.

To date, we have not sought to deport anyone to any of these five countries on grounds of unacceptable behaviour.

Asked by Baroness Stern

Lord West of Spithead: In the past 12 months (1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009), the removal directions for 19 people have been cancelled after the individual had been taken under escort to the port of departure because of problems relating to the purchase of airline tickets.

These figures do not constitute part of National Statistics as they are based on internal management information. The information has not been quality assured under National Statistics protocols, should be treated as provisional and is subject to change.



Asked by Lord Ouseley

The Financial Services Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Myners): On the latest data, the Gini coefficient—a measure of income inequality—is at a high level. However, since 1997-98, changes have been small compared with the sharp increases in inequality in the 1980s, when the Gini coefficient rose by almost 10 points.

Analysis by the Institute for Fiscal Studies has shown that tax and benefit reforms since 1997 have clearly been progressive.

Household survey data show that living standards for the poorest 20 per cent of households have risen by over 1.5 per cent a year in real terms since 1997-98, keeping pace with incomes of the richest 20 per cent of households.

This contrasts sharply with the period during the 1980s to the mid 1990s when the living standards of the poorest 20 per cent of households rose by less than 1 per cent a year compared with 2.4 per cent for the richest 20 per cent of households.

Iraq: Camp Ashraf


Asked by Lord Maginnis of Drumglass

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown): We are aware of the Amnesty International report of 20 April 2009 and the interview with the Iraqi National Security Adviser. We are continuing to urge the Government of Iraq to observe fully the human rights of the residents of Camp Ashraf and to find a humanitarian solution.

Iraq: NAPS Tablets


Asked by The Countess of Mar

1 Jun 2009 : Column WA45

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Baroness Taylor of Bolton): Orders were issued on 17 March 2003 authorising the taking of nerve agent pre-treatment sets (NAPS) by UK personnel in those areas where the NBC threat level was assessed medium or high. Subsequent orders dated 14 April 2003 instructed that their use should cease. Between these dates, operational commanders would have instructed troops to start and stop taking NAPS in accordance with the threat level in their particular area.

NAPS are a standard pharmaceutical preparation with no specific clinical disposal requirement. Once no longer required, disposal of unused tablets already issued to personnel would be the responsibility of the individual. Any that were returned to medical facilities would have been sent for incineration, in accordance with normal clinical waste procedures.

The active pharmaceutical ingredient, 30 mg pyridostigamine bromide, is the same in both the NAPS tablets issued to members of the UK Armed Forces in 1990-91 and 2003, and the soman nerve agent pre-treatment pyridostigmine (SNAPP) tablets issued by the US Department of Defense.



Asked by Lord Dykes

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown): We are aware of the New York Times interview with Khalid Mish’al. We welcome Khalid Mish’al’s professed commitment to being “part of the solution”. However, we remain concerned about Hamas’s refusal explicitly to renounce violence, recognise Israel, and indicate its adherence to previous agreements. Hamas must do this in order for the UK to be in a position to engage with it.

1 Jun 2009 : Column WA46

Israel and Palestine: David Foundation


Asked by Lord Hylton

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown): We understand Ir David is a sub-group of the Elad foundation which specialises in encouraging Jewish settlement in east Jerusalem.

Settlement expansion is illegal and clearly presents an obstruction to the peace process. The UK condemns such activity. We continue to urge the Israeli Government to freeze all settlement activity as set out in the road map agreement.

My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary reiterated this in his statement to the UN Security Council on 11 May 2009.

Justice: Sharia Law


Asked by Baroness Falkner of Margravine

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Bach): I refer the noble Baroness to the Answer I gave her on 21 April 2009 (Official Report, col. WA390). In July 2008 Oxford University's Family Law and Policy Unit held a seminar under Chatham House rules, at which leading Muslim academics and practitioners gave their views on Sharia law in family cases and Sharia councils. The Ministry encouraged the university to convene this conference and members of Ministry staff attended it. In October 2008, Dr Syed Aziz Pasha, Secretary General of the Union of Muslim Organisations of the UK and Ireland met my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Jack Straw). The judiciary is independent from the Government and therefore we are not able to comment on any discussions that the judiciary has held independently.

Marine Conservation


Asked by The Duke of Montrose

1 Jun 2009 : Column WA47

The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change & Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): We do not expect the European Union Commission to propose marine conservation zones.

However, there are a number of Community instruments that require the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs).

Under the EC habitats directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora), and the EC wild birds directive (Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds), member states are obliged to designate special areas of conservation (SACs) and special protection areas (SPAs). Currently, we have 81 SACs and 73 SPAs with marine components in the UK.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page