|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what analysis he has made of the elite sports which field teams to represent Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland which receive no funds from UK Sport. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: I have not made any analysis of the elite sports which field teams to represent Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Sport is a devolved matter, and the Devolved Administrations are responsible for analysis of the respective national teams.
Mr. Sutcliffe: My Department does not draw a distinction between urban and rural areas. Detail on lottery grants is held on the Department for Culture, Media and Sport lottery grants database by constituency and local authority. An award may be sent to an address in an urban area for use in a rural area.
Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the proportion of expenditure on sport which was funded by (a) public money, (b) sponsorship and (c) other sources in 2007-08 . 
The amount drawn down by the lottery sport distributors, consisting of Sport England, Sports Council Wales, Sport Scotland, Sports Northern Ireland and UK Sport according to the un-audited national lottery distribution funds annual accounts in 2007-08 was £216.111 million.
The amount drawn down by the Olympic lottery distributor from the Olympic lottery distribution fund in 2007-08 was £198.846 million. Again, this is an un-audited figure. In addition, some grants made by the Big Lottery Fund may have benefited groups related to sport.
Dr. Julian Lewis: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport for what reason Government funding has been withdrawn from the British team for the 2009 Deaflympics in Taiwan; how much has been withdrawn; how many deaf athletes will be affected; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 16 October 2008]: Government funding was never committed to the 2009 Deaflympics. Funding has previously consisted of a single supplementary payment of £75,000 from UK Sport to the British Deaflympic team in 2005. UK Sport have since developed a new strategy focused on delivering success in the Paralympics and Olympicsthrough which deaf athletes are eligible for funding. From April 2005 to 31 March 2008, UK Sport also provided £42,000 a year for a development post in UK Deaf Sport. This funding has now ceased, bringing UK Deaf Sport in line with other national disability sports organisations. The English Federation of Disability Sport, funded by Sport England, provides these organisations with support at the grass-roots level. The Government remain hopeful that a British team will go to Taipei and that consequently deaf athletes will not be affected.
Mr. Prisk: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much was claimed in expenses for taxi travel by officials from (a) his Department and (b) its executive agencies in (i) 2006-07, (ii) 2005-06, (iii) 2004-05, (iv) 2003-04 and (v) 2002-03; and if he will make a statement. 
The expenditure on taxis by the Department in each year since 2002 is set out in the table. These figures represent expenditure on taxis and black cabs. In addition, some expenditure on black cabs and taxis is included in general travel and subsistence account and cannot be separately identified except at disproportionate cost.
The Department's agency, The Royal Parks, does not itemise taxi costs separately on its accounting system and the cost of disaggregating this expenditure manually from the relevant travel claims would be disproportionate to the amounts involved.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how many civil servants in his Department were seconded to work for (a) trades unions and (b) the Trades Union Congress in each year since 2003. 
Mr. Sutcliffe: Since 2003 the Department for Culture, Media and Sport have seconded to work for (a) trade unions, one civil servant from the Department to the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) from January 2006 to June 2007; (b) Trade Unions Congress, no civil servants.
Barbara Follett: The Government are proposing to consult widely on its World Heritage Policy Review shortly. Following the consultation, should the Government decide to revise the UK tentative list of future nominations for World Heritage status, we anticipate the submission of a new list to UNESCO in 2011.
Laura Moffatt: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) when the compulsory biometric fingerprint checks of passengers on domestic flights will be introduced at (a) Heathrow, (b) Gatwick, (c) Manchester and (d) other airports; and which terminals at Heathrow and Gatwick airports will be included; 
(2) whether an impact assessment has been made of the likely effect on passenger flows through (a) Heathrow, (b) Gatwick, (c) Manchester and (d) other UK airports of mandatory biometric fingerprinting, if introduced; 
Mr. Woolas: Where there is a mixing of domestic and international passengers in a common departure lounge, the Government are considering requiring airport operators to verify the identity of travellers before boarding. This could be done through the use of biometrics such as fingerprints where it is considered a proportionate measure to manage border security. No final decisions have yet been taken on the proposal.
As part of their consideration, the Government will have due regard to the potential impact that this might have on passenger flows and are committed to working with airport operators to minimise any impacts where possible.
The Government have had several discussions with the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) on the issue of passenger verification at common departure lounges. The Government will continue to work closely with airport operators and the ICO on the measures required to maintain the security of the UK border and of air travel.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people were fined (a) up to £100, (b) £101 to £250 and (c) more than £250 for refusing to stop drinking or to surrender alcohol in a public place in each year since 2003. 
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 17 October 2008]: The number of people fined, and the level of fines received, for refusing to stop drinking and surrender alcohol in a designated public place can be found in the following table.
|Number of persons given fines for the offence of alcohol consumption in designated public places, by amount, all courts, England and Wales, 2003 to 2006|
|Number of persons|
|Offence description||Up to and including £100||£101 to £250||Over £250||Total|
These figures have been drawn from administrative data systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.
OMS Analytical Services.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many failed asylum seekers remained in the UK following the failure of their asylum application in each of the last five years; for what reasons failed asylum seekers are not removed from the UK; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woolas: Since the phasing out of embarkation controls in 1994, no Government has been able to produce an accurate figure for the number of people who are in the country illegally and that includes failed asylum seekers. By its very nature it is impossible to quantify accurately and that remains the case.
As part of the Government's 10-point plan for delivery, by December 2008 the majority of foreign nationals will be counted in and out of the country. This is part of a sweeping programme of border protection which also includes the global roll-out of fingerprint visas, compulsory watch-list checks for all travellers from high-risk countries before they land in Britain and ID cards for foreign nationals.
The Enforcement business plan 'Enforcing the Deal' published in June 2008, sets out the UKBA's priorities for enforcing the immigration laws in the UK communities and increasing removals. Copies of this document are placed in the Library of the House. It is also available to view at:
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many people have claimed asylum in the UK in each year since 2000; and how many of those people came from Commonwealth countries, other than Zimbabwe, in each year. 
Mr. Woolas: Information on the number of people (principal applicants and dependants) who have claimed asylum is unavailable, by nationality, prior to 2002. The following table shows all nationalities and total Commonwealth principal asylum applications from 2000 to 2007. The Commonwealth total comprises 51 countries: this excludes United Kingdom, Fiji and Zimbabwe (Fiji was suspended from the Councils of the Commonwealth in December 2006 and Zimbabwe withdrew from the Commonwealth in 2003).
|Asylum applications received in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, 2000-07( 1)|
|(1) Figures rounded to the nearest five.|
(2) Excludes Antigua and Barbuda, Canada, Malta, Samoa, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad And Tobago.
(3) Provisional figures.
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what conditions asylum seekers may work when their application has not been determined after 12 months through no fault of theirs. 
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 16 October 2008]: An asylum applicant may apply for permission to take up employment if a decision at first instance has not been taken on the applicants asylum application within one year of the date on which it was recorded. The application to take employment will only be considered if the delay in reaching a decision cannot be attributed to the applicant. If permission to work is granted, this precludes self-employment, business or professional activity.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|