|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his contribution on Second Reading of the Crime and Security Bill, 18 January 2010, Official Report, column 35, if he will provide detailed information on each of the 36 cases of DNA data being held on the National DNA database for those previously arrested but not convicted of an offence in which DNA evidence was vital in securing a conviction in cases of (a) rape, (b) murder and (c) manslaughter. 
[holding answer 24 February 2010]: The information given on Second Reading of the Crime and Security Bill was the outcome of an analysis by the Association of Chief Police Officers' Criminal Records Office (ACRO) and the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) of information held on the police national computer, following consultation with the Senior Investigating Officers in each of the 36 cases referred to. In 2008-09 there were at least 79 DNA matches for rape, murder and manslaughter where the original sample was taken for an offence that did not result in a conviction. 36 of these matches were found to have a direct and
specific value to the investigation. It is not our policy to release details of individual cases without the explicit consent of the victims or their families. In any case, some of the cases remain before the courts.
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether any assessment has been made of the frequency of (a) arson in and (b) theft of household wheeled refuse containers. 
Mr. Hanson: Figures from the 2008-09 British Crime Survey show that in 4 per cent. of incidents of other household theft a wheelie bin/dustbin was reported as the item stolen. Information is not available for arson offences.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will grant a temporary domestic worker visa to Ms Abieyuwa Omorogbe, with reference to the letter on the subject sent by the hon. Member for Totnes to the Minister for Borders and Immigration on 24 March 2010. 
Mr. Woolas: We have no record of a current visa application from Ms Abieyuwa Omorogbe. Any application received will be considered in accordance with the Immigration Rules, and in the light of any representations from the hon. Member for Totnes.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the oral answer by the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Totnes, of 17 March 2010, Official Report, columns 875-6, when he expects the Minister for Borders and Immigration to contact the hon. Member for Totnes regarding the Minister's decision on diplomatic domestic worker visas. 
Graham Stringer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what response he has made to the proposal of the President of Eurojust that a European Prosecutor's Office be established; and if he will make a statement. 
While the Lisbon Treaty created a legal base for an EPP any proposal would have to be agreed by unanimity of all member states. The UK would also have the choice whether or not to participate by virtue of our Justice and Home Affairs Opt-In Protocol. So, under no circumstances could we be obliged to take part in the creation of an EPP if a proposal was made.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the list of extremist websites, bookshops, networks, centres and organisations announced by the then Prime Minister on 5 August 2005 was first established; on what dates the list has been updated; whether the deportation of a foreign national has been (a) considered and (b) executed on the grounds of active engagement with one of the organisations on the list; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the most recent edition of the list. 
Alan Johnson: The Prime Minster's announcement on 5 August 2005 set out a 12-point plan designed to counter the threat of terrorism. As my right hon. Friend the former Home Secretary said on 1 September 2008, Official Report, column 1594W, significant progress had been made on the 12 point plan and that all counter-terrorist work was now subsumed into the Government's long-term counter-terrorist strategy (the Contest strategy).
The Home Secretary may make a deportation order where he is satisfied that deportation is conducive to the public good. The basis for such a decision could include, for example, the individual being engaged in the promotion or dissemination of extremist material (including via websites, bookshops, networks, centres and organisations). The police and other law enforcement and intelligence partners work closely to identify sources of extremism. Where an individual is found to have been engaged in the encouragement of terrorism or dissemination of terrorist publications, the police and CPS would seek to prosecute them. In the case of a foreign national engaged in extremist activities, we seek to deport them. In the case of organisations, the Terrorism Act 2000 allows an organisation to be proscribed if the Home Secretary believes it is concerned in terrorism. The Terrorism Act 2006 extended the meaning of "concerned in terrorism" to include the unlawful glorification of acts of terrorism.
I am not prepared to comment on individual cases of deportation. I can, however, confirm that individuals who are suspected to have engaged in extremist activity have been deported on grounds that their presence in the UK not being considered conducive to the public good. I refer the hon. Member to the answers given to him on 30 November 2009, Official Report, column 474W, which provide the number of foreign nationals deported from the UK on the grounds of unacceptable behaviour (relating to foreign nationals who foment hatred or violence in support of their extremist beliefs).
The police and other counter-terrorism partners seek to identify extremist websites, bookshops, networks, centres and organisations. A list of proscribed organisations is available on the Home Office website at:
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of the victims of human trafficking who were returned to their country of origin in each of the last five years were (a) EU nationals, (b) European non-EU nationals and (c) from a country other than Europe; and what the cost to the public purse was in each of those years. 
Mr. Hanson [holding answer 29 March 2010]: Tracking victims of human trafficking beyond the National Referral Mechanism reflection and recovery period is limited if there is no longer a risk to their safety or health and they have the right to remain in the UK (UK and EEA victims in particular). This makes it difficult to confirm the numbers of voluntary returns in this category and what associated costs there have been. There is currently no record of any enforced return of individuals conclusively found to be victims of trafficking returned to their own country.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions of people for human trafficking offences there were between (a) April 2009 and April 2010 and (b) April 2008 and April 2009. 
In many cases where there is insufficient evidence to support a prosecution for human trafficking, there are successful prosecutions resulting in convictions for associated serious charges such as rape, kidnapping, false imprisonment, managing a brothel or assisting unlawful immigration.
Jenny Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent discussions he has had with the Identity and Passport Service on upgrading the capability of identity cards; what estimate has been made of the cost to the public purse of that upgrade; and if he will make a statement. 
Meg Hillier: I have regular discussions with the Identity and Passport service about developments in the National Identity Service (NIS). In relation to upgrading the capability of identity cards, our ideas are at the technical development stage and are being explored as part of the work to develop identity services. No final decisions with regard to these services have been taken and no final costs have therefore been identified.
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what five types of activity, excluding front-line policing, accounted for most police officer time in each year since 1997. 
Alan Johnson: Front-line policing was defined in Home Office Guidance on Statutory Performance Indicators for Policing 2007-08, to include the following activities which have been measured using policy activity analysis (AA): dealing with crime incidents; dealing with non-crime incidents; visible patrol; special operations/events; investigate complaints; deal with informants; and community involvement.
In each of the years between 2003-04 and 2007-08, the first three of these categories were consistently the activities on which the police spent most time. After the activities which comprise front-line policing, the same five activities took up the greatest proportions of police time over the same 2003-04 and 2007-08 period. They were, in descending order of time taken:
Other non-incident-related work
2003-04: 26.9 per cent;
2004-05: 7.6 per cent;
2005-06: 26.9 per cent;
2006-07: 24.3 per cent;
2007-08: 25.6 per cent.
To reduce paperwork burdens on police officers, the collection of data about time spent by officers on police activities ceased after 2007-08 in response to the recommendations by Sir David Normington in his review of data burdens placed by the Government on the police service published in February 2009.
|Table A: proportion of time spent or policing activities, by activity and year|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|