|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
In addition, a standard memorandum of understanding (MOU) between DFID and the recipient organisations contained terms relating to the use of funds, independent auditing and reporting of financial accounts and evaluation requirements.
Mr. Carswell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what criteria were used by his Department for the selection of organisations to participate in the partnership programme arrangements awarded in 2009; and for what reasons these awards were not subject to competition. 
Mr. Michael Foster: The Department for International Development (DFID) entered in to Partnership Programme Arrangements (PPAs) with three groups in 2009: CIVICUS, Trades Union Congress (TUC) and Comic Relief. All three groups were previously being funded through a variety of separate programme funding arrangements involving considerable staff time and resources. All three groups filled an important niche in civil society not covered by other PPA partners. By supporting these groups through PPAs, we were able to provide assistance more efficiently. There was no benefit to DFID in undertaking a long and costly competitive application process.
Mr. Alan Campbell:
Since 2004-05, as with all other crime and disorder reduction partnerships (CDRPs), Birmingham was allocated £25,000 a year as a contribution towards funding an ASB Co-ordinator Post. In 2005-06, in England the antisocial behaviour co-ordinators' grant was pooled within the Safer and Stronger Communities Fund. This pooled budget supported the delivery of outcomes and indicators relating to antisocial behaviour in local area agreements (LAAs). As of 2008-09 Home Office funding for local authorities to tackle antisocial behaviour now form part of the general Area Based
Grant (ABG) paid by the Department of Communities and Local Government. This funding has been renewed for the period 2008-11 and it is for local partnerships to agree how the grants received should be allocated against locally determined priorities, including tackling antisocial behaviour.
In addition, on 13 October 2009 the Home Secretary announced assistance to 62 priority areas where public perceptions of antisocial behaviour are highest. As Birmingham is a priority area it receives support as well as funding to provide additional services to victims and witnesses of ASB. In 2009-10, Birmingham received £17,000 and £20,000 to be allocated in 2010-11.
There is also wider funding which contributes towards the wider cross-Government strategy to tackle antisocial behaviour, including an additional £10 million announced on 20 November 2009 by the Department for Communities and Local Government to 130 local authorities to support the fight against antisocial behaviour. Birmingham received £54,000 and it is for the local authority in conjunction with the police and other partners to decide how that money can best be spent to tackle antisocial behaviour problems in the area. In addition, the Government are committed to diverting young people from crime and antisocial behaviour as demonstrated by our investment in universal services such as Sure Start Children's Centres, parenting support and positive activities as well as targeted work through the Youth Crime Action Plan (YCAP).
Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how domestic burglaries were reported in (a) South Tyneside, (b) the North East and (c) England and Wales in each year since 2006. 
|Domestic burglary offences recorded by the police|
|Number of domestic burglary offences recorded in:|
|South Tyneside||North-east region||England and Wales|
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 18 January 2010, Official Report, column 29W, on departmental advertising, what activities accounted for the main areas of expenditure under the (a) television, (b) radio, (c) print and (d) online advertising category. 
Alan Johnson: The forecast expenditure for advertising activities for 2009-10 relates to spend on TV, radio, print and online advertising on public facing marketing campaign to tackle drug misuse, binge drinking, knife crime, teen partner violence, acquisitive crime and raise awareness of the service to expect from local crime and justice providers.
Mr. Alan Campbell: The Home Office now uses sanction detections as the preferred detection measure. The sanction detection rate for offences detected in the Birmingham area was 27 per cent. in 2006-07, 28 per cent. in 2007-08 and 31 per cent. in 2008-09.
From 1 April 2007 the rules governing recording of non-sanction detections were revised to reduce the scope within which they can be claimed to a very small limited set of circumstances. This has significantly reduced the number of non-sanction detections which has been reflected in the overall detection rates.
John Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department in how many convictions for criminal offences evidence from the National DNA database played a material part in (a) 2005, (b) 2006, (c) 2007, (d) 2008 and (e) 2009. 
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 18 January 2010]: Data are available on the number of detections in which a DNA match was available, but not the number of convictions. The following table shows the number of detections in which a DNA match was available or played a part. Data are collected by financial year, so figures for 2008-09 are the most recent available. The data are for forces in England and Wales only.
The figures held do not include crimes detected as a result of one-off speculative searches of the National DNA Database or from comparing DNA profiles in a forensic laboratory. One off speculative searches and DNA profile comparisons are used mainly in the investigation of serious crimes such as murder and rape, and therefore the figures in the table under-represent the overall contribution of DNA matches to the detection of serious crimes such as murder and rape.
It is important to note that detections are achieved through integrated criminal investigation, not through DNA alone. The source of the figures provided is the forensic performance data, which are collected by the Home Office from police forces.
|Detections of crimes in which a DNA match was available||Additional detections arising from DNA match||Total DNA-related detections( 1)||Total recorded crime|
|(1) 'DNA detections' and 'Additional detections'|
1. A 'DNA detection' means that the crime was cleared up and a DNA match was available.
2. 'Additional detections arising from the DNA match' occur when, for example, a suspect, on being presented with DNA evidence linking him to one offence, confesses to further offences. They arise from a crime with a DNA match, and are therefore detections where a DNA match played a part in solving the crime.
3. Total 'DNA-related detections' means 'DNA detections' + 'Additional detections arising from the DNA match'.
James Brokenshire: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment he has made of the implications of the provisions of the Prüm Treaty for the retention of information on the National DNA Database. 
Mr. Alan Campbell [holding answer 25 January 2010]: Work is currently under way on assessing a wide range of issues associated with implementing the UK's Prüm obligations including, among other things, the treatment and safeguarding of relevant data, including DNA information.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much revenue from fines for motoring offences in (a) Southend-on-Sea, (b) Essex and (c) England and Wales arising from detection by speed cameras was paid into the Consolidated Fund (i) directly and (ii) from surpluses of safety camera partnerships in each of the last 10 years; what recent discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on this matter; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Alan Campbell: Information reported to the Home Office on fixed penalty notices for motoring offences as well as data on court fines held by the Ministry of Justice do not include information on revenues as not all fines imposed will have been paid.
Data provided by the Department for Transport showing the fine receipts and surplus for the National Safety Camera Programme from 2000-01 to 2006-07 (when the programme ended) are provided by the table.
The National Safety Camera Programme was rolled out to 38 safety camera partnerships in England and Wales between 2001 and 2004 and had a distinct function-to strengthen detection, enforcement and deterrence of speeding and red light offences at places on the road network with particular problems.
All the fine receipts in the table are paid into the consolidated fund. Data have been provided for Essex and England and Wales only as the data reported to the Department for Transport are provided at police force area level only.
|Speed and red-light camera fine receipts and surplus for each year of the National Safety Camera Programme: Data for red-light cameras cannot be disaggregated from those of speed cameras: No data held below Essex geographical level|
The above will not include fine receipts from penalties detected by cameras operated outside the national programme
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many and what percentage of people of each (a) age, (b) ethnicity and (c) gender stopped for drink driving (i) tested positive and (ii) refused to provide a breath test in (A) each police authority area and (B) England and Wales in each of the last five years. 
The Breath Tests statistics on how many and what percentage of people of each (a) age, (b) ethnicity and (c) gender stopped for drink driving are not reported to the Home Office and therefore we are unable to provide this data.
Additionally, data are provided on the number of breath tests 'positive or refused' as it is not possible to separate positive breath tests and refused breath tests from the information reported to the Home Office.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|