Author: admin

  • Mark Pritchard – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mark Pritchard – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Pritchard on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will hold discussions with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime on a global response to the sale of stolen antiquities to fund terrorism.

    Norman Baker

    The UK takes the funding of terrorist organisations through any means very seriously. This Government endorsed guidelines on countering trafficking in cultural property and related offences at the UN Office on Drugs and CrimeCommission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice at its twenty-third session in May 2014.

  • Luciana Berger – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Luciana Berger – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much her Department spent on its tackling tobacco smuggling strategy in (a) 2011-12 and (b) 2012-13.

    James Brokenshire

    The Tackling Tobacco Strategy in its current form came into force in April 2011. Customs operations target a range of commodities, including those covered by this strategy, and our officers and equipment are deployed to cover a range of activities. We do not therefore hold information relating specifically to tobacco.

  • Graham Evans – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Graham Evans – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Graham Evans on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what consultation she undertook with (a) non-governmental organisations, (b) civil society, (c) church organisations, (d) front-line professionals, (e) social workers and (f) local authority and Health Service staff on the creation of a modern slavery helpline prior to her announcement that such a helpline was being set up.

    Karen Bradley

    We are working closely with the NSPCC to pilot a Modern Slavery Helpline as part of a wider communications and marketing campaign, to raise awareness of modern slavery. The helpline will be established by the end of July 2014. We are working with a number of non-governmental organisations and law enforcement agencies to ensure that all callers to the helpline can access any additional help, advice and support they need.

    Training will be provided to all call handlers working on the helpline, which will be delivered by the NSPCC Child Trafficking Advice Centre and the
    Metropolitan Police Service, building on their specific expertise and knowledge in this area. The training will include the nature of modern slavery, the information to be obtained from individuals who call the helpline as well as organisations that can provide further support and guidance. There are no specific costs to the Home Office associated with providing this training.

    Each call to the helpline will be considered on a case-by-case basis and, where an individual requires further information or advice, the helpline call handlers will provide the details of other organisations for the caller to contact, as appropriate. This is regardless of whether the caller is from an EU or non-EU country.

    Stakeholders, including NGOs, have been engaged in the communications and marketing campaign which underpins the helpline.
    The NSPCC is ideally placed to deliver what we need given their existing infrastructure and expertise in safeguarding issues. The NSPCC runs a number of helplines, including Childline, FGM helpline and the Child Trafficking Advice Centre (CTAC) line. We have engaged NSPCC by means of a formal Grant Agreement, not a Contract, which will be managed using standard Home Office grant terms and conditions in accordance with the principles of Managing Public Money.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many visa applications are presently deferred or on hold awaiting the outcome of the legal action in respect of the financial requirement that is presently before the courts.

    James Brokenshire

    According to Home Office management information, as at 31 March 2014, 3,134 family visa applications were on hold following the July 2013 High Court judgment in MM & Others.Following the Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the Home Secretary which confirmed the lawfulness of the income threshold policy, as a rational and reasonable means of achieving the legitimate aims of reducing taxpayer burdens and promoting integration, from 28 July, the individuals whose applications were on hold, pending this judgment, will now receive a decision. Decisions will take account of all the information presented. Any application which met all the requirements apart from the minimum income threshold now stands to be refused. The applications which have been subject to the hold will be decided as soon as possible. It is likely to take several weeks to complete this work. Overseas our regions are rebalancing resources to ensure decisions are made as quickly as they reasonably can be, allowing full consideration of the facts of the cases. This is with the aim of resolving all applications within three months in line with service standards for settlement applications.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken was for a spouse visa appeal to be heard from the time of being refused to a decision by the tribunal in each of the last five years.

    James Brokenshire

    The information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what process the civilian police must follow when attempting to arrest, summons or charge a serving member of the armed forces in connection with indictable offences.

    Mike Penning

    If a member of the UK Armed Forces is arrested and detained in police custody for a recordable offence, the custody sergeant is responsible for notifying the circumstances of arrest, detention and offence to the relevant service authorities.

    Civilian criminal courts and service tribunals have concurrent jurisdiction to deal with accused persons who are subject to military law. The decision on which jurisdiction prosecutes a person subject to military law is a matter of consultation between all police agencies involved in the investigation in consultation with the Crown Prosecution Service and Service Prosecutions Authority.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much has been spent by her Department on legal representation and court costs in respect of action over the financial requirement.

    James Brokenshire

    In the case of MM & Others concerning the minimum income threshold under the family Immigration Rules, the costs incurred by the Home Office as at 3 July 2014 were approximately £163,000.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she plans to introduce service standards and set processing time limits for visa applications made at overseas posts.

    James Brokenshire

    Service Standards are in place for the processing of visa applications submitted overseas.

  • Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Mike Wood – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mike Wood on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken was from a visa appeal being granted at tribunal to the post issuing the visa in (a) Mumbai and (b) Islamabad in the most recent period for which figures are available.

    James Brokenshire

    From 1st January to 31st March 2014, it took on average 34 days in Mumbai and 31 days in Islamabad to issue a visa after the tribunal decision was received in the respective post.

  • Diana Johnson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Diana Johnson – 2014 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Diana Johnson on 2014-07-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have been placed under a discretionary bar from working with (a) children and (b) adults in each of the last five years; and for what (i) reasons and (ii) harm type each person was so placed.

    Norman Baker

    The following table sets out the number of people that have been placed under a discretionary bar from working with (a) children and (b) adults in each of the last five years. Information relating to the reasons and the harm type under which each person was so placed cannot be provided without incurring disproportionate cost.

    Calendar Year Discretionary Barred Children’s Discretionary Barred Adults
    2009 26 2121
    2010 152 1022
    2011 163 503
    2012 157 391
    2013 165 441

    The Independent Safeguarding Authority did not have the power to automatically place individuals on the adults barred list where their convictions predated 20 January 2009, when automatic barring on the adults list became available. These cases were considered under the discretionary barring route. The ISA continued to receive notification of these convictions in 2009 and did not conclude all of these cases until 2010/11. This means that the figures for discretionary bars were higher in 2009 and 2010. After 2010, the number of such cases decreased and the number of discretionary bars reduced in line with that change.