Author: admin

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he has taken to ensure that funds devolved to the budgets of police and crime commissioners for victims’ services are allocated according to crime rates.

Damian Green

Funding for the commissioning of victims’ services has been allocated to Police and Crime Commissioners using a transparent formula based solely on population data. One of the reasons we are moving to a local commissioning model is to allow Police and Crime Commissioners to provide services tailored to meet local needs. The population based formula ensures that funding is allocated according to where the victim lives, and therefore where they will likely seek the support of victims’ services. Additionally the relatively low variation in distribution of population between areas year on year means these proportions should remain relatively stable over time.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect on funding available for victims’ services of devolution to police and crime commissioners.

Damian Green

From 1 October 2014 the majority of support services for victims of crime will be commissioned at the local level by democratically elected and publicly accountable Police and Crime Commissioners and this Government is making more money than ever before available to ensure that victims receive the vital support they require.

PCC’s with their knowledge of local victims’ needs are uniquely placed to ensure that available funding is targeted where most required to help victims of crime to both cope with and, where possible, recover from the impacts of crime.

PCCs are also ideally placed to co-commission with other local commissioners such as Health or Local Authorities, thereby reducing duplication and achieving better value for money.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when he expects to receive the Sentencing Council’s review of sentencing guidelines for death by drink-driving; and what discussions he has had with that body on its progress on that programme of work.

Jeremy Wright

The Government announced on 12 May that it intends to carry out a review of the offences and penalties available for a range of driving offences, including causing death by careless driving when under the influence of drink or drugs. Any changes to the law arising from this review will need to be considered by the independent Sentencing Council when setting new guidelines. For that reason the Sentencing Council has decided to suspend its consideration of driving offence guidelines until after the conclusion of the Government review.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the change in waiting times for an initial decision for Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visa applications in the last year; what the average waiting time is for an initial decision for a Tier 1 application; and what assessment she has made of the economic effect of the time taken for such decisions on economic growth.

James Brokenshire

The average waiting time for a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) customer in the financial
year 2013-14 was 125 calendar days. The number of days taken to process
applications dropped by 50 days over the course of the financial year and
processing times continue to decrease.

A record number of applications were decided in the financial year 2013-14, and
there is nothing to suggest that processing times are deterring entrepreneurs
from applying.

Month Despatched	Average Calendar Days Between Application Raised Date and Despatch Date
Apr-13	131
May-13	148
Jun-13	142
Jul-13	129
Aug-13	134
Sep-13	126
Oct-13	96
Nov-13	108
Dec-13	114
Jan-14	141
Feb-14	97
Mar-14	81
Overall Average / Total Cases	125

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment her Department has made of the potential need for a separate national policy on the collection, use and retention of data gathered by unmanned or other surveillance aircraft operating in the UK.

Damian Green

None. Existing regulation and guidance, which includes the surveillance camera
code of practice issued under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, applies to
the use of aircraft including remotely piloted aerial vehicles. The code
provides a framework of good practice for surveillance camera operators in
England and Wales and sets out obligations arising from other legislation,
including those for the processing of personal data under the Data Protection
Act 1998. Any covert surveillance undertaken by a public authority which is
likely to obtain private information would be subject to authorisation under
the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA).

The below Parliamentary question was asked by David Crausby on 2014-06-05.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the reasons for the reduction in businesses fined for employing illegal immigrants since 2010.

James Brokenshire

Since 2010 there has been a 13% increase in the number of civil penalties issued to businesses employing illegal migrant workers with 2,149 penalties issued in 2013/14 compared with 1,899 in 2010/11.An assessment of enforcement activity and operating procedures in relation to illegal working visits led to increased deployment and a renewed focus on illegal working in 2013. This resulted in 8,573 illegal working visits in 2013/14 compared with 5,441 in 2012/13. Additionally the target of issuing 2,500 Notices of Potential Liability (NOPL) for a civil penalty was exceeded with 3,562 NOPLs being issued in 2013/14 compared with 1,659 in 2012/13 equating to a 70% increase.We are committed to tackling illegal working and we are increasing our multi-agency operations to step up enforcement action against businesses. Through the Immigration Act and secondary legislations, we are getting tougher with non-compliant employers by increasing the maximum financial penalty from £10,000 to £20,000 per illegal worker; making it easier to enforce payment in the civil courts; and simplifying right-to-work checks for legitimate employers.