Blog

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken by UK Visa and Immigration Service was to process Confirmations of Acceptance for Studies renewal applications for the 2015-16 academic year.

    James Brokenshire

    The proportion of Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) renewal applications received between 1 September 2014 and 20 October 2015, where CAS may have been assigned for study during the academic year 2015-2016, which exceeded the service standard of 18 weeks was 60 out of a total of 2259 requests.

    The average time to process Confirmations of Acceptance for Studies renewal applications received between 1 September 2014 and 20 October 2015, where CAS may have been assigned for study during the academic year 2015-2016, was 32 days.

  • Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Daniel Zeichner – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Daniel Zeichner on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies renewal applications for the 2015-16 academic year took longer than 18 weeks for a final decision to be made by the UK Visa and Immigration Service.

    James Brokenshire

    The proportion of Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) renewal applications received between 1 September 2014 and 20 October 2015, where CAS may have been assigned for study during the academic year 2015-2016, which exceeded the service standard of 18 weeks was 60 out of a total of 2259 requests.

    The average time to process Confirmations of Acceptance for Studies renewal applications received between 1 September 2014 and 20 October 2015, where CAS may have been assigned for study during the academic year 2015-2016, was 32 days.

  • Helen Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Helen Jones – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Jones on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communication of the hon. Member for Warrington North since her election; and whether that hon. Member has been subject to surveillance.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.

    As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.

    The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.

    It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.

  • Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Vicky Foxcroft on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to tackle the rise in cases of domestic violence in London.

    Karen Bradley

    Tackling domestic abuse is a key priority for this Government.

    The Office for National Statistics has ascribed national increases in police recorded violent crime to improvements in police recording.

    The Government is providing £10 million to fund specialist domestic and sexual violence services and national helplines up to April 2016, including part-funding to 23 Independent Domestic Violence Advocates and eight Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Coordinators in London. New guidance for the police has been published by the College of Policing, new training has been piloted and for the first time police are collating domestic violence data against a national standard.

    The Government recognises that local areas are best placed to meet local need.

  • Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Angus Brendan MacNeil – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Angus Brendan MacNeil on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will estimate the cost to the public purse of deporting people who moved to the UK planning to work in the Scottish fishing industry.

    James Brokenshire

    Border Force has not deported anyone working in the Scottish Fishing Industry at public expense within the last 5 years.

    Immigration Enforcement cannot estimate the cost of deporting people who moved to the UK to work in the Scottish fishing industry as to do so would involve a manual search of records which could only be conducted at disproportionate cost.

  • Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Caroline Lucas – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Caroline Lucas on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the oral contribution of the Minister for Policing, Crime and Criminal Justice, of 12 October 2015, Official Report, columns 32-36, what discussions she has (a) had and (b) plans to have with (i) her counterparts in other Government Departments and (ii) the pharmaceutical industry on the medical evidence and research that exists on the use of cannabis for medical treatment; and if she will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    The Government’s position on the medicinal value of cannabis remains unchanged and no discussions are planned. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is open to considering marketing approval applications for further cannabis-based medicinal products.

    The Home Office will continue to consider applications for Schedule 1 licences on their merits to enable trials of new medicines, subject to the appropriate ethical approvals where human trials are envisaged. The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and regulations made under the Act, continue to facilitate research in this area.

  • Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Vicky Foxcroft on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent (a) meetings and (b) correspondence she has had on the setting up of buffer zones around abortion clinics; and if she will make a statement.

    Mike Penning

    I refer the Hon Member to the answers I gave to 5385 and 7247 on 13 July and 22 July 2015. We have also received correspondence from Members of Parliament on behalf of their constituents on this issue. The Home Office has not issued guidance to the police on this matter.

  • Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Helen Hayes – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Helen Hayes on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether the Wilson Doctrine has been consistently applied to the communications of the hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood; and whether that hon. Member or her staff have been subject to surveillance.

    Mr John Hayes

    The Government’s position on the Wilson Doctrine was set out by the Prime Minister in a written ministerial statement made on 4 November 2015.

    As the Prime Minister made clear, the Wilson Doctrine has never been an absolute bar to the targeted interception of the communications of Members of Parliament or an exemption from the legal regime governing interception. The Doctrine recognised that there could be instances where interception might be necessary.

    The Prime Minister announced that as matter of policy the PM will be consulted should there ever be a proposal to target any UK Parliamentarian’s communications under a warrant issued by a Secretary of State. This applies to Members of Parliament, members of the House of Lords, the Scottish Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Assembly and UK members of the European Parliament. It applies to all activity authorised by a warrant issued by a Secretary of State: any instance of targeted interception and, electronic surveillance and equipment interference, when undertaken by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. This is in addition to the rigorous safeguards already in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Code of Practice issued under it which set out a series of robust safeguards for any instance of interception.

    It is long standing policy of successive Governments neither to confirm nor deny any specific activity by the Security and Intelligence Agencies. Under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 it is an offence for anyone to identify an individual interception warrant or an individual interception that takes place.

  • Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Greg Mulholland – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Greg Mulholland on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will commission independent research into the causes of Islamophobia.

    Karen Bradley

    A key part of our new Countering Extremism Strategy, published this week, outlines how we will engage with and protect Muslim communities from Islamophobia and anti-Muslim hatred.

    We have access to a wide range of research on Islamophobia from academics, non-government organisations and from the Extremism Analysis Unit.

    We have announced a new Cross-Government Hate Crime Action Plan. As part of this we are engaging with partner organisations to establish the plan’s priority focus areas including future research requirement.

    The Government also recognises the risk of Islamophobia in the UK as well as the increasing number of attacks aimed at the Muslim Community. To address this the PM has announced that from next year all police forces will be required to record Anti-Muslim hate crime as a distinct category when it is reported.

  • Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Vicky Foxcroft – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Vicky Foxcroft on 2015-10-20.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many people have taken their own life in (a) Lewisham, Deptford constituency, (b) the London Borough of Lewisham and (c) Greater London in each of the last three years.

    Mr Rob Wilson

    The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.