Blog

  • Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Dawn Butler – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Dawn Butler on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Equality (Language Analysis – Palestinian, Syrian and Kuwaiti Testing) Authorisation (No. 2) 2013, whether the Government plans to revise the existing three exceptions.

    James Brokenshire

    The Government has no current plans to revise the existing Equality Act exemptions relating to language analysis testing.

    No further nationalities have been added to the Equality Act exemption authorisation since it was introduced in 2013.

    A review on language analysis use was undertaken in 2011 and published in 2012.

    (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257177/language-analysis.pdf).

    No further such review is presently planned. However, we do monitor the use of language analysis regularly to ensure it is used as effectively as possible and to identify new trends in nationality swapping.

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many third generation children of Jamaican descent living in Britain are not British citizens.

    Mr Rob Wilson

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

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many third generation children living in Britain are not British citizens.

    Mr Rob Wilson

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

  • Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Charlotte Leslie – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Charlotte Leslie on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the total cost of defending judicial reviews brought against her Department has been since 2010.

    Karen Bradley

    No central records are kept of (i) the number of judicial reviews initiated against the department since 2010; (ii) the cost of defending such challenges; or (iii) the number of such challenges which have been successful. It would incur disproportionate cost to try to acquire this information.

  • Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Johnson on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many appeals against fines to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 there have been in each year since 2005.

    James Brokenshire

    The value of fines issued to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in each year since 2005 is as follows:

    01/04/2005-31/03/2006 £1,105,103
    01/04/2006-31/03/2007 £1,898,866
    01/04/2007-31/03/2008 £1,946,705
    01/04/2008-31/03/2009 £2,552,490
    01/04/2009-31/03/2010 £2,609,737
    01/04/2010-31/03/2011 £1,083,390
    01/04/2011-31/03/2012 £931,618
    01/04/2012-31/03/2013 £890,544
    01/04/2013-31/03/2014 £4,070,471
    01/04/2014-31/03/2015 £6,490,232
    01/04/2015-31/03/2016 £5,249,894

    This information is from management information reports. The data held on the Civil Penalty data base does not allow the penalty amounts to be separated between driver’s and hauliers, hence the data provided is the total number of penalties imposed for the period.

    The number of appeals against fines to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in each year since 2005 is as follows:

    01/04/2005-31/03/2006 7
    01/04/2006-31/03/2007 8
    01/04/2007-31/03/2008 12
    01/04/2008-31/03/2009 13
    01/04/2009-31/03/2010 9
    01/04/2010-31/03/2011 10
    01/04/2011-31/03/2012 11
    01/04/2012-31/03/2013 0 *
    01/04/2013-31/03/2014 24
    01/04/2014-31/03/2015 64
    01/04/2015-31/03/2016 36

    *High Court appeal cases, all appeals were held behind at the time until resolved. Appeals then fell into subsequent years.

    This information is from management information reports.

  • Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Johnson on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the value of fines issued to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 has been in each year since 2005.

    James Brokenshire

    The value of fines issued to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in each year since 2005 is as follows:

    01/04/2005-31/03/2006 £1,105,103
    01/04/2006-31/03/2007 £1,898,866
    01/04/2007-31/03/2008 £1,946,705
    01/04/2008-31/03/2009 £2,552,490
    01/04/2009-31/03/2010 £2,609,737
    01/04/2010-31/03/2011 £1,083,390
    01/04/2011-31/03/2012 £931,618
    01/04/2012-31/03/2013 £890,544
    01/04/2013-31/03/2014 £4,070,471
    01/04/2014-31/03/2015 £6,490,232
    01/04/2015-31/03/2016 £5,249,894

    This information is from management information reports. The data held on the Civil Penalty data base does not allow the penalty amounts to be separated between driver’s and hauliers, hence the data provided is the total number of penalties imposed for the period.

    The number of appeals against fines to lorry drivers under section 32 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in each year since 2005 is as follows:

    01/04/2005-31/03/2006 7
    01/04/2006-31/03/2007 8
    01/04/2007-31/03/2008 12
    01/04/2008-31/03/2009 13
    01/04/2009-31/03/2010 9
    01/04/2010-31/03/2011 10
    01/04/2011-31/03/2012 11
    01/04/2012-31/03/2013 0 *
    01/04/2013-31/03/2014 24
    01/04/2014-31/03/2015 64
    01/04/2015-31/03/2016 36

    *High Court appeal cases, all appeals were held behind at the time until resolved. Appeals then fell into subsequent years.

    This information is from management information reports.

  • Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Gareth Johnson – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Gareth Johnson on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many police custody suites in the UK have technology to allow live-link interpretation; and what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of such interpretation.

    Mike Penning

    The Home Office does not collect this data. However, we support the use of video to minimise time spent in court and streamlined procedures that save time and money. The police and the wider Criminal Justice System need to meet the needs of a public who increasingly use technology in their day-to-day lives. They must have the tools and the skills to deal with digital information, to tackle crime, support victims and ensure swift justice.

  • Meg Hillier – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Meg Hillier – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Meg Hillier on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what her policy is on priority categories in Disclosure and Barring Service checks.

    Karen Bradley

    The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) processes applications in date order and is reliant on the police completing their checks in a timely manner. In very exceptional cases, where it is apparent that a delay is likely to cause undue hardship to an applicant, the DBS will do all it can to expedite the process by raising an escalation with the relevant police force.

    The table below shows the average time spent by each police force in England to process disclosure applications between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016.

    Force Name

    Average Days Taken By Force

    Avon And Somerset

    7.4

    Bedfordshire

    3.5

    Cambridgeshire

    10.9

    Cheshire

    10.7

    City of London

    9.0

    Cleveland

    8.6

    Cumbria

    13.8

    Derbyshire

    14.8

    Devon And Cornwall

    4.7

    Dorset

    76.6

    Durham

    15.3

    Essex

    16.2

    Gloucester

    11.1

    Greater Manchester

    12.8

    Hampshire

    11.4

    Hertfordshire

    10.5

    Humberside

    9.8

    Kent

    18.5

    Lancashire

    5.0

    Leicestershire

    7.7

    Lincolnshire

    9.2

    Merseyside

    8.2

    Metropolitan

    85.2

    Norfolk

    1.6

    North Yorkshire

    17.9

    Northamptonshire

    17.1

    Northumbria

    13.9

    Nottinghamshire

    10.9

    South Yorkshire

    21.7

    Staffordshire

    10.7

    Suffolk

    8.8

    Surrey

    13.1

    Sussex

    17.5

    Thames Valley

    60.3

    Warwickshire

    7.2

    West Mercia

    9.3

    West Midlands

    21.2

    West Yorkshire

    12.3

    Wiltshire

    4.8
  • Meg Hillier – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Meg Hillier – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Meg Hillier on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which police forces take longest to process applications from the Disclosure and Barring Service; and what the average processing time for such application is for each police force in England.

    Karen Bradley

    The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) processes applications in date order and is reliant on the police completing their checks in a timely manner. In very exceptional cases, where it is apparent that a delay is likely to cause undue hardship to an applicant, the DBS will do all it can to expedite the process by raising an escalation with the relevant police force.

    The table below shows the average time spent by each police force in England to process disclosure applications between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016.

    Force Name

    Average Days Taken By Force

    Avon And Somerset

    7.4

    Bedfordshire

    3.5

    Cambridgeshire

    10.9

    Cheshire

    10.7

    City of London

    9.0

    Cleveland

    8.6

    Cumbria

    13.8

    Derbyshire

    14.8

    Devon And Cornwall

    4.7

    Dorset

    76.6

    Durham

    15.3

    Essex

    16.2

    Gloucester

    11.1

    Greater Manchester

    12.8

    Hampshire

    11.4

    Hertfordshire

    10.5

    Humberside

    9.8

    Kent

    18.5

    Lancashire

    5.0

    Leicestershire

    7.7

    Lincolnshire

    9.2

    Merseyside

    8.2

    Metropolitan

    85.2

    Norfolk

    1.6

    North Yorkshire

    17.9

    Northamptonshire

    17.1

    Northumbria

    13.9

    Nottinghamshire

    10.9

    South Yorkshire

    21.7

    Staffordshire

    10.7

    Suffolk

    8.8

    Surrey

    13.1

    Sussex

    17.5

    Thames Valley

    60.3

    Warwickshire

    7.2

    West Mercia

    9.3

    West Midlands

    21.2

    West Yorkshire

    12.3

    Wiltshire

    4.8
  • Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Ian Blackford – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Ian Blackford on 2016-04-08.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will grant the Brain family residing in Dingwell, Scotland leave to appeal the decision to deport them from the UK whilst remaining domiciled in the UK; and if she will take steps to permit members of that family to maintain their employment until that appeal has been decided.

    James Brokenshire

    We do not routinely comment publicly on individual immigration cases and have written to the Honourable Member on 12 April 2016.