| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
24 July 2006 : Column WA219
Written Answers
Monday 24 July 2006
Army: Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lord Sanderson of Bowden asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will make a financial commitment to the non-commissioned officers and commissioned officers from the Lowland Regiments of the newly formed Royal Regiment of Scotland for the provision of mess kit.[HL7007]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): There are no special financial arrangements for the commissioned officers and non-commissioned officers (NCOs) of the Royal Regiment of Scotland in regard to the provision of mess kit. All commissioned officers are, however, provided with an initial outfit allowance to cover the cost of mess dress, and an annual tax credit to cover maintenance and replacement. NCOs are not obliged to wear mess dress, but where they choose to purchase it they do so at their own expense.
All officers in the newly formed Royal Regiment of Scotland have been given five years to replace their current privately purchased uniform, including mess kit. During this period uniforms (including NCOs mess kit) will run concurrently.
Asylum Seekers: Section 4 Support
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many unsuccessful asylum applicants who cannot return to their home country are currently receiving hard case support under Section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.[HL6834]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): At the end of March 2006 there were 5,435 failed asylum seekers in receipt of Section 4 support. The number of failed asylum seekers supported under Section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 is published on a quarterly and annual basis. The next publication covering the second quarter of 2006 will be published on 22 August 2006, and will be available on the Home Office Research Development and Statistics website at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration1.html.
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
What happened to the 37 per cent of those asylum seekers who were refused the support they applied for under Section 4 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.[HL6835]
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The information requested is not currently available as there are no central records kept on the movements of people whose applications for Section 4 support have been refused.
24 July 2006 : Column WA220
Azerbaijan: Armenian Monuments
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
What representations they will make as a member of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation regarding the destruction by the Azerbaijan authorities of the Armenian cemetery at Julfa and other Armenian monuments in the territory of Nakhichevan.[HL6870]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): I refer the noble Lord to the Answer given to the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, by my noble friend Lady Royall of Blaisdon on 20 July (Official Report, cols. 1405-08).
BBC
Viscount Astor asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the National Audit Office's remit over the BBC World Service affects the service's editorial independence.[HL6702]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): The National Audit Office's remit over the BBC World Service does not affect the service's editorial independence.
British Citizenship
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will make reference to the erroneous refusals of British citizenship applications from solely British nationals in Hong Kong and the steps taken to remedy this in the next six-monthly report to Parliament on Hong Kong.[HL6902]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): The decisions made by the Home Office that some applicants did not meet the “solely British” criteria of the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1997 were not erroneous. They were correct on the Indian interpretation of Indian nationality law at the time the decisions were made.
The six-monthly report to Parliament on Hong Kong for January to July 2006 will assess the implementation of the Sino-British Joint Declaration on Hong Kong over that period. We will not be referring to this issue.
Lord Avebury asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Triesman on 14 July (WA 146), whether an application form is considered to be completed in full only if every supporting document requested on the form and guidance notes is provided with the application; or whether consular officers can exercise discretion in these matters; and, if such discretion is permitted, in what circumstances it is exercised.[HL7061]
24 July 2006 : Column WA221
Lord Triesman: It has been agreed with the Nationality Directorate of the Home Office that our consular staff overseas should check all British nationality applications to ensure that all the relevant boxes are completed and that the declaration is signed and dated, as this validates the application. All applications must be sent to the Nationality Directorate within two months of receipt, regardless of whether the applicant has provided all the necessary documents. The missing documents can be forwarded at a later date, but reference to the missing documents should be included in the covering letter that consular staff provide and forward to the Nationality Directorate with the application.
CAFCASS
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
What plans the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service has to recruit additional front-line staff for (a) private law, and (b) public law work; and [HL6951]
Whether the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service is currently experiencing any delay in the allocation of (a) private law, and (b) public law cases.[HL6952]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): These are matters for the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (CAFCASS). Anthony Douglas, the chief executive, has written to the noble Baroness with this information and a copy of his reply has been placed in the Library.
Child Protection: List 99
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many names have been added to List 99 by each local education authority in England in the past five years.[HL6895]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): Local education authorities do not add names to List 99. Decisions on whether to place individuals on List 99 are made by the Secretary of State acting on advice from Sir Roger Singleton, who chairs a panel of independent experts. For certain serious offences against children barring is automatic. Referrals are received from a number of different sources including the police, local education authorities, schools and social services.
Some 1,679 individuals have been placed on List 99 in the past five years (18 July 2001 to 17 July 2006). It is not possible to break this down by local education authority due to the way the statistics are currently recorded.
24 July 2006 : Column WA222
Children and Adoption Act 2006
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
What additional resources will be made available to implement the Children and Adoption Act 2006.[HL6953]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): The Government are currently considering a timescale for commencement of the Children and Adoption Act 2006. Allocation of resources to implement the Act will be considered as part of that process, which I expect to be concluded by the autumn.
Children: Two-parent families
Lord Northbourne asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will instigate research into the reported statistical link between children who grow up in stable, two-parent families and favourable outcomes at school and in later life.[HL6967]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Education and Skills (Lord Adonis): The department is funding a range of studies including the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) study, the Millennium Cohort Study and the Sure Start National Evaluation which examine issues of family structure and educational outcomes.
Existing research suggests that while stable, two-parent families tend to be associated with favourable outcomes for children, factors such as work status, income, and family conflict and disharmony, are likely to be more influential than family structure alone.
The House of Commons Education and Skills Committee took oral evidence on this topic from four expert witnesses on 12 July 2006. The witnesses agreed that family structure was a relatively unimportant factor in predicting children's outcomes compared with other factors such as poverty. The uncorrected evidence can be found at the following link: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmeduski/uc1398-i/uc139802.htm.
Criminal Justice Act 2003
Baroness Anelay of St Johns asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many sections of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 have (a) been repealed; (b) been amended; and (c) not been brought into force.[HL6882]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): The information requested will be placed in the Library.
24 July 2006 : Column WA223
Drugs: Schizophrenia
Lord Jones asked Her Majesty's Government:
What assessment has been made of the use of street drugs, including cannabis, acting as triggers of schizophrenia and temporary psychotic symptoms; and what information is made available to primary care trusts and schools warning that cannabis may be one of the factors causing schizophrenia when used in late childhood and early teens.[HL6960]
The Minister of State, Department of Health (Lord Warner): The Department of Health monitors all the key research in cannabis misuse and has a range of expert advisers to inform policy. We are currently commissioning an academic “expert topic review” of research on cannabis and mental health, with the aim that its findings will inform mental health promotion regarding cannabis, and will help us to ensure that our advice to mental health patients, their families and professionals continues to be comprehensive and up-to-date.
The Advisory Council for the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) report on cannabis, Further consideration of the classification of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (2005) reviews the evidence on the mental health effects of cannabis. The report states that ACMD remains of the view that cannabis is harmful and its consumption can lead to a wide range of physical and psychological hazards. Nevertheless, it does not recommend that the classification of cannabis products should be changed on the basis of the results of recent research into the effects on the development of mental illness. Although cannabis is unquestionably harmful, its harmfulness does not equate to that of class B substances at the level either of the individual or of society. The department also published independent advice on the health harms, including mental health harms, of a range of substances in its guidance in September 2003, Dangerousness of Drugs—A Guide to the Risks and Harms associated with Substance Misuse.
In 2004 the Government produced guidance to schools on all matters relating to drug education. This has recently been updated to specifically highlight the dangers that cannabis use can lead to a wide range of physical and psychological problems. In addition, the key stage 3 drug education pack, due to be published imminently, also highlights the possible links, both in the pupil and teacher versions.
The department has developed three new leaflets for the Government communications campaign FRANK (www.talktofrank.com) on cannabis: for young people, for heavy users and for parents. All give information on the possible side effects of cannabis use.
The department has specifically made information available to primary care trusts about the regular and early use of cannabis possibly causing an increase in an individual's risk of developing “psychotic symptoms” including schizophrenia.
24 July 2006 : Column WA224
Energy: Nuclear
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether any undertakings have been given to the Government of the Republic of Ireland concerning the siting of nuclear power stations in the United Kingdom.[HL7068]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): Any new nuclear power stations would be proposed, developed, constructed and operated by the private sector. The responsibility for identifying and acquiring specific sites and securing the necessary consents will lie with the developer. Government have committed to undertaking a strategic siting assessment that will help developers to identify the most suitable sites.
European Court of Human Rights
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Over the past 12 months, which judgments by the European Court of Human Rights were made against the United Kingdom; which of these cases were not appealed; and what were the reasons for not appealing in each case.[HL6748]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): In the past 12 months, judgments finding a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights have been made by a Chamber of the Court against the United Kingdom in the following cases: P.M.; B. and L.; Shannon; Yetkinsekerci; J.A. Pye (Oxford) Ltd.; Yassar Hussein; Grant; and Elahi.
Under the convention there is no right of appeal. However, under Article 43 any party may in exceptional cases request that a case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. The Grand Chamber will accept the request if the case raises a serious issue affecting the interpretation or application of the convention or its protocols, or a serious issue of general importance.
The case of J.A. Pye (Oxford) Ltd has been referred to the Grand Chamber at the request of the Government. In the cases of Grant and Elahi, the time limit for requesting a referral has not yet expired. In the other cases no request was made by the Government, as it was not felt that they came within the criteria set out in Article 43, and/or it was not expected that the Grand Chamber would come to a different conclusion from the Chamber.
Extradition: Human Rights
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, by virtue of Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, the powers conferred upon the Secretary of State by the Extradition Act 2003 must be exercised in a way that is compatible with the convention rights.[HL7028]
24 July 2006 : Column WA225
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): The Secretary of State, as a public authority, is bound by provisions of Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and is forbidden from acting in a way that is incompatible with convention rights.
Forensic Explosives Laboratory
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is the average waiting time for security clearance for those who have applied to work in the forensic explosives laboratory; and whether they have proposals to speed up clearance for those who have waited for three months or longer.[HL7019]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): For the year ending 30 June 2006, the Defence Vetting Agency (DVA) awarded a total of 34 developed vetting (DV) clearances and 306 security check (SC) clearances for personnel employed and waiting to be employed at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Fort Halstead. These took an average of 74.6 days and an average of 61.7 days from receipt of application to clearance being awarded for DV and SC respectively. These figures apply to personnel at the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Fort Halstead in general; it is not possible for the DVA to supply figures for personnel in the forensic explosives laboratory without disproportionate effort. Within the vetting process, any outstanding checks are hastened at regular intervals. There is also the provision for sponsors to flag cases as priority at the outset, which will ensure priority handling throughout.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |