Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what percentage of staff working at visa application centres, processing biometric data for applicants for UK visas, they directly employ.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
are processed in these centres.
own personnel. In the UK, Sopra Steria Ltd run application service points, again with their own employees. Biometric data of customers is taken by supplier staff.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether staff collecting biometric data from applicants for UK visas are involved in the decision-making process for awarding visas.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Staff employed by our suppliers who collect biometric data from applicants for UKVI are not involved in the visa decision making. Staff in the SSCs are directly UKVI employed and some are trained decision makers involved in the decision making process.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have any plans to reassess the working structure of the Home Office.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Her Majesty’s Government has no such plans. Nonetheless, in common with all large organisations, the Home Office makes marginal adjustments to its structures routinely.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the use of drones on increasing the effectiveness of countering terrorism, piracy, kidnappings and other offences combatted by surveillance technologies.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Decisions to use drones and in which circumstances are operational matters for the Police and other law enforcement agencies.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is ever their policy to make an individual stateless by depriving them of their citizenship; what assessment they have made of the impact on an individual with dual nationality of being deprived of their citizenship of both countries; whether they provide guidance to officials for such a scenario; and if so, what is that guidance.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
There is no policy for prioritising nationality when deciding whether to deprive an individual with dual nationality of their British citizenship.
When making a decision to deprive an individual of British citizenship, the law requires that such a decision may not be made if it would make the individual stateless. This is compatible with the UK’s international obligations under the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. The Government cannot comment on the use of deprivation by other countries.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have a policy in place for whether any nation takes precedence over another when determining when someone with dual nationality is to be deprived of citizenship.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
There is no policy for prioritising nationality when deciding whether to deprive an individual with dual nationality of their British citizenship.
When making a decision to deprive an individual of British citizenship, the law requires that such a decision may not be made if it would make the individual stateless. This is compatible with the UK’s international obligations under the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. The Government cannot comment on the use of deprivation by other countries.
Asked by: Viscount Waverley (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government under which circumstances, if any, they intervene to block requests for assets to be remitted to foreign government organisations either from the UK or British overseas territories.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
Under proceeds of crime legislation, asset sharing and repatriation is ultimately the Government’s decision following the recovery of assets/money under a court order it is a matter of how to then dispose of those recovered moneys. In confiscation cases, the UN Convention Against Corruption requires a full return to victim States and the EU Framework Decision on confiscation orders requires a 50% share in cases in excess of 10,000 Euros.
There are other bilateral and multilateral international agreements that encourage the sharing of recovered assets. The UK does not require an international agreement to share or repatriate assets and does so on request on an ad hoc basis. The presumption is that 50% is shared with the requesting country. There are few cases so far, but none have been refused.
The Government does not intervene with similar cases involving the Overseas Territories or Crown Dependencies.