Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which services have been sold for profit by (a) her Department and (b) the College of Policing to the Saudi criminal justice system in the last five years.
Answered by Mike Penning
We are rightly proud of the British model of policing by consent and of the high level of skill and expertise across policing in this country. The College of Policing, which is independent of Government, ensures that respect for human rights and dignity is integral to each programme it delivers.
Course developers and trainers are required to include a bespoke human rights and ethical decision-making element in each course. Before undertaking any international work, the College refers to the International Policing Assistance Board (IPAB), which assesses all requests against British values and interests. IPAB comprises policing representatives and those from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Home Office, Ministry of Defence, Department for International Development and devolved administrations.
The College always acts in accordance with HM Treasury’s guidelines on ‘Managing Public Money’, which includes guidance on commercial charging rates. The Home Office do not keep records on the travel of College of Policing officials.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average conviction rate has been in England and Wales in each of the last three years; and what that rate has been where the offender is someone brought back to the UK under a European Arrest Warrant.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Ministry of Justice publishes statistics on conviction ratios, and these were last published on the 19th May 2016 (Criminal Justice Statistics Quarterly Update to December 2015 (annual edition) at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterly-december-2015).
The statistics on conviction ratios can be found at Table Q3.3 (https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524269/overview-tables.xlsx) and percentages for all offences were 81.8% in 2013, 83.0% in 2014 and 83.7% in 2015.
In relation to the European Arrest Warrant, this information is not held centrally and can only be obtained at disproportionate cost. The National Crime Agency publishes statistics on the operation of the European Arrest Warrant and these can be found here:
http://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/publications/european-arrest-warrant-statistics
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which immigration removal centres were inspected by the Office of Surveillance Commissioners related to the use of property interference by immigration officers in each of the last five years.
Answered by James Brokenshire
There has been no change in Immigration Rules in relation to the use of property interference by immigration officers. Part III Sections 55(1) and (2) of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 amended the Police Act 1997 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) in 2013 to empower officials within the Home Office exercising immigration functions to seek authority for property interference solely for the purpose of preventing and detecting serious crime. Immigration removal centres themselves cannot seek property interference authorisations.
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) scrutinise every application for property interference made by immigration officers upon authorisation and also retrospectively oversee any use of the power to ensure compliance. The OSC publish an annual report, which refers to the overall use of these powers by public authorities including the Home Office.
The Home Office does not provide information on individual Immigration Removal Centres visited by the OSC, or investigations carried out within them.
The Investigatory Powers Bill will replace the current oversight regime with a powerful In-vestigatory Powers Commissioner who will have the support, powers, resources and tech-nical expertise to continue to ensure that these powers are being used fully in accordance with the law.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many property interference authorisations were granted to each immigration removal centre inspected by the Office of Surveillance Commissioners in each of the last five years.
Answered by James Brokenshire
There has been no change in Immigration Rules in relation to the use of property interference by immigration officers. Part III Sections 55(1) and (2) of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 amended the Police Act 1997 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) in 2013 to empower officials within the Home Office exercising immigration functions to seek authority for property interference solely for the purpose of preventing and detecting serious crime. Immigration removal centres themselves cannot seek property interference authorisations.
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) scrutinise every application for property interference made by immigration officers upon authorisation and also retrospectively oversee any use of the power to ensure compliance. The OSC publish an annual report, which refers to the overall use of these powers by public authorities including the Home Office.
The Home Office does not provide information on individual Immigration Removal Centres visited by the OSC, or investigations carried out within them.
The Investigatory Powers Bill will replace the current oversight regime with a powerful In-vestigatory Powers Commissioner who will have the support, powers, resources and tech-nical expertise to continue to ensure that these powers are being used fully in accordance with the law.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether changes have been made to the immigration rules in the last four years in relation to the use of property interference powers by immigration officers.
Answered by James Brokenshire
There has been no change in Immigration Rules in relation to the use of property interference by immigration officers. Part III Sections 55(1) and (2) of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 amended the Police Act 1997 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) in 2013 to empower officials within the Home Office exercising immigration functions to seek authority for property interference solely for the purpose of preventing and detecting serious crime. Immigration removal centres themselves cannot seek property interference authorisations.
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) scrutinise every application for property interference made by immigration officers upon authorisation and also retrospectively oversee any use of the power to ensure compliance. The OSC publish an annual report, which refers to the overall use of these powers by public authorities including the Home Office.
The Home Office does not provide information on individual Immigration Removal Centres visited by the OSC, or investigations carried out within them.
The Investigatory Powers Bill will replace the current oversight regime with a powerful In-vestigatory Powers Commissioner who will have the support, powers, resources and tech-nical expertise to continue to ensure that these powers are being used fully in accordance with the law.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the oral contribution of the Minister for Security at the Home Office in the sitting of the Investigatory Powers Bill of 26 April 2016, column 549, PBC (Bill 143) 2015-16, how many details of medical records the security and intelligence services hold; what the definition of medical records was for the purposes of that contribution; and whether the intelligence and security services attain medical records directly from those who hold them.
Answered by John Hayes
The Investigatory Powers Bill significantly strengthens the safeguards in relation to the security and intelligence agencies’ retention and use of bulk personal datasets through the requirement for warrants subject to the ‘double-lock’ of Secretary of State and judicial approval.
The security and intelligence agencies do not hold medical records as part of their bulk personal datasets. Medical records are a collection of confidential medical information about the mental or physical health of individuals compiled by a medical professional and held by a medical institution.
The agencies may only acquire information where it is necessary for the proper discharge of their statutory functions and the retention of each bulk personal dataset is subject to strict handling arrangements to ensure that they are only retained where it is necessary and proportionate to do so.The Government cannot provide further details on the datasets that the agencies hold or how they are acquired as to do so would undermine the agencies’ ability to protect national security and prevent and disrupt serious crime.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts on 3 May 2016, on confiscation orders: progress review, how many outages of the Semaphore computer system have occurred since 2010; and how long each such outage lasted.
Answered by James Brokenshire
For national security reasons, we do not comment on operational issues such as performance and functionality of border security systems.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 21 March 2016 to Question 31078, on immigration officers, whether (a) her Department, (b) the Interception of Communications Commissioner and (c) any other body has reviewed the use of the power of immigration officers to carry out property interference since 2013.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) provides independent oversight of the use of property interference powers by law enforcement, including immigration officers. The Police Act 1997 was amended in 2013 to enable immigration officers to carry out property interference. The OSC regularly inspects law enforcement use of the power and scrutinises all individual property interference authorisations. A statutory code of practice for covert surveillance and property interference which can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/384975/Covert_Surveillance_Property_Interrefernce_web__2_.pdf
applies to all agencies with property interference powers.
The Investigatory Powers Bill will provide enhanced safeguards for the use of equipment interference, including the requirement that equipment interference warrants are subject to the double-lock authorisation safeguard. The Bill will also create a new and more powerful Investigatory Powers Commissioner who will keep the use of this important power under close and regular review. A new Equipment Interference Code of Practice was published in draft alongside the Investigatory Powers Bill. This Code will provide further guidance on the use of equipment interference powers to all relevant agencies.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 21 March 2016 to Question 31078, on immigration officers, what policy, guidance or code of practice is provided to immigration officers carrying out equipment interference.
Answered by James Brokenshire
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) provides independent oversight of the use of property interference powers by law enforcement, including immigration officers. The Police Act 1997 was amended in 2013 to enable immigration officers to carry out property interference. The OSC regularly inspects law enforcement use of the power and scrutinises all individual property interference authorisations. A statutory code of practice for covert surveillance and property interference which can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/384975/Covert_Surveillance_Property_Interrefernce_web__2_.pdf
applies to all agencies with property interference powers.
The Investigatory Powers Bill will provide enhanced safeguards for the use of equipment interference, including the requirement that equipment interference warrants are subject to the double-lock authorisation safeguard. The Bill will also create a new and more powerful Investigatory Powers Commissioner who will keep the use of this important power under close and regular review. A new Equipment Interference Code of Practice was published in draft alongside the Investigatory Powers Bill. This Code will provide further guidance on the use of equipment interference powers to all relevant agencies.
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to clause 96 of the Investigatory Powers Bill, whether Immigration Officers carried out equipment interference before 1 March 2016.
Answered by James Brokenshire
Immigration officers have had the power to carry out property interference, including interference with equipment, since 2013 through an amendment to the Police Act 1997.
They may only use the power to investigate and prevent serious crime which relates to an immigration or nationality offence and have done so since 2013. The Bill maintains this position whilst strengthening safeguards and oversight.