Category Archives: Home Office

Rights? What rights?

Posted on August 8, 2009 | 12 Comments

The Guardian reports today that the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) is advising its members to continue adding the DNA profiles of innocent individuals to the DNA database, notwithstanding the decision of the European Court of Human Rights that to do so is unlawful. 

In a letter leaked to the paper, Acpo says that senior officers should carry on as before, until new Home Office guidelines are issued in 2010:

“Until that time, the current retention policy on fingerprints and DNA remains unchanged.

 ”Individuals who consider they fall within the ruling in the S and Marper case should await the full response to the ruling by the government prior to seeking advice and/or action from the police service in order to address their personal issue on the matter.

“Acpo strongly advise that decisions to remove records should not be based on [the government's] proposed changes. It is therefore vitally important that any applications for removals of records should be considered against current legislation.”

In a Parliamentary answer last October, the Home Office minister, Alan Campbell, revealed that DNA profiles of 857, 000 individuals without criminal convictions were then recorded on the database.  Very probably, given the rate at which records are being added, there are now around a million.

This is nothing short of a national scandal.  The Government should issue its guidelines immediately and Acpo should implement them without delay.

→ 12 Comments

Posted in DNA, Home Office

Tagged

Hard to keep up

Posted on June 30, 2009 | 3 Comments

Yesterday, I asked my researcher to hand deliver a letter to the Home Office. 

Upon her arrival at the governing mall, the conversation went as follows:

 Researcher:  “I’ve got an urgent letter for Mr Alan Johnson.”

 Receptionist:  “Who?”

 Researcher:  “Alan Johnson.”

 Receptionist:  “Who’s he?”

 Researcher:  “The Home Secretary.”

→ 3 Comments

Posted in Alan Johnson, Home Office

Tagged ,

Kicking and screaming

Posted on March 26, 2009 | 1 Comment

gurkhaLast September, I blogged about the High Court test case won by a group of retired Gurkhas, giving them the right of settlement in the UK.  In the wake of the court’s decision, the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, confirmed that she would, by the end of the year, review her Department’s criteria for considering applications by Gurkhas to remain in the country.

The review proceeded at snail’s pace.  In fact, it was never completed. Nor did the Home Secretary complete the review of some 1,000 outstanding settlement claims.

Today, the Gurkhas went back to court seeking to enforce September’s ruling.  Their QC told the judge that the Home Secretary has now agreed to make a statement to Parliament within three weeks setting out her policy on the Gurkhas’ right to remain.

Sadly, some Gurkhas have died waiting for the Home Secretary’s decision.  The most recent was Rifleman Prem Bahadur Pun, on March 15. A document put before the court makes extremely distressing reading:

“It appears that his death – as well as being deprived of cheap modern drugs to bring him comfort in his final months – is linked to the Secretary of State’s failure to comply with her assurances to publish the policy and complete the reconsideration of over 1,000 stayed cases by December 30 2008.”

When the court made its ruling last year, one might have expected the Home Office, above all departments, to do its utmost to fulfil its undertaking to publish its policy and complete its consideration of the outstanding cases.

It is hard to think of anything that could reflect more discredit on the Government.  There is a huge fund of goodwill for the Gurkhas among the people of this country.  They are the staunchest, most loyal friends we have anywhere in the world.  They have been badly let down.

The Government should be thoroughly ashamed that it has had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, back to court before it would finally get round to honouring its legal and moral obligations to these brave, decent people.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Gurkhas, Home Office

Tagged

Tilting the balance

Posted on October 27, 2008 | 2 Comments
Speaking of Home Office Questions, the following exchange in the chamber today should worry anyone concerned about the progressive erosion of civil liberties in this country:

4. Mr. Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD): What her latest estimate is of the number of people without criminal convictions whose records are stored on the national DNA database.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Alan Campbell): There are about 857,000 people on the national DNA database who do not have a current criminal record on the police national computer, but that figure includes those who have been convicted and had their records deleted and those for whom proceedings are still ongoing, as well as those who have never been convicted.

Read that figure again: 857,000 people without criminal convictions have their DNA recorded on the Home Office database.

Many, perhaps most, of them are wholly innocent of any offence, such as my colleague, Greg Hands, MP for Hammersmith and Fulham, who supplied a sample simply to eliminate him from an inquiry into the murder of his uncle. He has asked for it to be destroyed, but the police and Home Office refuse.

The excuse is, of course, that DNA analysis techniques have led to increased crime detection; and so they have. But in a free society, a balance should always be struck between the freedom of the individual and the security of the state. In the present instance, the scales are tilted too heavily against the citizen.

The DNA database procedure is wrong. It should be revisited.

→ 2 Comments

Posted in DNA, Home Office

Tagged

Buddugoliaeth

Posted on August 5, 2008 | 1 Comment
Good news. The Home Office has relented and agreed to supply 500 Welsh language crime reduction leaflets to Conwy County Neighbourhood Watch.
Regular readers will recall that the previous order limit was 25, whereas as many as 1,000 Polish language leaflets were readily available.

Home Office minister Vernon Coaker responded with admirable speed to my request for a sensible number of leaflets so that Neighbourhood Watch could start its crime prevention campaign in Llansannan, one of the strongest Welsh-speaking communities in Clwyd West, and they have already been delivered to Watch chairman, Ray Jones.

A small victory, but very gratifying. Diolch, Vernon.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office, Welsh language

Speaking in tongues

Posted on July 2, 2008 | 1 Comment
I have been contacted by Raymond Jones, chairman of Conwy County Neighbourhood Watch, who tells me that he has attempted to obtain 500 Welsh language copies of Home Office leaflet PG2E, “Be Safe, Be Secure – Your Practical Guide to Crime Reduction”, only to be informed that there was a maximum order of 25 and that he could not be supplied with any more.

This caused Mr Jones considerable surprise, given that up to 500 English language versions of the leaflet may be obtained, but even more surprising was that the maximum order for Welsh language leaflets is significantly smaller than for those in other, non-native languages.

For example, the Home Office will happily give you 100 leaflets in Arabic, Chinese or Bengali. You can have 50 in Punjabi or Urdu and it is possible to order as many as 1,000 in Polish. But Welsh is right down there with Vietnamese, Turkish and Somali.

Mr Jones wanted the leaflets for a campaign in Llansannan, a village in my constituency in which Welsh is far and away the most widely spoken language. 25 leaflets wouldn’t be enough for a single street.

I’m not sure why the Home Office has decided to adopt such an unfriendly attitude to the oldest native British language, so I’ve written to them to ask for an explanation. The reply is eagerly awaited, be it in English or Welsh. Somali would be a bit trickier.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office

Doesn’t get it

Posted on February 20, 2008 | Leave a comment
The alternative reality inhabited by Gordon Brown became even more evident in today’s PMQs.

The Prime Minister was questioned by David Cameron over the failure of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to deal properly or at all with DNA data relating to 4,000 serious crimes which had been submitted to it by the Dutch police.

The data, in electronic form, was sent to the CPS in January, 2007, but examination of it did not begin until this month. So far, 15 matches have been found. 11 of those whose DNA has been matched are known to have committed offences in the UK.

Mr Brown told the House that the CPS had opened an inquiry, and went on to say:

“The inquiry will cover all the details of what happened. I must tell the right hon. Gentleman that it was possible for the Dutch to ask us to look at our DNA records only because we are keeping full DNA records. The Conservatives opposed that legislation.”

Brown’s assertion, delivered with his customary petulance, was, in fact, complete nonsense. It was Michael Howard, on his appointment as Home Secretary, who expanded the collection of DNA data as part of a package of measures to tackle rising crime. The Shadow Home Secretary at the time, one Tony Blair, dismissed them as “gimmicks”.

What Gordon apparently doesn’t understand is that it is not the keeping of DNA records that is the issue; it is the level of security with which it is kept and the legal principles that apply to its retention and storage. DNA data, in short, is material of the utmost sensitivity and should be treated accordingly.

In the present case, the data disc apparently lay on the desk of an official in the CPS for more than a year. The level of security applied to its handling was, effectively, zero. That should be a matter of deep concern to anyone, but most particularly to the British Prime Minister.

It would appear however, that the seriousness of the issue is lost on Gordon. He simply doesn’t get it.

That, too, is a matter of deep concern.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in David Cameron, Gordon Brown, Home Office

Poisoned Chalice

Posted on February 10, 2008 | 1 Comment
Yet another very serious security lapse, this time in the House of Commons itself. A Brazilian illegal immigrant, who had absconded from Heathrow airport over three years ago, was found to be working as a cleaner in the House, using a security pass belonging to another person. Even worse, the breach, which was apparently detected and reported to the immigration minister, Liam Byrne, as long ago as 31 January, was confirmed only last night, when the Home Office was contacted by the Daily Telegraph, which had received leaked reports of the incident.

Coming so soon after last year’s scandal, when 11,000 illegal immigrants were found to be working in the security industry, this episode is bound to put further pressure on the hapless Jacqui Smith, the latest in a long line of cabinet ministers to regret drinking from the poisoned chalice that is the Home Office.

It is also very likely to provoke accustions of a cover-up. Indeed, it is noteworthy that the memo sent to Liam Byrne on 31 January describes the level of controversy as “high” and advises a “reactive” approach to the media, “given recent coverage of security guards employed illegally at Government offices”.

A proactive approach, i.e. making a clean breast of the cock-up, would, I suppose, be too much to hope for.

Parliament is full of overseas cleaners; no doubt the Home Office, now the gaff has been blown, will be conducting an urgent audit to confirm their credentials.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office, Jacqui Smith

Shivers

Posted on February 6, 2008 | 1 Comment
According to the Telegraph, Sir Ronnie Flanagan’s review of policing will call for a big reduction in red tape, including the scrapping of the notorious “stop and account” form, a copy of which David Cameron produced at last week’s PMQs.

So far, so good. The Conservatives have been pressing the government to get rid of this bureaucratic burden for several years.

However, the Telegraph also tells us that the form will be replaced by a hand-held computer that will send details of the interview directly to the police data bank.

Why is it that any use of the word “data” in an article that also includes the words “Home Office” sends shivers down my spine?

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office

Pick up the phone, Jacqui

Posted on January 20, 2008 | 1 Comment
Jacqui Smith’s admission to the Sunday Times that she wouldn’t feel safe walking alone at night on the streets of Hackney, or even Kensington and Chelsea, is arguably candid but nevertheless deeply worrying. Revealing, too, are the terms of her response, which was: “No. Why would I do that?”

Ms Smith made it clear by the manner in which she framed her answer that she understands only too well that anyone venturing out on the streets of many of our towns and cities after dark is simply asking for trouble. But the point is that, as Home Secretary, it is her job to make those streets safe, which she isn’t achieving.

If she wants to learn why so many of our streets are unsafe, she could do worse than consult His Honour Judge Ian Trigger. Last week, in Liverpool Crown Court, Judge Trigger gave vent to his obvious frustration and despair when passing sentence on a teenager who had beaten an elderly woman about the head with an iron bar. The youth was on bail at the time.

Judge Trigger told the yob (and I make no apology for quoting him at length):

 

“It is the fault of politicians that bail is so readily granted, rather than judges or magistrates.

 

“Parliament, and its woeful and indeed dreadful concentration on rights, forgets duties and responsibilities. It has meant people like you have the right to bail in these circumstances.

“We are living in a society which is bedevilled by wild feral youths such as you.

“Before we plunge into even greater violence at the hands of lawless and irresponsible youths it is time for us to address the problem.

“It is time for parents to resume control over their offspring.

“It is time for parents to teach values and respect to their children, value and respect for other people and not allow their offspring to engage in selfish and irresponsible behaviour.

“It is time for the police to be released from administrative tasks and red tape and be once more a visible 24-hour presence on our streets, particularly in our violent hotspots.

“It is time for the public not to criticise the police but support them so that wild youths like you are brought to justice.

“And it is time for Left-wing intellectuals and well-meaning do-gooders to abandon their obsession and concentrate on the obligations and responsibilities which we all owe each other.

 

Ian Trigger knows exactly what is happening in our inner cities. He has what must be the dispiriting task of dealing with the consequences of Labour’s failure on violent crime every working day of his life.

 

So, if Jacqui Smith won’t venture out on the streets of London after dark, she could at least pick up the phone and speak to Judge Trigger, to find out from someone experienced and sensible just how bad it is.

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office, Jacqui Smith

Tagged

Note of Sanity

Posted on September 18, 2007 | Leave a comment
Further to Lord Justice Sedley’s call for the entire UK population to be DNA fingerprinted, a note of sanity is struck by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, who say that it is “unjustified” to keep people on the National DNA Database when they have not been convicted of any offence.

This is so manifestly true that I am surprised it had to be said at all.

Our liberties are under progressive threat by this government. If we let them get away with it, we will have only ourselves to blame.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Home Office

Judge Dread

Posted on September 5, 2007 | 1 Comment
I am appalled by the suggestion made by Lord Justice Sedley that the profile of every citizen of the UK should be added to the DNA database. We already have the largest such database in the world, and the notion of the state holding particulars of the very essence of every resident of this country should alarm everyone concerned by the insidious erosion of our civil liberties that has taken place under this government.

Just as depressing is the comment of Tony McNulty, Home Office minister, who, according to the BBC News website, said that there were no plans to introduce DNA profiling for everyone in the UK, but “no-one ever says never”. No, of course they don’t, Tony.

The issue of whose details go on the database is ultimately one for Parliament to decide. As it is, the database, under the dysfunctional Home Office, is growing stealthily and erratically, and already contains the details of over one million individuals who have never been convicted of any offence.

As for the judiciary, they are supposed to be the ultimate guardians of our freedoms. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

→ 1 Comment

Posted in Home Office

The Jury is Out

Posted on November 30, 2006 | Leave a comment
Spoke yesterday in the debate on the second reading of the Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill.
 
 This nasty little measure is aimed at removing the right to trial by jury in some fraud cases. Jury trial has been a feature of our legal system for eight hundred years. It is one of the cornerstones of our liberty and we tamper with it at our peril.
 
 There were some powerful speeches on our side, most notably from Douglas Hogg and Richard Shepherd, who were both ferocious in their attack upon the Bill.
 
 The Government benches were (astonishingly, given the constitutional importance of the issue under discussion) almost empty throughout the debate, although Bob Marshall-Andrews, the Labour MP for Medway and an eminent QC, demolished the Bill with an intellectually impeccable argument.
 
Needless to say, the Government won the vote on a three-line whip, but I have no doubt that we have not heard the last of the Bill. The Lords will hate it and the Government will probably, to its shame, have to rely on the Parliament Act to get it passed.
 
The most depressing moment of the debate came when Stephen Hesford, Labour MP for Wirral West, described the assault on liberty proposed by the Bill as simply a “case management” issue.
 
May God help us all.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Home Office

Tagged