What progress he has made in arranging suitable accommodation and services for dispersed asylum seekers. [130322]

:To date, the national asylum support service has entered into contracts to provide accommodation and services for dispersed asylum seekers with a number of local authority, voluntary sector and private sector providers. As the House will be aware, from today, NASS takes responsibility for the support of all new asylum seekers who claim in London.

In the past three months, 90 asylum seekers have been rehoused in 30 properties in Bolton—some of which were in poor condition. My main concern is that environmental health officers have reported to me that that has created houses in multiple occupation that do not conform to the statutory requirements. Will my hon. Friend tell us whether the agreement with the north-west consortium of local authorities is likely to be signed in the near future? Does she agree that it is important that the agreement include preferred provider status for those local authorities?

My information is that no asylum seekers supported by the NASS scheme have been held in my hon. Friend's constituency. Those who are there will have been under the previous or the interim arrangements.

The Minister was right when she stressed, last week, that economic migrants and asylum seekers can play a positive role in this country. I hope that she will give up eye-catching initiatives and concentrate instead on the real plight of people who desperately want to come to this country and who can make a positive contribution to our life in many respects. We are a generous nation; this is a human problem.

I was going to start off by thanking the hon. Gentleman for his comments—indeed I do thank him; I agree with him about the nature of the British people. We are a very generous country indeed. However, he makes the classic mistake of confusing asylum with migration. Asylum is for people who seek refuge from political persecution. We have honourable commitments in that regard under the 1951 convention and we shall continue to meet them. There is, however, some debate to be held over migration—I should like to see that happen during the next few months.

I am well aware of my hon. Friends' efforts to get the NASS system off to a flying start, because I have held discussions with her on the matter. Does she agree that there is concern about people who are currently settled inappropriately under the interim or the previous arrangements'? Will she do whatever she can to encourage colleagues in NASS to assume some of those responsibilities as soon as is practicable? Failing that, the well-meaning initiatives of NASS are likely to be compromised by inappropriate settlements under the previous conditions.

We have held good and constructive discussions on this matter. We managed to ensure that the NASS roll-out took place more quickly than we thought possible. That was a success and I congratulate the officials who were involved.

I suppose that we can, at least, give some welcome to the extension of the NASS scheme to the London authorities, albeit four months later than the Government promised us. If everything in the garden is so lovely—as the Minister says it is—why do we constantly hear complaints from local authorities such as Blackpool, and from voluntary organisations such as the Refugee Council, to the effect that the dispersal programme is being carried out in a shambolic fashion? Many people are not given adequate accommodation and access to legal advice and interpreters, despite the Government's continual promises. Why is there a steady flow of people back from the areas of dispersal to London and the south-east, as the Evening Standard reports only today? Is that not the clearest evidence that the Government's policy is not working in the way they promised us?

What is absolutely clear is that the programme that was inherited from the previous Conservative Government—whom the hon. Gentleman supported—was not well administered. The hon. Gentleman refers to a shambles. There was indeed a shambles; if he reads the report of the Audit Commission on the matter, he will find that all the research was conducted on the old arrangements—those set up by the previous Tory Government. Even to call them arrangements is a misnomer; they were organised chaos, from which local authorities—Labour and Tory—are still suffering.

What progress he has made on deregulating Sunday dancing.[130323]

We are seeking to resolve an issue with a House of Lords Committee in order to make progress.

Given that, this year, new year's eve falls on a Sunday and that Sunday dancing has long since been deregulated in Scotland, does my hon. Friend agree that it is a matter of frustration that the Deregulation Committee in another place, many of whose members' dancing days have probably long since gone, has declined to give an expeditious passage to this modest but necessary deregulation?

:I agree with hon. Friend. The ban on Sunday dancing is antiquated and should have gone years ago. We certainly do not want it to interfere with people celebrating new year. The ban was introduced in the Sunday Observance Act 1780 by probably the worst Tory Prime Minister, Lord North. Our proposals will give freedom of choice to people as well as remove unnecessary regulation on business. The hospitality and leisure industry estimates that the changes could generate up to 3, 000 new jobs. I am saddened that Conservative Lords are preventing progress at the moment. I hope that they will change their minds, because this is another example of the forces of conservatism opposing deregulation for business and freedom of choice for ordinary people.

Does the Minister not share my concern that it is the speed at which people might drive to dances on Sunday that is the principal concern? If we could be assured of a policy of zero tolerance in that respect, the proposition might be more acceptable.

I am afraid that, in my current state, I will not be driving or hobbling to dances—and I certainly will not be dancing.

Is not the law on this issue a complete shambles? It does not just affect dancing on Sunday. Is my hon. Friend the Minister aware that the Barrowford agricultural show in Pendle next month will, for the first time in about 100 years, take place on a Sunday? It will use only part of the local park, because if it used the entire park it would run counter to the Public Health Acts Amendment Act 1890 and the organisers would not be able to run their show. The issue is not just about Sunday dancing and what happens in another place, but about a whole raft of antiquated laws and anomalies that need to be addressed quickly.

We certainly want to make sure that we address a range of deregulation matters. It is regrettable that, at the moment, the Lords Deregulation Committee has proved somewhat obstructive on some issues, but we hope that it will change its mind. The archaic 18th century legislation prohibits discos and charity dances on Sundays. If such events were open to the public and run on a commercial basis, the position would be far better. All these Lords a' leaping could then begin to leap.

What the cost was to public funds of the recent expansion of his Department's Press Office. [130324]

To date, approximately £82, 000 has been spent on recruitment advertising and an external consultant's report, which recommended that the press office be restructured and expanded by between eight and 10 press officers.

From 31 March 1997 to 31 March 2000 the number of police officers in the United Kingdom fell by 2, 740, but now we hear, with a straight face from the Home Secretary, that he intends to spend up to £1.5 million on increasing his press office. Is he not slightly embarrassed by this conclusive evidence that he thinks that spin doctoring is more important than anything else, and that he would rather have press officers than police officers?

That was a silly point. As the hon. Gentleman wants to intertwine the issue of police officers with the number of press officers, he knows very well that, for the first three years of this Administration, the police authorities had to follow budgets either set or proposed by the Conservative Government. The difference between us and the Opposition on police numbers is that the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) promised an additional 500, 000 officers—[Laughter]—and secured only a reduction in numbers whereas, on 27 January 1997, we proposed giving police authorities money for additional police officers, which will now happen.

Does the Home Secretary agree that the importance of those people has been demonstrated over the weekend by the story in the News of the World? Is it not right that we need press officers to make it clear that releasing names in the way the News of the World has done puts children at risk? I am pleased to say that Opposition Front Benchers agree with that. Perhaps we ought to send a strong message through the press offices that the News of the World's action, whether well intentioned or otherwise, is profoundly dangerous.

The Minister of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Brent, South (Mr. Boateng), made our position very clear, and I am glad to note that the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald shares our concerns that, in these matters, the press should act above all on the advice of the police, who deal with the concerns of public safety.

When the right hon. Gentleman sorts out the press office, will he get it to issue a cheap press release explaining the Home Office's plans for the future of the three dangerous, empty tower blocks on Marsham street for which his Department has responsibility?

We have already done that.

What assessment he has made of the impact of CCTV systems funded under the crime reduction programme. [130325]

Schemes funded under the first round of the initiative are now being implemented and it will be at least 12 months before the impact of CCTV in those areas can be fully evaluated. The Home Office will fund in-depth and independent evaluations of 15 schemes and less detailed evaluations of a further 100. The crime and disorder reduction partnerships will also evaluate local schemes.

I thank the Minister for that reply. In my constituency, the Wetherby News has led a high profile campaign to install CCTV in the town centre. I very much support that campaign and have been in talks with Leeds city council to progress matters. Will the Minister look sympathetically at any well researched bid from Wetherby councillors and the business community that illustrates their willingness to give the scheme meaningful financial support and which clearly shows how CCTV fits into the overall strategy of crime reduction in Wetherby town centre?

I would be happy to do that. The good news about the second round announced on 31 March is that it will take the form of a rolling programme of bids, so with my hon. Friend's encouragement it will be possible for his local council to get in a well evaluated and targeted bid that is linked to local crime reduction targets. That is the key, as all the evidence so far suggests that such schemes make a substantial contribution to reducing crime in local areas.

How many CCTV schemes are there in the constituencies of Home Office Ministers, and what provisional assessment has been made of their efficacy?

I have no idea about arrangements in my colleagues' constituencies. However, under the previous and present Administrations, my local borough of Brent was able to put in well funded CCTV schemes that commended themselves to Ministers and civil servants alike. I recommend that approach to the hon. Gentleman.

If he will make a statement on his plans for the extension of different methods of voting in next year's local elections. [130326]

Thirty-eight pilot schemes to test new voting arrangements took place in 32 local authority elections last May. Each authority is preparing an evaluation of the effectiveness of their pilot projects, but these are not due until the beginning of August. When we have seen the evaluations we will be able to decide whether any extension is justified.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that while we all want an increase in the number of people who are able to vote in local elections, we want also to ensure the integrity of the vote and make sure that people's votes are cast correctly? What will happen to the pilot schemes next year if the general election falls on the same date as the county council elections?

We certainly want to ensure the integrity of any pilot schemes. Of course, if there were a general election at the same time as local elections, the arrangements that operate during a parliamentary election would apply in both cases.

When considering new voting methods, will the Minister bear in mind the needs of disabled people, particularly those with sensory disabilities, to ensure that any new methods take their requirements into account? We must ensure in particular that we do not lessen the pressure on authorities to maintain conventional voting methods that are open to disabled people.

I entirely agree with the right hon. Gentleman that we want to ensure greater access not only for those with physical disabilities but for those with learning disabilities. We have done a great deal to provide that access under recent legislation, and we have recently published guidance for electoral registration officers and returning officers to ensure that, wherever possible, there are obligations on them to provide access for disabled people to polling stations or to other forms of voting such as postal votes, so that they can play their full part in society.

I welcome some of the pilots that took place in May, particularly on earlier postal voting, but does the Minister accept that people fail to vote not simply because they cannot vote at weekends or over extended periods, but because they feel that the local government for which they are voting does not have the powers they want it to have? For example, when councillors vote against planning applications, their decisions are often referred to an independent inspector, who may overturn the wishes of local elected councillors. Will the Minister talk to his colleagues in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions to find out what measures may be introduced to ensure that local democracy means what it says?

As I understand it, the legislation under which local government operates was introduced by the previous Government, whom the hon. Gentleman no doubt supported. We are ensuring that we give local authorities greater freedom and greater powers so that we restore local democracy after the damage done by the Conservatives over 18 years.

In his deliberations, will my hon. Friend look into the important problem of voter impersonation? He may be aware that in the Coldhurst ward in Oldham there is a police investigation into what appears to have been widespread abuse of the voting system by people apparently voting twice.

Personation is a serious offence, and I will ask the police for their view on that matter when they have completed their inquiries.

When he last met the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to discuss arrangements for transferring responsibility for policing in London to the Metropolitan police authority.[130328]

I regularly meet the Metropolitan police Commissioner to discuss policing issues. The launch of the Metropolitan police authority was one of the issues discussed at our meeting on 22 June 2000.

Did not the Home Secretary hand a poisoned chalice to the Metropolitan police authority on 3 July, inasmuch as during his tenure of office, he has presided over a diminution of police manpower of no fewer than 1,200 in the metropolitan area? Furthermore, in the past year no fewer than 588 officers have left the service, while recorded crimes have risen by over 100,000.

The chalice is far from poisoned. The establishment of a democratic and representative Metropolitan police authority has been widely welcomed by all parties and is something that, in my view, should have been done many decades ago. What is lamentable is the fact that, year after year under the previous Administration, there were mounting reductions in the number of police officers in London—155 in 1995 and 400 in 1996, rising to 700 in 1997–98, under a budget set by the previous Administration—yet Conservative Members of Parliament did not protest about that serious reduction in police manpower in Greater London. It has taken changes to the financial arrangements for the Metropolitan police service that I have made, including a significant increase in the special allowance, to ensure that, at long last, numbers will stabilise and then start to rise. The one thing above all that made life so difficult for the Metropolitan police service was the abolition of the housing allowance under the Sheehy proposals, which the hon. Gentleman supported and we opposed; we are now repairing that damage.

Even if he would not describe it as handing over a poisoned chalice, surely the Home Secretary would agree that he has transferred the policing of London to the Metropolitan police authority in a pretty sorry state? How can he say that the drop in police numbers that occurred under the Conservatives is the problem when, during his years in office, the number has fallen by 1,581, at a time when crime is rising by 12.6 per cent., emergency calls are not answered and police stations are closing? Is he aware that Sir John Stevens has said that he needs 25,600 officers in London to police the capital properly, that numbers are currently lower than that and that even the mayor of London is now calling for urgent increases? Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us when numbers will return to the safe level of 25,600 that has been set by the Commissioner? Now, they are considerably lower than that, which represents an abdication of the Home Secretary's responsibilities.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, we are now putting money into the Metropolitan police service and other police services to ensure that numbers start to rise. In addition, already in payment is a £3,500 increase in the London allowance for Metropolitan police officers. What is absolutely certain, following last week's announcement by the shadow Chancellor, is that under the Conservatives the sums available for policing in London and the rest of the country would be significantly less than they are under the Labour Government.

Which police forces find it (a) most difficult and (b) easiest to recruit officers; and what mechanisms exist to attract potential recruits from the latter to the former forces. [130329]

If he will make a statement about those police forces which are experiencing recruitment difficulties. [130333]

The Metropolitan police service and the City of London police are finding it the most difficult to recruit police officers; a few other forces, including Essex, Hampshire, Hertfordshire and Thames Valley also report recruiting difficulties, but most forces, including Cheshire, West Midlands and Lancashire, are having no difficulty—indeed, the Sussex force in the south of England has reported considerable success in attracting recruits.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. The extra resources for more policemen and women are clearly much welcome. However, cannot more be done for areas such as mine in Cheshire, where there are more applications than positions, to give people incentives to go to forces such as those in the Metropolitan areas? Is there not a case for police forces doing more to retain officers and to stop the haemorrhaging in certain areas?

I hope very much that, following the very substantial increase in the London pay lead, which brings it to £6,000 a year above forces outside, many applicants who might previously have wished to join forces such as Cheshire's will be attracted to applying either to London forces or to those in the south-east.

Can my right hon. Friend say how the west midlands compares with other areas on recruitment? Secondly, what proportion of the 9,000 new officers proposed over the next three years will be allocated to the west midlands; more importantly, what will be Coventry's share?

My understanding is that recruitment in the west midlands is going well. I hope very much that it will be even more satisfactory following my announcements last week of significant increases in funding for the police service. I understand that total profile recruitment for 2000–01 for the west midlands is 555. Profile recruitment to the end of June was 149, and that was being met. Of those, 51 are officers provided under the crimefighting fund.

The Home Secretary announced that last year's growth was just short of 3 per cent., and we saw over the year a drop across the country of 1,700 officers—not a recruitment figure—which accelerated in the last six months, with a loss of about 1,000 officers. Given his answers in the House last week, when does he expect net recruitment to produce a police service across England and Wales of the 1997 size? Does he expect in the coming year a net increase in officers in every force? Will he give a guarantee that, unlike last year, every force will receive a net real-terms increase in the money that it receives after pensions moneys have been taken out?

As I told the House last week in answer to the hon. Gentleman, we anticipate that numbers should return to the April 1997 level some time in 2002, and then rise, on the funding that we have already provided, to their highest ever. Without notice, I cannot give him the detailed information for which he asked, but I shall certainly be happy to write to him.

The Home Secretary gave the figures for recruitment of regular police officers. Are those for the recruitment of special constables broadly similar? Will he give an indication of which counties have the greatest difficulty with early retirement and the retention of police officers over a longer period?

The figures that I gave were for full-time police officers and not for special constables, who are of course unpaid. I cannot give the hon. Lady detailed information about variations between forces in retention and retirement rates, but I am happy to write to her about that. I can tell her, however, that there are significant variations between otherwise similar forces on retirement, retention and sickness rates. Those illustrate variations in the performance of management. That is why, with Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary, we are expecting forces greatly to improve their performance. In London, improvements in sickness management have put hundreds of officers back on the beat.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one thing that police officers who are also community constables find so frustrating about the job is the extent to which they are taken off their community duties for other duties, as demand requires? To what extent does he expect the additional police officers whom he announced last week to change that practice? Does he intend to monitor the application of those additional officers to ensure that more community constables can do the job for which they are employed?

My hon. Friend is right. An Audit Commission report about two years ago showed that at any one time, only about 5 per cent. of the total strength of police services was available for general patrol. There has been a habit in many police services of giving higher priority to all other activities than to general patrol. I do not believe that that order of priorities is supported by the public. Yes, we will monitor the degree to which the additional officers are used on general patrol community duties and in the front line in fighting crime. We are providing the services with a great deal of back-room assistance, including an expansion in the number of scenes of crime officers. I very much hope that hon. Members in all parts of the House will monitor, in their own police forces and police districts, the effectiveness of the additional funds that we are providing.

Can the Home Secretary now answer the question that I put to him when he announced his public spending, and which he was then unable or unwilling to answer: after he has taken away from his projected £1.6 billion for police over the next three years the £500 million that he announced for the radio, the cost of salary rises and the cost of the pensions bill, how much will be left?

That was an extraordinary performance from the right hon. Lady. The simple fact is that police spending will rise by well over 6 per cent. in real terms next year and by almost 4 per cent. in real terms the following year. That contrasts extraordinarily well with the fact that when she was a Home Office Minister, police spending in real terms fell in one year by 0.9 per cent.

Clearly, the right hon. Gentleman cannot answer the question. May I ask him an easier one? Given that the number of police constables was rising when he took over, and given that the number has fallen consistently ever since, can he say whether he expects that by the time the Government leave office at the end of this Parliament, the number of police constables will be greater, smaller or the same as the number that he inherited?

Before the right hon. Lady devises her questions, it would be helpful if she could work out the difference between figures that are rising and figures that are falling. It was she who recommended the budget for 1997–98 to the House on 27 January 1997 and had the House approve it, and she who, during that debate, promised that there were funds available for police numbers to rise over the following three years by 5,000. In the year in which she laid down the budget, police numbers did not rise. They fell from 127,158 in March 1997 to 126,814 in March 1998. That was one more of the thousands of promises that the Conservatives failed to fulfil.

Clearly, the right hon. Gentleman does not know the answer to that question, either. May I throw him an even easier one? As a result of the spending plans announced last week, does he expect that the crime figures for 2000–01 will show a fall?

That depends on the criminals. Is the right hon. Lady saying, and will she go into the general election promising, that if people vote Conservative, crime will rise, year on year on year? [Interruption.] Oh, she is not saying that. She is inviting us to say it. What we are promising and what we are doing is putting in place the biggest-ever investment in police and crime reduction that the country has ever seen. Already, our programme of crime reduction is driving burglary and car crime down.

What assessment he has made of the effect of the employment concession on the total number of applicants for asylum in the UK. [130330]

We believe that the concession, which has operated since 1986, acts as a pull factor for applicants who wish to find work in this country but do not qualify for asylum. Several other European countries have no such concession to allow asylum seekers to work. We are keeping the need for the concession under review, especially in the light of the substantial progress we are making on speeding up asylum decisions.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does she agree that, while the employment concession can operate in favour of traffickers by allowing people with unfounded claims to work—often to pay their debts—it is also true that there are many genuine refugees, who need help and support to find work? They have valuable skills that they can contribute to this country. Will she ensure in any review she undertakes that their interests will be protected and that their skills will not be lost to the nation?

I agree with my hon. Friend. We must ensure that we have a firm response to those who, by trafficking and other means, try to undermine the honourable concept of asylum. My hon. Friend is right to mention refugee integration. Later in the year, I hope to announce a full programme for that and to illustrate the wonderful contribution that refugees have made to this country over the decades.

I am interested in what the Minister has said because it seems to fly in the face of what the Government are pleased to call joined-up government. My constituents are worried about congestion on our roads, the number of houses that will have to built on the green belt, the great pressure on hospitals—[Interruption.] I am glad that Labour Members find pressure on the hospitals interesting.

Order. Let us have the question.

My constituents are worried about the great pressure on hospitals and schools and that, if they are over 45, they cannot get a job. I do not understand how letting more economic migrants into the country is likely to change my constituents' perspective. Will the Minister comment on that?

Clearly the hon. Gentleman came into the Chamber without reading the question, which is about the work concession for asylum seekers. I respectfully remind him that the concession was introduced in 1986.

What assessment he has made of the impact the incorporation of the European convention on human rights will have on political parties in the United Kingdom; and if he will make a statement. [130331]

We do not anticipate that political parties will be covered by the definition of public authorities for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Is the Minister aware that many United Kingdom citizens, who are correctly on electoral registers, can neither vote for nor join the major political party in this country—the Labour party? I am referring to Northern Ireland. Will not those rights, which the citizens of Northern Ireland lack, be affected, at least indirectly, by the human rights convention? Is not it a good idea for the Labour party to organise in Northern Ireland? That might begin to end some of the sectarian nature of politics in the Province.

We do not believe that the way in which a political party allocates its membership or decides to organise itself internationally will come under the Human Rights Act.

Can the Minister tell us how the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Bill will square with freedom of expression—the fundamental tenet of the European Commission of Human Rights—given that, under the Bill, the composition of a Parliament will determine the funding and, therefore, the Labour party could currently spend £9 million on a referendum on the euro, but the Conservative party could spend only £5 million? How does that square with the fundamental tenet of freedom of expression and fundamental democracy?

Legislation has shown that it is possible to regulate the financial operation of elections and that that does not contravene the European convention on human rights. The legislation is clear on such matters, and it also deals with the transparency of the financial affairs of political parties. We want to ensure that we comply with the European convention on human rights—indeed, we will be obliged to do so—and nothing in the legislation to which the hon. Gentleman refers will cause us to breach it.

Pursuant to his answer of 6 July 2000 to my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Marsden), Official Report, column 299W, on the death of Hilda Murrell, when he expects the investigations by the Forensic Science Service into the remaining forensic evidence in the Hilda Murrell case to be complete. [130332]

The progress of the investigations by the Forensic Science Service into the remaining forensic evidence in the Hilda Murrell case is a matter for the Forensic Science Service and, of course, the West Mercia constabulary to whom it will report its findings. I understand that the West Mercia constabulary would be happy to brief my hon. Friend on the progress of the investigation.

I would like to meet them.

I will ensure that such a meeting takes place.

That is the sort of exchange I like.

If he will make a statement on his projections for police numbers on 1 March (a) 2001, (b) 2002, (c) 2003 and (d) 2004. [130334]

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced the outcome of Spending Review 2000 for Home Office services on 19 July. We are currently discussing the detailed implications of that announcement for police numbers with the police service. However, we expect that the number of police in March 2002 will exceed that which we inherited in March 1997. Moveover, we expect that, in March 2003, there will be the highest ever number of police officers in this country.

I hope that the Minister is right because, in April 2000, the West Mercia force was 101 policemen down compared with April 1997. Who will train those policemen? West Mercia could recruit 200 officers, but it could find only 40 places in the national training college. How does the Minister plan to increase capacity and when will those places be ready?

Places are ready at the moment, but that is precisely the issue that we are discussing with the police service. I am slightly disappointed that the hon. Gentleman did not acknowledge the fact that, last Thursday, West Mercia received £1.158 million of the £15 million special funding for rural areas this year. That will help to increase police numbers.

My hon. Friend will be well aware that a further reduction in crime figures in Lincolnshire was announced this month. That, together with the considerable amount of extra Government resources, including extra moneys for rural police forces, will make a career in the police force ever more attractive. Will he consider developing a national strategy of work in schools so that young people consider a career in the police force as a more attractive option to provide a greater number of recruits?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for asking that question. I congratulate the Lincolnshire force on beginning to decrease the figures. That is, of course, the test. It is a tribute to all those involved. We shall launch a major national recruitment campaign later this year, including close work in schools of the kind that she recommends. I am glad that we agree with the approach that she suggests.

I welcome the additional money for rural policing that will come to Somerset, but why was Somerset not included in the first place? How will the Minister monitor the adequacy of police resourcing for rural areas in police forces where there are also large urban areas?

Monitoring is an important part of the statistics that we published a week ago. For example, there is a wide variation in crime against the person and so on in the districts in Avon and Somerset. I have the figures in front of me, and the hon. Gentleman has them at his disposal. The purpose of publishing figures at the crime reduction partnership level and at basic command unit level is to allow the kind of informed debate about performance—which is key—to which he refers. I hope that he will join us in trying to drive standards up in the way in which we seek to do.

If he will make a statement on the number of applications for asylum from Chinese nationals in the past 12 months. [130335]

Compared with the first quarter of 1999, applications from Chinese nationals have increased by 180 per cent. in the first quarter of this year.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Earlier this year, I visited China with a number of parliamentary colleagues and, at first hand, we heard from our embassy and consular staff of the amazing demand for visas among young Chinese who want to improve their quality of life in the west. In the light of the appalling tragedy at Dover, does she agree that the civil penalty is fully justified and what discussions, if any, has she had with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to try to get the Chinese authorities to tackle at source the evil trade of trafficking in impressionable young Chinese?

We are having continuing discussions with our colleagues in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, but, as the House will know, there are difficulties with the way in which the Chinese Government carry out redocumentation. My hon. Friend is absolutely right to refer to the civil penalty, which has been very successful, and the appalling tragedy at Dover. We must make a concerted effort to combat that evil trade and the civil penalty is playing its part: since implementation, the number of clandestine entrants arriving through south-east Kent has dropped by 23 per cent. Perhaps the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald (Miss Widdecombe) will now drop her opposition to the civil penalty.

The Minister will be aware that Britain is being promoted in China as a soft touch for asylum seekers, who receive free national health service treatment and social security, neither of which are available in France. What is she doing to have the Chinese authorities place under arrest those gangsters—those facilitators—in China who promote Britain as a destination? It is no good her talking to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, which is patently doing nothing. When will her Department actively ensure that those facilitators in China are arrested?

I would take the hon. Gentleman a lot more seriously if he agreed to support our civil penalty, which gets to the heart of the matter, and if he had not backed the right hon. Member for Maidstone and The Weald when she opposed our plans to withdraw social security benefits and introduce the national asylum support service. Once again, the Tories say one thing and do another.

Are Ministers seriously considering the benefits that would arise in the management of asylum seekers—whether from China or elsewhere; whether legal or illegal—were the United Kingdom to introduce a national identity card system? When one begins to analyse that approach, does not the message come through that such a system would greatly reassure the wider public?

With the greatest respect to my hon. Friend, I do not think that that is the issue and we have no plans to introduce such a system. We must deal with those who seek to undermine the asylum system. Like many Members of the House, I owe a great deal to the stance taken by this country over the centuries on giving protection to refugees. I do not want anything to undermine that. Let us continue to provide sanctuary for those genuinely fleeing persecution.

What representations he has received from the chief constable of Hertfordshire regarding police numbers in Hertfordshire and pay levels; and if he will make a statement. [130336]

The Hertfordshire constabulary had 1,767 officers on 31 March 2000, which is 43 more than it had 12 months earlier. I understand from the chief constable that he is projecting a further increase in police numbers this year and that the force target for the constabulary is 2,083 officers by 31 March 2001.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that many Metropolitan police officers live in Hertfordshire and that as a result of the pay increase for Met police officers serving since 1994 there is now a differential between those officers and Hertfordshire officers of £6,000 a year? That is obviously encouraging many Hertfordshire officers to consider transferring to the Metropolitan police service. Will my right hon. Friend consider these issues and ensure that the police negotiating board deals with them with some urgency?

I understand my hon. Friend's point. The police negotiating board is considering this and a range of other issues in relation to pay and conditions. I will ensure that my hon. Friend's concerns are drawn to its attention.

Given the pay differential between officers in Hertsmere and Hertfordshire and those in the Metropolitan area, will the Minister bear in mind the need for more police officers in Hertfordshire, especially in view of the growth of offences in violence? There has been an increase of 15 per cent. in such offences; and robberies have increased by 68 per cent. Hertfordshire is rapidly becoming a much less safe place in which to live. Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the reliance that he has placed on crime and disorder strategies, and especially the anti-social behaviour order, of which only one has been issued in Hertfordshire in response to all the violence that has taken place?

The level of crime in Hertfordshire is still lower than the national average. Crime is at a lower level now than it was at the time of the general election. There are more serving police officers in Hertfordshire now than when the Conservative party had stewardship of these matters.

What measures he is taking to encourage local partnerships between the police and local authorities to make better use of orders available under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to prevent anti-social behaviour. [130337]

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary recently published guidance in the form of a booklet entitled "Anti-Social Behaviour Orders: Guidance on drawing up Local ASBO Protocols", and a copy has been placed in the Library. That guidance is supported by training seminars and a variety of other means.

I welcome the fact that an increasing number of local authorities and local crime partnerships are making use of these orders. However, does my hon. Friend agree that it is not enough to have one or two orders per local authority area? They should be used where appropriate, and they should be seen by local crime reduction partnerships as a tool of early intervention and not as a last resort.

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to the work done by her city council, Liverpool, which I have visited. It has developed co-ordinated work between a variety of different agencies, which delivers in that way. There is a need to examine the range of orders that is available, and not only the anti-social behaviour order, in taking the action that my hon. Friend recommends.

Does the Minister accept that one of the issues relating to the use of these orders is the overall level of police resources? In that context, will he tell us when he expects to be able to announce final conclusions on the overall element of rural sparsity funding in the police funding formula?

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the announcement that we made last Thursday. I do not know whether the hon. Gentleman is aware of it. The announcement included about £650,000 for Cumbria, which I think will be well appreciated.

How many applicants for asylum have permission to work under the terms of the employment concession. [130338]

We estimate that about 30,000 port asylum applicants at present have permission to work. In the case of in-country applicants, the available information indicates that about 14,000 applicants have been given permission to work in the past 12 months.

I thank my hon. Friend for that response. As a new Member, I was appalled by the time that was taken before decisions were made. Many families lived their lives in suspension, being unable to make any plans. I recognise that the time taken for initial decisions has been reduced, but what further steps are being taken to increase the speed of decisions?

My hon. Friend highlights an important point. We are recruiting many more asylum case workers to quicken decision making. We are working hard with the Lord Chancellor's Department to ensure that we are quickening the appeal process as well.

What assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of town centre CCTV systems in reducing crime and nuisance. [130342]

A number of research studies show that closed circuit television can have considerable success in reducing crime and anti-social behaviour in town centres and elsewhere. We have the largest scheme in the history of this country, and it is delivering substantial reductions in crime in many different ways.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Without wishing to pre-empt further research, he may like to know that, since CCTV cameras were introduced in Corby, 1,000 arrests have been directly attributable to them and crime has reduced by 32 per cent. Will he therefore consider sympathetically the application for extending CCTV in Corby to the town of Raunds in the rural part of my constituency and to the business watch schemes on industrial estates in Corby?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that information. I am glad to say that it is typical of what has been happening. The guidelines that we published last February gave priority, in the CCTV bidding process, to three areas: first, rural areas, which my hon. Friend specifically mentioned; secondly, transport to help promote our integrated transport strategy; and, thirdly, out-of-town estates and business parks of the type that he mentioned. If he can get his local council and police to look at the Home Office website, they will find detail that will provide further opportunity for reducing crime in Corby.