When he will publish his review of the voucher system for the support of asylum seekers. [5136]

If he will make a statement on his policy for dealing with asylum seekers. [5147]

I shall make a full statement to the House on nationality and asylum in the next fortnight. As part of that, I shall spell out the Government's approach to asylum in the years ahead, and shall publish the review of both vouchers and dispersal.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on conducting that review. However, does he understand that asylum seekers find the process of making purchases with vouchers humiliating? In addition, they are unable to get full value for money because of shops' inability to give change on the vouchers. Will my right hon. Friend therefore make sure that any future system addresses both those problems and will he try to ensure a speedy conclusion to the review?

I am aware of the strong feelings—how could I not be?—about the operation of the system generally and the perception of vouchers in particular. That is precisely why my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary initiated the voucher review, why we have taken our time to take the suggested changes on board and why I want to make any change part of a much broader package of measures.

Is the Home Secretary aware that many of us were impressed by his integrity when, shortly after taking office, he volunteered the information that the number of asylum seeker cases in the pipeline was not about 20,000, as had been stated before, but more than 40,000? However, it would help the House a great deal more if he gave us some explanation of how that massive statistical error occurred and who was responsible.

I am happy to do so. In 1996, the then Government put in place a computer system that soon collapsed; with it went the statistical base on which sensible calculation was made. It was not until we initiated a manual count that we discovered the complete mess-up following the collapse of the Siemens contract, entered into by Conservative Members. In those circumstances, of course we believed that transparency was the best way of proceeding, and that is how the Home Office team will proceed from now.

In reviewing the voucher scheme, my right hon. Friend will, I am sure, take on board the humiliation and stigma which have been mentioned already. However, will he also look at the critical question of the value of vouchers or whatever system replaces them? Many people will not accept the replacement of the voucher system with another system that still leaves people living on significantly less than income support.

The full range of issues raised, not just in the review itself but in representations by Members of Parliament, voluntary organisations and those working with refugees, will be taken on board, including the importance of providing necessary support. That will all be done in the context of getting a system that has the trust of the British people and the confidence of those who have to operate it, and sends a clear signal to the rest of the world.

Does the Home Secretary agree that the asylum voucher system question involves the question of value for money for the taxpayer? To illustrate those administrative costs, can the Home Secretary give the administrative cost of each £1 of vouchers provided to asylum seekers?

No, I cannot, but I will write to the hon. Gentleman with those details. I am aware of the calculations done about three years ago when the voucher system was first mooted. The calculation by the Department of Social Security and those administering the vouchers—the £700:£425 ratio per 1,000 claimants—did not take into account the full cost of administering the social security system. It would therefore be better if I gave the hon. Gentleman an up-to-date reply.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of my constituents sincerely hope that the conclusions of the second review will result in the abolition of the voucher system? If it does not, and an alternative system is introduced, will he ensure that it is acceptable not only in high street shops but in high street markets?

I am aware of the problems that people have had in accessing retail outlets that accept vouchers. On my hon. Friend's first point, the key issue is to see the survival or abolition of the voucher system not in isolation but as part of a review of the working of the structure and system. We need a system which allows those operating it to do the job efficiently and effectively, and which is sensible, rational and humane for those who experience it day in, day out.

In his review of policy, does the Secretary of State intend to review planning policy? I refer to the proposal for an asylum seeker stop-off site in Great Gransden, which I believe is being planned with no local consultation in a rural village and which is causing considerable upset to local people. In this and future cases, will proper local consultation be undertaken?

As we saw at Ashford, everyone wants something done, but somewhere else, away from their own patch. If there is to be a transition arrangement in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, I am keen that we should ensure that local people know what is taking place, why and how it is to be operated. That will have to be part of the review of the dispersal system, which is designed to protect the people of Kent and London, who were overwhelmed by the way in which the previous system operated. My predecessor, my right hon. Friend the present Foreign Secretary, implemented the dispersal system precisely because people wanted to ensure a more rational system of dispersing and placing people around the country.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us who supported the voucher system in the belief that it would not attract people without well-founded claims have lost their taste for the system, having experienced it almost first-hand? When he examines more closely dispersal and the wider issues, will he bear it in mind that, without dispersal, the situation in places such as Dover and the south Kent ports would be unsustainable? Whatever happens at the other end, will he ensure that for the ports of east Kent, there will be some protection and that dispersal will continue?

First, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the rational and mature way in which he has dealt with a difficult issue in and around his constituency. Thanks to the way in which he has handled himself and the issues, a great deal of difficulty has been avoided. I can give him an absolute assurance that any future dispersal system and review outcome will ensure that the people of those areas, which I recently visited, will be protected, and that a sensible way will be found, whether in the case of minors or older asylum seekers, to ensure that they are quickly, effectively and humanely found a suitable place to live which does not involve their staying around the Kent ports.

Does the Home Secretary accept that requests for asylum can be misused by men of violence? What is his response to the statement made by the Saudi ambassador and reported in the Sunday papers that

"many Arab governments have told the British Government repeatedly that a lot of people in Britain masquerading as political refugees are terrorists"?

I welcomed the hon. Gentleman to his position last week, and I do so again. I look forward to welcoming him for a long time to come. I read the ambassador's statements a week last Sunday. I suggest that all hon. Members read the full interview in order to get the measure of what was being said and how it was being said. If any ambassador from whatever quarter suggests ways in which we might follow up those who are alleged to be terrorists, we will do so. As was made clear in the statement last Monday, we will ensure that those who come into our country and attempt to claim asylum and who are suspected of terrorism will be held and dealt with quickly and effectively.

But is not the real problem that the Home Secretary is unable to deport people whom he regards as a threat to our national security? Given the widespread scepticism expressed in recent days, does he continue to believe that indefinite detention, otherwise known as internment, is really an adequate and sustainable solution to that problem?

The hon. Gentleman is an expert on escaping.

My hon. Friend's not so sotto voce sedentary remark caps it all. The hon. Gentleman is right in saying that there are difficulties in removing people from the country where they would face torture, death or degrading treatment. That is true. That applies and has applied since the inception of the European convention on human rights. The question that we must address is whether we would knowingly send those people to such situations, or would we prefer to hold them pending their transfer to a third safe country. As we spelled out in a statement and in answers to questions last Monday, that depends entirely on whether there is an extradition treaty. Where there is not, it is preferable to hold people than to send them back in circumstances where there is no guarantee of a fair trial.

What plans he has to extend CCTV in those areas that already have a CCTV presence in their town centres. [5137]

Under the crime reduction programme closed circuit television initiative, 149 town-centre schemes have been allocated funding to date, with a further eight still under consideration. Of these, 80 are extensions to existing CCTV schemes.

Is the Minister aware that the CCTV system in the centre of Chelmsford, which was funded by the previous Conservative Government and funded by the present Government, has had a dramatic impact in reducing crime levels in the area and increasing the number of people who have been apprehended while attempting to commit crime?

I am pleased that the hon. Gentleman recognises the dramatic impact that CCTV has had on crime in Chelmsford, and that he welcomes the placing of schemes in various positions in his constituency. He should welcome the fact that these areas receive funding from the initiative. As he knows, the initiative is now closed, but there are other opportunities for funding under the communities against drugs and the small retailers in deprived areas initiatives. I am sure that Chelmsford will be considering these opportunities to ascertain whether it qualifies for the programmes.

Will my right hon. Friend seek to provide more resources so that CCTV can be extended to smaller shopping areas, including estate shops within our constituencies? The system is based predominantly on large town centres, and has been a force for good for both the prevention and detection of crime. Surely we should extend the advantage that the system brings to smaller shopkeepers and not confine it to multinational companies.

As I have mentioned, there is the new small retailers in deprived areas initiative, which I am sure my hon. Friend's constituency may want to consider. We are evaluating the lessons from the CCTV scheme, and I hope that we will be able to bring forward new initiatives that will go round it in future.

Is the Minister aware that since CCTV was installed in King's Lynn it has had a very beneficial effect in reducing levels of crime? Is he also aware that the police are concerned that there has been a displacement of crime into surrounding rural areas and into some surrounding towns as well? Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that there is a strong case for the installation of CCTV in the neighbouring town of Hunstanton? What is the position of that bid for CCTV?

I am not aware whether the bid to which the hon. Gentleman is referring is one of the schemes that is still under consideration. I shall look into that and write to him with the answer.

My right hon. Friend knows about the success of the town centre CCTV scheme in Chorley, but dispersal of crime is a problem that we all fear, and is in danger of catching up with us. Will my right hon. Friend make extra resources available for areas such as Pall Mall in Chorley?

I am sure that my hon. Friend would not expect me to commit resources to his constituency from the Dispatch Box. Again, I welcome the fact that he appreciates the benefit of CCTV, which is part of the overall programme of crime reduction in the country. It must be viewed as part of a package of arrangements that we are introducing. I know that my hon. Friend will continue to press strongly for extra resources for his constituency.

Does the Minister agree that although any initiative on CCTV may be welcome, it has to be set against the evidence that the detection rate for crime is at an all-time low of 24 per cent.—and 12 per cent. for burglary? There appears to be no overall strategy. Does he accept that, as matters stand, the criticism by Nick Ross that the Government's claim to be tough on crime is no more than meaningless garbage is valid?

I do not remember that expression. The hon. Gentleman should welcome the overall reduction in crime in specific areas and the extra investment in police. The crime fighting fund has provided for 9,000 extra police officers on top of the planned development of police recruitment. The whole package will mean tackling crime more effectively in future.

The CCTV scheme in Barnsley town centre has been successful in reducing crime and making people feel safer on the streets. There is no doubt that that has allowed the crime prevention partnership to target burglary and set the goal of a 6 per cent. reduction each year, and a 10 per cent. reduction in areas where the highest incidence occurs. However, my right hon. Friend knows that CCTV involves a displacement factor. Will he consider financing research which could be used to give guidance to local authorities when they extend CCTV projects?

I thank my hon. Friend for his welcome of CCTV in Barnsley. I assure him that the initiative is being evaluated, and that there is research on the effects of CCTV and its consequences in specific areas. We will present the findings as soon as possible to guide us with new initiatives that we may introduce in future.

What steps he is taking to enable asylum seekers to work legally. [5140]

Under the terms of the employment concession, adult asylum seekers can apply for permission to work if their application has been outstanding for longer than six months without a decision being made on it. There are no plans to alter the way in which the concession operates.

A study by the Mayor estimates that more than half of London's refugee population is economically inactive although most refugees want to work. Does the Minister accept that, economically, that is highly irrational at a time of chronic labour shortage in many service industries? Is it not even more absurd that the Government are scouring the world for qualified doctors and nurses when hundreds are sitting in this country, dependent on vouchers or in detention? Will she have a fresh look at the six-month rule and the single-applicant rule, which perpetuate an irrational and unreasonable policy?

The hon. Gentleman seems to be confusing asylum seekers with refugees. As he knows, refugees are entitled to work and we have many schemes for enabling, for example, those who have medical and nursing qualifications to work in the health service, where they are much needed.

Will my hon. Friend reconsider the policy? There are many thousands of asylum seekers in my constituency. I do not sneer at economic migrants, who have come to this country to try to make a contribution. Thousands of them have nothing to do. If that position is allowed to persist, they will enter the unofficial economy, as they undoubtedly already do. It is demeaning to individuals who want to work not to be able to do so. I therefore ask my hon. Friend to think about the policy again.

If those people have applied for asylum, they have come to this country because they are fleeing torture. For those who are economic migrants, my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary will have something to say about organising the way in which we will deal with them in a more coherent way in the future. My hon. Friend should not mix up the two.

Can the Minister confirm that the Home Office has now abandoned proposals to introduce identity cards in this country, whether to deal with this or any other issue?

No, I cannot.

What assessment he has made of the connection between crime reduction and the provision of leisure, recreation and sporting facilities for young people. [5141]

We believe that the provision of facilities and activities for young people can help to reduce crime. That is why the Government have supported a number of programmes, such as the Youth Justice Board-managed youth inclusion and summer splash schemes. These provide structured activity programmes not only to occupy young people but to provide a vehicle for working with them to prevent them from drifting into crime or other antisocial activity.

Notwithstanding the need to continue to crack down on those young people who cause problems in our communities, is it not the case that our young people far too often say that they simply have nothing to do, that they cannot find a place just to go and have a cup of coffee and that there is a lack of recreational facilities? Notwithstanding the answer that my hon. Friend the Minister has just given, will she have another look at the facilities available to our young people so that they can get more of those facilities to help them as they grow up?

The evidence from the youth inclusion programme—particularly the summer splash schemes, which have been independently evaluated—shows that these kinds of activities are not only useful but cost-effective. The splash schemes show a 36 per cent. reduction in domestic burglary, and an 18 per cent. reduction in youth crime, on the estates where they took place. They are also important because they enable the police and other workers in the youth justice system to work directly, in a non-confrontational way, with young people, to develop relationships that are important in deterring young people from committing crime. These schemes have been successful and we are going to continue them.

Given that a young man with plenty of purposeful activity and plenty of useful things to do—be they sporting, recreational or educational—is less likely to turn or return to crime, how does the Minister expect young men aged 18 to 21, released from the B wing of Feltham young offenders institution, to lead a good life when, for the past four years under the Labour Government they have been denied all those facilities, having been locked up in their cells for most of the day under a regime described by Her Majesty's inspector of prisons as "utterly disgraceful"?

I do not know how recently or how frequently the hon. Gentleman has visited Feltham. If he has visited it, he will know that the problems there started long before this Government came to office. The problems that we inherited at Feltham were the product of long-term neglect by the Tory Government. If the hon. Gentleman has been there recently, he will have seen that the regime is being transformed, initially for the under-18s, and now for the 18 to 21s—not before time, I grant him, but it is this Government who have done it, not the Tory Government.

Will the Minister join me and the representatives of professional sports clubs whom I met on Friday in recognising that, while there is a need and a great desire to increase the level of participation in sport in this country, one of the problems the clubs have is the number of initiatives placed in front of them? Is it possible for the Home Office to work with others across government to ensure that, rather than professional and amateur sports clubs having to fill in a plethora of application forms to chase pockets of money, a more co-ordinated approach could be taken? Many professional sports clubs offer tens of thousands of opportunities across the east midlands already. They would like to offer more, but need assistance to deliver them.

I take my hon. Friend's point. It is sometimes difficult for sporting and other voluntary organisations to navigate the procedures that we rightly require them to go through when they try to access public money. Through Sport England, we are working directly with an initiative called "positive futures", as well as other bodies, and I hope that that enables the sporting bodies in particular to access the information that they need to make successful bids more easily. That is certainly our intention.

What recent discussions he has had with Essex police about police numbers in Essex. [5142]

I am told by the chief constable that, in September, Essex police had 2,953 officers, which is 66 more than in March, and 1,582 civilian staff, which is 135 more than in March. The crime fighting fund is delivering more police officers to Essex police and information supplied by the force shows that Essex expects to take on 247 new recruits in 2001–02.

Does the Minister accept that Essex police numbers are far lower than when I was previously an Essex MP and does he consider that to be deplorable? Does he accept that that figure is one factor that is driving down police morale in Essex, as elsewhere in the country where morale is at an all-time low? Does he agree that it is an unprecedented insult for the Government to refuse to grant the police the golden jubilee medal? I call on him to review his policy and grant that medal.

We are on course for a record, highest-ever number of police officers in England and Wales, and Essex, like other forces, is benefiting—[HON. MEMBERS: "When?"] In the lifetime of this Parliament. [Interruption.] Opposition Members laugh, but it is good news that there will be more police officers than ever before in England and Wales. That is being achieved by this Government, and the figure will exceed any previous level. I do not accept that morale is low. Wastage from the police service is low.

Will my right hon. Friend take it from me that the problem is not the welcome resources that he has described, but the chief constable's priorities and the way in which he distributes those resources? I represent some of the poorest areas in Essex and we are simply not getting our share of the cake. Bearing in mind that those are operational decisions of the chief constable, can my right hon. Friend have a word with him about setting the right priorities? We are talking about redistributing resources in favour of the most disadvantaged people who suffer the most crime and are least protected and supported by other mechanisms such as insurance. There is a real problem in Essex. It is not of my right hon. Friend's making, but those scarce resources must be redistributed.

As my hon. Friend rightly says, the deployment of officers is a matter for chief constables, but we intend to ensure that we drive up standards in the police service across England and Wales by identifying best practice and the ways in which forces are achieving it. The new standards unit that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has announced and the inspections of basic command units that are now taking place will enable us to identify any areas in which the service is not up to the standard that my hon. Friend would expect and will allow measures to be taken to tackle that.

Police in Essex will be interested to know that, by the end of this Parliament, there will be more officers than ever before, but they are fully aware that there are 1,600 fewer nationally than when the Government took office. They would be delighted to know when we shall get back to where we were when the Government started, let alone when that can be built on.

The hon. Gentleman should have the wit to adjust his question if it has already been answered earlier—but he ploughed on regardless and had nothing of any value to say to the House. I am proud of the fact that the Government have reversed the long-term trend of reducing police numbers that was established under the Conservative Government. Last year, police numbers increased by 1,349, the largest annual increase for well over a decade.

What proposals he has to amend the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. [5144]

The Government keep the misuse of drugs legislation under continual review.

After 30 years of the harshest prohibition of drugs in Europe, this country has the worst drugs problem in the continent and the position continues to deteriorate. Other countries have reduced harm by policies of regulated, licensed decriminalisation.

My hon. Friend will know that the overwhelming majority of heroin coming into this country comes from Afghanistan. It does not come from the area controlled by the Northern Alliance: it comes from the entire area of Afghanistan. The cultivation of those crops increased considerably when the Taliban Government came to power. Despite the fact that they took the decision not to produce heroin, there are massive stockpiles in Afghanistan, and there is no discernible impact on the supply to this country of any temporary disruption of cultivation. Therefore one wonders what their motivation was for that policy.

Bearing in mind that more than half of our young people have experimented with drugs at some point, and that the police have responded by not enforcing the law in all its severity, is there not scope for a wide-ranging inquiry, perhaps on the lines of a royal commission?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has called for an adult debate, and has rightly emphasised the need to consider carefully all the implications of any change in our drugs law. The potential for increasing usage is one of the issues that would have to be picked up in that debate. It is a challenge for those who advocate legalisation—one to which they rarely rise.

I am sure that my hon. Friend is aware of the comments made at the conference of probation officers last week. In the light of those remarks, of what is happening in other countries throughout Europe and of the recommendations in Lady Runciman's report, and bearing in mind what the Metropolitan police are doing in Brixton, why are the Government so resistant to reconsidering the law regarding cannabis?

If my hon. Friend had listened to my previous answer, he would have heard me say that my right hon. Friend wants an adult debate. If he properly examines the policies in many other countries, he will discover that the apparent discrepancies are often not as wide as they are believed to be. In many countries there is a convergence that involves the disruption of the supply of drugs and measures—such as harm reduction and education—to try to tackle these issues.

If he will make a statement on the number of special constables available for duty in England and Wales. [5146]

The number of serving specials was 12,738 at 31 March 2001. The Government are committed to increasing the special constabulary, and we are currently carefully considering improvements in support services and the recruitment and retention of specials.

I am grateful to the Home Secretary for his answer. As he will know from the response to Question 6, there are more than 1,600 fewer police officers than there were in 1997—but is it not also the case that there are 7,136 fewer special constables now than there were then? Does he recall the Prime Minister's pledge to put

"thousands more police officers on the beat"?

There is no hot air in the commitment that we have given to raise 130,000 full-time equivalent officers over the next two years. By next summer, we will have a record number of officers, and we will complement that with a recruitment and retention drive for specials. That will form part of our development of the role of the community and of active citizenship in tackling crime and disorder and, in particular, antisocial behaviour.

I welcome what my right hon. Friend has said about the increase in the number of special constables. Does he agree that it would be a great advantage if specially trained special constables worked with community groups on such issues as antisocial behaviour orders and matters dealt with by Crimewatch groups? Might that not help to reduce crime and bring some satisfaction to our communities?

I entirely agree. That would be an excellent way not just to mobilise the community to tackle crime and disorder, but to ensure that members of the community constitute an in-depth part of the solution and can reach out, having been trained, authorised and regulated by the police service. It would also be an excellent way of using the time and talent of people who may have retired early, and of making the community feel that it is indeed part of the solution. We are currently having constructive dialogue about resources, and I hope that we shall be able to recruit a large number of specials who will fulfil exactly the role that my hon. Friend has outlined.

I know how much specials are appreciated throughout the country, just as full-time officers are. At times of increased tension such as this, the more visible policing that can be provided through the use of both specials and regular officers is hugely appreciated, not least in areas where there could be a threat to minority communities, or where there are very mixed communities.

I, too, have read the figures that keep emerging from either the Metropolitan police or the Metropolitan Police Authority showing how much costs are escalating. I would never wish to intervene in the operational freedom of a chief constable or commissioner, but we must retain some sort of balance in what is spent by the Metropolitan police and the 43 authorities across England and Wales.

What plans he has to change the law in respect of double jeopardy. [5150]

The Government's manifesto includes a commitment to reform the double jeopardy rule in cases involving murder, and the Government will do so when parliamentary time allows.

I know that my right hon. Friend is very anxious to take the House with him in this matter. Does he agree that the provision of information is vital if he is to do so? Yet when I asked how many cases the change in the law is likely to lead to, I was told that the number is not known because the police do not investigate after an acquittal. When I asked how many cases per year fall within the sentencing category, how many lead to convictions and how many of those convictions are overturned on appeal, I was told that the answer was available only at disproportionate cost. Before we overturn a rule that has served us well for 900 years, will my right hon. Friend make sure that that information is made available to the House?

I am well aware of my hon. Friend's careful consideration of this matter. He has partly answered his own question about the likely number of cases. The information is not available because the police do not generally seek fresh evidence against someone who has been acquitted of an offence. However, in evidence to the Home Affairs Committee, the Director of Public Prosecutions suggested that there might be a handful of cases involving murder each year.

Does the Minister realise that the proposed change in the law is very controversial? Will he give an undertaking that if the Government are determined to make the change, it will be limited to murder cases? In the event of a second trial, what criteria will be applied to ensure that individuals do not have the threat of an infinite number of trials hanging over them?

As I said, we are carefully considering the views of Sir Robin Auld, and those of the Law Commission, on whether double jeopardy reform should be extended. We are consulting on those proposals at the moment and we will make our views known in due course.

What further action he is taking to increase recruitment into the Metropolitan police. [5151]

Recruitment to the Metropolitan police has been aided by the crime fighting fund, by the national recruitment campaign, by the provision of free rail travel within a 70-mile radius of London and by the increase last year in London allowance for post-Sheehy officers.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that the particular challenge in recruitment to the Met in attractive, highly desirable, outer-London suburbs such as Harrow is the high cost of property, especially for first-time buyers? Is he aware also that that issue is beginning to affect the retention of officers after two or three years service, when they may be attracted by cheaper property prices in other police force areas? Will he keep under close review the question of whether further investment in key worker housing is necessary both to retain police officers and to help with recruitment in suburbs such as my own?

My hon. Friend makes very good points. We are certainly keen to understand and respond to all the reasons for police officers leaving the force early. Wastage of officers remains very low, but we do not want to lose a single officer unnecessarily. On housing, I am sure that my hon. Friend will welcome the Government's initiative to enable 550 London police officers to buy first homes with financial assistance over the next three years.

Will the review of the resource allocation formula used by the Metropolitan police lead to an increase in police numbers in outer-London boroughs such as Harrow and Bromley?

Consultation is taking place on a new formula for the allocation of police officers in London boroughs, which was suggested by the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis. As that consultation is still under way, it is too early to be certain about what the final allocation will be.

While I welcome the initiatives that have been taken to increase Metropolitan police recruitment, police have been moved from the boroughs to central London because of the higher security levels, leaving those boroughs under-resourced. Are there any specific initiatives to address that issue?

Everyone welcomes and acknowledges the reassurance role that the Metropolitan police service has been playing since 11 September, and I think that that reassurance has had a significant impact on the sense of public security. However, I assure my hon. Friend that the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis is very clearly aware of the need to ensure that effective normal policing arrangements are in place during this time.

What the maximum capacity of the Metropolitan police training school was in each of the last three years; and what percentage of trainees completed the course successfully in each of those years. [5153]

I understand from the commissioner that the capacity of the Metropolitan police service training school for 2001–02 is 2,600. No maximum capacity was set in previous years. The percentage of recruits successfully completing training for each of the past three years is 92 per cent. in 1999; 93 per cent. in 2000; and 94 per cent. in 2001.

I thank the hon. Lady for that reply. Will she please comment on the likely impact of the drop-out rate on the ability to reach the targets for increased police numbers, particularly in that other attractive outer-London constituency of Upminster, which suffers very badly from the leeching of resources into inner London?

The commissioner fully expects to recruit up to 2,500 police officers this year. That number will both cover wastage and enable, by March 2002, an increase in strength of more than 1,000 officers, helping to reach the total target of 26,650 officers. The commissioner therefore expects that that number will more than meet demand.

If he will make a statement on the intensive supervision and surveillance programme. [5156]

The intensive supervision and surveillance programme is a Youth Justice Board initiative funded by the Home Office. It is targeted at the 3 per cent. of young people who are responsible for about 25 per cent. of juvenile offences, providing the courts with a robust community-based alternative to custodial sentences and remands.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Is she aware that my colleagues and I in Leeds are holding an inquiry into drug abuse in Leeds, and that one of the issues that has already been raised is the fact that the families, and especially the parents, of drug users experience great stress, particularly when their offspring go to prison? We therefore truly welcome the type of initiative that she has outlined.

I thank my hon. Friend for his support. The initiative is very important for the reasons that he has identified. The programme has two elements—intensive monitoring by electronic tagging or voice verification and very highly structured individual programmes with intense supervision and surveillance. It is a very robust alternative to custody. I hope that the initiative will prove as successful nationally as the Rotherham pilot showed it to be locally, not only in keeping young serious offenders out of custody but in substantially reducing their offending.

If he will make a statement on his priorities for tackling prison reform. [5158]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for this question. We do not often get a question on prison reform at Home Office questions, yet it is an issue that hon. Members need to take more seriously.

I thank my hon. Friend for her reply. Perhaps it is because I have three prisons in my constituency that I have more than the average interest. We have had three bad cases involving paedophiles. One was exceptionally awful, in which a paedophile sentenced to a four-year term in prison was given 18 months off for remission, having received no education or psychiatric care. He returned to the community almost the same as he was when he left. Will my hon. Friend give such cases renewed thought? I look forward to changes in the way in which paedophiles are treated in prison.

Alongside the provision of more offending behaviour programmes in prison, the Prison Service has a target to deliver a substantial number of sex offender treatment programmes. That is linked to a more co-ordinated strategy in terms of multi-agency protection panels and continuing work with sex offenders in the community when they are released from prison. This is an important priority. We must ensure that when offenders leave prison, they are as well equipped as possible to ensure that they do not reoffend. For sex offenders, that is a particularly important part of our public protection strategy.

How can the Minister and the Prison Service be taken seriously on prison reform when Downview prison was re-roled from a category C/category D prison—it had a splendid scheme, RAPT, for dealing with drug offenders—to a women's prison, with just five weeks notice? The offenders being treated on all the programmes to which the Minister has referred were scattered to the four winds throughout the Prison Service, thereby losing the benefits of all those programmes.

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the need to re-role Downview, and he has spoken to me about this. One of the fundamental responsibilities of the Prison Service is to respond to the summation of decisions of the courts. The number of women being sent to prison on sentence and on remand is increasing rapidly—much more rapidly than the general rise in the prison population. The Prison Service must respond to that. Were the numbers of women sent to prison to stabilise or reduce, I, for one, would be glad. We must respond to the decisions of the courts, and we had to re-role a prison to take the 4,000 women who are now sent to prison by the courts.

Should not the priorities be the safety of prison staff and, among prisoners, the eradication of drug dependency, as well as improved education? On the last point, is my hon. Friend shocked by the high levels of illiteracy in our prisons? Should not those levels be eradicated first?

Yes, I am shocked. It is important for hon. Members and the general public to appreciate that those whom the Prison Service receives are, on a range of indicators, some of the most socially excluded and disadvantaged people. That is not to excuse their offending, but to try to show that the problems with which the Prison Service has to deal are multiple and serious. Levels of drug-related offending are high, but the Prison Service is making massive strides in trying to help prisoners to make up some of their deficits. The number of literacy and numeracy qualifications now awarded at basic level 2—the lowest level for employability—is considerable. The focus on rehabilitation and resettlement is something that we want to continue.

What steps will the Minister take to ensure that the increasing number of women prisoners can keep in touch with their children during their sentence?

There has been a worrying reduction in the number of visits received by prisoners over the past couple of years, and I am watching that closely. In particular, I am considering a pilot scheme in one region, in conjunction with a major voluntary organisation, to see whether we can provide better facilities in prison and, more importantly, make the links with agencies in the community, so that prisoners' family contact, especially with children, can be maintained. The hon. Lady is right to say that that is an important factor in the effective resettlement of prisoners, and maintaining links with family is an important priority for us.