What steps he is taking to implement the recommendations of the Law Commission on reforming the law of provocation; and if he will make a statement. [183084]

The Law Commission's provisional proposals would mean a major change from the way the law works at present. We will want to look at the final report and recommendations carefully before we consider taking any action.

The provisional proposals are not expected to change and they have been greeted with unusual unanimity among the senior judiciary, the academic world and many organisations that deal with domestic violence. Can my hon. Friend undertake that, if the proposals continue to meet with widespread favour, an early legislative vehicle for them will be sought?

May I begin by acknowledging my hon. and learned Friend's substantial contribution on this issue and the campaign against domestic violence generally? She was able to share many of her experiences and insights in Committee when the Bill was debated, for which I pay tribute to her. We have debated the issue on a number of occasions recently and I can tell her that we will consider carefully the Law Commission's final report.

What measures he is taking against legal advisers facilitating unfounded claims for (a) asylum and (b) applications for work permits. [183085]

An unfounded immigration application is not in itself proof of any wrongdoing on the part of the legal adviser or, indeed, of any adviser involved. However, the provision of immigration advice is a matter of concern to the Government. The Lord Chancellor has taken steps through the Legal Services Commission to improve the quality of advice provided by publicly funded solicitors and the immigration services commissioner is taking steps to raise the quality of legal advice provided by those whom he regulates. It is, of course, a criminal offence to provide immigration advice when unqualified so to do and it is also a criminal offence for anyone, including a legal adviser, to facilitate entry to the United Kingdom in contravention of the immigration rules. Evidence of any such activity will be thoroughly investigated by the immigration and nationality directorate, which will take appropriate action.

I would certainly not like to suggest that there were some dodgy solicitors, but there is clear evidence of some solicitors dragging cases along for a long time and misleading those whom they are representing on asylum and work permit cases. How many prosecutions have there been and, if there have been any, what has been the outcome of the action taken?

My hon. Friend, with characteristic shrewdness and subtlety, is right to emphasise the importance of confidence in advice in this area of public policy, particularly from the legal profession. As a matter of fact, 12 immigration advisers have been prosecuted by the immigration service in 2003–04 and 11 convictions were secured. In 2003, the office for the supervision of solicitors, the disciplinary arm of the Law Society, took disciplinary action against three solicitors in connection with immigration advice, one of whom was struck off, one given an indefinite suspension and one fined. Furthermore, the Legal Services Commission advises that, in London alone, 96 firms did not have their contract extended in the current financial year.

How many of those 12 cases referred to work permits? Does the Minister accept that the quadrupling of the number of work permits each year, including for a new category of completely unqualified people in sectors such as the leisure industry, is simply an invitation for such advisers to suggest to those already here that it is a good way of getting round immigration rules?

I am not in a position to answer the hon. Gentleman's specific question in relation to numbers. If the figures are available, I will write to him with the information, though I am not sure that that sort of information is collected separately. The main thrust of his attack, of course, is about the increasing number of people permitted to work in this country through permits in response to a set of circumstances that he may find difficulty in identifying—a growing labour market in which there are difficulties with the availability of skills and labour in some sectors.

Does my hon. Friend accept that the thrust of the question is about inefficiency on the part of legal officers rather than criminal activity? Does he also accept that when it comes to evaluating efficiency, the scandal of firms wasting loads of money before finally telling their clients, "Your best bet is to go and see your MP", needs structural correction in the legal profession?

As Minister with responsibility for this matter, I am concerned about inefficiency, bad advice and possible illegal advice. That is why, in answering the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Burnley (Mr. Pike), I identified a number of criminal prosecutions and went on to speak about the other steps that are being taken.

May I first pass on the apologies of my right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (David Davis) for not being present this afternoon?

That was entry clearance.

It was entry clearance for the purpose of working in this country. Would the Minister now like to answer the question with specific reference to work permits?

I answered the question asked by the hon. Member for Canterbury (Mr. Brazier) with specific reference to work permits, but I could not give him the specific information that he required. As I have not managed to get that information since I gave that answer, I shall have to write to the hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) if he is interested in that information as well.

How many Spanish passport holders he estimates are resident in England and Wales. [183086]

Figures taken from the UK labour force survey show that, for the period December 2003 to February 2004, there were an estimated 44,000 nationals of Spain resident in England and Wales.

Is that not a fair swap with Spain, in that there are an estimated 300,000 UK passport holders in Spain, plus all the holidaymakers? Should not we consider these things in perspective—in terms of how the movement of labour throughout the European Union benefits everyone involved?

My hon. Friend is right that the movement of labour throughout the EU has helped the prosperity of all the countries in the Union. It is striking that, since Spain entered the EU, it has become a country of net migration from other EU countries, unlike what was predicted before it entered.

Is the Minister aware of a growing problem: numbers of South American economic migrants who are not entitled to come here can, and readily do, obtain in Madrid or Barcelona Spanish passports and travel documentation, on which they do a bit of work and then pass relatively easily, although illegally, into this country? Are her immigration officials well aware of that growing practice and receiving extra training to cope with it? Does she believe that last year's official figures for such fraudulent entry attempts tell us the whole truth?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that the UK leads the world in passport detection technology. I am sure that he will be reassured by the fact that, following enlargement of the EU, we are not only improving the training of all our officers but checking every passport offered by an EU citizen when seeking entry to the United Kingdom.

What about South America?

The hon. Gentleman referred to passports held by those not entitled to EU passports.

South America.

The hon. Gentleman keeps saying "South America", and I am responding in this way because he made the claim that people are entering on EU passports to which they are not entitled. I am confident that, if his allegations are true, our checking and detection mechanisms and our good relations with the Government of Spain and other EU Governments will mean that we can stop that practice.

When he next plans to meet the Children's Commissioner for Scotland to discuss the operation of the Dungavel detention centre. [183087]

If he will make a statement on his recent visit to Dungavel detention centre. [183095]

I visited Dungavel on 2 July and found the conditions and facilities entirely satisfactory. I was impressed, as I know the hon. Gentleman was when he visited the centre in May, by the caring and dedicated staff who work there. The issue of accommodation centres is a reserved matter, but in his usual generous way, my hon. Friend the Minister for Citizenship and Immigration has agreed to meet the Children's Commissioner for Scotland, Professor Kathleen Marshall. I am sure that that will be a suitable occasion for her to express her concerns.

I thank the Home Secretary for that answer. I confirm that during my visit to the Dungavel detention centre recently I was impressed by the standard of the staff and the care that they exhibited. He may be aware that the Children's Commissioner for Scotland recently described the detention of children in Dungavel as "morally upsetting". She is said to be considering taking legal action to end it. Would it not be better if the Home Secretary accepted that holding families with young children in the same institution as adults—some of whom have just been released from lengthy prison sentences and are awaiting deportation—is wrong and ought to be ended sooner rather than later?

First, I ought to make it clear, so that there is no doubt in anyone's mind, that the individuals described by the hon. Gentleman are separated from the families, as he will have found on his visit in May. Secondly, of course we accept that in an ideal world it would be appropriate not to have children in removal centres. That matter concerns retaining the unity of the family. I am prepared—my hon. Friend the Minister for Citizenship and Immigration and I have been discussing this—to consider whether we could use tracking and electronic methodology so that we could take families out of such accommodation centres, and whether we could provide more concentrated facilities for those for whom that would not be suitable, such as people who would abscond and use their children as an excuse for not being available for removal. These are difficult issues, but we have to take public policy into account and deal with the often contradictory pressures that come to bear when we are trying to remove people who, because of the very nature of the challenge facing them, are unlikely to co-operate.

I, too, have visited Dungavel recently as a member of the Scottish Affairs Committee, and I join my right hon. Friend in commending the staff there on their work and professionalism. To pick up his comments on detention of children, I noticed that, because of the presence of single men and women at the centre, the security regime has to be fairly tight and restrictive. Does he think that there is a convincing argument in favour of detaining families in an entirely separate unit where security arrangements can be much less restrictive, especially given that the risk of families absconding seems to be far less than that of single people doing so?

One consequence of the investment in substantially increasing the number of removal places is that we can reconfigure where we place single people and families, which will help in future. The Minister for Citizenship and Immigration and I have discussed with the Churches and the Scottish Trades Union Congress the potential for reconfiguring in a way that meets my hon. Friend's understandable concerns. I thank her for her constant interest in the matter. The challenge that we face, as the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Carmichael) spelled out in his debate last Thursday in Westminster Hall, is that some people who should know better talk a lot of nonsense about Dungavel.

It seems to me that the Home Secretary is saying, in effect, that he plans to ignore the fundamental concern of the Children's Commissioner for Scotland, the unions, the Churches and civic Scotland, which would be quite contemptible. He specifically mentioned electronic tagging as an alternative to detention. Will he clarify whether he plans to tag children of asylum seekers who have committed no crime whatever?

When I mentioned comments made by the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland, I was referring to his descriptions of people calling Dungavel a "hell on earth" and politicians—some of whom have presumably never been to Dungavel—describing the centre in totally unacceptable ways. On cue, the hon. Member for Perth (Annabelle Ewing), representing the Scottish National party, accuses us of ignoring the Churches, when I had just said that the Minister for Citizenship and Immigration and I met representatives of the Churches two months ago; of ignoring the STUC, when I had just said that we had met its representatives as well; and of ignoring the Children's Commissioner for Scotland, whom the Minister of State has just agreed to meet. What sort of nonsense is that? I do not mind those who cannot hear not understanding, but those who can should open their ears and listen.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that, at least for the time being, detention centres are an unwelcome but necessary part of asylum policy? Does he agree also that those who try to focus the debate on the detention of children are simply trying to erect a smokescreen behind which to campaign for the total removal of detention centres, which is a prerequisite to the introduction of the policy that they support—a completely open asylum policy, which is naive and simplistic?

My hon. Friend is substantially right. Such people also argue that immigration should be a matter for Scotland, not a reserved matter—

Hear, hear.

The hon. Lady supports that, but the consequences of such a policy would be very interesting indeed. The Scottish National party would have to put border controls at Hadrian's wall, which would be bizarre. I think that we have now exposed the SNP's policies for what they are.

I am sure that the meeting with the children's commissioner will be widely welcomed throughout the political parties. I ask my right hon. Friend to consider one point for that meeting, and that is the question of people being held at Dungavel who are awaiting deportation after completing a sentence. Will he consider how we can remove those people from families and their children at Dungavel?

Fortunately, we are removing such individuals much more quickly than it is possible to remove families. The legislation that will come before the House later today will further assist us in doing that because it will reduce the unwarranted use of judicial review. However, I take the point, and the expanded removal centre facilities will help us better to segregate those of different categories. To pick up a point made by my hon. Friend, the Minister of State will welcome meeting Professor Kathleen Marshall. He has met her on many occasions because he happened to go to University with her.

In how many prisons the population was in excess of the certified normal accommodation on the latest date for which figures are available; and by what percentage the prison population has changed over the Past 10 years. [183089]

There were 81 prisons operating above their certified normal accommodation figure on 30 June 2004. All those prisons are within their operating capacity, which is the total number of prisoners that an establishment can hold, taking into account control, security and the proper operation of the planned regime. The prison Population has increased by 54 per cent. since 1994.

The official figures for June, which are published in the weekly review—although the Government have not published figures since 2002–show that 82 of the 141 prisons were above their certified uncrowded capacity, and 11 were operating above their maximum capacity. In Preston and Leicester, overcrowding was classified as 89 per cent. and 83 per cent. Given those facts, is there not a crisis that has to be faced? In particular, will the Minister say why he believes that the number of women prisoners has increased by 173 per cent. in the past 10 years?

Eighty-one prisons are above their certified normal accommodation figure, which means that 57 prisons are not above that figure. There is no getting away from the fact that our prisons have been under huge pressure. One of the ways in which we deal with that pressure is by building additional places. That we have continued to do. The operational capacity as of today, is 76,395, which is an increase of more than 500 in recent months.

Do the Government have a view of what should be the maximum overall size of the prison population? What signals should the Government be giving the judiciary on the appropriate use of imprisonment?

The Government have an idea about that figure. We believe that, if we rebalance our correctional system appropriately so that we ensure that those who need and deserve to be in prison because they have committed the most serious offences are in prison while those who have not committed such serious offences are on community penalties, we can hold a stable prison population below 80,000.

I welcome the Minister's genuine commitment to trying to get to grips with the scandal of overcrowding, but may I draw his attention to his own overcrowding targets for this year? They state that in publicly run prisons, overcrowding must not exceed 24 per cent. of the prison population, but in privately run prisons, the figure is 34 per cent. Will he tell the House why, on overcrowding, he has one target for public prisons, but an easier target for private prisons?

The private prisons tend to have more modern facilities than the older prison stock that the Prison Service has at its disposal, but the hon. Gentleman makes an interesting point. What is most interesting is that, with our commitment to increasing the number of places available, by the end of this year we will have an operational capacity of 77,600, and by the end of next year it will be some 79,400. We are prepared to ensure that we have fit-for-purpose accommodation for those who are sent to prison by sentencers, but we are also building up the alternative, so that sentencers can confidently give people community sentences that are effective.

The Minister wants to have it both ways. Will he confirm that in order to rebalance the correctional system, as he puts it, and to save money, the Government are proposing to extend the home detention curfew scheme so that offenders serving seven years for drugs offences or street robbery can be set free early? Does he think that that policy will be popular with law-abiding citizens?

Yes, I do want it both ways. I want people who need and deserve to be in prison to be in prison, and I want those whose offences are less serious and are first-time offenders to be on community penalties, putting something back into the communities where they have offended.

If he will make a statement on the status of National Crime Squad officers on transfer to the serious organised crime agency; and what surveys his Department has conducted into the views of NCS officers on such transfers in the last year. [183091]

No decisions have yet been taken with regard to terms and conditions, but we hope to make a statement of approach on this matter shortly. We are undertaking a wide-ranging and inclusive consultation process. I was pleased to visit the NCS office in Wales on 16 June, where I heard the positive views of officers about the creation of the agency. We also discussed some of their concerns about transfer and terms and conditions, and I hope that I offered them some reassurance.

I hope so, because this is an important development that the Minister knows we support, although we would perhaps do things slightly differently. Is she aware that, among the Police Federation members in the National Crime Squad, more than 95 per cent. of the 900 officers who responded, out of a total of 1,200, said that they would not be happy to transfer to the NCS full time in the knowledge that it would be absorbed into the new agency; and that, in the first quarter of this year, more than 80 officers have left the NCS? That is very serious, and it means that we are losing highly trained, experienced and able officers from the new agency. Will she now go back to the Police Federation and the individual officers and talk to them about their concerns, so that we can ensure that we start the agency in the best possible way?

Of course we want to start the agency in the best possible way. That is why we are not rushing into the situation and why we have a programme team at the Home Office that is working with the NCS and he other component parts of the new agency and is in discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers. There are also monthly updates and regular bulletins and meetings involving the police officers who currently work with the NCS. As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary said, the terms and conditions package will be guided by the principle that no one should be disadvantaged by moving into the new organisation. I shall be very happy to facilitate a meeting for the hon. Gentleman with Bill Hughes, director general of the NCS.

What steps he is taking to reduce the number of suicides amongst women prisoners. [183094]

The number of self-inflicted deaths among women prisoners is a very serious concern for the Prison Service and for me. The suicide prevention strategy that I announced on 31 March 2004 applies across all types of prisons and to all prisoners, both male and female. A specifically targeted arid separate suicide prevention strategy is being developed for women.

I thank my hon. Friend for his answer. What steps are being taken to ensure that women are given community sentences wherever possible, not just because they relieve pressure on prisons and the overcrowding that we have been discussing, but because they relieve pressure on families, particularly where there are single mothers and children may be left without their carer?

My hon. Friend is right that when a mother goes to prison, her children are affected the most, and therefore a mother should be placed in prison only when the circumstances warrant it. The Government are developing a range of community alternatives to prison, and I am discussing improvements to court diversion schemes with ministerial colleagues in the Department of Health. We are ensuring that the bail information systems in our prisons are suitable, and I am currently reviewing hostel accommodation to make sure that women who can be accommodated in the community are accommodated in hostels rather than in prisons.

What steps she is taking to ensure that offenders receive adequate treatment for drug misuse. [183096]

Drug misusing offenders damage communities, their families and themselves. We are committed to breaking the cycle of offending and drug misuse. We are investing £447 million through the criminal justice interventions programme to get offenders out of crime and into treatment. That includes drug testing on charge for some offences, placing drugs workers in police custody suites, increasing treatment places in prisons and putting in place comprehensive through-care and after-care packages.

Although I agree that weaning offenders off drugs, including methadone, is important in tackling drug-related crime, does my hon. Friend agree that tackling alcohol abuse is equally important? Alcohol causes half of all violent crimes in this country and probably most incidences of antisocial behaviour in Wirral, South. The issue must be tackled. and I hope that the Home Office will take all possible steps to address alcoholism as well as drug addiction among offenders.

My hon. Friend makes an important point. This summer, we are targeting enforcement and tackling the underlying drinking problems associated with binge drinking in 70 basic command unit areas. We agree with the alcohol harm reduction strategy that drug action teams should become drug and alcohol action teams, and we are considering how we can support pilots to examine alcohol arrest referral, and are examining two pilot areas. In a recent speech at the Turning Point conference, the Home Secretary announced that we will examine the interventions for those for whom misusing alcohol becomes a criminal problem.

The restriction on bail project is already under way in some of our cities, and the Government are ever so reluctantly inching towards the policy that we announced two years ago. What are the Government doing to increase the number of places for drug treatment outside prison? Does the Minister agree with the chief executive of DrugScope, Mr. Martin Barnes, who said that unless the initiative is matched by investment in places and in skilled drugs workers, there is

"a risk that already stretched services will be inundated and unable cope."

I have crossed swords with the hon. Gentleman before, and it is a bit of a cheek to ask that question. The Government have put more money than ever before into both enforcement and drug treatment. The proof is that 140,900 people were in treatment in 2002–03, which is a 41 per cent. increase from the 100,000 baseline in 1998–99. The number of people starting treatment has increased by 47 per cent. in areas covered by criminal justice interventions programmes, and waiting times are falling across the piece. More needs to be done, but the Government are tackling the problem because we recognise that drug addiction fuels a huge amount of crime in this country. The issue involves growing capacity, which we intend to carry on doing.

So the Minister does not agree with the chief executive of DrugScope and believes that the resources are sufficient. [Interruption.] Will she explain to the House why only 28 per cent. of drug treatment and testing orders were completed last year, and why recidivism occurred within two years in 80 per cent. of cases in the three pilot areas? That demonstrates that the system is still not right. The Minister may laud the extra resources, but they are inadequate. How many residential places—proper places—are needed to ensure that all young, hard drug abusers receive the same treatment as that provided in the best countries in the world, such as Sweden?

I am pleased to inform the hon. Gentleman that drug services have increased to approximately 750—up a third since 1997—and treatment for young people has increased by 69 per cent. In addition, we have pooled the young people's budget to ensure that money can be spent better and more wisely locally.

As of last week?

As of last week, approximately 90 per cent. of beds in residential rehabilitation were being used. However, that is only one part of treating drug users and, as I have told the hon. Gentleman several times, one has to deal with people before they go into residential treatment and when they leave. The only way to achieve that is through a sustained policy, which means putting your money where your mouth is. The Government are doing that.

I welcome the Government's substantial investment in drug treatment. Will my hon. Friend confirm my impression that, in the past year or so, we have probably made more impact on speeding up access to treatment for those who are newly arrested than on improving services for those who come out of prison? Given the importance of ensuring that those who clean up in prison do not go back on drugs, will my hon. Friend make sure that the investment is applied evenly across every part of the criminal justice system?

My right hon. Friend makes a good point. As Chair of the Select Committee on Home Affairs, he knows the importance not only of identifying people through drug testing on charge—we are expanding the number of offences to which that will apply—but of getting people into treatment even before they go to court, whatever subsequently happens. Whether they go to prison or have a community-based sentence, they should be supported. That is why I am pleased to be working with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary responsible for correctional services to ensure through-care and after-care. That is an important aspect of making the policy work and making it sustainable.

If he will make a statement on the use of fixed penalty notices for antisocial behaviour in Barnet. [183097]

Penalty notices provide the police with a quick and effective tool for dealing with low level, disorderly behaviour and divert those minor cases from the courts. In the past three weeks, police in Barnet have been conducting a successful operation, targeting antisocial behaviour that occurs on Friday nights. Around 40 penalty notices were issued in Barnet between April and June; 20,000 have been issued nationally.

The Barnet police borough commander recently told me that he was highly sceptical about the effectiveness of the notices. However, he subsequently changed his view. He originally used rather unparliamentary language, describing them as something akin to a dog's reproductive anatomy. However, he has authorised me to say to the House that he now considers them to be an effective, precision-guided impact weapon in the fight against antisocial behaviour. He has issued 75 since May and believes that relentless follow-up of the fines is required. Will my hon. Friend consider whether some of the money could come back to Barnet to enable us to continue the campaign against antisocial behaviour?

I am delighted that the borough commander has changed his view on fixed penalty notices. Perhaps I would prefer him to refer to them as the cat's whiskers rather than his original description. I am pleased that fixed penalty notices have been welcomed throughout the country. It takes approximately half an hour to deal with a case with a fixed penalty, as opposed to two and a half hours to complete the paperwork for a charge. Each fixed penalty notice saves the criminal justice system approximately £100. Police universally welcome the notices as a quick, effective way in which to get the message across. We will use many more as part of our alcohol enforcement campaign.

For what reasons the home detention curfew scheme is being extended to a maximum of 135 days. [183098]

The maximum curfew period available under the home detention curfew scheme was increased from 90 days to 135 days 12 months ago. That change provides earlier resettlement opportunities for lower risk offenders and helps to manage the prison population. At the same time, we also introduced a presumption against release for prisoners convicted of certain serious offences.

To exactly what category of offences is the scheme to be extended? Will the Under-Secretary give the House an assurance that serious offenders, who serve seven-year sentences for street robbery, and drug offenders will not be included in the scheme? If they are to be included, has a proper risk assessment of public safety been conducted?

I am sure that I can reassure the hon. Lady. There is a presumption against people who have committed certain offences—violent offences, sexual offences, cruelty to children and so on—who cannot even be considered under this scheme. It is only available for prisoners serving sentences between three months and four years. Therefore anybody serving seven years would not be eligible. I confirmed earlier that we are not seeking to extend the scheme. Finally, of those who are eligible, only 39 per cent. are granted home detention curfew. Risk assessment is therefore taken very seriously.

What action has been taken to deal with foreign nationals working illegally in the Morecambe Bay cockle beds. [183099]

The immigration service is working closely with both Cumbria and Lancashire police forces to tackle immigration offences arising from the presence of foreign national cockle pickers in the region. That work includes sharing intelligence, planning disruption strategy and responding to calls for assistance. The immigration service participates in Department for Work and Pensions-led multi-agency enforcement work, and is co-operating in the establishment of a joint enforcement group proposed by the north-west sea fisheries committee. I know that my hon. Friend is aware of 13 visits in the 50-day period between 24 March and 12 May to contact or identify illegal workers, disrupt illegal activity and gather intelligence.

I thank the Minister for that response. I am sure that he is aware that there is widespread public concern about the large numbers of Chinese, suspected illegal, immigrants still working in dangerous conditions on Morecambe bay. Does he accept that there is still a public perception that the Government are turning a blind eye to this problem? That is probably because when Chinese people are picked up and identified as illegal immigrants, they are simply documented and released back into community, where they are once again vulnerable to exploitation. Can he tell me what his Department intends to do to remedy this unsatisfactory situation?

I know that my hon. Friend, who has been consistent and persistent in relation to this issue, as she has a particular constituency interest in it, is fully aware of the extent of the work being done not merely by the police but by the immigration service, the DWP and others in this regard. I rely on her to a degree, as she has the ear of her constituents, to provide assurance that the information that she has been given, often confidentially, proves to be correct in terms of activity in her area. She identifies a significant problem—returning illegal immigrants to China is difficult, as those immigrants tend not to co-operate with the Chinese Government's redocumentation procedures. That issue is at the forefront of our ongoing discussions with the Chinese Government on tackling immigration. We have recently signed a memorandum of understanding with China to take forward our co-operation on illegal immigration, which will provide a framework for progress on increasing removals. In the meantime, we stand ready to continue to assist any Chinese nationals who wish to return voluntarily.

What recent assessment he has made of the contribution of community support officers to reducing crime and antisocial behaviour. [183101]

At the end of June, there were 3,802 community support officers on patrol, and reports from forces that deploy community support officers indicate that they play a considerable role in reassuring the communities that they serve, that they provide a high-visibility presence, and that they have significant potential for impacting on low-level antisocial behaviour and disorder. A national evaluation is being planned, which will inform the future development of this role.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that answer. From my discussions with CSOs in my constituency, and from the time that I have spent out on the streets with them, may I tell her that they make a considerable contribution, not only to providing reassurance for people but to working with other agencies in the area to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour? Will she tell the House when she thinks the assessment of their effectiveness will be completed? What chance is there of making sure that there are more CSOs out and about on our streets to contribute to making the public feel safer?

The evaluation of the current achievements of the CSO force will be completed by the end of the year, but I hope my hon. Friend will find that the conclusions of the Home Office strategic plan accord with her ambitions for the improvement of CSO provision.

In York and north Yorkshire we do not have too many community support officers, and not too many antisocial behaviour orders have been issued. How can we ensure that more are issued in the area, given that the Government have made them the main tool for controlling antisocial behaviour?

The hon. Lady is right to recognise the importance of adequate numbers of officers to deal with antisocial behaviour issues effectively. That is why 11,000 more police officers have been provided throughout the country since this Government came to power. We find them in every community—in Yorkshire, in Leicestershire and in the west midlands. All over the country there are more police officers, and we have given them the set of tools that they require, including antisocial behaviour orders. It is up to local authorities to ensure that they use the ASBO powers we have given them to tackle this nuisance, rather than tolerate it.

We have 40 community support officers in Warwickshire—they are very welcome, and do an excellent job—as well as a record number of serving police officers. Nevertheless, many communities in my constituency would like a still greater police presence on the streets. CSOs are ideally placed to perform that role, and to develop strong relations with the community. Can my hon. Friend assure us that we will continue to expand the available supply of CSOs?

For information about national supply, my hon. Friend will have to wait—as I hinted earlier—for the Home Office strategic plan. I hope that he finds it pleasant reading. He should, however, join us in welcoming the fact that not just Home Office expenditure is ensuring that we have CSOs throughout the country. Nearly 1,000 are funded entirely from other sources. Dealing with crime in our communities is such an important job that communities themselves are willing to raise the resources to provide CSOs who will tackle nuisance behaviour, and I welcome that where it has happened.

When he next expects to meet representatives of police forces to discuss policy on stop and search. [183104]

I have regular meetings with the Association of Chief Police Officers and other police representatives at which stop-and-search issues are discussed. We have recently launched a stop and search action team to ensure that the police use their powers of stop and search fairly, and as effectively as possible. The team will be working with both community representatives and police organisations, including ACPO, the Police Federation and the Police Superintendents Association. Its work is overseen by Baroness Scotland and me.

Can the Minister confirm that future stop-and-search policy will be based entirely on operational policing requirements and priorities? Does she agree that at a time when the Government were stepping up measures against terrorist threats, it was wrong of her and other Ministers to criticise the police for recent stop-and-search statistics?

I gladly confirm that we consider stop and search to be an extremely useful power to the police when it is used in an intelligence-led and targeted fashion. That is why we are determined to ensure, along with the stop and search action team, that it is used in exactly that way.

Does the Minister agree that there would be a public outcry if some terrorist had not been stopped and searched and had subsequently committed an act of terrorism?

The hon. Gentleman is correct, and I want to place it on the record that the powers under section 44 can be used only when they are authorised by a senior police officer, and then confirmed by me or the Home Secretary. We take that position extremely seriously.

If he will make a statement on his policies to combat antisocial behaviour. [183105]

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 introduced antisocial behaviour orders, and the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 provides a further range of tools to tackle antisocial behaviour. It reinforces the powers available to deal with antisocial behaviour, and along with the "Together" campaign it aims to make a lasting difference to the lives of people who experience antisocial behaviour day after day, and to change culture in communities where antisocial behaviour is tolerated rather than tackled. [Interruption.] We will continue to listen to feedback about the powers available, and we will consider legislating where necessary. [Interruption.]

Order. The Minister is addressing the House; it is unfair that so much conversation is going on.

I thank the Minister for her reply. Will she commend Sheffield city council's housing department and South Yorkshire police, who are working increasingly closely together in my constituency and using the whole range of measures against antisocial behaviour? Does she also agree with Sergeant Andy Wilson, the local community sergeant, who points out that although some young people are serious antisocial offenders, many simply cause nuisance and annoyance to elderly people by hanging around in large groups? Would it not be better to find extra resources to target youth facilities and other local facilities in our communities, and to ensure that the police are not wasting their time and resources by moving on groups of young people from one estate to another? For all the good work that the Government are doing in this respect—

Order. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman can save that for an Adjournment debate.

I am happy to join my hon. Friend in congratulating the Sheffield trailblazer on its work in tackling antisocial behaviour. He is right to point out that the most effective work against antisocial behaviour operates in a two-pronged way. It provides positive activities for young people, in which this Government are investing at an unprecedented level, and the tools that the police and local authorities need to crack down on antisocial behaviour. That is why we have provided the new legislative powers that have been used in Sheffield.

I am sure that the Minister will agree that the initial legislation, introduced half a dozen years ago, was merely a first step, and that all the subsequent actions that the Government have taken through recent legislation and the Home Office's broad antisocial behaviour strategy have been very important additions to that first step. Will she therefore point out to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland that it really is time he caught up with all that?

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his welcome for the work that we have done. The Minister for Crime Reduction, Policing and Community Safety will of course continue to have conversations with her colleagues in Northern Ireland to ensure that best practice is spread throughout the country.

How does the Minister envisage that Liverpool's proposed community justice centre will be able to develop policies to deal with antisocial behaviour?

The key to the proposed community justice centre is that it involves local people in delivering justice. Until now, the conviction and prosecution process has seemed very detached from the communities in which antisocial behaviour occurs. The community justice centre can bring that process back into the hands of the community, and make sure that justice is delivered by the people who are most affected by antisocial behaviour.

If he will make a statement on his relations with the National Neighbourhood Watch Association. [183106]

The Home Office has worked in partnership with the National Neighbourhood Watch Association for a number of years. In 2003, the Home Office provided a grant of £350,000 to help the NNWA out with its financial difficulties. It recently came to light, however, that it has without authorisation registered the Neighbourhood Watch name and logos as its own trademarks. Those are Crown copyright and public assets, and we are taking steps to recover them into public ownership.

I thank the Minister for that response, but she will be aware of the Home Office's very recent decision not to provide interim funding support for the NNWA, while at the same time blocking its signing of a commercial sponsorship agreement. Given that recent Home Office statistics show that there were 66,000 incidents of antisocial behaviour in one day alone, does the Minister think this last-minute intervention by the Home Office acceptable—an intervention that the NNWA believes will result in its closure within weeks?

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely wrong. It is not the case that the Home Office has scuppered the sponsorship deal. I want to place that on the record, along with the fact that the Home Office has supported neighbourhood watch every step of the way. We are determined that our local organisations will continue to involve local people in being the eyes and ears of the police, giving us that excellent community intelligence and doing the fantastic job that they do throughout the country.