Object.

If he will make a statement on the provision that his Department makes for treatment of drug offenders. [75310]

To break the links between drugs and crime, we are taking every opportunity to get offenders into treatment. There is a range of initiatives to ensure early intervention to identify drug misusing offenders and to help them gain access to treatment, for example arrest referral, drug treatment and testing orders, and drug testing and treatment services in prisons.

I am very pleased to hear the general tenor of that answer. In Spain, this year's national plan for drugs refers to

"a decrease in heroin consumption in all forms"

My hon. Friend will be aware that we are conducting a review of the 10-year drugs strategy. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has said that he wants harm minimisation to be central to our treatment and demand reduction initiatives. My hon. Friend must wait for a final announcement on that, but I think he will find that Government thinking on harm minimisation is not removed from the regime that he describes.

Does the Minister agree that a high proportion of burglaries are carried out to feed a heroin addiction? For that reason alone, there are persuasive arguments why the treatment of the heroin addict should be given a high priority in sentencing.

The acquisitive crime that flows from problematic drug use is caused almost entirely by those people who have either a heroin or a cocaine addiction. The hon. Gentleman is right in that regard. We require not only good quality treatment where it is needed but effective criminal justice interventions to make an early analysis of the problem and to get people into that treatment. That is why we introduced drug treatment and testing orders, and why we are considering where and how we can have initiatives that come into effect earlier. We need to be as effective as possible when dealing with such acquisitive crime.

May I take this opportunity to thank the Home Secretary for the £1.5 million of extra funding that has been given to police forces in my area for drugs intelligence work? Is the Minister aware, however, that only 31 beds are available in Wales for the treatment of drugs offenders? Will he discuss with Welsh Assembly Ministers the need to increase that and to improve the service, bearing in mind the emphasis that he places on the treatment of drugs offenders?

My hon. Friend may be aware that we set up the National Treatment Agency to increase the planning of the provision of drug treatment, to improve its quality and to involve the medical profession in such work. We need to be certain that the NTA works closely with the Welsh Assembly to ensure that there are no gaps in what we are trying to provide.

Although I acknowledge that quite a bit of work has been done on drugs recently, and echo what the hon. Member for Preseli Pembrokeshire (Mrs. Lawrence) said, may I suggest that one way to fund the rehabilitation centres that are so badly needed is to ring-fence drug confiscation moneys, many millions of which are taken every year from drug barons in crown courts?

I agree that much could be done with confiscated money. The whole purpose of pushing the Proceeds of Crime Bill through the House of Commons last year was to increase substantially the confiscation that takes place, which is woefully below international levels. That money is available. Some 50 per cent. is earmarked for the communities that have been damaged by the drug problem. We also want to improve our performance on the confiscation of criminal assets. In principle I agree with the hon. Gentleman. We need to use the money as effectively as possible, but for the purposes of reducing crime we need to increase the amount of money that we confiscate from criminals because it is nowhere near as high as it should be.

May I say how pleased I am that the Home Secretary came to my constituency on Friday and met the families of drug users, some of whom are dead, some are in prison and some are receiving treatment? Does the Minister agree that we must think about the problem globally? Since 90 per cent. of the heroin on the streets of the United Kingdom conies from Afghanistan, we must offer Afghan farmers alternatives to growing the poppy, and we must do so as quickly as possible.

My hon. Friend is right to say that we must think of the problem from end to end. We must not only have a demand-reduction strategy but try to limit supplies as much as possible, which means chasing the problem back to source countries. I assure my hon. Friend that we are trying to do our level best to intervene in Afghanistan in the most appropriate and effective way. We are trying to build civic society in that country; there have been encouraging signs, and we are trying to build on those. At the same time we are trying to tackle the problem of the opium poppy.

What assurance can Ministers give to society and to Rob, a divorced man in his 30s with two children whom I met on Saturday on a train from King's Cross to the north-east? He was discharged from a prison in southeast England five weeks ago, and he told me that although he has been inside three times for short periods in the last three years, he has had no follow-up support to deal with the drugs problem that was the cause of all three offences apart from four weeks' signing on with the probation service. Given last year's joint probation and prison inspectorates' report saying how important it is to give people follow-up support to keep them off drugs, will next year's sentencing Bill guarantee people discharged from prison as much support outside as they can receive inside? Has the Treasury provided the money for that support?

The hon. Gentleman exposes a problem. I cannot announce exactly what we will do as a result of the stocktaking review that is under way, but I can tell him that, like him, I feel that the problem of through-care and aftercare for those leaving treatment or leaving prison is one of the biggest weaknesses in the system, and we seek to tackle that. If the hon. Gentleman will wait for our planned announcement, hopefully he will find that it addresses the issue that he has raised.

It is encouraging that there is clearly a consensus emerging in the House that to lift people off the conveyor belt to crime we have to find means of dramatically increasing the availability of treatment and rehabilitation for young heroin and cocaine addicts. Has the Minister calculated the number of places that would be required to accommodate all those addicts, and has he compared that number with the effect of the plans that he announced a moment ago?

Information on this matter is incomplete precisely because of the illegality involved, but our best estimate of the number of problematic drug users in this country—most of whom, but not all, are heroin addicts—is about 250,000. We have treatment places for more than 118,000, and we are managing to expand our capacity by 8 per cent. a year. If the right hon. Gentleman thinks that there are easy ways of quickly expanding that capacity, we would be happy to hear from him.

Does the Minister also agree with his hon. Friend the Member for Bassetlaw (John Mann) and with us that we desperately need to find some means of compelling young heroin and cocaine addicts to take up that treatment? Is he aware that at present drug treatment and testing orders regularly fail because they are not properly enforced, and because there is not sufficient available intensive and residential treatment? When will the Department stop treating the matter as a problem that can be handled over many years, and start treating it as the crisis that it has become?

I listened to the hon. Gentleman's speech to his party conference, and it was good to hear. I hope that it is true that we have a growing consensus as to how we deal with the problem. However, he should not seek to rubbish drug treatment and testing orders, because they are being used effectively. As magistrates learn and grow confident in the way that they use them, they are indeed behaving flexibly sometimes towards the problems that arise. I was surprised at the absence of a number of issues from the hon. Gentleman's conference speech. For example, having made mischief in south London, what exactly is his policy on the classification of cannabis, and how on earth does he think he will increase treatment places tenfold with £500 million? I wait to see what kind of treatment and what quality of treatment he is proposing. It may look good as a headline figure in a policy document, but I think his maths needs a little refining.

What further measures he proposes to deal with antisocial behaviour. [75311]

What his policy is to reduce antisocial behaviour in suburban areas; and if he will make a statement. [75312]

If he will make a statement on the impact of the Government's policies for tackling antisocial behaviour. [75323]

I do not think that there is a Member of the House who does not feel the scourge of antisocial behaviour. Uncontrolled antisocial behaviour is the breeding ground for more dangerous and long-term criminality. The new slimmed-down antisocial behaviour orders, action against vehicles on and off the road, the new community support officers, the street wardens scheme, and now the consultation that has been undertaken by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will help us to put in place support mechanisms for those at local level, whether in the inner city, the suburbs or rural areas, who are, first, tackling the problem and, secondly, helping those who are at the receiving end of it.

My constituents will be pleased to hear that response from the Secretary of State. He will be aware that the headline figures on crime in north Kent have come down substantially in the past five years—by about 30 per cent.—but the fear of crime persists, because of the loutish and antisocial behaviour of a few people in my constituency, as elsewhere in the country, who blight the lives of the many. What further measures does my right hon. Friend propose to help councils such as mine to push through antisocial behaviour orders, and has he any further plans for the use of parenting orders and final warnings to try and stem the problem of youth offending?

There is a combination of the strengthening of the powers, the slimming down of the bureaucracy, and the imperative at local level for the crime reduction partnerships. Over 90 co-ordinators now exist at local level to act at local level. We have to deal with the dichotomy between people wanting the Home Office to intervene and do things from the centre, and at the same time wanting to stop the Home Office intervening and doing things from the centre. I appeal to local authorities to pick up the new powers, whether through antisocial behaviour orders or parenting orders, and to co-operate with the police and the community to make them work. So often, the reluctance to use them stems from a fear that they will be overturned. The new powers allow the slimmed-down initial orders to be issued before the hearing, and send a clear message that we will no longer put up with antisocial behaviour.

The Home Secretary is right to describe antisocial behaviour as a scourge on all our constituents. I welcome many of the measures that the Government have tried to put in place, some of which have been more successful than others. However, we must all try to deal with the problem. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it would help a great deal to have more visible local policing? Will he join with me in urging the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis to reopen West Drayton police station?

I would certainly encourage the Commissioner to use his operational accountability to ensure that there is accessibility for local people and that, above all, response times are improved. That is why the initiative taken by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State on the non-999 number will be important. Response times to antisocial behaviour are commensurate with the commitment to reassure and support people rather than to ignore their calls, and to ensure that community support officers and street wardens can play their part. By joining together at local level—I understand that that is happening in Hillingdon by tackling graffiti and other abuse in the environment—an atmosphere can be created in which people believe that they can play a part in improving their community. They can be a strong community that can tackle antisocial behaviour.

Progress is undoubtedly being made but there are still parts of my constituency where a small minority cause mayhem for those around them. Will my right hon. Friend take more steps to encourage local councils to make better use of the powers that they already have? Will he discuss with my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister ways of enabling councils to take swifter action against antisocial tenants, to ensure that the system protects the vast majority who pay their rent and do not cause trouble, rather than the small minority who make life hell for the people living round them?

We are doing well this afternoon because we all agree on that. The review that the office of my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has been undertaking will be a crucial further strand in the extension of work in the Home Office in tackling the problem. People are sick and tired of cheap housing being bought up and of public funding going into tenancies, with no control, no proper contractual arrangements and no responsibility on the part of landlords. If we could combine the action that we are taking with a massive clampdown on what is a complete scam, we would all be much better off at local level.

As antisocial behaviour orders have still not been introduced in Northern Ireland, will the Home Secretary kindly initiate discussions at the earliest opportunity with the newly enhanced team at the Northern Ireland Office to ensure that the orders are extended to Northern Ireland?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the newly-appointed Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, with his experiences across the board, including Wales, will be keen to do so. I will take the opportunity, as quickly as possible, to do what the hon. Lady asks.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that a great deal of antisocial behaviour is generated by out-of-control youths with air weapons. What plans does he have to address the problem? Does he have any plans to raise the age limit at which youths can handle these weapons? We have to take our chances where we can.

Very neat. I know that the issue is close to my hon. Friend's heart. I stress that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State will be bringing forward quickly a series of measures that will proportionately address the matter. It is becoming a scourge and people are genuinely frightened. The nature of the weapons has changed to the point where we need a rapid review.

The Home Secretary will be aware that Opposition Members were pleased when he listened to the concerns expressed by Government Back Benchers, such as the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker), and by my right hon. and hon. Friends that the original antisocial behaviour orders were far too bureaucratic.

As far as I am aware, the courts are under no restriction in terms of naming those who come before them, although I am certainly prepared to check out the matter. In the spirit of this afternoon, I agree that we have not got in place sufficient behaviour contracts or antisocial behaviour orders. I think that slightly more than 650 antisocial behaviour orders have so far been issued, but we will issue new guidance and support in November to back up the change in the law. I am always amenable to pressure, especially when it is in the direction in which I was already going.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that constituents of mine were both relieved and appreciative when an antisocial behaviour order was imposed on 14-year-old Lorraine Ogden, whose name was circulated by the police in a leaflet? However, she breached the order six times, was arrested by the police and charged six times and, after five months, was subjected to a supervision order, a curfew order and a parenting order served on her mother. Does he agree that although the orders are an excellent institution that was introduced by this Government, to allow people who have been placed under the orders to defy them and to waste the time of police and the courts is to undermine their purpose? Will he consider what action he can take to stop that happening?

My right hon. Friend demonstrates the very worst tip of an iceberg in terms of constant reoffending leading to action that is too weak and failure to reinforce the agreed penalties. With my right hon. Friends the Lord Chancellor and the Attorney-General, I am doing everything possible to get the sensitive, proportionate message across. It is important that magistrates, as well as district judges, who sometimes overturn the decisions of magistrates on enforcement, understand the damage that they can do to the signals that need to be sent out to young people in particular saying that they can no longer make a monkey of tile police and the judicial system. That will be one of the tasks of the new criminal justice legislation that will be introduced following the Queen's Speech.

Is the Home Secretary aware that, in parts of my constituency, there will be cuts in youth programmes for 11 and 12-year-olds, even with Connexions and the children's fund? What will he do to ensure joined-up thinking in this very important area of tackling antisocial behaviour?

I sincerely hope that that will not happen and that the local council and the Connexions service can respond with the Youth Justice Board. The board announced only last week that, with resources allocated by the Home Office, we will be developing for eight to 13-year-olds youth inclusion panels and programmes to link up with the work done over the summer, including the Splash programmes and the very imaginative work done in excellence in cities areas, and carry it forward throughout the year. Instead of carrying out youth policies appropriate to the 1950s, we are now adapting our policies to the 21st century.

What plans he has to review the procedures to be followed by inmates on day release from open prisons; and if he will make a statement. [75315]

It is important that prisoners in open conditions can re-establish links with the community, for all the reasons set out in the social exclusion unit report on reducing reoffending. That is the purpose of granting release on temporary licence. The Prison Service is currently reviewing all forms of such release and will report to Ministers in due course.

While I note that reply, is my right hon. Friend aware of the enormous publicity that a convicted criminal has recently received as to the sort of lifestyle that he was leading while on day release, including driving to work in his own car and having lunch in top restaurants? Did the prison authorities know about that, and if so, why did they not stop it? Is my hon. Friend further aware that public confidence in the day release system has been seriously eroded? It really is time that prison governors are clearly told what inmates can and cannot do when they are on day release from prison.

Although I entirely understand the concerns that gave rise to my hon. Friend's points, it is important that we do not allow the activities of one individual—who could not in any way be described as a "quiet man"—to undermine the use of release for rehabilitation and resettlement. The fact is that prisoners on facility or resettlement licences are advised of the terms of those licences, and they are placed on trust to comply with their requirements.

May I put it to the Under-Secretary that too many prisoners are held in overcrowded local prisons such as Lincoln and that they could quite well be held in open prisons? It would be a great help if he could expedite the process of categorisation so that yet more people now held in the crowded local prisons could be transferred to the open prisons.

I agree about making sure that categorisation is undertaken as quickly as possible, and I have recently raised the issue with the Director General of the Prison Service for precisely the reason that the right hon. and learned Gentleman has given. However, it is important to ensure that the prisoners allocated to open conditions are suited to those conditions. The proof of the success of the current arrangements is that, from memory, about 250,000 licences for leave from open prison were granted last year, and the failure rate is 0.1 per cent. That is testament to the robust nature of the current arrangements.

Does my hon. Friend accept that more prisoners should be allowed on day release schemes when that is considered appropriate and that any abuses committed by Archer should not be used as an excuse to discourage such schemes? They can be very useful in making sure that, when the prisoner leaves prison, he or she can lead a useful life. Are there not other ways of reducing the prison population? When the offence is less serious or there is no danger of violence, could not non-custodial sentences be used more than at present? Our prisons face a crisis, and I believe that my hon. Friend understands that.

My hon. Friend is entirely right to say that the prison system currently faces considerable pressures. He will have heard the statements on sentences made by my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, the Lord Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor and about the need to consider the appropriate use of custody and to reserve it, in particular, for dangerous offenders, sex offenders and persistent offenders. My hon. Friend is also right to speak about the importance of allowing prisoners to resettle within the community. My original reply referred to the social exclusion unit report, because all the evidence demonstrates that, if prisoners lose contact with their families and lose their job or their home, it is much more difficult for them to resettle when they come out of the prison gates. Having a job is an effective crime prevention measure, because the statistics clearly tell us that a prisoner who walks out of the prison gates with a job to go to is half as likely to reoffend as someone with no job.

What recent discussions he has had with the chief constable of Nottinghamshire about community policing, with particular reference to the city of Nottingham division. [75318]

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I have met the chief constable of Nottinghamshire on several occasions on which a variety of issues, including community policing, have been discussed. My right hon. Friend visited Nottingham on 18 April.

I thank the Home Secretary and the Minister for the personal interest they have taken in Nottinghamshire constabulary. They will know that we in the city of Nottingham division are losing bobbies on the beat. In addition, our local police stations are losing large numbers of officers to response units—in effect, those stations are being hollowed out. Is the Minister aware that, at a time when the Government are, rightly, being congratulated on having more officers employed in the United Kingdom than at any other time in history, people on some of our estates and in some of our communities are seeing less of those police officers? Will he please keep a watchful eye on the issue, so that the Government's rhetoric about community policing, which we all support, is matched by the reality of policing on the ground?

I recognise that my hon. Friend has deep concerns about the reorganisation of policing in the city of Nottingham. There is honest disagreement between him and the chief constable about the implications of the reorganisation—the chief constable would argue that it is increasing the number of officers available for beat work. We need to find a way forward. In January, the city of Nottingham will be subject to a routine basic command unit inspection by Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary. Having listened to my hon. Friend, I have written to the regional HMI and asked it to ensure that it examines those matters during the inspection.

Is the Minister aware that Nottinghamshire, like many other areas, will be a beneficiary of the unfortunate fact that police officers are fleeing the Thames valley in record numbers because of the high cost of living there? Is he aware that, within months, half of our police officers will be probationers? Will he comment on the concern felt by many superintendents about rumours that the Government are to tax pension lump sums? The Police Superintendents Association has announced that 20 to 25 per cent. of total numbers might be lost. Will he have a word with the Treasury and tell it to drop that stupid plan?

We recognise the concerns about the south-east of England, which is why I, as Minister with responsibilities for the police, took the initiative a few weeks ago to bring together a team of people from police forces in the south-east and London to examine those concerns, as well as a range of issues including housing and transport. However, it is worth bearing in mind that in the next couple of years those forces will receive a ring-fenced part of their settlement—equivalent to 2 per cent. of their current pay bill in two years' time—for special priority payments; that funding can and should in part be used to address retention issues. As for the hon. Gentleman's final point, I have no knowledge of any such proposals.

Is the Minister aware of the fact that, despite the major problems that my community has with drug-related crime, while I was carrying out an inquiry into those problems, the chief constable of Nottinghamshire, as part of his Nottingham city community policing scheme, transferred 10 experienced officers from north Nottinghamshire into the city of Nottingham? Is it not about time that areas such as mine had equal priority with cities in policing matters?

All areas have crime problems that must be tackled. My hon. Friend has rightly been persistent in raising his concerns about drug problems, but the chief constable of Nottinghamshire has to be able to make tactical decisions about priorities from day to day, and problems such as crack cocaine and gun-related violence in Nottingham have demanded a response. My hon. Friend mentions 10 officers, but let me put that in context: last year, the number of police officers in Nottinghamshire increased by 55, and this year—according to current projections—it should increase by a further 104. That is a substantial increase.

Does the Minister not recognise that it is not only in the city of Nottingham—or, indeed, in the county of Nottinghamshire—that there is concern about police numbers, whether for community policing or any other purpose? Does he agree with the assessment that his proposals for the distribution of police grant might result in 34 rural or semi-rural forces—similar to Nottinghamshire's—losing large numbers of police officers? Dorset might lose 270 officers, Surrey 260, North Wales 300, and so the list goes on.

The hon. Gentleman should wait to see what happens about the police funding formula. The Government have published a consultation paper that proposes six or seven different options, some of which point in one direction and some in another. It is ludicrous for the hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends to calculate the worst possible case for every police force and say that that is what the Government are going to do. I recall that, when his party was in power, police officer numbers were falling. We now have record numbers of police officers, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary recently announced a new target of 132,500 police officers. That option was never on the table in the 18 years when the hon. Gentleman's party was in power.

If he will make a statement on his plans to set up new sector based migration schemes next year. [75320]

My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced on 7 October two new schemes to help employers in the hotel, leisure and food manufacturing sectors to recruit workers from abroad to fill vacancies that they have been unable to fill from the resident work force. This is part of the continued development of our comprehensive policy of managed migration.

Does my hon. Friend agree that such managed schemes are good news not only for the economy but for key cutting-edge technology areas such as engineering, information technology and medical research? People can enter the country legally and make a great contribution to our future wealth, thereby providing extra jobs that can give a real boost to the economy. In addition, are we not sending a clear signal to those who try to smuggle individuals into this country by clandestine measures that we want to undermine their terrible acts and put a stop to the despicable smuggling of people?

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Recent estimates suggest that migrants contribute a net benefit of about £2.5 billion to the economy, over and above any resources they consume. My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is chairing a new Cabinet Committee that is looking into the social and economic impacts of migration. My hon. Friend is also right that the White Paper marked a radical shift in policy, based on a recognition of the positive contribution of migration while acknowledging that we need to manage it, return asylum to its proper purpose and bear down on the gangs that encourage people to enter the country illegally to work. We need better integration of refugees, including a UNHCR gateway, and to open up legitimate routes into the United Kingdom for people to work. These schemes will be additional to the work permit and other existing schemes.

Everybody accepts the terrific benefits that this country has enjoyed over the years and centuries from the immigration of people with key skills, but is not this scheme one more example of the Government trying to paper over the disaster that is their asylum policy? Are not we still failing to deport even one in 10 of failed asylum seekers? At what stage will the Government recognise that they must look at more imaginative ways of tackling the asylum problem if they are going to avoid the sort of pressures that Members on both sides want to avoid?

We are already removing more failed asylum seekers than the Conservative Government did—indeed, we are now removing more than any other European country. The hon. Gentleman misses the point. We will not get on top of the extent to which the asylum system is being used by people to get into the country unless we send out the right signals to the countries that they come from, and part of that is being clear that we will bear down strongly on traffickers and smugglers and that people who arrive here will be dealt with swiftly and removed if their claim fails. At the same time, we want to make it clear that we welcome people coming here legitimately and that we are opening up new legitimate routes.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the attitude that all immigrants should be used as cheap labour should be stamped on firmly? Will the working party examine closely the way in which immigrants are constantly and deliberately being used in an attempt to keep down wages and conditions in certain industries?

Indeed, the role that illegal working plays in encouraging people to come here, with the consequences for indigenous workers in some parts of the labour market and the economy that my hon. Friend describes, is a serious problem. That is precisely why the strategies of bearing down strongly on abuse of the asylum system and opening up legitimate routes in, as I outlined, are the two essential strands of a coherent policy—one that the Conservative party signally failed to introduce when it had the opportunity.

I listened with interest to the Minister's comments on the new migration schemes. Will she amplify as fully as possible the meaning, effect and means of implementation of the new external gateway proposals?

I am not sure whether the hon. Gentleman is referring to the new migration schemes that the original question was about or to the UNHCR gateway. That gateway, to bring in refugees from out of country, is currently being discussed with UNHCR and the voluntary organisations. We intend to institute a pilot scheme from April next year. We aim to start fairly small, with about 500 people. We are currently working up the details of the scheme, considering both how the gateway will work and how we can ensure more effective integration of those people once they are here. Several European countries already operate such schemes, and we will draw on their expertise to ensure that we have an efficient and effective system in place early next year.

If he will make a statement on the review of the coroners service. [75321]

We established the review group last year. It published a consultation document in August and will report back by the spring.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that local coroners should be both accountable and sensitive to their communities? Clearly, that has not happened in Durham. I raised serious concerns about the death of one of my constituents, Maureen Malta, in the local accident and emergency department, but the local coroner, Mr. Andrew Tweddle, arrogantly refused to publish the letter or even to give reasons for that refusal. Will my right hon. Friend take a look at that case and have a meeting with me and others who have concerns about the service in Durham?

The Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, Central (Hilary Benn), will write to my hon. Friend shortly. We certainly need to open up consultation on how to improve the services. I do not want to make a statement about the individual case, other than to say that openness and transparency are very important and I hope that the health care trust will respond positively to his approaches. The consultation paper in August showed that existing systems for the investigation of deaths were fragmented and failed to provide clear participation rights or standards of service for the bereaved. They lacked appropriate mechanisms for skilling and training those involved, and a proper auditing processing system. They did not even respond to modern legal baselines, so there is a great deal of room for improvement in a process that has been left to fester for too long in the 19th century rather than being brought into the 21st century.

May I make a plea that, as part of the review, the Home Office examine the need for a formal appeal procedure for coroners' decision processes? The relatives of people who have been killed are often left in an unhappy state of mind because of their lack of ability to appeal against the coroner's decision.

I certainly do not rule that out, but we need much greater clarity as to what an inquest is for, how it fits in with the wider criminal justice system, and what the rights of the bereaved should be. We also need to narrow the number of occasions on which an inquest would be appropriate, so that we can use the resources, not least the pathology services, more effectively. I am always listening to the radio or watching the television and learning, as we did from ancient films, about the "Home Office pathologist"—but of course there are no Home Office pathologists, only a range of people who are taken on, for individual payments and on individual contracts, to do the job. All that needs to be brought together if we are to ensure that the whole system is geared to providing answers to questions, to a search for the truth and to action on the findings, rather than the present vagaries.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that the Law Officers' Department is holding an inquiry into the way in which deaths in custody are investigated and dealt with by the justice system. Clearly there is some overlap with the review of coroners, especially with regard to the investigative process. Although suspicious deaths in custody are few, one could argue that there is not currently great public confidence in any of the investigatory processes. Can my right hon. Friend assure me that the coroners service review team and the Law Officers' inquiry will liaise to work towards a better and more open mechanism for dealing with this difficult problem?

Yes, I shall be happy for the review to do that, and to do it in conjunction with the development work for the establishment of the independent police complaints mechanisms that will provide a more transparent route for those who raise complaints about what has happened to people in custody. My right hon. Friend the Minister for Policing, Crime Reduction and Community Safety will publish the latest statistics shortly.

Does the Home Secretary also accept that all too often the coroners service is signally failing the public? I shall give him a specific example about which I have been in correspondence with the Under-Secretary, the hon. Member for Leeds, Central (Hilary Benn). The parents of constituents of mine were killed in a car crash in Teesside more than 18 months ago, but because of incompetence and alleged short staffing, there has been no inquest, and the coroner has still not acted. Is there really a shortage of staff, and is the Home Secretary doing anything about it? When will my constituents who are suffering have their minds put at rest?

Those are all extremely good questions, but because the Home Secretary has no remit in such matters at the moment, the review will need to tell us how to develop sensible accountability, which will not take away the responsibility at local level, but will enable us to ensure that there is consistency and proper monitoring, and that we train those involved to be able to do the job. There is a kind of "ad hocism" here, which dates back to a distant bygone era. It is time to shed light on the process, and ensure that we use it sensibly so as to link it in with the criminal justice system in a meaningful fashion.

What plans he has to reduce the paperwork police officers have to deal with. [75325]

We published the report of Sir David O'Dowd's taskforce on policing bureaucracy in September. It shows us how the police service can cut administrative burdens and reduce inefficient working practices, which together keep police officers off the streets. The Government have set up a joint group co-chaired by the Association of Chief Police Officers to take forward and implement the taskforce report.

I am very appreciative of my right hon. Friend's answer, but what progress has so far been made in implementing the report? More importantly, since this is really about getting police officers back into frontline policing, how are we going to monitor whether reducing bureaucracy is in fact equalling more policemen doing what they are employed to do?

On my hon. Friend's first point, we kept in close touch with the taskforce while it was doing its work, so we were able to make a number of changes to, for example, the powers that can be exercised by civilian custody staff in the context of the Police Reform Act 2002, which received Royal Assent in July. We have therefore already made a start on the issues identified by the taskforce. Equally, we are discussing with the police service the best way to measure the taskforce's impact. My hon. Friend is absolutely right—we need to develop an effective measure that indicates to us and to the public how we are gaining greater visibility and more officer hours on the front line as a result of these and other changes. When we have completed that work, we will publish that indicator for the police service.

Will the Minister tell us when the new computer systems in respect of arrest and taking into custody will be available for use in the service?

The case and custody system, to which I think the hon. Gentleman refers, is being successfully trialled in Warwickshire. I hope that, during the three years from next April, the system will be rolled out across the police service. We are looking in detail at the deadlines and timetables, but that is the time scale towards which we are working.

Has my right hon. Friend seen a piece of paperwork that is doing more to reduce the number of police officers on the streets of Slough than any other? It is an advertisement, issued by the Metropolitan police, showing a photograph of two terraced houses, both of which are occupied by police officers. The rubric states the following about the occupiers:

"Both in their late 20s, both became police officers 6 years ago. One earns £22k a year and pays to travel to work and one earns £29k a year and travels to work for free."

I have not seen the advertisement to which my hon. Friend refers, but if that is what it says, that is not the way in which forces should compete for police officers. A few years ago, an agreement was reached and police forces did not attempt to recruit from each other's areas. At the instigation of the Association of Chief Police Officers, that was changed some time ago, when it was agreed that such recruitment exercises be carried out. However, it is essential that they be conducted in a responsible manner.

If he will make a statement on reoffending rates among young offenders in the last five years. [75326]

Reoffending rates are not normally measured, as they rely on self-reporting by offenders. Our target is therefore to achieve, by 2004, a 5 per cent. reduction in reconviction rates for young offenders within 12 months of original conviction, reprimand or final warning. Statistics published in June this year for the group dealt with in July 2000—just after the start of the main youth justice reforms—showed a 14.6 per cent. reduction in reconviction rates compared with 1997.

Notwithstanding the hard work put in by many staff, does the Minister agree that young offenders' institutions such as Glen Parva in my constituency are not happy places? Contrary to what the Minister says, the number of those in such places who are reconvicted has increased by 58 per cent. in the past five years throughout the country. Does the Minister think that there are any lessons to be learned from past regimes—for example, approved schools—in terms of why the offending rate was so low then? Does he think that a case exists for a challenging regime of support, rehabilitation and training after custody, to prevent people from re-offending and being reconvicted?

I do agree with the hon. Gentleman's last point. If he looks at the work that the Youth Justice Board is undertaking, what he describes is precisely what makes up the intensive supervision and surveillance programmes that youth offending teams are running up and down the country. They provide the rigour that is required to get young people to face up to the consequences of their offending, and they give them the support that they need to live their lives differently in future. That is precisely why we have invested in youth justice reforms, and the whole House will doubtless welcome the early indication that those reforms are succeeding in helping to reduce reconvictions.