Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label previous answer version answering member constituency answering member printed answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

101018

registered interest
date	27/10/2014
answering body	Department for Business, Innovation and Skills
answering dept id	26
answering dept short name	Business, Innovation and Skills
answering dept sort name	Business, Innovation and Skills
hansard heading	Deloitte
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what assessment the Insolvency Service has made of the performance of Deloitte as an appointed administrator in collective redundancy consultation.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211982
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2014 answer text <p>Responsibility for assessing the conduct and performance of insolvency practitioners in their role as Administrators falls to the Regulatory Professional Body of which they are a member. The role of the Secretary of State, through the Insolvency Service, is to ensure that these bodies are effectively undertaking their regulatory functions.</p><p> </p><p>In June 2014, an Employment Tribunal judgement was handed down which was critical of the role of the Administrators (from Deloitte) in their handling of redundancies involving approximately 6,500 employees following the collapse of Comet, a large national retailer of electrical goods. The judgement was referred by the Insolvency Service to the Administrators’ Regulatory Professional Body, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales for consideration of disciplinary action. That investigation is currently on-going.</p><p> </p><p>An Employment Tribunal had previously made criticisms of the Administrators of WW Realisations 1 Limited formerly known as Woolworths (also from Deloitte). That matter was also referred by the Insolvency Service to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales for consideration. No disciplinary action was taken as a result of that investigation.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency East Dunbartonshire answering member printed Jo Swinson question first answered 30/10/2014 15:34:24 answering member 1513 label Biography information for Jo Swinson
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

101192

registered interest
date	27/10/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Drugs: Misuse
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 15 October 2014 to Question 208447, how many people convicted of (a) class A, (b) class B and (c) class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 were given custodial sentences in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	212153
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2014 answer text <p>Sentencing and fines imposed in individual cases are a matter for the independent courts, within the limits set by Parliament and following sentencing guidelines.</p><p> </p><p>The number of persons found guilty, fined and given a custodial sentence for class A, class B and class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, in England and Wales, from 2009 to 2013 (the latest data available) can be viewed in the table below.</p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>Persons found guilty, fined and given a custodial sentence for class A, class B and class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, England and Wales 2009-2013 <sup>(1)(2)(3)</sup></strong></td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td>Total guilty</td><td>Total Fine</td><td>Immediate Custody</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>20,293</td><td>5,915</td><td>5,627</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>25,565</td><td>11,801</td><td>1,459</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>2,977</td><td>792</td><td>625</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>271</td><td>3</td><td>237</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>232</td><td>78</td><td>40</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>18,632</td><td>5,450</td><td>5,343</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>38,284</td><td>16,678</td><td>2,969</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>1,811</td><td>600</td><td>245</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>368</td><td>3</td><td>296</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>241</td><td>79</td><td>32</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>16352</td><td>4766</td><td>4857</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>41524</td><td>17655</td><td>3705</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>1655</td><td>591</td><td>180</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>376</td><td>6</td><td>316</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>233</td><td>81</td><td>31</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A Drug</td><td>15184</td><td>5009</td><td>4721</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B Drugs</td><td>40526</td><td>15814</td><td>3428</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C Drugs</td><td>1222</td><td>391</td><td>96</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class Unspecified</td><td>288</td><td>0</td><td>253</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>177</td><td>74</td><td>13</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A Drug</td><td>15,426</td><td>5,086</td><td>4,924</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B Drugs</td><td>39,407</td><td>15,162</td><td>3,280</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C Drugs</td><td>1,108</td><td>334</td><td>107</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class Unspecified</td><td>318</td><td>0</td><td>271</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>222</td><td>97</td><td>18</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>(-) = Nil</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">(1) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">(2) The conviction statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 212152 question first answered 30/10/2014 16:39:31 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

101193

registered interest
date	27/10/2014
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Drugs: Misuse
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 15 October 2014 to Question 208447, how many people convicted of (a) class A, (b) class B and (c) class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 were fined in each of the last four years.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	212152
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 30/10/2014 answer text <p>Sentencing and fines imposed in individual cases are a matter for the independent courts, within the limits set by Parliament and following sentencing guidelines.</p><p> </p><p>The number of persons found guilty, fined and given a custodial sentence for class A, class B and class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, in England and Wales, from 2009 to 2013 (the latest data available) can be viewed in the table below.</p><table><tbody><tr><td colspan="4"><strong>Persons found guilty, fined and given a custodial sentence for class A, class B and class C drug offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, England and Wales 2009-2013 <sup>(1)(2)(3)</sup></strong></td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="4"> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td>Total guilty</td><td>Total Fine</td><td>Immediate Custody</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>20,293</td><td>5,915</td><td>5,627</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>25,565</td><td>11,801</td><td>1,459</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>2,977</td><td>792</td><td>625</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>271</td><td>3</td><td>237</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>232</td><td>78</td><td>40</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>18,632</td><td>5,450</td><td>5,343</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>38,284</td><td>16,678</td><td>2,969</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>1,811</td><td>600</td><td>245</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>368</td><td>3</td><td>296</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>241</td><td>79</td><td>32</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>16352</td><td>4766</td><td>4857</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>41524</td><td>17655</td><td>3705</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>1655</td><td>591</td><td>180</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class unspecified drug offences <sup>(4)</sup></td><td>376</td><td>6</td><td>316</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>233</td><td>81</td><td>31</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various summary offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(6)</sup></td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A Drug</td><td>15184</td><td>5009</td><td>4721</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B Drugs</td><td>40526</td><td>15814</td><td>3428</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C Drugs</td><td>1222</td><td>391</td><td>96</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class Unspecified</td><td>288</td><td>0</td><td>253</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>177</td><td>74</td><td>13</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class A Drug</td><td>15,426</td><td>5,086</td><td>4,924</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class B Drugs</td><td>39,407</td><td>15,162</td><td>3,280</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class C Drugs</td><td>1,108</td><td>334</td><td>107</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Class Unspecified</td><td>318</td><td>0</td><td>271</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Various triable either way offences under Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 <sup>(5)</sup></td><td>222</td><td>97</td><td>18</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>(-) = Nil</td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">(1) Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr><td colspan="10">(2) The conviction statistics relate to persons for whom these offences were the principal offences for which they were dealt with. When a defendant has been found guilty of two or more offences the principal offence is the offence for which the heaviest penalty is imposed. Where the same disposal is imposed for two or more offences, the offence selected is the offence for which the statutory maximum penalty is the most severe.</td></tr></tbody></table> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning grouped question UIN 212153 question first answered 30/10/2014 16:39:31 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100750

registered interest
date	23/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Databases
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what her policy is on the future of the Childbase database of known online child abuse; how she envisages this database interacting with the Child Abuse Image Database; and if she will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211722
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2014 answer text <p>The Childbase database ceased to be active in 2011 and is no longer live. All forces have access to the interim National Hash Set Database which will be replaced by the Child Abuse Image Database (CAID). The CAID is being developed to support analysis by police of devices seized during investigations; to support victim identification; and to provide hash set data to the internet industry, to allow them to remove these appalling images from their networks.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 29/10/2014 13:36:08 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning previous answer version 24622 answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100751

registered interest
date	23/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Databases
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how much her Department has spent on commissioning the Child Abuse Image Database; whether this database will include all image-data known to Interpol; what steps she has taken to ensure that police forces can access this database; what specialist software regional police forces will require to access this database; and what additional funds she is making available to cover the costs of such software.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211721
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2014 answer text <p>Departmental spend on commissioning the Child Abuse Image Database (CAID) for the first year is £1,473,179, which is being recharged to police forces. It is estimated that CAID will save the police £7.474 million by March 2017 by speeding up police processes.<br><br>The project has been developed using data from Interpol and, where appropriate, this information will be included in the initial database load for CAID.<br><br>The CAID system will be available to all police forces in the UK and National Crime Agency – Child Exploitation and Online Protection (NCA-CEOP) Command via the police secure network. All forces will be accredited to access this data supported by the Home Office project team and security advisers. The CAID system allows the use of forces’ existing image grading and hashing software. <br><br>Any additional software needed to access CAID and to upload new material from the forces/NCA-CEOP Command to the database is provided as part of the central project at no cost to the forces. <br><br>Each force is responsible for its own set-up costs to establish the connectivity of their force High Tech Crime Unit or Grading Unit in an <br>enhanced, secure way to the police secure network that already exists in their forces.<br><br>It is expected that the CAID will cost forces approximately £20,000 per year in service costs (which are used to maintain and improve the database). This cost has been agreed with the National Policing lead for Child Protection and Abuse Investigation.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 29/10/2014 13:37:13 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning previous answer version 24642 answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100430

registered interest
date	22/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Internet
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many times digitally stored photographs seized by police forces in England and Wales investigating online child abuse were checked against the National Crime Agency's Childbase electronic database of known abuse images in each of the last four years; and how many times that database was used by each police force in England and Wales.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211467
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 27/10/2014 answer text <p>The Childbase database is no longer live and ceased to be active in 2011. All forces have access to the National Hash Set Database which houses images seen and categorised by UK forces. We are developing a national capability for collecting, assessing and storing indecent images of children (IIOC) for law enforcement agencies. This capability will also be used to provide hash set data to the internet industry, to allow them to remove these appalling images from their networks. The child abuse image database (CAID) will be operational by the end of 2014.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 27/10/2014 16:53:54 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning previous answer version 24348 answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100431

registered interest
date	22/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Internet
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have been identified as part of Operation Notarise; how many IP addresses have been linked to named people during that operation; and how many such people have been checked against (a) the Department for Work and Pensions database and (b) the Disclosure and Barring Service list of those working in regulated activity.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211463
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 10/11/2014 answer text <p>Operation NOTARISE is an ongoing NCA-led, UK-wide operation which is identifying and taking law enforcement action against individuals viewing <br>indecent images of children. Activity in Operation NOTARISE was prioritised according to how much risk the individuals presented, including checking the appropriate databases. <br><br>Those with access to children have been given the highest priority. As of 23 October, 704 people have been arrested, 133 children protected and <br>324 children safeguarded. It would not be appropriate to share any furtherdetails of operational procedures.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Staffordshire Moorlands answering member printed Karen Bradley question first answered 10/11/2014 16:32:07 answering member 4110 label Biography information for Dame Karen Bradley
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100432

registered interest
date	22/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Internet
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many cases of online child abuse were referred from the National Crime Agency to individual police forces in each of the last four years; and how many of those referrals included named individuals.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211464
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2014 answer text <p>The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), and the National Crime Agency (NCA), which became operational on 7 October 2013, have together made the following number of disseminations in relation to child sexual exploitation and abuse, which will include on-line abuse, to the territorial police forces in the UK in the last four years. The figure for 2013 includes the Project SPADE disseminations, hence the significant increase over 2012.<br><br>2011 – 1113<br>2012 – 1927<br>2013 – 4875<br>2014 to 30 September - 2519<br><br><br>The NCA is not in a position to provide details on how many referrals included named individuals.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning question first answered 29/10/2014 13:35:08 answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning previous answer version 24345 answering member constituency Hemel Hempstead answering member printed Mike Penning answering member 1528 label Biography information for Sir Mike Penning
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

100433

registered interest
date	22/10/2014
answering body	Home Office
answering dept id	1
answering dept short name	Home Office
answering dept sort name	Home Office
hansard heading	Offences against Children: Internet
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many times the National Crime Agency has made a request to internet services providers to link an identified IP address with a name and address in each of the last four years; how many such requests were made in relation to investigations into online child abuse; and what the average charge made for each such request was.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	211465
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/10/2014 answer text <p>There are limits to what can be said publically about the operational techniques used by our law enforcement agencies. To do so would assist <br>potential criminals to evade detection. However, in investigations that start with an online identifier or IP address, such as online child sexual <br>exploitation cases, communications data will often be the only available investigative lead to identify a suspect or victim in the real world. If this <br>data is not available, such investigations cannot proceed. As the Director General of the National Crime Agency, Keith Bristow, has made clear: <br>&quot;Communications data is still overwhelmingly the most powerful tool available to those investigating child sexual exploitation and identifying and <br>safeguarding its victims and potential victims.&quot;</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Staffordshire Moorlands answering member printed Karen Bradley question first answered 29/10/2014 13:30:02 answering member 4110 label Biography information for Dame Karen Bradley previous answer version 24346 answering member constituency Staffordshire Moorlands answering member printed Karen Bradley answering member 4110 label Biography information for Dame Karen Bradley
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson

77228

registered interest
date	10/07/2014
answering body	Department for Transport
answering dept id	27
answering dept short name	Transport
answering dept sort name	Transport
hansard heading	Rolling Stock: North of England
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what progress he has made in securing rolling-stock to serve cross-Pennine routes post-electrification; and whether he plans to use new rolling stock or a redeployment of current stock.
tabling member constituency	Kingston upon Hull North
tabling member printed	Diana Johnson
uin	205118
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 15/07/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>Following North West and North TransPennine electrification we expect bidders who are bidding for the TransPennine (TPE) franchise to propose high quality and high performing rolling stock suitable to serve the mix of passengers and journey types on TPE. Bidders will have the freedom to propose whether to use new rolling stock or redeploy current stock.</p> answering member constituency Scarborough and Whitby answering member printed Mr Robert Goodwill question first answered 15/07/2014 11:50:30 answering member 1562 label Biography information for Sir Robert Goodwill
tabling member	1533 label Biography information for Dame Diana Johnson