Search Results

1-12 of 12 results for subject:Forgery

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many (a) passports and (b) identity documents purported to be issued by an EU member state presented by passengers on arrival in the UK were the subject of enquiries with the authorities of the member state to determine the...

Asked by

Baroness King of Bow (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

3 November 2000

For answer on

13 November 2000

Answered on

13 November 2000

Ms Oona King: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) passports and (b) identity documents purported to be issued by an EU member state presented by passengers on arrival in the UK were the subject of inquiries with the authorities of the member state to determine the document's genuineness and that issue to the holder was correct, during 1999. [137290] Mrs. Roche: Statistics are not currently compiled for the number of inquiries made with other European Union/ European Economic Area (EU/EEA) member states regarding documents issued by them. The Immigration Service National Forgery Section is the nominated United Kingdom contact point for EU/EEA travel document inquiries. Other Immigration Service offices, however, also make certain unilateral inquiries directly with EU member states via established bilateral liaison contacts. Reference is normally made to these authorities only in a restricted number of cases; for instance, when it cannot be determined that the document is a forgery, or to clarify whether or not a document is a stolen blank whose details have not already been circulated via the nominated national contact point. A new system of recording details of the mutual exchange of such information is currently being put in place. Comprehensive figures are, however, available for the number of cases of fraudulent passports and identity cards detected by the Immigration Service at United Kingdom ports of arrival during the course of 1999. There were 5,516 such detections, 3,018 of which were non-British EEA documents.

Date

13 November 2000

Reference

356 c543W; 137290

House

House of Commons

Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 (Extension of Group A Offences) Order 2000

SR 2000/226 (Negative instrument). Coming into force 1 August 2000.

Department

Northern Ireland Office

Type

Statutory instruments

Date

10 July 2000

Reference

SR 2000/226

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Criminal Justice Act 1993 (Extension of Group A offences) Order 2000

Draft SI on Criminal Justice Act 1993 (extension of Group A offences). Lords debate on a motion to approve. Agreed to on question.

Lead member

Lord Bassam of Brighton

Answering member

Viscount Bridgeman

Department

Home Office

Type

Debates on delegated legislation

Date

7 July 2000

Reference

614 c1750-1

House

House of Lords

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many fraud cases were investigated in each police authority area in (a) 1979, (b) 1983, (c) 1987, (d) 1992 and (e) each year since 1995; what was the clear up rate in each year; and what estimate he has...

Asked by

Jim Cousins (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

29 June 2000

For answer on

6 July 2000

Answered on

6 July 2000

Mr. Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many fraud cases were investigated in each police authority area in (a) 1979, (b) 1983, (c) 1987, (d) 1992 and (e) each year since 1995; what was the clear up rate in each year; and what estimate he has made of the value of such fraud in each year since 1995. [129129] Mr. Charles Clarke: Fraud offences comprise part of the offence group covering both fraud and forgery. The number of fraud and forgery offences recorded in the years requested in each police force, and the clear up rate, are given in the tables. The counting rules for recorded crime changed from 1 April 1998. The effect on the number of fraud and forgery offences recorded was substantial, resulting in an estimated increase of 61 per cent. due to counting rules changes in England and Wales as a whole. The Economic Cost of Fraud, a report for the Home Office and the Serious Fraud Office, will be published by National Economic Research Associates (NERA) on Tuesday 11 July. The report will provide estimates of expenditure on investigations, court proceedings and preventative measures, and the amounts of money defrauded across all sectors of the economy, for the years 1997 and 1998. Fraud and forgery offences _________________________________________________________________________________________________. 1979 1983 1987 1992 Police force Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) Avon and Somerset 2,570 90 3,507 78 5,537 75 5,699 46 Bedfordshire 1,783 90 1,199 60 1,648 59 2,101 42 Cambridgeshire 928 87 910 70 967 66 1,764 49 Cheshire 982 98 1,690 91 1,642 83 2,414 74 Cleveland 2,140 78 1,501 65 2,598 58 1,679 36 Cumbria 1,094 91 622 74 935 81 858 63 Derbyshire 2,547 94 1,973 90 1,489 84 1,349 55 Devon and Cornwall 2,289 86 3,628 87 3,849 79 3,601 46 Dorset 2,271 92 2,178 84 2,824 83 3,726 87 Durham 1,391 97 1,497 86 1,840 18 2,572 75 Essex 2,281 86 1,734 61 1,966 60 3,670 40 Gloucestershire 780 92 876 69 1,356 82 2,087 46 Greater Manchester 8,066 96 13,746 87 12,426 83 11,819 74 Hampshire 4,231 91 2,826 67 3,862 73 5,146 61 Hertfordshire 3,437 97 1,660 84 2,531 90 1,594 51 Humberside 1,217 84 1,525 76 2,827 55 3,184 44 Kent 2,672 89 1,482 58 1,842 60 4,356 40 Lancashire 2,512 94 2,791 84 4,384 92 3,833 80 Leciestershire 1,349 93 2,107 81 2,048 76 3,156 51 Lincolnshire 690 82 809 70 933 61 1,404 64 City of London 407 52 372 56 499 46 485 45 Merseyside 3,342 83 5,416 81 4,680 73 5,098 73 Metropolitan police district 25,954 60 29,714 49 27,892 47 39,664 44 Norfolk 1,108 86 1,001 77 1,096 72 1,814 57 Northamptonshire 1,285 86 1,058 78 1,237 65 1,556 52 Northumbria 2,413 89 2,204 57 3,081 71 3,507 37 North Yorkshire 1,267 93 895 77 1,070 77 1,033 72 Nottinghamshire 2,850 78 2,116 54 2,760 57 4,023 37 South Yorkshire 1,845 89 1,648 73 1,638 75 2,009 60 Staffordshire 1,668 84 1,128 65 1,371 68 2,246 46 Suffolk 1,364 89 831 71 1,086 71 1,772 73 Surrey 2,156 91 1,136 62 1,178 66 2,078 44 Sussex 3,062 90 1,745 65 2,692 64 3,820 53 Thames Valley 5,049 91 4,214 74 4,352 67 7,651 43 Warwickshire 584 91 505 69 553 66 1,129 52 West Mercia 1,685 91 1,344 77 1,039 74 1,342 56 West Midlands 4,640 76 6,111 53 5,609 55 8,293 39 West Yorkshire 3,717 70 4,123 71 4,388 73 6,183 64 Wiltshire 1,046 80 1,023 76 851 66 1,711 66 Dyfed-Powys 1,019 96 1,116 93 1,660 91 906 79 Gwent 1,262 96 1,292 91 1,479 92 1,095 72 North Wales 2,125 90 1,615 85 1,949 87 1,354 66 South Wales 2,955 92 2,923 83 3,339 74 3,819 43 Total 118,033 82 121,791 69 132,976 67 168,600 53 _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Fraud and forgery offences _________________________________________________________________________________________________. 1995 1996 1997 1998-99 Police force Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up Offences Clear-up recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) recorded rate (%) Avon and Somerset 4,017 45 4,293 49 3,584 44 9,950 39 Bedfordshire 1,781 37 2,033 49 1,799 41 4,114 27 Cambridgeshire 1,369 41 1,498 44 1,391 42 2,389 42 Cheshire 2,639 79 2,359 83 1,845 80 2,146 72 Cleveland 1,481 53 1,475 46 1,425 34 2,261 41 Cumbria 930 70 995 67 1,099 68 1,388 78 Derbyshire 1,399 46 1,355 44 1,308 48 4,200 48 Devon and Cornwall 2,674 57 2,374 59 2,232 59 7,064 47 Dorset 1,501 68 1,303 64 1,300 65 6,334 51 Durham 1,661 62 1,279 64 1,163 75 1,311 74 Essex 2,465 42 2,485 41 2,443 44 4,366 41 Gloucestershire 1,986 52 1,652 48 1,517 49 2,527 50 Greater Manchester 5,840 48 5,532 42 5,773 39 15,830 41 Hampshire 3,892 59 3,907 58 3,781 60 5,130 61 Hertfordshire 1,232 47 1,237 47 1,345 39 2,312 46 Humberside 2,966 52 2,610 44 2,316 55 3,582 54 Kent 3,627 44 3,155 54 2,932 47 5,687 42 Lancashire 3,484 77 3,446 73 3,412 70 4,446 63 Leciestershire 2,681 47 3,365 52 2,870 46 7,227 39 Lincolnshire 1,163 63 1,148 61 1,382 78 2,723 78 City of London 488 51 439 54 502 42 862 36 Merseyside 4,259 64 4,288 60 4,269 59 4,884 59 Metropolitan police district 32,838 46 38,983 45 42,687 41 80,541 15 Norfolk 1,345 62 1,251 62 1,045 74 2,488 63 Northamptonshire 1,217 61 1,246 63 1,266 76 4,425 39 Northumbria 2,606 43 2,109 44 2,221 46 4,991 58 North Yorkshire 1,032 55 1,052 58 980 55 2,563 67 Nottinghamshire 3,701 34 3,352 36 2,874 36 4,736 32 South Yorkshire 2,524 35 2,651 32 2,367 40 3,951 59 Staffordshire 1,905 46 2,004 50 2,200 55 3,830 44 Suffolk 1,243 70 1,333 69 1,116 74 2,099 49 Surrey 1,442 55 1,389 52 1,332 55 2,994 51 Sussex 2,763 57 2,815 56 2,994 54 7,790 25 Thames Valley 4,732 46 4,551 44 4,174 38 11,778 25 Warwickshire 901 51 975 51 898 51 2,401 38 West Mercia 1,739 50 1,894 44 1,881 39 3,961 57 West Midlands 7,624 27 6,365 33 4,844 44 15,675 31 West Yorkshire 4,818 55 5,071 55 5,244 55 10,608 45 Wiltshire 1,012 63 920 56 830 53 1,933 56 Dyfed-Powys 577 84 604 75 482 82 1,402 86 Gwent 933 71 1,305 64 1,415 65 2,395 67 North Wales 1,130 71 1,022 68 844 68 1,869 74 South Wales 3,399 33 3,105 38 3,016 36 6,340 44 Total 133,016 50 136,225 49 134,398 48 279,503 36 _________________________________________________________________________________________________.

Date

6 July 2000

Reference

129129; 353 c302-4W;353 c302-3W

House

House of Commons

Criminal Justice Act 1993 (Extension of Group A Offences) Order 2000

Draft SI on Criminal Justice Act 1993 (extension of Group A offences). Motion to approve. Agreed to on question (formal).

Type

Parliamentary proceedings

Date

27 June 2000

Reference

352 c879

House

House of Commons

Criminal Justice Act 1993 (Extension of Group A Offences) Order 2000

Draft SI on Criminal Justice Act 1993 (extension of Group A offences). Considered by Standing Committee. (Minutes of proceedings at UP 7 1999/2000).(Vote).

Type

Debates on delegated legislation; Delegated Legislation Committee proceedings

Date

26 June 2000

Reference

1st SC on DL

House

House of Commons

Criminal Justice Act 1993 (Extension of Group A Offences) Order 2000

Draft SI on Criminal Justice Act 1993 (extension of Group A offences). (Affirmative instrument). Approved by Parliament. Made 13 July 2000 (SI 2000/1878). Coming into force 1 August 2000.

Department

Home Office

Type

Statutory instruments

Notes

DEBATE;SC (1ST) 26 JUN 2000;LH 7 JUL 2000

Date

12 June 2000

Reference

SI 2000/1878

House

House of Commons; House of Lords

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what amount has been spent under the National Changeover Plan in connection with measures to combat the counterfeiting of the euro; and if he will make a statement. - Do not come within the scope of the National Changeover Plan.

Asked by

David Lidington (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

7 April 2000

Reference

347 c632W; 118076

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will make a statement on the agreement reached at the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting on 27th March to introduce an EU-wide minimum prison sentence for counterfeiting the euro; what plans he has to implement that...

Asked by

David Lidington (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

4 April 2000

For answer on

7 April 2000

Answered on

7 April 2000

Mr. Lidington: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on the agreement reached at the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting on 27 March to introduce an EU-wide minimum prison sentence for counterfeiting the euro; what plans he has to implement that decision; what estimate he has made of the cost to public funds; and if he will make a statement; [118075] (2) if he will place in the Library a copy of the framework decision on the protection of the euro against counterfeiting discussed at the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting on 27 March; [118068] (3) what were the accompanying measures aimed at supporting the objectives of the framework decision in respect of the criminal sanctions against counterfeiting of the euro, announced by Commissioner Vitorino at the EU Justice and Home Affairs Council meeting on 27 March; [118069] (4) what plans Her Majesty's Government have to make it a criminal offence in (a) England and Wales, (b) Scotland and (c) Northern Ireland to counterfeit the euro; and if he will make a statement. [118078] Mr. Boateng: I am placing in the Library a copy of the draft framework decision as deposited for Scrutiny. Article 6(2) of the draft framework decision provides that offences of fraudulent making, shall be punishable by terms of imprisonment, the maximum being not less than eight years. The maximum term of imprisonment already provided for these offences under existing United Kingdom legislation is 10 years. Article 6 of the framework decision will not, therefore, require new legislation or result in any additional costs. In all parts of the United Kingdom it is already a criminal offence to counterfeit any currency which is customarily used as money, including the euro. The Commission has indicated that it plans to bring forward a number of accompanying measures aimed at supporting the objectives of the framework decision in the area of judicial co-operation, exchange of information and training. The Commission hopes to make a formal proposal to this effect during the Portuguese Presidency.

Date

7 April 2000

Reference

347 c632W; 118075;118068;118069;118078

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what was the outcome of the Justice and Home Affairs Council held in Brussels on 27th March; and if he will make a statement.

Asked by

Jim Hood (Labour)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

27 March 2000

For answer on

3 April 2000

Answered on

3 April 2000

Mr. Hood: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what was the outcome of the Justice and Home Affairs Council held in Brussels on 27 March; and if he will make a statement. [116833] Mr. Straw: The Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Mrs. Roche), represented the United Kingdom at the Council. The main matters dealt with were as follows: `A points' The list of `A' points was agreed in full, including, among other things, the Europol Work Programme for 2000; the exchange of information in the evaluation of risks and control of new synthetic drugs; and the Council Decision concerning the better exchange of information in order to fight the use of counterfeit travel documents. Open Debate on the protection of victims in the European Judicial Area The priority being given to improving the position of victims in the European Union was welcomed wholeheartedly by the Council. The Commission's consultation paper was regarded as the basis for future work. All member states had domestic schemes to assist victims, but it was agreed that action was needed at Union level to ensure adequate protection for those who were victims abroad. The right to compensation was also discussed. Adoption of the Agenda In view of ongoing discussions between Spain and the United Kingdom, in consultation with the Government of Gibraltar, the Presidency dropped four items (Insolvency, Service of Documents, Eurodac Regulations, Mandate for a parallel Dublin Agreement with Norway and Iceland) from the meeting's agenda, since the outstanding issue on these dossiers was the question of application to Gibraltar. Tampere Score-Board There was a presentation by the Commission. The Council gave broad endorsement to the objectives, structure and deadlines set out in the Commission Score-Board, as a political, not legal, commitment. It was acknowledged that the document should be flexible, with deadlines and substance being kept under review. A revised version would be presented for review once per Presidency. Member states set out their priorities, with the next Presidency giving a detailed picture of its Presidency objectives. Counterfeiting the euro There was political agreement, subject to one member state's parliamentary scrutiny reserve. The Commission announced its intention to bring forward a supplementary instrument including provisions on co-operation, training and exchange of information. Draft Mutual Legal Assistance Convention Agreement was reached on outstanding issues except territorial scope and data protection. The draft Convention would be submitted for adoption at the May Council, following further consultation and consideration. Framework Decision establishing Joint Teams to conduct criminal investigators in one or more member state Member states remained divided as to the most appropriate means of implementing the paragraph of the Tampere conclusions calling for the establishment without delay of Joint Investigation Teams to conduct criminal investigations. The issue would be remitted back to the appropriate working group. The prevention and control of organised crime: a European strategy for the beginning of the new Millennium The text of the strategy was approved and would be published in the Official Journal in due course. Collective Evaluation preliminary country reports on Czech Republic and Hungary The Council noted the reports by the Collective Evaluation Working Group. The importance of Justice and Home Affairs matters in the enlargement exercise was stressed. Member states would assist applicant countries all they could, but it was considered important that pressure should continue to be placed on the applicant counties themselves. It was agreed that the Council Secretariat would prepare a document for the Enlargement Working Group setting out any areas of omission or weakness identified in the country reports. Brussels II Regulation (proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for joint children) Substantial progress was made on this item, subject to the outstanding issue of territorial scope. The United Kingdom did not lift its parliamentary reserve and in that respect the reference in the press statement by the Council reporting on the outcome of the proceedings that "political agreement" has been reached on the draft instrument was incorrect. Brussels I Regulation (proposal for a Council Regulation on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters) The Presidency gave a `state of play' report on discussion of the draft Regulation. It was noted that the European Parliament's opinion was awaited. The Commission announced its intention to propose an amendment to Article 15 of the Regulation to make clear that it applied to distance contract only. Charter of Fundamental Rights The Presidency gave a `state of play' report on discussions. A final draft would be prepared by June and adopted by the end of October, for submission to the European Council. Major issues such as scope, legal status and relationship with the European Court of Human Rights would be considered once agreement had been reached on the body of the text. There was no discussion. Commission's proposal for a European Refugee Fund The Presidency gave the state of play, reporting on discussion in the Strategic Committee on Immigration, Frontiers and Asylum, noting the need for the proposal to be clearer on the aims and target of the fund, on future financing and on the allocation criteria. The Commission was invited to bring forward a proposal on temporary protection as soon as possible. Following discussion, the Commission expressed the hope that the proposal could be adopted during the current Presidency. Revision of the Dublin Convention The Commission paper (analysing the current problems with the operation of the Dublin Convention and considering alternatives for a replacement Title IV measure) was generally welcomed. The Commission planned to consult widely. A proposal would then be made at the turn of the year. High Level Working Group on Asylum and Migration The Presidency noted that the Action Plan on Albania and the neighbouring region had now been agreed by the High Level Working Group and would go to the General Affairs Council for adoption in June. New working methods had been established to take forward the implementation of all the Action Plans. United Kingdom Drugs Initiative We provided information on the United Kingdom Initiative for European Union action to tackle drugs with the aim of achieving a drug-free enlarged Union. The Presidency asked the Committee of Permanent Representatives to remit this to the Article 36 committee to take forward. German Initiative on Public Contract Law Germany introduced its initiative for a Framework Decision to establish uniform minimum standards under criminal law for unlawful/uncompetitive behaviour in the award of public contracts. Relations with Mediterranean countries An Israeli request to increase the dialogue on judicial co-operation between the European Union and Mediterranean countries through the Barcelona process was noted by the Council. Asylum conference The Presidency confirmed that it would host a joint conference with the Commission in Portugal on 15-16 June, on asylum issues.

Date

3 April 2000

Reference

347 c373-6W; 116833

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what is his estimate of the number of forged SAL 2 forms in circulation.

Asked by

Nick Gibb (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

7 February 2000

Reference

344 c50W; 107951

House

House of Commons

Home Office

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will make a statement on Council Decision 1999/C 322/04 (C322 of 10th November 1999), with reference to the (a) manner of legislative implementation in the United Kingdom and (b) consequences for extradition arrangements; what assessment he has made...

Asked by

John Bercow (Conservative)

Answering body

Home Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

19 January 2000

For answer on

27 January 2000

Answered on

27 January 2000

Mr. Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if he will make a statement on Council Decision 1999/C 322/04 (C322 of 10 November 1999), with reference to the (a) manner of legislative implementation in the United Kingdom and (b) consequences for extradition arrangements; [106403] (2) what assessment he has made of the impact on UK law of the German initiative on increasing penal sanctions against counterfeiting the euro, set out in document 11302/99 of 5 October 1999; what court of law would try UK cases; and what supreme court would take final appeals. [106429] Mr. Charles Clarke: An amended version of Germany's initiative on increasing penal sanctions against counterfeiting the Euro was "agreed in substance" at the Justice and Home Affairs Council in December. The text agreed was similar to that deposited for scrutiny with the House in November (reference: 12585/99). The text did not receive final approval at the Council because a number of member states, including the United Kingdom, held parliamentary scrutiny reservations, and because the European Parliament had not yet given its opinion. The Council hopes to adopt the Framework Decision in March. The draft Framework Decision, as provisionally agreed in December, contains three main legislative implications for the United Kingdom. First, the United Kingdom would be required to ensure that pre-circulation Euro notes and coins are covered by United Kingdom legislation. This requirement would be met by Part one of the Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 in relation to pre-circulation Euro notes, and Part 2 of the 1981 Act in relation to pre- circulation Euro coins. The Forgery and Counterfeiting (Protected Coins) Order (1999) designates Euro coins as protected coins within the meaning of Section 27(1) of the 1981 Act. Second, the United Kingdom would be required to take jurisdiction over counterfeiting offences committed in whole or in part within the United Kingdom's jurisdiction. The Government intend to meet this requirement through an amendment to Part I of the Criminal Justice Act 1993. Finally, should the United Kingdom adopt the Euro, the United Kingdom would be required to take universal jurisdiction for cases of counterfeiting of the Euro (i.e. to empower United Kingdom courts to try offences of counterfeiting of the Euro which had been committed anywhere in the world). Cases of counterfeiting of the Euro within the United Kingdom's jurisdiction, like all other criminal offences, would be tried by United Kingdom courts, and the normal avenues of appeal would apply. I do not expect the draft Framework Decision to have any consequences for the United Kingdom's extradition arrangements.

Date

27 January 2000

Reference

343 c230-1W; 106403;106429

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher