§ 14. Mr. RobathanTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is his target date for reducing the backlog of asylum seekers to the same level as May 1997. [116798]
§ Mrs. RocheWe have all but cleared the backlog of pre-1993 cases and expect to clear the backlog of 1993–95 cases by the summer of this year. We expect to start making significant inroads into the backlog of post 1996 cases by late spring of this year, and are aiming for a very substantial reduction in the backlog by April 2001.
§ 25. Ms RyanTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions he has had with local authorities outside the south-east about the policy of dispersal of asylum seekers. [116812]
§ Mr. StrawWe have had many discussions with local authorities about the dispersal of asylum seekers. The National Asylum Support Service began operating last Monday in respect of all new applicants who claimed asylum at their port of entry.
The new asylum support scheme will be extended to cover asylum seekers who claim asylum in-county, while within the county of Kent, on or after Monday 17 April. The effect of this is that no asylum seeker making a claim for asylum in Kent, on or after that date, will be eligible for support from Kent County Council, or Medway Council. This will, I hope, bring considerable relief to the local authorities in Kent. This is the first stage of the roll-out of the support scheme to all in-country applicants.
§ Mr. RammellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the Government's plans to speed up the processing of asylum claims. [116820]
§ Mrs. RocheWe have already recruited hundreds of new asylum caseworkers in the Integrated Casework Directorate and plan to recruit more; in Croydon, Liverpool and elsewhere. We are also thoroughly overhauling processes across the system from end-to-end and across directorate and departmental boundaries. The provisions of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 will also provide much needed support for the system as a whole.
§ Mr. ColemanTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what amounts each London borough has claimed in excess of the maximum asylum grant available from his Department for(a) single asylum seekers and (b) asylum seekers with children for (i) 1998–99 and (ii) each calendar month in 1999–2000. [117929]
64W
§ Mrs. RocheWe do not hold this information on a monthly basis. 1999–2000 was split into two periods, the first from 1 April 1999 to 5 December 1999 and the second from 6 December 1999 to 31 March 2000. The information for the first period on the excess of claim over Special Grant is set out in the table, subject to audit, for both adults and families. Information on the second period is not yet available. A number of claims have been received and are being processed but I am unable to give the information requested at this stage.
Special Grant—1 April to 5 December 1999 £ Excess of claim over grant Local Authority Adults Families Barking and Dagenham 0 260,610 Barnet 0 608,598 Bexley 40,386 41,022 Brent 0 512,376 Bromley 103,135 76,143 Camden 511,217 1,435,467 Corporation of London 163,100 89,400 Croydon 9,712 29,905 Ealing 0 200,890 Enfield 237,803 233,500 Greenwich 0 0 Hackney 0 125,337 Hammersmith and Fulham 25,547 1,759,243 Haringey 635,425 388,022 Harrow 192,534 306,883 Havering 240,803 85,874 Hillingdon 0 434,519 Hounslow 130,456 220,674 Islington 1,454,744 67,643 Kensington and Chelsea 634,482 999,456 Kingston upon Thames 57,280 300,000 Lambeth 0 0 Lewisham 0 0 Merton 66,879 240,813 Newham 0 0 Redbridge 0 20,798 Richmond upon Thames 1,396,033 1,025,550 Southwark 562,254 191,511 Sutton 193,235 15,340 Tower Hamlets 93,169 15,340 Waltham Forest 0 51,461 Wandsworth 117,384 1,517,907 Westminster 919,220 2,092,003
§ Dr. PalmerTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what criteria asylum seekers are selected for a fast-track system of processing in respect of their claim. [116808]
§ Mrs. RocheWe are fast-tracking cases which appear to be straightforward or where there are strong public interest grounds for doing so.