View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

7 Oral Answers
26 OCTOBER 2009
Oral Answers
8
in my view, was the abolition of border controls in 1994.
With your permission, Mr. Speaker, I throw the question
back at the hon. Gentleman: does he now support the
border controls that we have put back into place?
Chris Grayling: I think a lot of people will notice that
the Minister has made no attempt to answer my question.
What Mr. Neather, the former adviser, said was that the
policy of rapid expansion was done to put pressure on
the right. Would it not be utterly disgraceful for any
Government to decide immigration policy that was in
the interests not of the country, but of a political party?
Was that what happened?
Mr. Woolas: I do not know to whom or to which
reports the hon. Gentleman refers. If he wants to take
the views of someone with a political motivation, that is
up to him, but I repeat that the Government have
reintroduced border controls—electronic borders—despite
opposition from the hon. Gentleman.
Chris Grayling indicated dissent.
Mr. Woolas: It is no good the hon. Gentleman shaking
his head and smirking about it. The facts are that his
party abolished border controls, that we have reintroduced
them and that he opposes them.
Prevent
5. David Tredinnick (Bosworth) (Con): If he will
assess the value for money of his Department’s expenditure
on the Prevent strand of its counter-terrorism strategy.
[295129]
7. Mr. Greg Hands (Hammersmith and Fulham)
(Con): If he will assess the value for money of his
Department’s expenditure on the Prevent strand of its
counter-terrorism strategy. [295131]
The Secretary of State for the Home Department
(Alan Johnson): Prevent is an essential aspect of the
Contest counter-terrorism strategy designed to safeguard
our country and its citizens. The Prevent strategy aims
to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting violent
extremism through a variety of initiatives focused on
local communities. Delivery of the strategy, expenditure
and impact, is monitored routinely to ensure value for
money, and effectiveness.
David Tredinnick: I am grateful to the Secretary of
State for that reply, but is not the great problem that
there is no guarantee that that money is not finding its
way into the hands of extremist groups? When is he
going to have a proper audit of this expenditure to
convince the House that it is going to the right place?
Alan Johnson: The hon. Gentleman asks a very important
question about Prevent. I hope that he would accept, as
should everyone in this House, that yes, we should have
a strategy on pursuing terrorists, and yes, we should
have a strategy on ensuring that we are prepared for
terrorist attack, but that it would be strange indeed to
have a strategy that did not concentrate on preventing
young people, in particular, from being radicalised in
the first place. Having developed the strategy, of course
we have to ensure that the money is used effectively on
behalf of the taxpayer and is not finding its way into
the hands of extremists. There is absolutely no evidence
of that whatsoever. This money is carefully audited, not
just by us but by the Department for Communities and
Local Government, on a continual basis.
Mr. Hands: In 2005, Tony Blair announced that Hizb
ut-Tahrir would be banned, which we support, but that
never came to pass. Further, the Government should
put a total ban on Hezbollah. Can the Secretary of
State tell us why Ministers have been so slow to take
action against these extremist groups?
Alan Johnson: Going back in history, the hon. Gentleman
will find that it was a previous Home Secretary, the
right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and
Hythe (Mr. Howard), who let these people in in the first
place. Secondly, we are a functioning democracy that is
very careful about the organisations we proscribe, which
should be those that particularly and specifically refer
to the use of violence to meet their aims. That level has
not been reached. Organisations across the country—and
Members of Parliament, actually—would look askance
if we used the legislation to proscribe organisations that
should not be proscribed under its terms. It is absolutely
right that we do not give a gift to these radical organisations
by using the proscribing legislation unwisely.
John Reid (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab): Does my right
hon. Friend accept that one of the defining characteristics
of today’s terrorism is the constant search for new
methods of inflicting terror, and that in response, therefore,
we have to try to harness together the innovative tendencies
inside Government and across the private and academic
sectors? May I commend, through him, the work of
Charles Farr and the Office for Security and Counter-
Terrorism in identifying publicly, through the national
security strategy and the science and technology strategy,
the areas of research that they would like academia and
the business community to pursue? Will my right hon.
Friend continue to issue such guidance so that we can
harness the whole community against terrorism?
Alan Johnson: My right hon. Friend played a very
distinctive role in formulating the Office for Security
and Counter-Terrorism. It was absolutely essential that
we brought together the various strands from across the
Government to concentrate on these issues, and Charles
Farr is leading the operation magnificently. My right
hon. Friend is right to point to an aspect that is not
often referred to—the race against time to find new
methods of technology to thwart the increasing ingenuity
of those who seek to destroy our society.
Dr. Phyllis Starkey (Milton Keynes, South-West) (Lab):
When my right hon. Friend is monitoring the effectiveness
of the Prevent programme, will he give his urgent attention
to the need to push more resources into prisons, which
are clearly a place where many young men are converted
to violent ideologies? Will he also consider the criticism
currently made of Prevent that it is spread far too
widely in being aimed at an entire community with a
particular religious belief instead of being focused on
the people who are really the problem?
Alan Johnson: We are looking at prisons all the time;
I work closely on that with my colleagues at the Ministry
of Justice. I do not accept my hon. Friend’s second