State IntegrityReceipts, not verdicts

James Brokenshire corrected a written answer on Asylum: Deportation

22 February 2016 · Commons written answer · Home Office

Mr David Hanson (Labour, Delyn) asked written question 1933 on 10 June 2015. James Brokenshire answered on 15 June 2015 for the Home Office, and James Brokenshire corrected the answer on 22 February 2016. The correction replaced 4 figures (1023, 1343, 1545, 972) with 4 figures (1,150, 520, 800, 980). Altogether 72 words differ between the two versions.

The question

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have been removed from the UK under the Dublin Convention in each year since 2010.

Original and corrected answer

Struck through: original only. Bold: correction only.

OriginalCorrected
The number of people transferred under the Dublin Convention and the later Dublin II and Dublin III Regulations, is shown in the following table:
| 2010
| 2011
| 2012
| 2013
| 2014
Total
| 1545
| 1343
| 972
| 1023

| 740
Transfers to other Member States under the Dublin Regulations fell in the last three years because we stopped transferring asylum claimants to Greece in 2010. This was because it was found conditions there amounted to a breach of article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights. There then followed similar litigation around conditions in Italy, but we are still able to effect transfers there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our records indicate that the
number of people transferred under the Dublin Convention and the later Dublin II and Dublin III Regulations were as shown in the following table:
| 2010
| 2011
| 2012
| 2013
| 2014
Total
| 1,150
| 980
| 740
| 800
| 520
Figures are rounded to the nearest 10; are based on the latest management information so are subject to change; and have not been quality assured under national statistics protocols.

Transfers to other Member States under the Dublin Regulations fell in the last three years because we stopped transferring asylum claimants to Greece in 2010. This was because it was found conditions there amounted to a breach of article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights. There then followed similar litigation around conditions in Italy, but we are still able to effect transfers there.

The question and answer on the Parliament website.

More on James Brokenshire.

Receipt

Read fromhttps://questions-statements-api.parliament.uk/api/writtenquestions/questions/349817?expandMember=true
Date read15 October 2026
SHA-2565991f8888e7e453cf423379c917d565629d2098b62d53393d6da639865741157