My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs (Ian McCartney) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I promised to keep this House informed of the Government's progress to put in place measures to avoid a repetition of the devastating impact on Farepak customers caused by the demise of the company last autumn.

Upon the collapse of Farepak, the Government acted quickly to set up the Farepak Response Fund, which secured £8 million. Thereafter, the Government have sought to work with the industry in order to provide added protection for consumers. While the urgency of the situation which existed ahead of Christmas may have passed, I have remained as committed to this issue as I was when it first arose. Today, I am pleased to announce that discussions with the industry have led to an agreement between industry and government which I am confident will lead to far greater consumer protection in the future.

Since the collapse of Farepak, the remaining hamper companies have been taking payments towards Christmas 2007. My immediate priority therefore has been to concentrate on securing early action to ensure that these payments are protected as far as possible to avoid a repetition of the situation where some of the poorest families in Britain, who had budgeted for Christmas, paid the price for the collapse of Farepak.

Since last autumn, the Government have been in discussions with the existing companies in this sector to develop an industry-led scheme to provide better safeguards for pre-payments through independently controlled, ring-fenced accounts, similar to the scheme that protects National Lottery prize money in the event of Camelot becoming insolvent. The purpose of these ring-fencing arrangements is to ensure customers' money could only be credited to the customers and agents should the company go bust, thereby avoiding another situation like Farepak. The key points of the proposal are:

the customers' money would be placed in a separate account and held on behalf of the customers;

control of this account would rest with independent trustees and not with the company;

the money would be released to the company by the trustees only to satisfy the customers' orders, and not for other business activities or expenses of the business; and

the arrangements would be formally defined as a trust deed and would be subject to trust law.

I am pleased to report that the industry has agreed to safeguard pre-payments through trust arrangements on these lines, thereby protecting the interests of consumers within the hamper industry. The companies are now working to introduce these accounts over the coming weeks. We think that effective safeguards of this type will provide the reassurance consumers are looking for in this industry. We therefore strongly welcome this move.

To increase consumer confidence further, we are also working with the industry to ensure these arrangements are monitored by a new, strengthened trade association. We will be looking for the trade association to put in place effective procedures through a reinforced code of practice to monitor the companies and ensure these accounts are established and operated correctly.

The trade association will have a strong independent element—independent directors will have responsibility for ensuring compliance with the code of practice. In particular, the code will be monitored by an independent Director of Compliance, free from association with any hamper company. Consumer concerns and consumer rights will be monitored by an independent Director of Consumer Affairs. We expect the companies to make the appointments in the next few weeks.

We will continue to work with the industry to ensure these measures are put in place as quickly as possible. I believe this move is an important step and welcome the commitment of the industry to seek to protect its customers.

In the longer term, the advice received from the Office of Fair Trading and the Financial Services Authority on a range of options to protect consumer interests in this industry will be considered alongside the findings of the two investigations into Farepak by the administrators and the DTI's Companies Investigation Branch. I hope to come back to the House once we have had a chance to consider all these issues.

With respect to the ongoing investigation into the administration of Farepak, the administrators have a statutory requirement to report to the Secretary of State within six months of their appointment. Their report is expected no later than 13 April 2007. The Insolvency Service will then consider the administrators' report and consider whether there are grounds for requiring further investigation—for example, with a view to bringing proceedings to disqualify the directors of Farepak Foods & Gifts Ltd from acting as directors to any other company.

The DTI's Companies Investigation Branch is continuing its wider confidential investigation into the circumstances surrounding the failure of Farepak. I do, of course, recognise the understandable desire for a speedy inquiry, but the investigation needs to be both thorough and fair, and it would not be appropriate to give an estimate for its conclusion. The victims of the collapse of Farepak have the right to expect that a comprehensive investigation has taken place.

I will provide further details to honourable Members in due course.

My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

One year on from the publication of the Deepcut Review, I am reporting on the progress that has been made in the provision of care for our young recruits and trainees.

We remain indebted to the work undertaken by Nicholas Blake QC for his independent, objective and comprehensive analysis of all relevant matters bearing on the four deaths at Deepcut. This added impetus to the extensive programme of work that was already under way to deliver improvements in the provision of care of our young recruits and trainees. Many of the actions arising from the review are either complete or near completion and we have made significant progress. In their Better Training report, published on 6 March and which I welcomed in my Written Statement on 6 March 2007 (Official Report, cols. 123-124WS), the Adult Learning Inspectorate (ALI) comments on the changes we have made to improve the training environment and our progress in detail.

The Deepcut Review made specific recommendations with regard to our care of recruits and trainees under 18 years of age and the environment in which they are trained. We have implemented the supervisory care directive across the training organisations to reduce the risks to trainees. Our policy regarding the management, care and welfare of service personnel under the age of 18 has been revised and reissued. Arrangements are in place to ensure that our under 18s are properly identified, monitored and supported throughout their training, and when necessary during their free time too. We have also improved our procedures to prevent under 18s inadvertently deploying to hostile theatres of operations.

The Deepcut review required us to look at ways to reduce the number of soldiers joining their units while under the age of 18. From September 2008, all the Army's junior entry phase 1 training will be conducted at either the Army Foundation College Harrogate over 42 weeks, or over a period of 20 weeks at the Army Training Regiment Winchester, from where trainees go on to complete longer phase 2 training courses.

We continue to look at ways of ensuring the physical and mental suitability of recruits to the Armed Forces and all three services now have pre-joining fitness tests that must be passed before entry. The Army obtains medical information from GPs to corroborate a candidate's response in the British Army health questionnaire and to answer further questions, thus reducing reliance on self-declaration. A copy of the trainee’s NHS records is also obtained at the start of phase 1 training to improve primary healthcare, and, if necessary, to substantiate the previous information on physical or psychological vulnerabilities. This practice is to be evaluated later in the year with a view to application across the three services.

The Deepcut review recommended that the Army should encourage maximum involvement in the selection process by the parent, or other responsible adult, of the applicant under 18. We have made great efforts to keep families and partners informed as recruits pass through training. We engage with families if a young recruit has a problem but in general our contact with families goes far beyond keeping them informed of problems; as they receive letters and phone calls about progress and information about forthcoming events. The ALI has acknowledged that our approach to recruits’ families has improved significantly (Better Training report, page 17).

The Deepcut review recommended that recruits who joined the Army as minors and who have reached a settled decision that they are unhappy with pursuing a military career before they reach the end of their phase 2 training, but after their 18th birthday, should be able to discharge as of right. We have no plans to change our policy that allows all new recruits who have completed 28 days’ service, regardless of their age, to discharge as of right (DAOR) within the first six months of service. However, those under the age of 18 years three months who have passed their statutory period for DAOR and who are clearly unhappy in their service may be considered for discharge from the Armed Forces provided that their unhappiness has been registered with their commanding officer before reaching the age of 18.

To address recommendations made on the training and selection of instructors, we have introduced the defence train the trainer course, which was mandated for all new instructors from April 2006. On 2 April 2007, a purpose-built Army Recruiting and Training Division Staff Leadership School will open at Pirbright. The Armed Forces have tightened up their procedures for checking the personal records of service personnel before employing them as instructors, to ensure that only suitable personnel of the right quality are posted to training establishments. While current legislation does not allow for Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks to be carried out on personnel working with recruits and trainees under the age of 18 because they are in full-time employment, we are working as a matter of urgency with the DfES and Home Office on changes to legislation that will allow greater flexibility in carrying out CRB checks on employees in the future. These changes are likely to come into effect this summer.

We have introduced a new policy on remedial training to address the recommendations in the Deepcut review on the use of informal punishments. The new policy defines what is legitimate in order to assist trainees to achieve required standards and to ensure that both instructors and trainees distinguish this from bullying or harassment, which is always unacceptable. It also reinforces the difference between training and punishment. Punishment may be awarded only as a result of a formal disciplinary process. Unofficial punishments are always unacceptable. The defence instructor handbook includes the behavioural standard expected of an instructor and it makes it clear that any unacceptable behaviour will not be tolerated. Any allegations of wrong-doing are thoroughly investigated and where proven, appropriate action is taken against the perpetrators that may, ultimately, result in dismissal from the service.

We have made real progress in managing the risk of self-harm and suicide. Training is being implemented, at all levels, on the identification and management of both operational and workplace stress. The supervisory care directive issued in March 2006 sets out the responsibilities of commanding officers in respect of managing risks to recruits, including the maintenance of an “at risk” register. The term “at risk” is interpreted widely and intelligently to include any recruits experiencing problems that affect their performance during training and which may put them at risk of failing their course. This approach has transformed the way in which support is targeted and the ALI cited this as our single most important development (Better Training report, page 17).

We said in our response to the Deepcut review that we intended to extend and deepen inspection arrangements across the military justice system using the opportunity afforded by the creation of a combined inspectorate for the criminal justice system. Although a combined inspectorate will now not be created under the Police and Justice Act, we intend to continue to progress our plans with the five separate justice inspectorates, and are working closely with other government departments to achieve this.

As a result of the Deepcut Review, we have produced a simple leaflet on what to do on encountering any form of bullying, who to turn to for help, sources of advice, definitions of the terms bullying and harassment and an overview of how complaints are made, responded to, investigated and dealt with. The Army has completed its trial of a system called “Bullytext” where trainees who may not wish to report incidents to the chain of command can text messages to an authorised officer. The trial was undertaken in three large training establishments, but received limited use by trainees so it was not possible to undertake a detailed assessment of its merit. However, feedback from trainees has indicated that the existence of such a scheme acts as a “reassurance mechanism” that is considered beneficial to them. Other more localised schemes using a text messaging service are therefore now being explored to complement the well-used confidential support line.

We have revised and reissued our procedures for making and dealing with complaints of bullying and harassment. The revised procedures apply to both service and civilian personnel and set out how to make a complaint, how to respond if the subject of a complaint, and how complaints are investigated and decided upon. We have provided clearer guidance on how the complaints procedures work, with more information on how to get help and advice, and on how complaints are logged and recorded. Further improvements will be made to the complaints process under the Armed Forces Act 2006, including the introduction of service complaint panels, which include an external, independent member for the consideration of complaints which make allegations of harassment and bullying. We will appoint a service complaints commissioner who will be able to receive complaints directly from service personnel, or from a third party, and refer them to the chain of command for action. While many complaints can be resolved satisfactorily by the chain of command at the lowest possible level, the service complaints commissioner will offer service personnel and others an alternative means of raising a grievance if they do not feel comfortable, for whatever reason, in reporting it to the relevant commanding officer. These changes are planned to come into effect in 2008, ahead of full implementation of Armed Forces Act 2006. The recruitment process for the position of service complaints commissioner will begin shortly.

The Deepcut review made recommendations about armed guarding and unsupervised access to weapons. The policy for routine armed guarding at training establishments has been updated and we are well into a programme of transferring routine armed guarding at all phase 2 establishments to the Military Provost Guard Service rather than trainees. Phase 2 trainees may be tasked to carry out armed guarding but only under strict guidelines which ensure that they are appropriately qualified, supervised and receive proper rest periods following their armed guarding duties. No trainee awaiting discharge from the services is used and no phase 1 trainees carry out armed guarding duties in any establishment.

There are tighter and better enforced controls over access to firearms and the risks associated with the use of firearms in our training establishments are managed more carefully. While phase l trainees are no longer required to carry out armed guarding duties, we continue to prepare them adequately for the duties that will be expected of them once they join their units.

The Deepcut review made recommendations regarding our support to bereaved families. We recognise the families’ needs and we offer them considerable support. But each family’s needs are different and we acknowledge that we do not always meet their expectations. We go to great lengths to pass all relevant information to the families; this includes redacted copies of the board of inquiry. Families are routinely offered briefings on the board of inquiry to help them understand its content and conclusions. Equally, our support through the services of a visiting officer remains available for as long as the family needs it. We continue working with the Department for Constitutional Affairs to improve support to families based on their experience of the inquest system. Arrangements are in place to ensure that inquests are held as quickly as possible; and bodies which are repatriated to the UK may now be transferred to the coroner's district of the final resting place to alleviate family members from having to travel long distances to the inquest.

The Government’s response to the Deepcut review accepted that there may be circumstances in which family attendance at a particular board of inquiry would be acceptable where it would not impede the proceedings of the board. We are developing a more open and inclusive approach to the family in relation to the conduct of the inquiry and there is now discretion for presidents to allow family attendance at boards of inquiry.

Achieving real and lasting change in the Armed Forces will require sustained effort. We have introduced a successful programme of internal review and evaluation that is conducted by the Directorate of Individual Training Capability, whose role is to evaluate the implementation of policies relating to the individual training environment, enabling the identification of issues and for the sharing of good practice. In addition, our training organisations will remain open to external scrutiny, through the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skill organisation in April 2007. I would like to pay tribute to all those who have worked so hard across the services to bring about the necessary changes to improve the way in which we look after and train our young men and women.

We will not forget the four young soldiers—Sean Benton, Cheryl James, Geoff Gray and James Collinson—who died at Deepcut but we are confident that we have done and continue to do all that we can to prevent such tragedies happening again.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (John Hutton) has made the following Statement.

I am today able to announce the annual performance targets in 2007-08 for four of the executive agencies of the Department for Work and Pensions. The targets I have agreed are set out below.

Further information on the plans of Jobcentre Plus, the Child Support Agency, Disability and Carers Service and The Rent Service in 2007-08 is contained in their individual business plans which have been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library and the Vote Office. The Pension Service targets and business plan will be published in due course.

Jobcentre Plus

Child Support Agency

The Secretary of State’s targets have been designed to ensure that the agency is firmly on track to achieve its operational improvement plan commitments in this crucial second year of the programme. They are:

Disability and Carers Service

The Rent Service

Service Delivery

Speed of Processing

Value for Money

My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (James Plaskitt) has made the following Statement.

I am pleased to announce that the gross discretionary Social Fund budget for 2007-08 will be £752 million.

This includes a £50 million injection of net funding, being the second of three which in total comprise a substantial £210 million boost to support changes to the loans scheme.

With the net funding available, I have been able to allocate a gross national loans budget of £610 million and a national community care grants budget of £141 million from 1 April 2007.

£1 million will be retained centrally as a contingency reserve. For example, it is available to provide additional help to Jobcentre Plus budgets facing unexpected and unplanned expenditure.

Details of individual budget allocations will be placed in the Library.

The discretionary social fund budget is cash limited. Budgets are allocated to districts on 1 April each year. The gross discretionary social fund budget allocated for 2007-08 is £752 million made up of:

new money (net AME) £228.2 million;

forecast loan recovery £523.8 million.

This was allocated as follows:

loans £610 million;

grants £141 million;

contingency reserve £1 million.

My honourable friend the Minister for Schools and 14-19 Learners (Jim Knight) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I have today announced the outcome of the Diploma Gateway process to approve consortia to offer the first new diplomas to young people in selected areas of the country in September 2008. A list of the consortia and their approval status has been placed in the Library.

The diplomas will broaden the options available to young people, encouraging more to continue learning for longer and gain the qualifications they need to progress into further and higher education, and employment. They are fundamental to our proposals on raising the participation age, as set out in last week's Green Paper Raising Expectations: staying in education and training post 16.

The availability of the first 5 diploma lines from 2008 shows that we are on track with our priorities set out in our 14-19 Education and Skills Implementation Plan (2005).

EU heads of state and government met in Berlin over the weekend 24 to 25 March to mark the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome. The Berlin declaration recalls the historic achievements of the past 50 years, and looks ahead to the challenges that we the countries of the European Union need to face together. Copies of the declaration have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Douglas Alexander) has made the following Ministerial Statement.

I attended the transport session of the Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council, held in Brussels on 22 March. The German Minister for Transport, Building and Urban Affairs, Mr Wolfgang Tiefensee, was in the chair.

Two aspects of the Galileo satellite navigation programme were on the agenda.

The presidency and Commission reported to the council on the current difficulties with the concession contract negotiations for the PPP and the impact on the overall development of the project. There has not been any recent progress on the negotiations because of internal problems among the partners in the consortium bidding to run the Galileo PPP. In the light of the delays, the presidency recently convened a meeting with the consortium but no satisfactory solution had been found to the current deadlock. At council, it was therefore necessary to consider what action could be taken to get the process back on track. The bidding consortium has now been given a deadline of 10 May 2007 to take the necessary measures to allow negotiations to move forwards effectively. If the deadline is not met, the Commission will begin to develop alternative options for taking forward the Galileo project. A more detailed discussion on these issues would then follow at the June Transport Council. Council conclusions, acceptable to the UK, were agreed to this end.

The council adopted a decision setting out the framework for third country participation, as associated members, in the Galileo supervisory authority. The decision, with which the UK is content, authorises the Commission to open negotiations with non-EU countries that apply, with final approval resting with the council.

There was unanimous support for an EU-US air services agreement. The presidency reported that, following the most recent negotiations with the US, the proposed text for a first stage agreement had been considerably improved and was a good starting point for reaching a full open aviation area.  However, negotiations should resume quickly to make further progress on a second stage.  A number of Ministers spoke to welcome the agreement. I pointed out that the UK accounts for a 40 per cent share of the EU-US market.  The deal on the table did not go the full way to achieving a fully liberalised open aviation area, so it was essential to have a clear timetable for delivering a stage 2 agreement and have real leverage if the negotiations did not proceed as we wished.  I proposed a mechanism be established for the automatic withdrawal of rights by the EU if an agreement had not been reached within the timetable set down in the draft agreement.  Each member state would decide which rights it would wish to withdraw.  This suspension would apply unless the council agreed unanimously otherwise.  In addition, it was proposed that the start of the agreement be delayed until 30 March 2008 to give airports and airlines more time to prepare.  These points were agreed and are reflected in the council conclusions, which were adopted unanimously.

The council adopted a decision on the signature and provisional application of the agreement reached with Russia on Siberian overflights, including the establishment of a cost equalisation mechanism during the transitional period. We strongly welcome this agreement and support the decision.

There was a debate on the contribution of the transport sector to the Lisbon Strategy. The presidency put questions to member states for this debate, focusing on how to stimulate consumer demand for cleaner vehicles and how to ensure that rail, shipping and inland waterways play their part. Most member states focused on the proven or potential benefits of: taxation measures for vehicles or fuels; alternative fuels (particularly biofuels); eco-driving; eco-labelling; information campaigns to buyers and drivers; and new technologies. The UK was among those which expressed support for the Commission’s proposal for mandatory CO₂ limits for cars and light vans, while pointing to the need to work towards even lower limits by 2020. The Commission summarised its plans for sustainable transport, including car CO₂ reduction; an action plan for logistics and a green paper on urban transport; and binding biofuels targets.

Under AOB, the Commission presented two recent communications: one on extension of trans-European transport axes to neighbouring countries, including those in Asia and Africa; and the other on the implementation of the SESAR programme for the modernisation of the European air traffic management system. The presidency is aiming for a decision at the Transport Council in June on the establishment of the SESAR joint undertaking.

Among items adopted without debate was an amending regulation on the accelerated phasing-in of double-hull or equivalent design oil tankers.

My honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Ed Balls) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

The Government are today publishing a document, Financial inclusion: the way forward, setting out general principles for their ongoing financial inclusion strategy.

The Government have three goals for financial inclusion:

that everyone should be able to manage their money effectively and securely through having access to a bank account, and the confidence and capability to get the most from it;

that everyone should be able to plan for the future with a reasonable degree of security and therefore, affordable credit, saving accounts and simple insurance products should be available to all who need them; and

that everyone should have the information, support and confidence they need to prevent avoidable financial difficulty, and to know where to turn if they do find themselves in financial distress.

Financial inclusion: the way forward affirms the Government's commitment to promoting financial inclusion in the next spending period. From 2008 to 2011, financial inclusion policy will be supported through a new Financial Inclusion Fund. While the amount of the fund will be determined after the Comprehensive Spending Review, the current level of intensity of action to promote financial inclusion will be maintained.

A detailed action plan will be developed by a cross-departmental ministerial working group, which will report after the Comprehensive Spending Review. The Financial Inclusion Taskforce, which monitors progress and advises the Government on financial inclusion policy, will be extended until March 2011.

The document also announces further spending on financial inclusion in 2007-08. £6 million will be made available to the Department for Work and Pensions to support credit unions and community development finance institutions in making affordable credit and banking services available to financially excluded consumers.

The document details progress made to date with financial inclusion objectives. The Government agreed a goal, shared with the banks, to halve the number of people living without access to a bank account. The number of adults living in households without access to a bank account fell from 2.8 million in 2002-03, to 2 million in 2005-06. The number of unbanked households also fell from 1.9 million to 1.3 million during the same period. Steady progress is being made with Government's shared goal.

The document announces the Government's continued commitment to working with banks and other financial services providers to reduce the number of unbanked people further, and to promote wider financial inclusion. The Government have asked senior representatives from the banking sector to work with the Financial Inclusion Taskforce to consider how to achieve a nationwide increase in the coverage and capacity of third-sector lenders such as credit unions.

As announced in the 2006 Pre-Budget Report, the Government asked Brian Pomeroy, Chair of the Financial Inclusion Taskforce, to conduct a review of Christmas savings clubs and hamper schemes. Following the collapse of Farepak in November 2006, the purpose of this review was to increase understanding of who uses these schemes and why, and to consider how the saving needs of this group of consumers might be better met by mainstream financial products. The review is published today by the Treasury.

The Government have responded to the recommendations made in the review in today's financial inclusion document. Their response includes an announcement that the Department of Trade and Industry has secured agreement from the hamper industry to establish an industry-led scheme to ensure that consumers' interests are fully protected. The scheme will establish secure, ring-fenced accounts, and will be implemented as soon as possible.

The Government also announce that £1 million will be made available to the Office of Fair Trading to run a consumer awareness campaign. This campaign will inform consumers of the options available to them, including mainstream accounts, for saving towards Christmas.

Other responses to the Pomeroy review from the Government were as follows:

the OFT has agreed to investigate the findings of the Pomeroy review in full, and whether a further inquiry into competition in the market for Christmas saving schemes is needed;

following encouragement and support from the Government, credit unions are now offering Christmas saving accounts with a lock-in. The Post Office also has plans to launch a Christmas saving account. The Government have asked the Financial Inclusion Taskforce to monitor developments, and consider what further detailed actions are needed to expand community-based provision of saving;

the Thoresen review of a national approach to generic financial advice will consider how to provide better generic advice on informal saving;

the Government's financial inclusion campaign, “Now let's talk money”, is working with local charities and community organisations to promote credit unions as an alternative to hamper schemes;

the FSA will enhance the saving information on its MoneyMadeClear website by including information about Christmas hamper schemes; and

the new Wealth and Assets Survey will collect information on informal saving. The Government will use the first results of the survey, due by the end of the year, to inform any further data gathering.

The Treasury Committee conducted an inquiry into financial inclusion in the spring of 2006, and published three reports detailing its findings, in November and December 2006. The Government have sent their response to the inquiry to the Treasury Committee today.

Copies of both Financial inclusion: the way forward and the Pomeroy review of Christmas savings are available in the Vote Office and in the Library of the House.

My honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport (Stephen Ladyman) has made the following Ministerial Statement.

I have today laid before both Houses of Parliament a draft revised edition of the Highway Code containing alterations proposed to be made by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State pursuant to Section 38 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. In accordance with Section 38 of the 1988 Act, the proposed revision will not be made until after the end of a period of 40 days beginning with the day on which the alterations were laid.

The draft revised edition of the Highway Code takes account of responses to the public consultation held between February and May 2006.

I have also today published the response to consultation, reporting on the results of the consultation on the proposed revision of the Highway Code.

The most significant issues raised during consultation were:

a variety of cycling-related issues;

stopping distances; and

road users’ attitudes and greater consideration for vulnerable road users.

Copies of the response to consultation have been placed in the Library of each House of Parliament.

The response to consultation is also available from the DSA website at www.dsa.gov.uk: or by telephone on 01234 744054.

The revised Highway Code is planned for publication in summer 2007.

My honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport (Stephen Ladyman) has made the following Ministerial Statement.

My Answer to Parliamentary Questions UIN 126098 (Official Report, 9 March 2007, cols. 2262-4W) regarding traffic volumes for each concrete section of the national trunk road network and UIN 126096 (Official Report, 12 March 2007, cols. 20-2W) regarding the proportion of the concreted trunk road network which has had quieter surfacing installed since July 2005, contained several inaccuracies.

The Answer to the Parliamentary Questions should have read:

PQ 1602 UIN [126098]

The table below gives the annual average daily traffic (AADT) data for each concrete surfaced section of the all purpose national trunk road network for 2005.

The table below gives the annual average daily traffic (AADT) data for each concrete surfaced section of the motorway network for 2005.

PQ 1600 UIN [126096]

The Highways Agency has a policy of using quieter surfaces as a matter of course whenever a road needs to be resurfaced. Since July 2000 approximately 35 per cent of the concrete sections of the strategic road network have been surfaced with quieter materials.

Tables (A) and (B) indicate concrete sections surfaced and sections not surfaced respectively.

My honourable friend the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality (Mr Liam Byrne) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I am today publishing a new strategy entitled Securing the UK Border, the terms of reference for the new Migration Advisory Committee (MAC), a summary of the responses received to our recent consultation on establishing a Migration Advisory Committee, and terms of reference for a new Migration Impacts Forum. Copies of all documents have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Effective immigration systems require effective controls. The Securing the UK Border strategy is the third in the series of papers setting out how we will henceforth create a new offshore border control system, and strengthen UK border security here at home. It sets out how we intend to strengthen our borders against those who seek to abuse our laws and present a threat to our security while at the same time making the system simpler and faster for legitimate, low-risk travellers. The main proposals include:

Visa Waiver Test: we will henceforth assume that all non-EEA countries will face a visa regime unless they meet a sufficient benchmark against a basket of immigration, crime, security and economic criteria. A test will be conducted over 2007 with regimes maintained, lifted or imposed during 2008-09. In tandem, we will be reviewing the transit-without-visa concession and the direct-airside-transit-visa regime;

Biometric capture: underpinning our proposals is the need to establish the identity of those seeking to travel to the UK. We will therefore capture the biometrics of all non-EEA passengers before travel to the UK or on arrival;

Visitors: we want to make the rights and obligations of those visiting the UK clearer and more transparent. During 2007, we will consult on the creation of distinct and separate routes for those coming for six months or less as tourists, business visitors and sponsored family visitors;

Forced Marriage: we will also consult on the introduction of measures to address the problem of forced marriage, including raising the minimum age for spouse and sponsor and examining the case for introducing some form of English language test prior to entry for those spouses intending to settle.

We are committed to attracting people with the skills Britain needs from around the world. With our policy set, a points-based system will, starting from next year, ensure that we only admit to work and study those migrants with a contribution to make to Britain.

We believe that the UK would benefit greatly from advice from a new committee of independent experts about where migration is of benefit to Britain and where it is not. There has been a full consultation on our proposals and the response I am publishing today shows strong support from the public.

The Migration Advisory Committee will be a non-statutory advisory non-departmental public body established from April 2007. It will provide independent and evidence-based advice to Government on specific sectors and occupations in the labour market where shortages exist which can sensibly be filled by migration. In addition, the Government may, from time to time, ask the MAC to advise on other matters relating to migration.

Alongside the MAC we are also establishing a new Migration Impacts Forum (MIF) which will provide us with information and input from interested parties on the wider impacts of migration. I will co-chair this body with my honourable friend the member for Oldham East and Saddleworth and will invite membership from among those with a direct interest in issues associated with the wider impacts of migration from across the UK.

I am also announcing today a number of changes to the immigration rules relating to ministers of religion and international students, including an extension of the Science and Engineering Graduates Scheme and the Fresh Talent: Working in Scotland Scheme.

The following list sets out the key performance indicators that have been set for Her Majesty's Land Registry for 2007-08.

Customer Service

Speed:

percentage of official copy and search applications processed within two working days: 98 per cent;

percentage of all registrations processed within 18 working days: 80 per cent.

Accuracy:

Percentage of registrations processed free of any error: 98.5 per cent.

Overall Satisfaction¹:

percentage of customers who, overall, are very satisfied/satisfied with the full range of services provided by Land Registry: better than 95 per cent.

Financial

Percentage return on average capital employed: 3.5 per cent.

Efficiency²

Cost per unit in cash terms³ (real terms)⁴: £29.95 (£20.61)

Strategic Development Areas

Customer Service:

provide a sustainable and scaleable e-security infrastructure solution, providing role-based access, identity management and future e-signature functionality for Land Registry's external and business customer base.

Land Registration:

add a further 550,000 hectares of land to the total areas of registered freehold land in England and Wales.

Electronic Service Delivery:

Complete a review of responses to the consultation paper on the Land Registration (Network Access) Rules and the Land Registration (Electronic Communications) Order and report to Ministers.

Other Business Development:

Move the Land Registry corporate website to the new portal and establish the portal for the use of one or more of the following segments; citizens, conveyancers, lenders, estate agents.

¹ Result from quarterly satisfaction.

² Agreed with HM Treasury on 20 December 2006.

³ Based on the GDP deflator issued by HM Treasury on 21 December 2006 (base year 1992-93).

⁴ The real term unit cost in the base year of 1992-93 was £30.65.

My honourable friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is today publishing a report on departments’ and agencies’ performance on handling Members’ and Peers’ correspondence during 2006. Details are set out in the attached table. Figures for 2005 were published on 30 March 2006, (Official Report, col. WS 75). Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.

The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.

My right honourable friend the Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement:

With effect from 1 April 2007, the Defence Procurement Agency (DPA), the British Forces Post Office (BFPO), the Defence Communication Services Agency (DCSA), the Disposal Services Agency (DSA), Defence Estates (DE), the Defence Bills Agency (DBA) and the Duke of York's Royal Military School (DYRMS) will cease to hold agency status. It has also been decided that the Defence Diversification Agency (DDA) should be closed later this year.

Given that many of the reasons for making these organisations agencies are now embedded in the wider department, particularly for those that are also top level budgets, agency status now adds little value.

In recognition of this, the “Enabling Acquisition Change” (EAC) report of June 2006 recommended that, in creating a new integrated procurement and support organisation, neither the new organisation (Defence Equipment & Support) nor any of its sub-divisions should retain agency status. Agency status is accordingly being removed not only from the DPA, which is currently a top level budget, but also from the BFPO, DCSA and DSA. Only the Defence Storage and Distribution Agency will retain its agency status in the new Defence Equipment & Support organisation.

Agency status will also be removed from DE, which will remain a top level budget. Oversight of DE by the Defence Estates Committee will also continue.

Removal of agency status from the DBA has been precipitated by the advent of MoD's new financial management Shared Service Centre, which has responsibility for end-to-end accounting processes.

Removal of agency status from the DYRMS will bring it into line with other state-maintained boarding schools.

In addition, although the Defence Diversification Agency (DDA) does not have the same formal agency status as the organisations mentioned above, the department also wishes to announce the conclusions of the consultation process into its future, which began last September.

The DDA was formed in 1999 to encourage the civil exploitation of defence technology; help inform industry about MoD’s future equipment needs; and facilitate the spin-in of civil technology to defence. However, since it was formed, the environment in which it operates has fundamentally changed.

Regarding the civil exploitation of defence technology, the creation of QinetiQ in July 2001 transferred three-quarters of the MoD’s Science and Technology base directly into a company with strong commercial incentives to exploit defence technologies in civil markets. In 2005, the MoD’s Defence Science and Technology Laboratory established Ploughshare Innovation Ltd as a direct route for diversification and commercial exploitation of its intellectual property. Ploughshare has demonstrated growing success in this role: developing new licensing agreements; managing a technology innovation fund, and creating three new spin-out companies

In terms of spinning-in new technology, the MoD’s research programme has been progressively opened to competition, encouraging a broader range of suppliers to become directly involved in the supply of defence technology. Recent initiatives, such as the formation of defence technology centres and the “Competition of Ideas”, have also provided new ways to encourage innovation. On the equipment side, the recent review of acquisition policy supports the conclusion that, the route to market for small and medium-sized enterprises in defence should be via prime contractors rather than directly to the department.

When it comes to informing industry about the department's requirements, there have also been significant changes since the formation of the DDA. The Defence Industrial Strategy in 2005 set out publicly the technologies and capabilities required to support future defence requirements. In 2006, the Defence Technology Strategy identified our priorities for research and development. It identifies the actions the defence sector must take to maintain an appropriate level of R&D investment in those areas key to defence capability and national competitiveness. Taken together, these strategies, and the work in hand across MoD to implement them, generate a more direct engagement with industry than was possible through the DDA.

Consultation on the future of the DDA has included discussions with industry, defence trade associations and trade unions. Our conclusion is that, given the changes over the past eight years which have embedded diversification into the department's wider activities, there is no longer a requirement for a separate organisation to facilitate the diversification role. Consequently, the department has decided to proceed with the closure of the DDA.

The DDA has been a good champion for diversification, and we would like to thank the director and staff for their significant contribution. Attempts will now start to find alternative employment for the 35 staff, most of whom are on secondment from other organisations. We will engage with stakeholders to ensure that remaining issues are resolved effectively, and that the value of information generated within the DDA is not lost. In parallel with this announcement, the department will be writing in more detail to the DDA’s stakeholders.

This decision does not lessen the Government's commitment to diversification and technology transfer. As highlighted in the Defence Industrial Strategy this remains an important objective and one which we are fully committed to meeting through the mechanisms which I have described above. These initiatives are all evidence of the continuing importance we place on maintaining momentum in this key area.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Health (Patricia Hewitt) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I am pleased to announce changes to the resource accounting and budgeting (RAB) regime for National Health Service trusts and the impact this will have on the financial position of affected NHS trusts in 2006-07. I am also announcing the allocation of the £450 million reserve to the NHS.

The NHS financial position has shown a massive improvement since last year. A deficit of £547 million has been transformed into a small surplus as reported on 20 February 2007 by the department in the report NHS Financial Performance Quarter Three 2006-07, which is available in the Library.

This improved performance of the NHS overall means that we are now confident that we can move NHS trusts out of the RAB regime. This means that NHS trusts will no longer have their income reduced for overspends in the previous year.

This does not mean we are writing off the deficits of overspending NHS trusts, which will still need to generate surpluses to meet their statutory duty. What has been eliminated is the double effect of having both an income reduction and then having to generate a surplus.

This is in line with recommendations set out by the Audit Commission in its Review of the NHS Financial Management and Accounting Regime, published in July 2006.

In line with these changes, we are reversing income deductions imposed on NHS trusts in 2006-07 under the old RAB regime as a consequence of overspends in 2005-06. This totals £178 million and benefits 28 NHS trusts, as set out in table 1 below.

In support of this change, I am also pleased to announce that we can now allocate the £450 million contingency to the NHS. This is being allocated to strategic health authorities (SHAs) on a fair shares basis meaning that the most needy areas of the country will receive a larger share of the funding in line with the our needs-based resource allocation formula. Details of the allocation by SHA and the effect this has on the financial position of each SHA economy, as reported at quarter three, is given in table 2 below.

The first call on this funding is to reverse the £178 million RAB deductions made to NHS trusts in 2006-07. The balance is available to begin to reverse the funding top-sliced from PCT allocations to create SHA level reserves.

As a result of these and earlier reforms, the NHS now has a financial system that ensures fairness, transparency and responsibility. Organisations can now understand clearly their financial performance and the consequences and benefits of the management decisions they make. This gives us the firm basis to go forward and continue transforming the services we provide for patients by implementing policies such as 18 weeks.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Peter Hain) has made the following Ministerial Statement.

The British and Irish Governments held multi-party talks, with the Northern Ireland political parties, at St Andrews on 10 to 13 October 2006. The aim of the St Andrews summit was to focus discussion on achieving the restoration of the political institutions in Northern Ireland.

The summit culminated in the St Andrews agreement between the British and Irish Governments. The progress made at St Andrews was significant and has subsequently brought us, with this week's historic statement by the leaders of the DUP and Sinn Fein, to the brink of a stable future for the Government of Northern Ireland. The Government will continue to do everything they can to support the political parties in Northern Ireland in taking the final step towards restoration.

A total breakdown of the costs for the talks held at the St Andrews summit, which were shared by the British and Irish Governments, has been published on the Northern Ireland Office website today. I have attached a copy of the costs to this Statement and a copy will be placed in the Library of the House.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (John Hutton) has made the following Statement.

The Chancellor in his Budget Statement on 21 March announced our decision to significantly extend the help provided by the Financial Assistance Scheme (FAS).

This announcement was the result of my reflection on the implications of the High Court ruling in the judicial review of the Government’s decision to reject the Parliamentary Ombudsman’s findings of maladministration by the DWP.

My reflections have also been informed by the judgment of the ECJ in the Robins case. In that judgment, given on 25 January, the European Court indicated that the level of protection provided to some members of the ASW pension scheme fell short of the level required by Article 8 of the insolvency directive. But the ECJ also said the directive did not require a guarantee of pension rights in full, and it gave a strong steer that damages would not be payable for breach of the directive earlier than the judgment date. Having carefully considered the terms of the ECJ ruling, the Government believe that the enhanced FAS package announced last week offers a level of protection that is compliant with that judgment.

In its judgment in the judicial review relating to the ombudsman’s report, the High Court directed me to reconsider my response to the ombudsman’s first recommendation on the basis that maladministration had occurred. I have undertaken my reconsideration on that basis. As a result of that reconsideration we have made this extended FAS package available for all those who suffered losses as a result of their employer’s insolvency, and have considered it appropriate to set the assistance at the same level as the protection offered in compliance with the ECJ judgment.

This announcement is not affected by our appeal against one of the High Court’s decisions in the ombudsman case. That appeal has been mounted because the judgement raises important legal and constitutional issues, in particular on the relationship between the ombudsman and the Government, and those issues need to be resolved. This extension to FAS will stand, regardless of the result of our appeal against the finding of maladministration.

The extended scheme will now provide assistance to ensure that the pensions of all members of affected pension schemes are topped up to 80 per cent of the core pension rights accrued in their scheme.

We will more than double the cap on assistance payments to £26,000, and in recognition of the significant difference that £10 a week can make to some pensioners, we will end the de minimis rule that excludes those whose FAS payment would be £10 or less a week. Although FAS payments commence at age 65, they will remain “inflation proof” up to age 65.

In total, an estimated 100,000 will benefit from this extension. Eighty-five thousand scheme members will be eligible for assistance for the first time. Around 15,000 people who stood to benefit from FAS under the current scheme will receive more assistance due to the extension.

As a result, we expect that all the estimated 125,000 people with losses will be helped. This increases the taxpayer’s commitment from £2.3 billion in cumulative cash terms, to £8 billion. This equates to more than doubling the scheme in present value terms, from £830 million to £1.9 billion.

Having now settled the public expenditure support for these schemes, I have today set up a review to:

examine how we make best use of the assets in pension schemes that are winding up under-funded with an insolvent employer;

determine if these sources of funding could be used to increase assistance for affected scheme members; and

consider any suggestions from interested and concerned parties.

The review will be conducted by the Department for Work and Pensions and advised by a panel of technical experts. Due to the complexity of the issues involved the review will be informed by advice from the Government Actuary Department. This will commence immediately and the review will report by the end of the year.

Let me be clear that the 80 per cent level of support we have committed is from the taxpayer, and it is not contingent on the release of any other funding source.

Regardless of the review, it continues to be important to the interests of all members of affected pension scheme that schemes are wound up as quickly as possible. Should the review identify an alternative way of using scheme assets, we will ensure that no scheme members lose out because their pension scheme has completed the wind-up process.

It is also important that trustees continue to apply on behalf of members to the Financial Assistance Scheme for payments and provide member data. Failure to do so will mean that people who could be receiving payments will lose out on the substantial help that is now available.

My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Planning has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I wish to make a Statement about government policy on commercial leases and the launch of a new property industry code of practice for leasing business premises.

The starting point is the need for a modern, efficient, competitive industry. The UK commercial property industry is acknowledged as one of the foremost and most sophisticated in the world, exporting its expertise globally.

However, the Government challenge to the industry is to provide a flexible framework, creating a new partnership between owner and occupier. Our policy is based on careful and thorough research of the property market.

We have had a positive and collaborative response from all sides of the industry—owners, occupiers, small business organisations and the professional bodies. The industry has developed new ways of working, setting up the Owner and Occupiers' Forum and the Property Industry Alliance. Alongside this, government have been working with business to bring about change.

The outcome has been agreement on a new code, which I am launching today. This comprises three documents: a landlord's code of practice, an occupier guide and model heads of terms. The landlord's code is significantly stronger in tone and content than the previous code, while the occupier guide and model heads of terms are designed to improve business understanding of lease terms, helping them to get more suitable lease terms.

It is essential the industry follows this through, and I welcome plans for wide dissemination of the code. My challenge to the industry is to ensure that the code is used in all lease negotiations.

The British Property Federation is introducing an accreditation scheme identifying landlords who are committed to the new code. This will include an independent complaints procedure. I hope the professional bodies will introduce similar arrangements for their members.

I recognise the considerable changes in commercial leasing practices over recent years, especially the trends towards shorter leases. But I am concerned about continuing elements of inflexibility, particularly the predominant use of upward-only provisions in rent review clauses and inflexible provisions for tenants exiting property they no longer need.

We will want to keep a close eye on market practice in these areas. If the market does not deliver, we have identified legislative options. The Department for Communities and Local Government will shortly be consulting the bodies that drew up the code about suitable monitoring arrangements.

Copies of the code for leasing business premises will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

I am today announcing that with effect from 3 April, the Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office (RCPO) will make charging decisions in all indictable-only, either-way or summary offences investigated by HM Revenue and Customs.

The Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office was established in April 2005. Under Section 37(A)(l)(a) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as inserted by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and as amended by the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005, the Director of Revenue and Customs Office is empowered to issue guidance on charging. A copy of the guidance has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

I welcome this development, which recognises the enormous progress made since the independent Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office was established. This move has also been welcomed by HM Revenue and Customs investigators, who have worked closely with RCPO in identifying issues to be covered in the guidance.