Zimbabwe

DFID has spent £67 million in humanitarian assistance to Zimbabwe since September 2001. DFID's support for humanitarian relief will be funded through a protracted relief programme worth £18 million over the next two years. This will work with NGOs to provide support to approximately 1.5 million of the poorest households in the country, particularly those affected by HIV/AIDS. The programme will provide targeted food aid, low-cost agricultural inputs and rehabilitation of water points support to stop people falling into acute distress.

Zambia

Although Zambia is expecting a good cereal harvest this year, Zambians remain vulnerable due to risks associated with access to food, HIV/AIDS and adverse economic conditions—factors that are common throughout the region. DFID recently began a £10 million programme supporting CARE International to help some of the most destitute and poorest groups in Zambia manage these risks more effectively and are supporting the Government's efforts to establish a vulnerability monitoring system in the country.

Mozambique

In Mozambique, DFID's poverty reduction budget support programme has allowed the Government of Mozambique steadily to improve its disaster management capacity and end the previous pattern of annual emergencies. We continue to support targeted food aid and nutritional supplementation programmes as well as seed and input fairs in Mozambique, a method that gives farmers their choice of appropriate agriculture inputs while supporting the private sector and local economies.

Malawi

In Malawi, we are working with the UN to support school feeding programmes to feed over 100,000 pupils in five districts. In addition, through the Malawi Social Action Fund, DFID will provide £4.95 million to vulnerable people through a "cash-for-work" programme from which 100,000 households are expected to benefit.

Swaziland and Lesotho

In Swaziland and Lesotho, we continue to support targeted food aid programmes through the World Food Programme and supplemented by support for seed fairs with FAO. We are also supporting nutritional monitoring work in Lesotho. We are spending £2 million in Lesotho to support the Government's food security priorities as part of the Poverty Reduction Strategy process. This will include the establishment of a national food security policy, which will be aimed at sustaining and promoting livelihoods.

Longer-Term Response

In response to the International Development Select Committee's report of March 2003, DFID is working with Governments, the UN and the NGO community to improve our understanding and response to the problem of food insecurity in Southern Africa. We have produced a regional hunger and vulnerability strategy which outlines the regional dimensions of food security in the region and forms the basis of a regional programme of support, which is currently being designed.

We are also working with the regional UN office in Johannesburg to encourage better joint programming among UN Agencies and NGO partners in the region. And we are supporting the vulnerability assessment committees in Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe so that they can better track vulnerability trends and allow countries and the international community to respond more effectively.

The consultation document will be given a wide circulation, which will include the reserve forces' and cadets' associations, various bodies representing employers, the Trades Union Congress, the British Medical Association, the British Dental Association and other interested parties. The closing date for responses is 15 October 2004.

Copies of the consultation document will be in the Library of the House and will also be available on the Ministry of Defence website, at: http://www.mod.uk/consultation/reservists.htm

Further detailed work on student applications and routes of potential abuse have raised concerns about the large numbers of overseas nationals switching in-country to the student category, often for lower level courses.

I have therefore decided to prohibit switching into the student category for anything other than degree level courses. Visa nationals are already prohibited from switching: this will place non-visa nationals in a similar position.

Genuine students wishing to study on courses below degree level will therefore need to seek entry clearance overseas. Those who intend to study but have not finalised their arrangements may use the prospective student category.

A related problem has been identified with overseas students who take a succession of short courses at a low level and demonstrate no clear plan of study. I have therefore decided to reduce the overall time that may be spent on such short courses below degree level to a maximum of two years.

Arrangements are in hand to bring these changes in to effect from September.

I am also announcing changes that will restrict further the circumstances in which those admitted to the United Kingdom in a temporary category will be allowed to switch into employment routes.

My hon. Friend the Minister for Citizenship and Immigration announced on 19 May that those admitted under the sectors based scheme (SBS) and seasonal agricultural workers scheme (SAWS) would no longer be allowed to switch into work permit employment. I am now also making further changes to the immigration rules which will mean that only those who are present in the United Kingdom as work permit holders, graduated students, working holidaymakers, postgraduate doctors, dentists and trainee general practitioners may switch into the high skilled migrant programme (HSMP) and innovator categories. Switching from most temporary categories into work permit employment, HSMP and the innovator category will therefore only be allowed in exceptional circumstances. The changes will come into effect on 1 October 2004.

These measures will help to ensure that the separation of temporary and permanent migration routes, which is necessary to an effective immigration control, is preserved. It is also desirable that switching policy should be clear and transparent.

These measures will not prevent UK employers from recruiting overseas workers with skills that they need. It will simply mean that those currently in the UK in a temporary category will normally need to return to their country of residence and seek entry clearance to come to the U K for employment.

The Government is determined to ensure that the benefits of managed migration should be realised, as well as limiting the scope for abuse of the system.

Sir Gareth Roberts' review— "The Supply of People with Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Skills"— highlighted the fact that the UK was suffering from a severe shortage of physical science, engineering and mathematics students at university and skilled workers in the labour market. He said that the shortage could do serious damage to the UK's future growth. In response, the Government have decided that students at UK universities graduating from specific physical science, engineering and mathematics courses should be permitted to stay in the UK for one year following their graduation to take up employment.

I am now announcing the detail of how the new science and engineering graduate scheme will work. The new scheme will be open to undergraduates (at 2:2 level and above), Masters and Doctors who have successfully completed a shortage physical science, engineering or mathematics course, as defined by the Secretary of State for Education and Skills. The eligible courses will be reviewed by the Department for Education and Skills on an annual basis. The list of eligible courses for the first year of this scheme is annexed to this statement.

We want to attract individuals with skills in these shortage areas to the UK. We expect that individuals who do not initially find employment in their chosen field will successfully find work in their sector within the one-year period of the scheme. If an individual can not meet the requirements for work permit employment, or can not meet the requirements to switch into another of our managed migration schemes, they will be required to leave the United Kingdom once their one year on the science and engineering graduate scheme is over.

We will be making the changes required to the Immigration Rules to implement this scheme in October. It will be open to this year's graduates.

Further to my statement on 17 June about Ken Sutton's report on the operation of the European Association Agreements in Romania and Bulgaria, work has been in hand in the UK and at posts overseas to implement the recommendations in Mr Button's report about the procedures and guidance which need to be in place to manage applications under the agreements, and the additional safeguards which need to be in place.

It is now our intention to resume consideration of initial applications, that is for entry clearance and in-country switching (which will be limited under Mr Sutton's recommendations) from 1 September and to resume a service on further leave to remain and indefinite leave to remain later in the year.

I am also today announcing changes to the current arrangements for Ministers of Religion. The Government is concerned that those who come to the United Kingdom to serve as ministers or religion should understand and respect the community in which they teach and work. I am therefore making changes that take account of consultations which were carried out in 2002 after publication of the White Paper (secure borders, safe haven) and discussions held during June and July this year with faith representatives. Under the changes we will be bringing into force, those seeking entry as a Minister of Religion will be required to demonstrate that they have a basic command of spoken English by providing an International English Language Testing System (IELTS) certificate at the "limited user" level (Level 4). We intend to raise the requirement to level 6 spoken and written English (competent user) after an interim period of two years. Missionaries, Members of Religious Orders (i.e. monks and nuns) and preachers visiting the UK on a religious tour will not be expected to undertake an English language test before entering the UK.

I will shortly be laying before Parliament the proposed changes to the immigration rules that will allow the English language requirement to be introduced. I envisage the new requirement will come into force at the end of August.

For people with existing English skills—for example, those educated in an English speaking nation—discretion will be applied to allow entry where evidence is provided that an individual speaks competent English. These requirements will be set out in the immigration rules for all those seeking to enter the United Kingdom as a Minister of Religion as well as those switching in-country.

We are also amending the immigration rules formally to permit in-country switching to Minister of Religion status, with certain limitations. These include that the applicant is legally entitled to be in the United Kingdom as a student or through any other managed migration route; that they have been here not less than one year; and that appropriate evidence is provided of their suitability for the post. This provision will not apply to visitors or asylum-seekers. This was also in the White Paper, which specifically proposed allowing qualified people from overseas to switch their status in-country to fill local vacancies as Ministers of Religion.

During the second half of this year we will be launching a further round of consultations and meetings with faith communities about what further measures might be taken by the Government in collaboration with faith communities to ensure that the pastoral and religious needs of British congregations in a diverse and cohesive society are met. In particular, we will be consulting on whether there would be merit in introducing religious qualification requirements for those seeking admission as a Minister of Religion. Work will be undertaken with United Kingdom faith communities to identify what skills and qualifications a successful minister needs, with a view to developing standards or accredited qualifications that applicants for the Minister of Religion category must meet. We will look to faith communities to tell us what the requirements should be. In addition the Government is proposing to invite views on the proposal that at the point at which a Minister of Religion from abroad applies for an extension of stay, usually after their first year in this country, they should be asked to undergo an assessment of their civic knowledge and the level of their community engagement. We will therefore be consulting faith communities about the elements of such an assessment and arrangements for making training or tuition available.

Further announcements will be made in due course.

First Degree Graduates Course List

Parole Board Rules

The new Rules will address:

the arrangements under which Parole Board panels are appointed to consider the cases of tariff expired life sentence prisoners and extended sentence prisoners; the procedural arrangements for panel consideration of such cases both on the papers and at oral hearings;

the information and reports to be provided by the Secretary of State and the evidence to be supplied by the prisoner, and

the arrangements for witnesses and observers to attend the hearing.

The rules will apply for the first time to Parole Board reviews for tariff-expired mandatory life sentence prisoners as well as to all other existing lifers to whom the previous rules applied. What this means in practice is that the new arrangements will provide for all tariff expired lifers to have their cases considered initially "on the papers", and, if not satisfied with the outcome of that paper panel decision, at a further oral hearing on request. The Government are persuaded that these new arrangements will be just as fair to all parties involved as the previous arrangements, and will have the added advantage of enabling the Board to deal with cases more efficiently and effectively.

The rules also provide for similar arrangements to apply to the review of the continued detention of recalled extended sentence prisoners.

The other major change to the rules is that they will now empower the Parole Board panels to call witnesses to oral hearings in their own right. Previously, panels have tended to rely on either party to call witnesses. This is in line with a recommendation of the comprehensive review of parole and lifer processes on which I have reported to the House previously.

Directions

Amendments have also been made to the Secretary of State's directions to the Parole Board on the release and recall of mandatory life sentence prisoners and their transfer from closed to open conditions. The amended Directions will, for the first time, apply to all lifers, not just mandatory lifers. They have been designed to reinforce the importance of risk assessment and they will set out more clearly, the factors that panels are expected to take into account in reaching decisions on a lifer's risk to the public.

The Parole Board have been extensively consulted on the content of the rules and directions and the rules have also been discussed with prisoners' legal representatives.

The new rules and directions come into force on 1 August 2004. Copies of the rules and directions have been placed in the House of Commons Library.

8.0 per cent. outside the upland severely disadvantaged area (SDA)

1.3 per cent. within the non moorland SDA

There will be no requirement to set aside land in the moorland SDA. These rates are lower than have applied in the past, but a greater area of land will attract a set aside obligation from 2005, thus approximately maintaining the area of land under set aside overall.

Information concerning the management conditions that will apply on set aside land will be made available shortly and a communication will be sent to all farmers.

The National Reserve is the mechanism by which certain defined categories of applicant may apply for subsidy entitlements for which they would not qualify through the normal process. A range of decisions relating to the reserve are required to be taken at UK level and some others have UK wide implications. As the Northern Ireland consultation process has only just finished and full consideration of the results has not been completed, it is not possible to make an announcement at this stage. We will be discussing the issues further throughout the summer and hope to be in a position to make an announcement shortly after the recess.

Another issue that will be given further attention over the coming weeks is how to apply the new scheme in respect of common land. My officials will shortly discuss a potential solution with stakeholders.

Further decisions concerning implementation of CAP reform will be announced in due course. The RPA is currently in the process of contacting those farmers with historic subsidy records to inform them of the crop area and livestock numbers that will be used to calculate the historic entitlement and resolve any queries. If a farmer is unhappy with the outcome of a representation against a decision concerning this data, he or she will be able to make an appeal through a formal appeals procedure. Also during the summer the RPA will provide an opportunity for farmers who have not yet registered their land on the rural land register to do so. This exercise is intended to benefit farmers who consider that they may be entitled to the flat-rate element of the single payment, and/or would like to apply for environmental stewardship. In Spring 2005 the RPA will despatch application forms to farmers for the single payment. The deadline for completed application forms to be returned to the RPA will be 15th May 2005. In the summer of 2005, when the aggregate area of land applied upon is known, we will advise applicants of entitlement amounts. The window for making single payments to farmers runs from 1 December 2005 to 30 June 2006.

I want now to move to detailed discussions with all interested parties about how to implement these changes. Some changes will require primary or secondary legislation and the parliamentary scrutiny that goes with that. Some statutory consultation will be required on specific changes.

Last week, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced the Government's overall plans for releasing resources to the front-line. The ALB review contributes to those plans. It will also lift the burden that the central overhead can place on frontline staff. The way in which we achieve the ALB reductions will be linked to the analysis undertaken for the Gershon efficiency review. The changes I will be making reflect the Prime Minister's wider civil service reform agenda and will also deliver the expectations of the Lyons review on public sector relocation.

The ALB review covered the work of stand-alone national organisations sponsored by the Department to undertake executive functions. Some 38 of these existed in the baseline year of 2003–04, although the review also looked at four prospective ALBs. A list of the bodies can he found in the report. The decisions I have taken so far will reduce the number of ALBs by almost half to 20, in the following four main categories.

Regulation

ALBs in this category regulate, inspect and hold specific parts of the system to account. They often have their own primary powers and extra independence from direction by the Secretary of State.

The Healthcare Commission (whose statutory name is the Commission for Healthcare Audit and Inspection), the Independent Regulator of National Health Service Foundation Trusts and the Commission for Social Care Inspection, will continue to regulate providers and their services. The Healthcare Commission will take on the main role of the Mental Health Act Commission, which will be abolished.

A new Regulatory Authority for Fertility and Tissue will be created to encompass the work of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority and The Human Tissue Authority.

The Council for the Regulation of Health Care Professionals will continue to oversee the statutory health professional self-regulatory bodies and the General Social Care Council will continue to regulate social care workers. The Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board will take on the role of the Dental Vocational Training Authority, which will be abolished.

The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency will continue to regulate medicines and healthcare products.

Standards

ALBs in this category establish national standards and best practice.

The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) will take on the work of the Health Development Agency (HDA) in order to link standards work on both the prevention and treatment of ill health. The HDA will be abolished.

Public welfare

ALBs in this category are focused primarily on the safety, protection, well-being and involvement of patients and public.

The National Clinical Assessment Authority (NCAA) will be brought into the National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) which will also support high quality, independent ethical review of all research that could affect patients. The NPSA will take on the lead national perspective on hospital food, cleanliness and safe hospital design. NPSA will also take over responsibility for the national confidential enquiries from NICE.

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) has taken on functions from the Public Health Laboratory Service and will take on the role of the National Radiological Protection Board under the Health Protection Agency Act 2004. The PHLS and the NRPB are to be abolished. The National Biological Standards Board will also be abolished and its functions taken on by others, primarily the HPA.

The regional functions and staff of the National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse will be transferred to existing mainstream structures as soon as possible. A further announcement on this will be made shortly. Centrally the NTA will continue in existence until we are confident that a detailed programme of mainstreaming drug treatment within the NHS is successfully in place. A review of progress will take place in 2006 to agree any further action needed to ensure drug treatment is fully mainstreamed into the NHS including agreeing the future of the NTA's national functions.

The Commission for Patient and Public Involvement in Health will be abolished. Patients' forums will remain the cornerstone of the arrangements we have put in place to create opportunities for patients and the public to influence health services. Stronger, more efficient arrangements to provide administrative support and advice to forums will be put in place after consultation. The NHS Appointments Commission will appoint forum members. A clearer quality framework for forum activities in monitoring and reviewing health services will be established and communicated to forums as quickly as possible.

Central services to the NHS

These ALBs provide services involving economies of scale and focused expertise.

A new Blood and Transplant Authority will be created to encompass the services provided by the National Blood Authority and UK Transplant, which will be abolished.

The NHS Litigation Authority (NHSLA) will be reconstituted to oversee the proposed NHS redress scheme and manage the financial compensation element at national level. Further details on how the scheme will operate will be published later this year, and implementation will require primary legislation. The NHSLA will also take on the functions of the Family Health Services Appeal Authority (Special Health Authority) which will be abolished.

The NHS Appointments Commission will be reconstituted as an executive non-departmental public body with wider powers to make public appointments. It will also make appointments to patients' forums and to research ethics committees.

The NHSU is subject to a more detailed study, within the overall ALB Review process, which will be completed shortly. The NHS Modernisation Agency will have most of its budget and staff devolved to the NHS, with a smaller core remaining within the Department for the present.

A new Health and Social Care Information Centre will be created to reduce burdens on the front-line by coordinating information requirements across a wide range of bodies. The new centre will retain some of the information-related functions of the current NHS Information Authority and will take on the statistics and information management functions of the Department. The NHSIA will be abolished. To build on the progress and momentum achieved to date, and reflect its sheer scale, the National Programme for Information Technology will become a time-limited executive agency for three to five years and will incorporate the IT functions of the NHSIA.

A new NHS Business Services Authority will be created to replace the NHS Pensions Agency, the Dental Practice Board, the Prescription Pricing Authority and the NHS Counter Fraud and Security Management Authority, all of which will be abolished.

The NHS Purchasing and Supply Agency will be reformed. The role of the NHS Logistics Authority will be market-tested. It is anticipated that the function will be contracted out and that the NHS Logistics Authority will be abolished.

A Dental Special Health Authority will no longer be created.

NHS Direct and NHS Professionals will retain their ALB status for two to three years. In the meantime, we will work with both organisations to consider how they may prepare to transfer to independent status as bodies established on foundation principles to operate in the public interest.

A small core estates team will be brought into the Department and NHS Estates abolished.

Releasing resources to the frontline

In 2003–04, ALBs spent a total of £4.8 billion, including operating costs of £1.8 billion, and employed around 25,000 staff.

The principles outlined in Sir Peter Gershon's efficiency review will be applied to the ALB sector to generate more than £200 million in cash-releasing savings for the front-line, for example by sharing back office services and by carrying out activities more efficiently. No ALB will be exempt from the need to improve efficiency. In addition, £150 to £200 million will be released to frontline control by devolving functions from ALBs. The scope for achieving full cost recovery for regulation will be investigated and taken forward.

The Department's commercial directorate is scrutinising the business processes and procurement activities of many of the central services ALBs to establish the full scope of the efficiencies to be made, especially in relation to the money (about £3 billion) that is spent by ALBs on behalf of frontline organisations on NHS supplies, temporary staff and litigation services. The commercial directorate's work on the NHS supply chain is already well advanced, suggesting savings of approximately £150 to 200 million in the period to the end of 2007–08.

We are confident that expenditure on ALBs can be reduced by at least £0.5 billion by 2007–08. Savings of this magnitude will be associated with a reduction in the number of posts in the ALB sector of about 25 per cent.

The ALB Review will now move to implementation. Over the next three to four months my officials will work closely with the devolved Administrations, ALBs, staff interests and other stakeholders to draw up implementation plans and to resolve outstanding issues on allocation of functions. These plans will include decision points on new ALB functions and processes, staffing levels, budgets, location and time scales for transfer. A small team in the Department will oversee this process. These arrangements will ensure delivery of the saving of £0.5 billion by 2007–08 and the reduction of posts within ALBs.

previously transfused apheresis donors; and,

donors who were unsure if they had previously had a blood transfusion

Apheresis donors are a small pool of committed donors who make frequent attendances to donate blood, where machine processing removes only certain blood components and the rest is returned to the donor.

When actions were taken in April 2004 to exclude certain donors, neither of these groups were excluded until any potential impact on the blood supply became clearer.

In the light of experience since the exclusions came into effect, MSBT has now advised that these groups can be excluded without adverse impact on the blood supply. These new exclusions will take effect from 2 August.

In a separate development, a second case of possible vCJD prion transmission via blood transfusion has now been confirmed. A patient in the UK received a transfusion of blood in 1999 from a donor who subsequently developed vCJD. Though the patient died of causes unrelated to vCJD, abnormal prion protein has been found in spleen tissue. This patient had a genetic type that differs from that so far found in patients who have developed vCJD.

I understand that a detailed account of the case will be appearing soon in the medical journal The Lancet. This new finding was referred to the spongiform encephalopathy advisory committee (SEAC) and MSBT for expert advice. SEAC agreed that this second patient with apparent vCJD infection added to the evidence that the vCJD agent can be transmitted by blood. MSBT concurred with this view, and has advised that no additional public health measures are required to protect the blood supply. This confirms the precautionary approach set out in my statement of 17 December.

www.dh.gov.uk/ publications. Copies of the report have been placed in the Library.

I wish to inform the House that, further to the reply given to the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr Dhanda) by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Health on 8 June at column 138, our response to the inquiry will not be available in July, but will be provided later this year.

I want to reassure the House that this delay is because we want to ensure that our response to the inquiry report recommendations can be set alongside our wider programme of action to improve mental health care for black and minority ethnic communities. This will be published in the autumn, following our consultation on the framework in the report "Delivering Race Equality". We need more time to consider the significant issues raised during our consultation on this document. We also want to ensure that we properly address the recommendations of the inquiry report.

In the meantime we must ensure that NHS staff have the skills they need to provide services, without discrimination, for people from black and minority ethnic communities. I am pleased to inform the House that the NHSU will be giving priority to develop and deliver this training for NHS staff, starting with staff in mental health settings.

Further information about progress on the national work we have started and to which I referred in my statement of 12 February is now available. This includes information about the programme of work led by the National Institute for Mental Health to support the development of effective services for people with mental health problems from black and ethnic minority communities; and guidance on best practice to support the safe and therapeutic management of aggression and violence in mental health inpatient settings.

I would like to draw particular attention to the publication yesterday of our Health and Social Care Standards and Planning Framework. It sets out the local action needed to commission services for the public to take forward the NHS Improvement Plan through effective partnership working. It sets out the national framework for PCTs and their partner organisations to take account of different needs and inequalities in their local populations. It commits us to providing national data year on year on the experience of service users from black and minority ethnic communities. It sets out how PCTs should support access to assessment, treatment and care for all those at risk, paying particular attention to the needs of those from black and minority ethnic communities and other groups that may be hard to reach.

I would also like to take this opportunity to reiterate my view that there is no place for racism or discrimination in the NHS. Discrimination, both direct and indirect does exist. It is unacceptable; it contradicts the basic value of equity that is the cornerstone of the health service. We are committed to rooting out racism, tackling the inequalities that exist, and ensuring that the experience of people from black and minority ethnic communities is improved.

¹ Details of the NIMH(E) programme, including key publications, can be found at:http://www.nimhe.org.uk/ priori ties/black. asp. NIMHE's guidance "Developing Positive Practice to Support the Safe and Therapeutic Management of Aggression and Violence in Mental Health Inpatient Settings: Mental Health Policy Implementation Guide" has been developed to support mental health service providers and enable them to review their current policies and procedures relating to education, training and practice in the safe and therapeutic management of aggression and violence. It can be found at http://www.nimhe.org.uk/whatshapp/itemdisplay_publications.asp?id=441

to restructure the levels of service for private law family cases to encourage the early and amicable resolution of family disputes wherever possible. A new level of service called family help will replace the existing three services, and will build upon the work already done through the FAInS (Family Advice and Information Service). This proposal will be piloted through FAInS providers before full implementation;

to introduce wider powers to refuse funding for divorce (ancillary relief) cases on the grounds that private funding mechanisms may be available, for example, using the value of the assets in dispute;

to introduce stricter controls over multiple and repeat applications in private law family cases and to limit funding to one certificate per client at any time;

to remove from scope low priority categories of case, such as legal help for drafting divorce and judicial separation petitions and changes of name;

to revise the financial eligibility limits to achieve uniform income limits across all levels of service. The upper limit for qualifying for legal representation in court would be reduced, to the (lower) level for legal help, as adjusted for inflation. However, there should be appropriate safeguards and exemptions in place to ensure the most vulnerable applicants are protected;

to remove the current rule which disregards £100k of equity in an applicant's home in assessing financial eligibility for legal aid. Again, there will be exemptions for the most vulnerable clients;

in clinical negligence cases and complaints against the police, a requirement that redress is initially pursued through the appropriate complaints procedure before funding for litigation can be considered.

Copies of the consultation paper have been placed in the Library of both Houses. It is available on the LSC's website: www.legalservices.gov.uk

A consultation document later this year on how the OFT's proposals could be brought into effect and what more could be done to strengthen the regulation of estate agents.

Taking a power in the Housing Bill to require estate agents to belong to any industry redress scheme approved for the purpose by the Secretary of State. The power would be linked with marketing homes with Home Information Packs (HIPs) and its exercise would be subject to detailed evaluation and consultation once Government and industry have drawn up detailed proposals.

Working with stakeholders to develop methods to evaluate trends in consumer detriment in this market and the case for an industry qualification and national quality standards for estate agents.

In their report, the OFT concluded that the estate agency market works well in many respects and the market structure is competitive, with businesses able to enter and exit the market with ease. But consumers could make average savings of around £300 on each house sale if they did more to shop around and negotiate fees.

However, the report highlighted significant consumer dissatisfaction with estate agents' services, ranging from serious uncorrected abuses that the Estate Agents Act should deter (for example, failure to pass on offers or declare a personal interest) to, more commonly, quality of service issues (for example, delays and inadequate communication). Much of estate agency business is conducted orally with relatively little documentation so the process is not transparent and it is consequently difficult for enforcers to detect and substantiate that abuse has occurred in order that it might be dealt with.

The OFT's broad approach to the problems they have found in the market is

to ensure a baseline of protection for consumers by making the present regulatory regime more enforceable. The OFT recommend that estate agents should be required to maintain written records of offers, that these should have to be copied to those making the offer as well as sellers, and that the enforcement agencies are given enhanced powers to access these when there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the Act has been breached. Breach of statutory undertakings given under the Enterprise Act 2002 should become "trigger" events enabling enforcement action, and the OFT should be able to ban a person who has committed certain offences, not just when he has been convicted of them (as is currently the case).

to promote quality of service and redress beyond minimum standards by creating incentives for members of the industry to sign up to recognised Codes of Practice with free systems of redress. The Consumer Code of Practice of the Ombudsman for Estate Agents Company Ltd (OEA) has now completed Stage One of the OFT approval process (the code is meeting the OFT's core criteria on paper) and is seeking to complete Stage Two of the process (it will need to show the code is functioning effectively in practice) in order to obtain OFT approval. However, at present it only covers around 40 per cent. of agents. Whilst the OFT hope their promotion of the Scheme—should it be approved—will boost its membership and profile, the OFT recommend that powers should be obtained to establish a statutory redress mechanism in the event that voluntary methods do not realise the anticipated improvements.

The OFT's recommendations also cover such matters as making the statutory terms used in estate agency contracts clearer, extending the definition of an estate agent's personal interest in a deal and bringing the definition of estate agency in the Act up to date.

There have been calls for the introduction of a positive licensing system as a way of improving standards and increasing protection in this market. The OFT specifically addressed the question of whether positive licensing, which could include a fitness test and training or competence requirements, would improve regulation in this market. They reject it for a number of reasons:

A requirement for estate agents to obtain licences before they engage in business would not deal with the main identified causes of serious problems in this market. These tend to concern the way existing agents conduct their business and are consequently unlikely to be detected by a screening test in advance of granting a licence.

Estate agents clearly need to understand their obligations under the legislation but their role is primarily that of salesmen and intermediaries. Evidence from cases where estate agents have been banned suggests that misconduct results from a lack of integrity rather than deficiencies in their knowledge or expertise.

Positive licensing would adversely affect the benefits consumers receive in terms of downward pressure on prices that results from the ease with which new businesses can enter the market and increase competition. It would also be costly to administer and these costs would ultimately be passed on to consumers in the form of higher fees.

The OFT's conclusion is that positive licensing would raise costs and inhibit competition without delivering enough improvements to justify this. In their view, a more effectively enforced negative licensing system combined with the OFT's new powers under the Enterprise Act will be effective in dealing with malpractice.

In considering our response to the OFT's report, the Government have consulted stakeholders and taken into account the representations we have received. We will continue to consult fully as we take this work forward.

In large measure, the Government agree with the OFT's analysis which identifies a number of clear problems and the case for action to deal with these. We believe that their recommendations potentially offer an effective and proportionate basis for tackling the problems they have identified in this sector.

However, we believe that it may be necessary to go beyond the OFT's proposals in tackling consumer detriment in this market. In particular we wish to take further views on the question of enforcement and to see what can be done to build on the OFT's initial analysis. It is clear that amendments to the legislation are necessary to improve protection in this area. The Government are therefore proposing to consult later this year on a package of measures that will bring about real improvements in this sector. Our proposals will cover:

Making estate agents dealings with consumers more transparent by requiring them to copy to buyers the written offers they have passed on to sellers and to keep clear and comprehensive records of each property transaction. This will give consumers more confidence that they are being treated fairly.

Giving the OFT and local Trading Standards Departments the comprehensive armoury of regulatory tools they need to investigate consumer complaints properly, address unfair practices and drive the rogues out of the market. We will look at whether they should have powers to demand the on-site production of administration records, files and copies of correspondence when they have reasonable grounds to suspect estate agents have not complied with the provisions of the Estate Agents Act.

Allowing enforcement action to be taken where specified offences have been committed, regardless of whether or not the offenders have been successfully prosecuted.

Widening the range of circumstances in which the OFT can consider the fitness of agents and the range of sanctions available to them.

Widening the circumstances in which estate agents have to disclose their personal interest in property transactions.

Modernising the Estate Agents Act so it is relevant to developments in estate agency practices, such as internet enterprises, and making it clear that consumers are protected.

Making estate agency contracts more transparent so consumers have a better understanding of their liabilities and are not ambushed by clauses in small print or unclear language.

Making it easier for the OFT and Trading Standards Officers to addressing flyboarding abuses by requiring agents to identify specific properties on "for sale" boards.

Encouraging estate agents to improve quality of service by subscribing to and developing codes of practice that will meet the standards required to obtain OFT approval.

In addition, an OFT consumer information campaign will alert consumers to how they can get best value for their money by shopping around, negotiating fees and checking whether agents subscribe to consumer codes of practice, such as the OEA's Code of Practice.

In the Consultation Document, we will also raise whether there are other ways going beyond the OFT's recommendations in which enforcement could be improved e.g. whether some of the OFT's powers could be delegated to local authorities, whether the OFT's internal procedures for dealing with cases involving estate agents can be streamlined, and what could be done to improve communications between the OEA, the OFT and other relevant bodies to facilitate enforcement action being taken when there are serious complaints about estate agents. And we will work with the OFT and Trading Standards to ensure that the best use is made of their new enforcement powers. Updating the regulatory system on its own will not be sufficient to tackle unscrupulous behaviour unless it is effectively and speedily enforced and problems in this sector are prioritized and the necessary resources allocated to them. We are confident that the OFT and local Trading Standards Offices will rise to this challenge but we will want to work with them so that consumers benefit from real improvements in behaviour in this sector.

The Government have noted calls for positive licensing of estate agents but we agree with the OFT's analysis that this is not justified. We believe that stakeholders have underestimated the potential impact of the OFT's recommendations as an overall package for addressing mischief in this sector. These recommendations can address the most serious problems without imposing unnecessary costs on businesses or inhibiting competition (both of which would result in higher fees). But we are also committed to going beyond the OFT's proposals, for example in making it possible to require estate agents to belong to an industry redress system.

The Government agree that access to free, independent redress is important in the estate agency sector and offers a proportionate means of dealing with consumer complaints about quality of service issues. The OEA is currently seeking approval for its Consumer Code of Practice from the OFT which would enable member agencies to demonstrate a clear commitment to higher standards.

The Government are concerned, however, that by itself this would leave many consumers unable to obtain redress without resort to the courts. Housing markets are local so a seller may not have the option of engaging an estate agent who subscribes to a redress scheme. A buyer who wants a particular property may also have no choice as he will have to deal with the estate agent or agents selected by the seller.

The Government are also conscious that with the introduction from 2007 of HIPs as provided in the Housing Bill estate agents may well play an increasingly pivotal role in housing transactions. On the other hand, the Government are concerned that any redress scheme should not impose an unnecessary burden on the industry or significantly increase barriers to entry, neither of which would be in consumers' interests. Proposals for a redress scheme need to be reconciled with the fact that there are no positive licensing arrangements for estate agents.

The Government also accept that there are advantages in redress arrangements being run by the industry rather than the state. The Government believe that a way of reconciling these different considerations is for Parliament to provide a power to require estate agents to belong to any redress scheme approved for that purpose by the Secretary of State. Under the proposed arrangements, enforcement would fall under the present statutory arrangements in the Estate Agents Act: that is, that Act would apply to breach of the duty to belong to the scheme as it currently applies to a person who has engaged in an undesirable practice under the Act, so that enforcement action, including prohibition from acting as an estate agent, could be taken against any estate agent who failed to comply with the duty. The Government consider that the Housing Bill represents an opportunity to deal with this matter and propose to bring forward amendments to the Bill during the Committee stage in another place to provide for such arrangements. In recognition of the fact that this is a new proposal on which the Government have yet to consult, we would not propose to exercise the power until it was clear what industry scheme or schemes would seek recognition, what arrangements they would have for providing redress including the fees they would charge estate agents, consultation had been carried out on the detailed arrangements and a full Regulatory Impact Assessment had been done. Subject to those considerations, the Government hope that the arrangements will be brought into effect before the introduction of HIPs in 2007.

We encourage those in the industry who wish to do so to subscribe to more wide-ranging codes of practice and to seek approval under the OFT's Consumer Codes Approval Scheme.

Turning to other steps the Government intend to take in respect of this market, we want to improve the evidence base so as to gain a better picture of just how much consumer detriment there is in this market and how much our proposals improve it. We plan to invite the main stakeholders to join us in trying to devise a methodology for this. Such a better evidence base might establish the need to take further steps in future.

We also plan to work with stakeholders on the scope for devising and promoting a recognised qualification for estate agents. We see benefit in this as something that, if properly done, could provide a career incentive to raise standards.

We also note that the British Standards Institute, the UK National Standards Body, is considering developing a service quality Standard and associated Kitemark for the provision of residential estate agency services and we shall follow with interest progress on this.

Consumers deserve a better deal from estate agents than, as the OFT's report shows, in many cases they have got. The Government's proposals will go a long way to providing consumers in this vital market with a much better deal.

www.dti.gov.uk/rda/info.

Separate regulations under section 74A of the 1991 Act allow highway authorities to charge utility companies a daily rate, commonly known as "lane rental", whenever the latter carry out works in the street. The 74A powers have not, as yet, been activated nationally, but have been tested in pilot schemes in the London Borough of Camden and in Middlesbrough, which ended on 31 March 2004.

The Department appointed consultants, Halcrow, to monitor the effectiveness of both sets of powers in reducing disruption on the highway. Halcrow have produced two final reports covering the section 74 and 74A powers respectively. Copies of each report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses shortly.

The number of cases cleared was 45,000, taking the total number of clearances (calculations and closures) to over 197,000. The total number of cases cleared continues to rise but, clearly, we need to do much more and the agency has instigated a programme designed to drive performance improvement and build on the progress made during 2003–04, with further emphasis on achieving positive outcomes for families.

The poorest families are starting to gain significantly in real terms from the new system with the introduction of the child maintenance premium. This last quarter saw a further rise—the highest quarterly rise to date—with over 8,000 first child maintenance payments being made and bringing the total number of beneficiaries to over 25,000.

Whereas under the old system, most cases were closed before calculations were made, the reverse is now true. The ratio between those cases reaching calculation compared with those that closed remained consistent with previous quarters at around 6:4, comparing favourably with the ratio of 4:6 under the old scheme.

Technical issues precluded the reporting of reliable figures on compliance and throughput during 2003–04 and this, in turn, has impacted the agency's ability to manage performance improvements. We still do not have complete, fully accurate or timely information on compliance. The best information now available suggests that, in March 2004, just over half of those non-resident parents due to make payments did so.

The agency is in the process of validating the compliance information it has for this quarter with the aim of providing this in future quarterly reports. We expect performance to improve progressively over the next year or so as the new arrangements move into steady state and better information is made available to support performance improvements.

A special exercise was undertaken to test accuracy at the end of 2003–04. At the end of the first year of the new scheme, 82 per cent. of decisions checked were accurate to the nearest penny (against a target of 90 per cent.).

Average weekly child support maintenance payments to parents with care are shown in the table. Figures are for June 2004 only and are calculated as the total amount received and allocated divided by the number of cases.

Figures for these are as follows: