As part of the routine management of UK forces in the multinational division (south-east) (MND(SE)) in Iraq, we intend to conduct a roulement of forces involving the replacement of 40 Commando Royal Marines with the 2nd Battalion the Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment.

The Secretary of State for Defence announced on 17 June 2004, Official Report, column 48, that 40 Commando would deploy to MND(SE) during June and July, both to provide support to Iraqi security forces and to provide the capacity for some other tasks, including the protection of essential infrastructure. The General Officer comanding MND(SE) has concluded that there will be a continuing requirement for these tasks beyond elections in Iraq planned for 30 January. Based on this advice, we have decided that 2nd Battalion the Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment should replace 40 Commando when their six month deployment in Iraq comes to an end in January 2005.

Since 1 November, 2nd Battalion the Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment has been acting as the very high readiness reserve (VHRR), at 10 days' readiness to deploy to Iraq. In January the responsibility for VHRR will pass from 2 Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment to the 1st Battalion the Royal Scots.

The roulement is currently planned to take place from early January 2005, with handover to 2nd Battalion the Princess of Wales' Royal Regiment complete by mid- January. We expect that the number of armed forces personnel in theatre will remain broadly the same as a result of these changes, with the other major UK units currently in Iraq unchanged. These units are as follows:

4 Armoured Brigade Headquarters and Signal Squadron

The Queen's Dragoon Guards

The Royal Dragoon Guards

4th Regiment Royal Artillery

1st Battalion Scots Guards

1st Battalion Welsh Guards

1st Battalion The Duke of Wellington's Regiment

21 Engineer Regiment

I would emphasise that these are routine adjustments to UK forces in MND(SE). We continue to consider, with our partners in the multinational force, the levels and dispositions of forces required in Iraq in the months ahead, to support the sovereign Interim Government of Iraq through the process leading to the election of an Iraqi Transitional Government and assembly in January 2005 and full constitutional elections in December 2005. If we judge that further changes to the UK military contribution in Iraq would be appropriate to support this process, we will of course inform the House at the earliest opportunity. At present, however, no such decision has been made.

This statement provides the final details relating to the business rates revaluation that will take effect from 1 April 2005. It confirms the results of the consultations on proposals announced in my written statement of 21 July, Official Report, columns 30–33WS, gives details of the transitional relief scheme and sets out the final small business rate relief scheme. In addition it includes the provisional non-domestic rating multipliers for 2005–06 and adjustments to the thresholds for various reliefs.

The Local Government Act 2003 requires the 2005 revaluation to be accompanied by a transition scheme to lessen the effects of sudden and significant rises in rates bills. The legislation provides that the scheme must be self-financing, so that the costs do not fall on other taxpayers. In July we announced the proposal for a four-year self-financing transitional scheme with the costs of phasing in increases met by phasing down the reductions in liability for others. The scheme seeks to provide an appropriate balance between protecting those who have larger increases in rates bills and allowing those who enjoy a fall in bills to receive the full benefit as quickly as possible.

We consulted on this proposal over the summer and most respondents felt that the proposed scheme struck the right balance. The Valuation Office Agency published the draft rating lists on 1 October and the updated valuations in the draft list have resulted in the transition scheme costing less than we initially estimated. We therefore have been able to reduce the impact of the scheme on those ratepayers that are paying for it.

As a result the caps for properties experiencing increases will be 12.5 per cent., 17.5 per cent., 20 per cent. and 25 per cent. for the four years, and for small properties 5 per cent., 7.5 per cent., 10 per cent. and 15 per cent. Large properties experiencing reductions in rate bills will be capped at the rates of 12.5 per cent., 12.5 per cent., 14 per cent. and 25 per cent. For small properties, the rates are 30 per cent., 30 per cent., 35 per cent. and 60 per cent. These downward caps are significantly more generous than the consultation levels or than any previous transitional scheme. They mean that those expecting decreases in their rates bills will benefit more quickly than under earlier schemes. Also, the effect of the separate capping levels means that small businesses will only be required to make a very small contribution to the scheme.

Government recognises that the current system of business rates places a disproportionate burden on small businesses. The scheme we consulted on over the summer proposed that rate relief should be available at 50 per cent. for single properties with a rateable value up to £5,000, with relief declining in percentage terms on a sliding scale with no relief at a rateable value of £10,000. In addition we proposed a buffer zone so that eligible business properties with rateable values between £10,000 and £15,000 would not have to contribute towards the relief. The scheme is designed to be funded through a supplement on the rates bills of larger businesses.

The feedback from the consultation suggested that the eligibility criteria should be extended, that the buffer zones for London should be amended and various technical changes made to the draft regulations. We will now introduce a scheme where the ratepayer will be eligible for the relief if all their main properties fall within the appropriate threshold, and the other properties are under a rateable value of £2,200. The relief will apply to the main property only. This extends the relief to more ratepayers while not increasing the financial burden on large ratepayers or introducing complex administrative arrangements. In addition we will raise the threshold for the buffer zone in London to £21,500.

In line with the Local Government Act 2003, from 1 April 2005, there will be two multipliers, the small business non-domestic rating multiplier, which is applicable to those that qualify for the small business relief or in the buffer zone, and the non-domestic rating multiplier which includes the supplement to pay for small business relief. The small business non-domestic rating multiplier for 2005–06 is 41.5p per pound of rateable value, and the non-domestic rating multiplier is 42.2p. This means that those paying for the relief will see a 1.6 per cent. increase in rates bills as a result.

In addition we will adjust the thresholds for a variety of rate reliefs in line with the general increase in rateable values. The relief for rural single petrol stations and pubs will increase from £9,000 to £10,500, for other rural single enterprises from £6,000 to £7,000 with discretionary relief from £12,000 to £14,000. Relief for stud farms will increase from £3,000 to £3,500, former agricultural premises from £6,000 to £7,000 and small unoccupied property from £1,900 to £2,200.

My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister is publishing today the revised regional spatial strategy for Yorkshire and the Humber to replace RPG12 which was published in 2001.

The revised strategy follows the selective review or RPG12 carried out by the Yorkshire and Humber assembly in 2003, the public examination held in February 2004, and consultation on proposed changes July-September 2004. In response to the proposed changes, around 250 comments were received from 56 people and organisations. Nearly half of the comments were expressions of support.

The revised strategy makes significant improvements and changes to the 2001 version in the following areas:

Transport

RSS now sets out a list of transport investment and management priorities that will help achieve the overall spatial strategy, create sustainable communities and deliver economic growth.

RSS contains public transport accessibility criteria and a strategic transport demand management strategy. These should help ensue that new developments are located where they minimise the need to travel by car and that best use is made of the transport networks in the region.

Climate change

RSS now sets out a clear target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the region. It also contains policies to both help achieve this target and to help different parts of the region adapt to the effects of climate change.

Flood risk

RSS provides a clear framework for local authorities and the Environment Agency to address development and flood risk in an integrated, consistent and sustainable manner across the region.

Renewable energy

RSS now sets out targets for developments needed in different parts of the region in order to significantly increase the amount of renewable energy that can be generated.

Waste management

RSS now sets out targets for the amounts of municipal waste to be recycled/composted in different parts of the region and initial guidance on the numbers and locations of different types of waste management facilities that are likely to be needed up to 2016.

Revised RSS will be sent to the Yorkshire and Humber assembly, all of the region's MPs, MEPs and local authorities, and all those that attended the public examination in February 2004. It is available on the Government Office for Yorkshire and The Humber website www.goyh.gov.uk/rpg/.

I have today asked the Higher Education Funding Council for England to advise me about higher education subjects or courses of national strategic importance, where intervention might be appropriate to strengthen or secure them. I have asked for the council's views on the circumstances when such intervention might be right, and the types of intervention which it believes could be considered.

I have asked the council to consider the following subject areas:

Arabic and Turkish language studies and other middle eastern area studies, former Soviet Union Caucasus and central Asian area studies—this is mainly for strategic security and inter-cultural awareness reasons, as highlighted by the recent BRISMES report.

Japanese, Chinese, Mandarin and other far eastern languages and area studies for business and trade purposes, as highlighted by, among others, the UK-Japan 21st century group.

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics—chiefly for maintaining the UK's excellent science base and ensuring our national productivity.

Vocationally oriented courses of particular interest to employers in industries that are of growing importance to the UK economy; for example, the cultural and creative industries, and e-skills.

Courses relating to recent EU accession countries, especially those in eastern Europe and the Baltic.

Following the outbreak of BSE in this country measures were introduced to protect consumers and to eradicate BSE from the national herd. Incidences of BSE have declined in the UK in line with scientific projections.

vCJD is a dreadful disease. I and other Ministers pay tribute to the courage of the families who have been tragically affected by it. We consider the protection of the public from this devastating condition to be of paramount importance.

In 1996, when the possible link between BSE and cases of vCJD first became apparent, the then Government decided to ban the feeding of mammalian meat and bone meal to all farmed livestock; to strengthen controls on the removal of specified risk material (SRM); and to introduce the over thirty month (OTM) rule prohibiting the sale for human consumption in the UK of meat from cattle aged over 30 months at slaughter. Studies had suggested that cattle presented a much higher risk to consumers in the year before the onset of clinical disease which occurs at an average age of 5 years. The rule thus excluded higher risk cattle.

One of the main public health control measures is the removal of SRM, which is estimated to remove over 99 per cent. of infectivity in cattle.

This Government have made great efforts to control BSE in cattle. There were 186 clinical cases last year, a reduction of over 99 per cent. since the peak year of 1992 when over 37,000 clinical cases were confirmed, and a significant reduction also since 1996, when over 8,000 BSE clinical cases were confirmed. This reduction is expected to continue and DEFRA and the other Departments involved are continuing to work towards the complete eradication of BSE.

Since 1996, rapid post-mortem tests for BSE have been developed. From January 2001, throughout the EU, it became compulsory to test at slaughter all cattle aged over thirty months sold for human consumption. Other member states, where BSE emerged later, and at lower levels, do not have an OTM rule. Instead they rely on an EU-wide feed ban introduced in January 2001, SRM controls, and BSE testing. However, they have not had the high level of BSE that was present in the UK.

The OTM rule was introduced at a time when BSE posed a significant risk to UK consumers, and it has been one effective component of our wide ranging BSE controls. The risk is now greatly reduced and very low, although no risk can ever be completely eliminated.

In year 2000 the FSA was set up as an independent agency to advise Ministers on issues of food and consumer safety.

In July 2004, that agency advised Ministers that, subject to putting a robust testing regime in place, it would now be acceptable to replace the OTM rule with BSE testing for OTM cattle born after July 1996. The science of vCJD remains highly imprecise, and for this reason it is impossible to be precise about the risks, but the estimates are based on conservative current assumptions. The FSA risk assessment, with valuable input from the independent Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC), concluded that it would be consistent on the basis of the risk involved for Government to lift the OTM rule if a robust testing system was in place.

In April 2004 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) had already agreed that

the United Kingdom's BSE risk status should be reduced from "high" to "moderate", the same as most other EU countries, later this year;

that the UK was clearly already moderate risk in respect of cattle born after 31 July 1996; and

that for such cattle the OTM rule could be replaced by the same protective measures presently adopted in other moderate risk countries.

UK Government Ministers, the Scottish Executive and the Welsh Assembly Government have agreed today to announce the start of a managed transition towards the lifting of the OTM rule.

It is essential to establish a robust and independently quality-assured testing regime, taking account of the significant recent failures in the existing testing regime. The main public health protection measure—the removal of specified risk material—has been and will continue to be rigorously enforced by the meat hygiene service.

I believe it is responsible for the Government to proceed cautiously. A further process of stakeholder engagement will now take place, which will include key Government advisers, such as the FSA and the chief medical officer.

A final switch-over from the OTM rule to BSE testing will happen only when the Agency has advised Ministers that the testing regime is robust. This change, when introduced, would bring the UK into line with the arrangements which apply throughout the EU, except that UK cattle born before August 1996 would remain permanently excluded from the food chain.

I and other Ministers have also agreed that the Food Standards Agency should be responsible for the on-going audit and review of the testing system. This role in relation to testing will be in addition to the agency's continuing responsibility, as an independent body set up to protect the public's health and consumer interests in relation to food, for monitoring developments and advising Government on the scientific evidence on the food-borne BSE risk to consumers. In advising on the robustness of testing, the agency will be assisted by a group of independent experts which includes experts in food safety and consumer affairs. This group will take into account recent failings in current testing arrangements, including in relation to casualty cattle.

The FSA will be conducting a full public consultation on draft legislation to replace the OTM rule by testing for OTM cattle born after July 1996.

The timing of any changeover would be dependent on the agency advising Ministers that it is satisfied that the testing regime is robust and on other matters such as the outcome of the consultation, amendments to legislation and the recruitment of additional meat hygiene service staff. Testing arrangements are not yet properly quality assured. This is a source of concern and therefore further work is necessary to ensure the testing regime is robust. This is expected to take until the latter half of next year in Great Britain. Given the recent more favourable European Commission report on the testing system in Northern Ireland, I do not rule out earlier change there.

Ministers have also agreed that it would be desirable for the ban on OTM imports to be lifted at the same time as the domestic OTM Rule, and that every effort should be made to accelerate the lifting of the EU restrictions on UK beef exports. Before export restrictions can be eased, there will need to be a further inspection visit from the EU's food and veterinary office to check our BSE controls and our testing arrangements, a proposal from the European Commission to amend EU legislation, and agreement by other EU member states. This is likely to take until late next year.

With the support of Her Majesty's Government, the United Nations Security Council on 15 November unanimously adopted resolution 1572 (2004) imposing an arms embargo against Côte d'Ivoire, effective for 13 months, following violations of the cease fire by Government forces. The embargo includes humanitarian exemptions, exemptions for the United Nations operation in Côte d'Ivoire (UNOCI) and the French forces who support them and for States engaged in the evacuation of their nationals or those for whom they have consular responsibility in Côte d'Ivoire. There is also an exemption to allow support for the process of restructuring Ivorian defence and security forces.

Resolution 1572 (2004) also imposes a travel ban and assets freeze against all who constitute a threat to the peace and national reconciliation process in Côte d'Ivoire, which will come into effect on 15 December unless the Security Council decides that the signatories concerned have fully implemented their commitments under the Accra III Agreement and are embarked towards full implementation of the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement. I will inform the House if the travel ban and assets freeze come into force.

My answer to the question from the right hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram) of 17 November, Official Report, column 1548W, set out what HM Government knew of reports of a planned coup in Equatorial Guinea earlier this year. This statement informs the House more widely of the position. At all times we acted properly, promptly, and entirely in accordance with international law.

The United Kingdom has normal diplomatic relations with the Government of Equatorial Guinea, which is a former Spanish colony. We have no embassy in the country. Our high commissioner in neighbouring Cameroon is accredited as ambassador to Equatorial Guinea and has responsibility for relations with Equatorial Guinea. There is a British community of some hundreds, many involved in the energy sector. We have an honorary consul and a commercial attaché in the capital, Malabo.

The country has in the past suffered political instability. Rumours of upheaval and further instability are common. For example there were reports picked up by BBC monitoring in October 2003 of an imminent planned coup. These appeared not to be accurate; certainly, there was no coup.

On 29 January this year the Foreign Office received an intelligence report of preparations for a possible coup in Equatorial Guinea. The report was the first intelligence we had received. It was not definitive enough for us to conclude that a coup was likely or inevitable. It was passed by another Government to us on the normal condition that it not be passed on. There were, coincidentally, reports on Spanish radio, and in both El Pais and El Mundo on 30 January, making similar suggestions that a coup was being planned in Equatorial Guinea, and reporting that Spanish naval vessels were sailing towards the country.

British newspapers have this week reported that a South African national, Johann Smith, is claiming to have passed to contacts in British intelligence in December 2003 and in January 2004 a note setting out in detail plans for a coup. We have no record of this information being passed to British officials at any time before May 2004.

I received a submission, dated 30 January, from FCO officials on the weekend of 30 January-1 February which summarised both the media and intelligence reports and made recommendations to me. I considered the case and agreed that the FCO should approach an individual formerly connected with a British private military company, mentioned in the report of 29 January, both to attempt to test the veracity of the report, and to make clear that the FCO was firmly opposed to any unconstitutional action such as coups d'etat. A senior Foreign Office official did so within days. The individual concerned claimed no knowledge of the plans.

On 3 February we changed our travel advice to reflect our latest assessment. This reads "visitors should expect . . . isolated incidents of political unrest" in Equatorial Guinea, particularly as "legislative elections are scheduled for the first quarter of 2004".

In anticipation of these elections our ambassador in Yaounde was due to visit Malabo in early February. We instructed him to continue with his planned visit. He found the situation calm. But as a precaution, our consular crisis plan for Equatorial Guinea was reviewed. Given our limited British representation, it had not been recently updated.

We did not pass the report of 29 January to the Equatorial Guinea Government. It had been passed to us on the condition that it not be passed on to any third party. But there were two considerations of substance which led us to this judgement in any event. First, because there had been media reports about preparations for a possible coup which the Equatorial Guinea government would already have seen. Second, because it was not definitive enough for us to conclude that a coup was likely or inevitable. Indeed, we went back to the originating government and to another Government which had also received the report to check their belief in the veracity of the report. Their responses gave no certainty. The fact that the rumours were in the public domain suggested in any event that a successful coup was growing less likely.

There have been some suggestions in the press that the British Government were under a legal obligation to act differently. We do not condone or support unconstitutional action including coup d'etat of any kind in other countries. But my understanding is that governments are under no legal obligation to pass on information which they may receive about such possible action.

On 9 March we learned that the Zimbabwean authorities had arrested a number of individuals in Harare, alleged to be on their way to effect a coup in Equatorial Guinea. A number of individuals were also arrested in Malabo in connection with the alleged coup plot. Over the following months, the names of a number of others allegedly involved appeared in the media.

On 28 August the Foreign Office press office was asked by The Observer if the Government knew before March that a coup was going to happen. It replied, correctly, that the FCO did not. As I told the right hon. Member for Devizes on 9 November I had first heard reports of possible coup planning in late January this year. And this I followed up with a fuller account for the House in my answer to the right hon. Member's questions on 17 November.

In the Government's view, applications for asylum should be made at the earliest possible opportunity after arrival in this country. Staff at ports of entry are trained to receive such claims when made by arriving passengers. There are also currently three screening units at which applications by people already in the country can be received.

Over the last 18 months, there has been a significant reduction in the number of claims. There is also a case for concentrating expertise in dealing with such cases. The asylum screening unit at Solihull currently deals with fewer than 5 per cent. of asylum applications and I have therefore decided that it should close with effect from 3 December. This change is part of the Government's continuing strategy to tighten up management of the asylum system and to take effective action against abuse of the asylum process.

Our experience in Croydon ASU has shown that by providing a more streamlined and focussed service to asylum applicants those who are genuine can be identified more quickly, whilst those whose claims have no foundation are dealt with more effectively.

Those wishing to seek asylum and already in the country will be able to do so at one of the other screening units at Croydon and Liverpool. Vulnerable applicants, such as unaccompanied children, families, pregnant women and those with medical problems will continue to be able to register their claims at immigration service locations throughout the United Kingdom.

The closure of the Solihull Asylum Screening Unit will free up staff in such a way as to make more effective the reporting arrangements for existing asylum seekers in the West Midlands. Our partners in local government and the voluntary sector have been informed of these changes.