The House will wish to be aware of developments in the Government's plans for modernising civil registration.

On 29 March 2004, my predecessor Ruth Kelly announced that a draft Regulatory Reform Order containing provisions relating to the registration of birth and deaths in England and Wales would be presented to Parliament during that session and that presentation of the proposals relating to marriage would be postponed until the present Session.

The Regulatory Reform (Registration of Births and Deaths) (England Wales) Order 2004 was presented to Parliament on 22 July 2004. The Commons Regulatory Reform Committee and the Lords Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee published their reports towards the end of last year concluding that use of the order-making powers of the 2001 Act is inappropriate for modernisation of the registration service in respect of births and deaths. In the light of those reports, I am no longer planning to bring forward a draft Regulatory Reform Order to reform marriage law.

This Government remain committed to the modernisation of the registration service in England and Wales. This service, with its roots in the nineteenth century, touches everyone during their lives and it is important that it reflects the needs of society, families and individuals. Modernisation will provide more choice for the public in how they deal with the service, improved service delivery and easier public interaction with government on a wider range of services.

I am actively looking for ways of delivering the key elements of civil registration modernisation and will be working with stakeholders over the coming months to agree a way forward. I will seek parliamentary approval at appropriate times. In the meantime, new and more modern technology is planned to be introduced that will make it easier for members of the public to deal with the local registration service.

The conclusion of the recent court martial in Osnabruck, and the lifting of reporting restrictions on an earlier court martial about the same incident enables me to say more about the outcome of both trials, although I must take into account that both cases are still subject to the statutory process of review and potential appeal.

I was profoundly disturbed when I first saw the photographs. I do, however, share the Chief of the General Staff view that the incidents depicted do not reflect typical behaviour and standards of the British Army. We also agree that it is right to apologise on behalf of the Army to the victims and the people of Iraq.

On Friday the Chief of the General Staff issued a statement on this and future cases. He explained that this was the first in a possible five cases which might come to court where the allegation against members of the British Army is that they committed acts of deliberate abuse against Iraqis. These cases involve up to 22 soldiers.

The CGS announced on behalf of the British Army that he has asked a senior officer to assess what lessons we need to learn in light of this and the other cases that might come to court, and to make recommendations for action. We will publish the findings from this work when the Army is no longer constrained by the legal processes. I fully support this statement.

The Army sets high standards and demands that they are met. The recent courts-martial have demonstrated that those who fail to meet those standards are called to account. The vast majority of servicemen and women do, however, perform to the very highest standards. Their service in Iraq has been outstanding and we are right to be proud of this.

I have today signed a new call-out order made under Section 56 of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 so that reservists may continue to be called out to support UN operations in Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The current order has expired and this new order takes effect from 1 March 2005. There are no plans to call out Reservists compulsorily under this order as it is expected that the small numbers needed will be met through voluntary mobilisation.

Torbay Council and Teignbridge district council experienced exceptional storm and flood damage on 27 October 2004. Given these circumstances, I am satisfied that financial assistance under the Bellwin scheme is justified. Schemes will therefore be established under section 155 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. Grant will be paid to the authorities to cover 85 per cent. of the eligible costs above a threshold, which they have incurred in dealing with the storm and flood damage.

Today we have published a good practice guide to monitoring our new system of local plans or local development frameworks (LDFs) as they are now called. It sets out a step by step approach to monitoring and producing annual monitoring reports.

This new guidance will help local planning authorities check that their plans are delivering sustainable development and sustainable communities, and where not, trigger an appropriate response. Under the new planning system the ability to produce various local development documents, as opposed to one local plan document, allows authorities to respond quickly to new issues and changing priorities for sustainable development in their areas. Monitoring will play a critical part in identifying these.

To complement the recommended local output indicators in the LDF monitoring guide, we are also publishing today revised core indicators for regional planning. These update those in planning policy statement 11 and in an earlier guide to monitoring regional planning guidance. These are closely aligned with the core indicators for LDFs. They will help ensure a consistent and cost-effective approach to monitoring implementation of key national objectives and targets at the regional and local levels.

Copies of both of these documents will be available in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's planning website: http://www.planning.odpm.gov.uk

I have today published the Government's new "Strategic Framework for the Sustainable Control of Bovine Tuberculosis in Great Britain". Through the Framework we aim to bring about a Sustainable improvement in control of bovine tuberculosis over the next ten years. Copies of the framework are available in the Libraries of both Houses.

I have today published "Charting Progress—An Integrated Assessment of the State of UK Seas".

Charting Progress is the first holistic assessment of the state of UK seas, and a step towards an ecosystem approach to management. The Government set out a vision of clean, safe healthy, productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas with the marine stewardship report "Safeguarding our Seas" published in 2002. Charting Progress brings together the national scientific monitoring data assembled by over 60 organisations, to assess how far we are from achieving that vision. It is a summary of the comprehensive sectoral and regional reports, which describe and evaluate what this data say about the current state of many components of the marine ecosystem and the main human impacts upon it. Charting Progress highlights where these states are acceptable, unacceptable and where there is room for improvement. The report also gives recommendations on how to improve our understanding of the marine environment.

This is a joint publication of the UK Government and the devolved Administrations. Copies have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. It will be available on the Department's website: www.defra.gov.uk and from the DEFRA publications office.

Today I am delighted to announce that Andrew Bridges' term of appointment as HM chief inspector of probation has been extended until 31 March 2007. Through their expertise and rigour of approach the probation inspectorate have provided a major contribution to the National Probation Service. I am confident that Andrew Bridges will play a key role in shaping the future of inspection policy for the national offender management service.

I am announcing today statistics relating to antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs).

An ASBO is a civil order which protects the community from behaviour that has caused or is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as the perpetrator.

ASBOs were introduced under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and have been available since April 1999.

ASBOs can be issued to anyone aged 10 years or over. They impose restrictions on the behaviour of individuals who have behaved in an anti-social way and protect communities from often longstanding and highly intimidating activity.

Breach of an ASBO is a criminal offence and can lead to custody. The maximum penalty for breach of an ASBO is five years imprisonment or a fine of up to £5,000 for an adult offender.

The Home Office is notified by all courts of ASBOs issued.

Data on the number of ASBOs issued is updated quarterly. New figures for the period up to September 2004 are now available. For the period between April 1999 and September 2004 the number of ASBOs issued, as reported to the Home Office, is 3826. Nearly 20 per cent. of these (730) were issued in the most recent quarter (July to September 2004).

Of those ASBOs issued, 50 per cent. were to adults and 45 per cent. to juveniles, 5 per cent. of ASBOs are age unknown.

Some 59 per cent. were orders on application, 41 per cent. are orders on conviction.

Data on breach is updated annually. Information on breach of orders is obtained from the court proceedings database. This data is matched with the data we hold on actual ASBOs issued. Until now data for the period from June 2000 to December 2002 which is based on 855 ASBOs issued during this period was available. However, data up to December 2003 is now available, based on 1892 ASBOs issued up to this period.

This data shows that 42 per cent. of all ASBOs were breached, compared to 36 per cent. for the period up to December 2002.

Of those persons who breached their ASBO on one or more occasions, 55 per cent. received immediate custody on the first or later occasion. The figure for young people is 46 per cent. receiving immediate custody.

The majority of those who receive custody for breach of an ASBO are persistent offenders. Of those entering custody, 31 per cent. were dealt with for breach of ASBO alone. Only 17 per cent. (30) juveniles received a custodial sentence for breach of ASBO alone, the remaining 83 per cent. were also sentenced for other offences.

I intend to make a similar statement to the House every quarter to provide an update on ASBO statistics.

I have placed with the House Libraries a briefing note containing information about ASBOs and the ASBOs statistics issued today.

The troubles have left their mark on the people of Northern Ireland and all those affected by the conflict. Almost 4,000 lives were lost, each one an individual loved and mourned by family and friends. And the human cost extends beyond these victims, to their families and friends, to all those who survived their ordeals, and to the wider community which struggles still to heal the divisions that were created and became entrenched.

The pain of loss is still keenly felt by those who lost loved ones. The Government cannot hope to change that. But there is a sense in which we in Northern Ireland need to come to terms with what has happened over the past 35 years: to tackle the legacy in a way that respects the suffering and loss that has been experienced; but which also allows the community as a whole to build a future that is not overshadowed by the events of the past.

Last spring, the Prime Minister said that he hoped that the Government could find a way to deal with Northern Ireland's past. Since then I have been reflecting on how we might begin this process. I have visited South Africa, to see first hand how a very different society has sought to address its own particular legacy. I have talked privately to experts and opinion formers to hear their views. And in parallel with that process the Minister for victims, Angela Smith, has been engaged in a detailed consultation with groups representing victims and survivors of the troubles on the future shape of services to meet their needs. I have drawn a number of lessons from these experiences.

My view remains that Northern Ireland needs its own tailored approach to dealing with the past. That is not to say that we cannot learn from the experiences of other societies that have faced a difficult and turbulent period in their recent history. But any process for dealing with Northern Ireland's past will require an approach that acknowledges and respects its unique features as well as its similarities to situations elsewhere.

I also believe that the scope and aims of any process need to be widely understood and agreed, and must be capable of commanding support and credibility right across the community. Government have the ultimate responsibility for ensuring that an appropriate mechanism is found for dealing with the past to the satisfaction of all sections of the community. But I recognise too that, for some, the Government's role in past events is itself seen as an issue; and it is hard for some sections of the community to see us as a genuinely neutral party. Neither does the Government have a monopoly on wisdom, and I recognise the major contribution that many practitioners and other bodies are already making in this field.

These considerations have led me to conclude that any process for dealing with the past in Northern Ireland cannot be designed in isolation, or imposed by Government. There will need to be broadly-based consultation that allows individuals and groups across the community to put their views on what form any process might take. And that consultation process itself will need broad cross-community support if the ideas it generates are to be constructively received.

In the light of recent events, I am clear that now is not the right moment to launch such a broadly-based consultation process. And I think that we need to be realistic about what can be achieved in advance of a political settlement. But that is not to say that nothing can be done or that political considerations should forever stand in the way of meaningful progress. There are important steps that the Government can take now to address issues that are at the heart of how we can all deal with Northern Ireland's difficult legacy.

I am therefore announcing today that the Government intend to put in place a new victims and survivors commissioner. I believe that this is necessary both to ensure a real focus on the needs of victims and survivors of the troubles in Northern Ireland and to ensure that their voices continue to be heard and respected. So I am publishing alongside this announcement a consultation paper on the future of victims and survivors services for those victims, which includes the Government's initial proposals for the commissioner's detailed remit. The document sets out proposals for a comprehensive approach to the provision of services, with the commissioner playing a pivotal role in ensuring effective service delivery and in promoting the interests of all those who have suffered as a result of Northern Ireland's troubled past. One of the commissioner's responsibilities will be to take forward the establishment of the victims and survivors forum envisaged in the joint declaration to represent their views in a structured way. That consultation will continue until the end of June this year.

For many victims and survivors, the possibility of coming to terms with what has happened in the past is made more remote because there remain significant unanswered questions, for example about the fate of their loved ones. For many families, the difficulty of not knowing certain details surrounding their loved one's death continues to be a significant issue many years on. The Government recognise that there is a need to address in a systematic way all of the unresolved deaths in Northern Ireland's recent troubled past. As I announced last September, I have been in discussions with the chief constable about how the groundbreaking work of the serious crime review team (SCRT) within the Police Service of Northern Ireland might be expanded to help meet this need. I hope that both we and the PSNI will soon be in a position to say more about the next steps on this.

We need to consider carefully and collectively how best to deal sensitively with the needs and expectations of all sections of the community in dealing with the legacy of the past. The creation of a victims and survivors commissioner is intended as a major contribution to that work. But it does not mark the end either of the process or the Government's contribution to it.