The Government launched in August a consultation document on reform of public sector ombudsmen services in England.

The proposed reforms would remove some of the existing legislative constraints that prevent the main public sector ombudsmen—the parliamentary ombudsman, the health service ombudsman, and the local government ombudsman—from working collaboratively to provide a more efficient and streamlined service to the citizen.

The consultation period ends on Friday 18 November. Copies of the consultation document are available in the Libraries of both Houses and available electronically at www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety and ethics/parliamentary–ombudsman/ombudsmenreform.asp

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and Lord Chancellor has made the following written statement in the other place today:

"The Government will shortly introduce legislation to improve the administration of elections. This will be accompanied by the publication of the Government's response to the DCA policy discussion paper and the Electoral Commission's securing the vote report.

This legislation will aim to make progress on the Government's three core principles for elections:

access to voting for all;

highest possible turnout; and

lowest possible fraud.

These key issues—access, participation and integrity—are those on which the legitimacy of our representative democracy depends.

We need to strike a balance between security and access. The changes that the Government will propose to Parliament aim to enhance both. Our key objectives are to ensure that all who are entitled to vote are on the register and improve safeguards against fraud.

The changes we propose include:

introducing performance standards, to be set by the Electoral Commission in consultation with the Secretary of State, to promote best practice in electoral services;

moving back the last date for registration, enabling people to register to vote after an election has been called;

placing a new duty on registration officers to take all necessary steps to ensure comprehensive registers. Those steps include the following specific measures:

(a) Sending the canvass form more than once to any address;

(b) Making house to house inquires on more than one occasion;

(c) Making contact by such other means as the ERO thinks appropriate with persons who do not have an entry in a register;

(d) Inspecting any records held by any person which the ERO is permitted to inspect; and

(e) Providing training to persons under the direction or control of the ERO in connection with the carrying out of the duty;

giving returning officers a new power to promote elections and electoral registration;

enabling parents and those with caring responsibilities to take children into the polling stationwith them when they go to vote;

providing for pre-poll information to be sent to all electors including details about their vote;

allowing electors to register anonymously in certain circumstances, so that registration doesnot compromise the safety of the vulnerable;

lowering the age of candidacy from 21 to 18;

simplifying guidance for voters, and enabling this to be available in languages other than English for those who need it;

establishing a framework for returning officers to conduct reviews of polling places every fouryears to ensure they meet accessibility criteria;

establishing two new electoral fraud offences, for falsely applying for a postal or proxy vote and for supplying false information or failing to supply information to the electoral registration officer at any time;

providing for pilots of personal identifiers (e.g. signatures and dates of birth) at registration to test the security benefits that this could bring and measure the effect on the completeness of the register;

establishing a framework for the co-ordinated on-line record of electors (CORE) to improve the accuracy and integrity of electoral registers and support national access and future data sharing between registers;

revising the offence of undue influence, enabling the offence to be effective even where influence has not led to any action being taken;

improving security markings on ballots papers;

introducing a marked register of postal votes received, similar to that currently used for polling station voters;

introducing statutory secrecy warnings to accompany postal and proxy voting papers to deter anyone from unlawfully attempting to influence another person's vote;

requiring voters to sign for their ballot paper at the polling station to act as a deterrent to fraud;

allowing access to accredited observers at polling stations and at other stages of the electoral process, such as the count, to enhance the openness and integrity of the electoral system; and

simplifying and clarifying regulations for political parties, including by standardising the period in which election expenses can be incurred at four months.

To provide for more flexibility and transparency in the administration of elections we will:

enable administrators to correct clerical and administrative errors during the course of the election;

introduce simpler and more flexible funding arrangements for national elections; and

support the administration of postal votes by enabling automated production of postal vote documents, including by removing the counterfoil on ballot papers and replacing the stamping perforation with a pre-printed security mark.

We will also seek to address the concerns raised by the hon. Member Sir Patrick Cormack of South Staffordshire in relation to the death of an election candidate during the campaign period by reducing the time delay for setting a new date of poll. We also intend to respond to the issue of candidates standing in more than one constituency at the same election, which Sir Patrick raised in his speech on 6 July.

We also plan to introduce a package of secondary legislation echoing the principles I have set out above. These measures are based on existing primary legislation, and our aim is that they should be in place in time for the next local elections in May 2006, to improve public confidence in our electoral system.

A full announcement on the secondary legislation package will be made in due course. Specifically it will deal with questions around how and when voters can apply for a postal vote or a replacement, the process by which postal votes are returned to administrators and how postal votes are collected on polling day. It will also address the issue of standard polling hours for local elections. More detail on the individual proposals are included in the response to the DCA policy discussion paper and Securing the vote report, also published today.

These measures will be consolidated with regulations concerning access to and supply of the electoral register. Both sets of regulations will be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure. It is intended that they will be laid before Parliament in the near future so the debate can run alongside the Government's proposed legislation.

The legislation will be accompanied by the publication of the DCA paper Electoral Administration—legislative proposals resulting from consideration of the policy discussion paper published on 25 May 2005, including a response to the Electoral Commission's securing the vote report. This paper is also available on the DCA website: www.dca.gov.uklegistelectadmin.htm."

In my written ministerial statement on 13 July, Official Report, column 28WS, I apologised to those British civilians who were interned by the Japanese during the Second World War in the Far East and who were led by the incomplete terms of our initial announcement of the scheme in November 2000 to think that they would qualify for an ex-gratia payment. The apology was for the distress caused to those who claimed before the eligibility criteria were fully spelt out and who, in particular, would have qualified but for later clarification that "British" was to be defined by the birth-link criterion.

In my Statement I undertook to examine whether the apology should be expressed in a tangible form. I have, therefore, decided that a one-off payment of £500 should go to each of those individuals to whom the apology in my Statement of 13 July was addressed. I also intend to send a personal letter to each of those who will be compensated. We expect to establish eligibility and make payments for the majority of cases within six months.

I am pleased to be able to announce the location for the South-East fire and rescue control centre and put on record the locations for the other seven new control centres.

England's fire and rescue service control functions will be delivered through a resilient national network of nine new control centres, one for each of the English regions. The centres will be mutually supporting and will bring the best of the latest proven technology together into one system. This will increase resilience, operational performance and improve public safety.

The following developers and sites have been selected, following an EU procurement process, for the eight English regions excluding London, to build the fire and rescue service control centres for England.

London already has a regional control centre and is expected to form part of the national network. Exactly how this will be implemented is to be taken forward with the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority. The whole national network will be fully operational before the Olympics in 2012.

Further details are available on the FiReControl project website. http://www.firecontrol.odpm.gov.uk/.

In December last year I announced the Government's intention to establish a new executive agency with responsibility for the management of marine fisheries, to include the inspection and enforcement activities then discharged by my Department's Sea Fisheries Inspectorate, and other marine delivery functions carried out by DEFRA.

I am now pleased to announce that the new body was launched on 1 October and is called the Marine Fisheries Agency. The first chief executive of the agency is Nigel Gooding, who will now take forward the challenge of delivering high-quality, integrated marine fisheries management and environmental conservation services to the agency's many stakeholders. Those services will include the management of the fisheries licensing and quota regimes, the provision of grant aid to the industry and the enforcement of national and European regulations in England. It will also undertake similar services in Wales on behalf of the Welsh Assembly Government.

The creation of the Marine Fisheries Agency is an important milestone in the Government's drive for public service reform and in my own Department's internal change programme. My Department is committed to reducing the size of its policy core and to the delivery of its services through others.

Copies of the Agency's Framework Document, Corporate Plan and Key Targets are in the Libraries of both Houses.

In December 2003, I set out the Government's international priorities for the next five to 10 years and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's strategy for delivering them in a world of new challenges, opportunities and threats.

On the basis of that strategy and the outcome of the 2004 spending round I announced on 15 December 2004, Official Report, columns 137–40WS, changes to the overseas network, aimed at enhancing our effectiveness in representing British interests abroad, and helping to deliver an efficient service on behalf of the British taxpayer.

However, in the light of further reviews I have agreed to make the following small adjustments to our plans:

One subordinate post, Hamburg, scheduled to remain open with locally based staff, will now close and our interests will be covered from Berlin. Two subordinate posts, Munich and Miami, will now continue to be headed by a UK based member of staff rather than covered entirely by locally engaged staff as originally proposed. Other changes will go ahead before end 2006, as previously announced.

The overall picture on implementation of the changes announced in December is as follows:

In addition, I have agreed the following further changes to the network:

In Brazil, following a review of our commercial effort there, I have agreed that our Trade Offices in Belo Horizonte and Curitiba should be closed, but the existing Honorary Consuls will remain. Commercial services currently provided in Belo Horizonte and Curitiba will in future be delivered through our other posts in Brazil. In India we plan to upgrade our Business Information Centres in Pune and Chandigarh to British Trade Offices and cease to operate a Business Information Centre in Bhopal.

The full details of these additional changes are as follows:

We have no other plans to close or open any further sovereign posts but like any well-run organisation we will continue to move resources flexibly as priorities require in line with UK interests. I will inform the House of any further planned changes.

Assessments in Southern Africa have identified that over 10 million people are likely to face food shortages in the period up to April 2006 in Zimbabwe, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique, Lesotho and Swaziland. Both the UN Secretary General and the Executive Director of the World Food Programme have written to donor Governments about this.

The Scale of the Problem

Country assessments are carried out by national committees and are co-ordinated regionally by the Southern African Development Community (SADC). They consider whether households will be able to access their normal food requirements between harvests. Assessment reports can be found at the website of the Southern African Development Community: www.sadc.int. The figures include those with potential food shortages ranging from 1 per cent. to over 80 per cent. of their normal food requirements.

The breakdown by country is as follows:

Zimbabwe—The Zimbabwe Government have not yet published the national assessment but independent estimates range from 3 million to 5 million people facing food shortages over the coming months. This is as a result of erratic rains, HIV/AIDS and bad governance. The World Food Programme, with support from DFID, is presently providing food aid for 1 million vulnerable people, mainly children. Operations will grow as the numbers in need increase. In addition, the Government of Zimbabwe's forced clearance of unauthorised dwellings earlier this year, Operation Murambatsvina ("Clean Up"), displaced or destroyed the livelihoods of 700,000 people, making poverty and food shortages worse in both urban and rural areas. The Zimbabwe Government's own efforts to mitigate the suffering caused by their mass evictions have been very limited, and in some instances, the Government have obstructed the wider humanitarian effort, for example by refusing to accept the provision of tents and other temporary shelters for those without shelter. Despite these difficulties, a range of UN and non-governmental agencies are operating relief programmes reaching 40,000 affected households, including those affected by HIV and AIDS, with food, blankets, medical care and other essential items. It is a tragedy that humanitarian needs in Zimbabwe have been exacerbated by the disastrous policies of the Government, which have led to economic collapse and social and political crises.

Malawi—Up to 4.2 million people could face food shortages, though this number could rise to 4.6 million if price rise sharply. The Government and the World Food Programme have started a coordinated emergency programme targeting the 2.7 million most vulnerable people. A range of other safety nets are in place, such as food for work and cash for work programmes, and the Government have taken steps to increase the import of maize available for purchase through Government and commercial channels. A UN appeal for $88 million was launched in September covering food aid and distribution of seeds and fertiliser. $28 million has been contributed to the appeal, including $9 million (£5 million) from the UK Government.

Zambia—At least 1.2 million people in the Southern, Western and Eastern Provinces could face food shortages before the next harvest in February-March 2006. The Government are still considering whether an emergency appeal is needed. In the meantime, the World Food Programme and an NGO consortium are distributing food aid.

Mozambique—Up to 587,000 people could face food shortages, mostly in the south of the country. There is no emergency programme but the World Food Programme is distributing some food aid and the Government have established a range of safety nets, such as food for work programmes and free or subsidised seed distribution so that the poorest households have enough seeds to plant for next year.

Lesotho—About 440,000 people could face food shortages. These are virtually all in households that suffer from chronic food insecurity. The Government are trying to respond through safety nets, including through a recently introduced old age pension.

Swaziland—About 225,000 people could face food shortages in households that suffer from chronic food insecurity. As in Lesotho, other responses to chronic hunger, apart from food aid, are being encouraged, such as provision of seeds and fertiliser to poorer households.

What are the UK Government doing?

In response to this emerging crisis, the UK Government have already allocated this year over £57 million in humanitarian assistance for the region. Some of this has been channelled through UN agencies and some has gone through Governments or NGOs. The breakdown of our commitments so far this year is as follows:

Zimbabwe—£40 million covering relief programmes for up to 3 million people provided through non-government channels, including contributions to the World Food Programme, HIV/AIDS programmes and responses to those affected by Operation Murambatsvina.

Malawi—Over £15 million towards the Government's emergency food distribution, helping to purchase maize, options on additional maize, and seeds, support to the Government's logistics and early warning capacity and support to UNICEF's nutrition rehabilitation units. Government of Malawi planning for the emergency began in March with help from early pledges from the UK.

Zambia—£430,000 to the World Food Programme for food aid distribution to 3,280 households with at least one person enrolled in a medical treatment programme across the affected provinces, and £1 million to Oxfam for cash transfers to 14,350 households in Western Province. Together these will reach over 100,000 people.

Mozambique—£355,000 for cash for work programmes and provision of seeds to poor households.

Lesotho—£350,000 for distribution of seeds and fertilisers and small-scale livestock interventions.

Swaziland—£300,000 for distribution of seeds and fertilisers and other necessary help for vulnerable households.

Information systems for assessing and monitoring needs are improving in Southern Africa with support from DFID. The capacity of national Governments to respond to humanitarian needs remains limited though and it is essential that the international community reacts quickly when the assessments indicate that action is needed. I have urged EU member states to respond speedily and will follow up with them when we meet later this month. I have also remained in contact with the UN on the international community's response. My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Gareth Thomas) recently visited Malawi and Zambia to discuss the food shortages with the Governments and people on the ground in these countries, and I have had discussions with Mr James Morris, the Executive Director of the World Food Programme.

The Wider Challenge

While the position in each country is different, there are high levels of chronic hunger across the region which reflect not just the depth of poverty but also the shockingly high levels of HIV and AIDS across Southern Africa. We need to tackle emergency food needs effectively. But that in itself will not end chronic hunger. We are therefore also making greater efforts to work with Governments to develop and implement safety nets, such as regular grants of cash and/or food, that will protect the most vulnerable households that regularly need emergency help. These include the elderly, orphans and vulnerable children, the disabled and others that simply cannot find work.

Early warning has helped to ensure that governments and the international community work together to meet humanitarian needs in Southern Africa, but we will continue to monitor the position closely and be ready to take further action if necessary. In Zimbabwe, we will work closely with the UN and other donors to do all we can to address the increasing suffering of poor people there.

At the end of last year, I also called upon the international community to support the establishment in the UN of a large, central fund to speed up the response to humanitarian emergencies and to support wider reforms of the international system to improve its efficiency and effectiveness. Progress is being made, with widespread endorsement of our reform proposals being achieved at the UN Millennium Review Summit in September and detailed follow up work now underway. So far 6 countries have agreed to commit $150 million to this fund next year; the UK's contribution will be $70 million (£40 million). We are pressing hard to ensure further countries contribute in time to get the fund working in the New Year.

Over the past three months a major humanitarian relief operation has been underway in Niger in response to a food crisis affecting an estimated 3 million people, with the lives of up to 150,000 children at risk. The humanitarian operation is now working at full capacity and has helped to avert a major catastrophe. The UK has played an important part, being one of the first donors to respond when the United Nations and NGO relief agencies alerted the world to the severity of the crisis. Intense media interest in the events in Niger subsequently encouraged other donors to join the effort, and an appeal by the Disasters and Emergency Committee, representing British relief and development NGOs, prompted a magnificent response from the British public.

Throughout this crisis, the UK Government have been one of the three largest donors, with a total contribution of £3.9 million (including modest support to targeted humanitarian aid in the neighbouring states of Mali and Burkina Faso). Combined with the donations made by the public, Britain has made the biggest total contribution to the Niger relief effort.

Although the immediate causes of Niger's problems were a poor harvest at the end of last year's growing season, and the additional stresses caused by a locust invasion in the Sahel which did significant damage to grazing lands, the crisis itself had much more complex roots and deeper causes. Niger lies at the bottom of the UN Human Development Index as the world's poorest country. A large proportion of the population is chronically poor and therefore highly vulnerable to even quite modest shortfalls of food and other necessities. Last year's harvest was in fact only 7 per cent. below the average of recent years and a year ago there were good reasons to believe that a crisis could be avoided altogether. A combination of factors—including garbled information from early warning systems, inappropriate plans for dealing with the problem, unusually high food prices, and a failure of contingency planning and disaster preparedness—tipped the balance and plunged Niger into crisis.

The seriousness of this became evident as the results of NGO nutritional surveys became available in April and May. This was followed by an emergency appeal by the UN in mid May. DFID had been following events in the Sahel region as a whole for many months. In August last year we gave £1.5 million to the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation to help tackle the locust invasion. Our humanitarian advisers immediately contacted the UN when it launched its emergency appeal in May, and in June we sent an expert to Niger to assess the situation on the ground. This was followed by an immediate contribution of £0.5 million to support the relief efforts of the World Food Programme (WFP), followed by a further £2.7 million to the UN and to NGO partners soon afterwards. The bulk of our support was provided ahead of the coverage that drew world attention to the crisis and prompted further donations from both Governments and the public.

In the early stages of the crisis we funded two emergency airlifts, by Save the Children and UNICEF, to speed up the delivery of life-saving supplies for child nutritional therapy. Since then, as a result of our funding, the WFP has been able to deliver general food rations to 1.6 million people. OXFAM has provided much needed cash vouchers to 131,000 people. The Save the Children Fund has treated 13,000 malnourished children and delivered medicines and supplies to 12 health centres. Islamic Relief has delivered medicines and supplies to 30 health centres. Concern has treated 6,000 malnourished children, and the World Health Organisation has helped contain a cholera outbreak that threatened to make the crisis even worse.

To date around 2.8 million people have received food aid and more than 90,000 children have received life-saving nutritional therapy. Thanks to good rains this year, food is now being harvested and a bumper crop is expected. Nonetheless, the relief effort will continue in the months ahead, with priority being given to the needs of malnourished children and to those who will not benefit fully or adequately from the new harvest. Much work also remains to be done to help those who have suffered during the crisis to recover, and in the longer term to put in place welfare safety nets and other measures to help the most impoverished people of Niger avoid further crises of this kind.

Although the international relief effort has succeeded in heading off a major disaster, it was too slow in getting underway. An earlier, better-planned response may well have avoided a major crisis. What has happened in Niger is symptomatic of fundamental weaknesses in the international system for humanitarian response for which urgent remedies are required.

At the end of last year I called upon the international community to support the establishment in the UN of a large, central fund to speed up the response to humanitarian emergencies and to support wider reforms of the international system to improve its efficiency and effectiveness. If this package of reforms had been in place sooner, the crisis in Niger may have been averted. Progress is now being made in changing the system, with widespread endorsement of our reform proposals being achieved at the recent UN Millennium Review Summit and detailed follow up work now under way. So far six countries have agreed to commit $150 million to this fund next year; the UK's contribution will be $70 million (£40 million). We are pressing hard to ensure that further countries contribute in time to get the fund working in the New Year.

British Transport Police carries out an important role in maintaining the security of the railways and in deterring potential terrorist activity. The excellent work that it does was shown in the events in London on 7 and 21 July.

Following discussion with the BTP Chief Constable, and in the context of the current review of the 43 local police forces being undertaken by the Home Secretary, I will be reviewing the role of the British Transport Police. My review will examine the functions of the British Transport Police and whether some or all of these are best carried out by a national force, regional forces or, indeed, by the industry itself. This review is aimed at ensuring that policing of the railways is fit for the 21st century.

The Government remain committed to the principle that the costs of policing the railway should remain largely funded by the industry itself.

I will be placing the terms of reference for this review in the House Library shortly.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) inspection report on East Dunbartonshire council was published on 11 August 2005 and is available in the Library.

In 2004–05, East Dunbartonshire council administered some £48 million in housing benefits, about 31 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The council was selected for a focused inspection of claims administration because it reported that it was taking 92 days to process new claims for the quarter ending 30 September 2004.

BFI found that the council did not meet any of the performance standards relating to claims processing, but the sample of cases that BFI examined showed that it was processing new claims in an average of 42 days against the standard of 36. The figure of 92 days that the council had been reporting was wrong because the council had made errors in processing and data input, leading to overstatements of the time taken to process claims. Existing arrangements to monitor the delivery of targets and plans do not provide sufficient assurance about the levels of performance actually being achieved.

The council's claim form did not meet the requirements of the Department's HCTB1 claim form. The council had adopted the Department's Verification Framework but to comply with the framework improvements need to be made.

BFI noted a clear commitment to improve performance. The council plans to implement all of the recommendations made in the BFI report.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is considering the report and may ask the council for its proposals in response to BFI's findings.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) inspection report on Caerphilly county borough council was published on 11 August 2005 and is available in the Library.

In 2003–04, Caerphilly county borough council administered some £41 million in housing benefits, about 18 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. Overall, the inspection found that the council was performing to a fair standard in housing benefit and council tax benefit administration and counter-fraud activities. While there were some strengths it did not meet any of the seven functional areas of performance standards. The council had not implemented some significant recommendations made in BFI's first inspection report published in November 2002 even though internal and external audit had repeated those recommendations.

Although the council was reporting times for its processing of new claims that put it in the top quartile, procedural errors meant that the council was paying claims before all the necessary evidence had been obtained from the customer.

The council recovered a high proportion of overpayments, but the findings showed procedural errors that meant that recoveries were being made from the wrong person and at the wrong rates. The council did not prioritise the recovery of fraud overpayments.

The council had secured 54 sanctions against fraudsters between April 2004 and February 2005 which is good progress.

To ensure it provides an effective and secure benefits service, the council must ensure that it implements the recommendations from this inspection.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is considering the report and may ask the council for its proposals in response to BFI's findings.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) announced its phase 13 programme of work on 5 September 2005.

Many local authority customers are let down by slow benefits services and some authorities do not seem to be tackling fraud rigorously. BFI will be undertaking seven inspections of local authorities taking longer than seven weeks on average to process housing benefits claims. The authorities are Braintree district council, Fenland district council, Isle of Anglesey county council, London Borough of Newham, London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Manchester city council, and Thurrock borough council.

It is important to deter fraudsters by applying sanctions, including prosecutions; therefore BFI will inspect 12 authorities that in comparison with their caseload have applied few sanctions, including successful prosecutions. The authorities are Bath and North East Somerset, Durham city council, East Lothian council, Ellesmere Port and Neston borough council, Hastings borough council, Highland council, Leicester city council, Neath and Port Talbot county borough council, Newport city council, North East Derbyshire district council, Rother district council and Woking borough council.

St. Edmundsbury borough council, which did not return performance data to the Department in 2004–05, will be inspected to determine their performance in claims cessing and customer service.

BFI is an independent unit within the Department for Work and Pensions that inspects and reports directly to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions on the standard of benefits administration and counter-fraud activity in local authorities and the Department itself.

On behalf my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI), inspection report on Uttlesford district council was published on 11 August 2005 and is available in the Library.

In 2004–05, Uttlesford district council administered some £10.7 million in housing benefits, about 33 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The council's commitment to combat fraud was commendable. Administrative penalties were recovered efficiently and all successful prosecutions were given publicity in order to deter potential fraudsters.

The council had, however, misinterpreted the rules governing the security against fraud and error (SAFE) scheme. This had resulted in a higher value of rewards being claimed than was due. Although the standard of interviews under caution was high and all relevant legislation was followed, BFI found that in the majority of cases where a formal caution had been administered a full admission of guilt had not been obtained from the customer. The anti-fraud team had no service plan and the only target that it worked towards was a monetary target for claimed SAFE rewards. BFI recommended that a broader range of targets covering quality and joint working should be introduced and that case reviews, management checks and the process for deciding which sanction to apply all needed to be formalised.

The council's commitment to learn and put things right was impressive and many issues that were identified during the inspection were corrected immediately.

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is considering the report and may ask the council for its proposals in response to BFI's findings.