On 28 October I published the Ministry of Defence's Annual Report And Accounts 2004–05. It combines the Department's Annual Performance Report and Departmental Resource Accounts in a single document that provides a comprehensive overview of the MOD's financial and non-financial performance. For the second successive year the Comptroller and Auditor General has approved the accounts without qualification.

The report shows that once again the Armed Forces and the Ministry of Defence delivered what they were required and resourced to do during a busy and challenging year. It reflects the broad and diverse range of operations and tasks undertaken during the year, and the Armed Forces and Ministry of Defence's continuing vision of being a force for good in the world. It also details the sizeable progress the Ministry of Defence has made towards achieving the efficiency targets set by Her Majesty's Treasury in the 2002 and 2004 Spending Reviews, and the considerable progress already made in delivering the capabilities and reformed force structure set out in the July 2004 Command Paper "Delivering Security in a Changing World: Future Capabilities".

Copies of the annual report and accounts have been placed in the Library of the House. It is also available online from the Department's internet site at www.mod.uk.

On 19 May 2004, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister published a consultation paper asking for views on options for the principles to be used in amending the 2003–04 Local Government Finance Report and the 2004–05 Local Government Finance Report in the light of revised population statistics. This consultation exercise closed on 10 August 2004.

After consideration of the views expressed by local authorities in consultation, we decided to postpone the issuing of the Amending Report for 2004–05 until after the mid-2004 population estimates had been published to ensure that all possible revisions to the data used in the 2004–05 settlement were included. This decision was announced on 18 November 2004.

Due to the postponement of the 2004–05 Amending Report, an Amending Report for 2005–06 will now also be required, and we are now publishing full details of our proposals for the 2004–05 and 2005–06 Amending Reports. Copies of all related documents have been placed in the Vote Office and the Library of the House. They are also available on the ODPM website at: www.local.odpm.gov.uk/finance/0607/grant.htm.

This announcement launches a period of consultation on the Amending Reports for 2004–05 and 2005–06. The consultation will close on the same date as the forthcoming consultation on proposals for the 2006–07 local government finance settlement, the date for which will be announced in due course. This will allow local authorities some additional time to consider the effects of the Amending Reports in their budgeting proposals.

I attended and chaired the meeting of the Environment Council in Luxembourg on 17 October 2005. I was accompanied by the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment, Elliot Morley, in the UK seat.

The agenda consisted of three substantive items: policy debates on the REACH chemicals legislation and on better regulation, and agreement of conclusions on climate change.

On the REACH chemicals dossier, Ministers were invited to comment on a compromise text prepared by the UK presidency. There was widespread support for the balance struck in the text between achieving a high level of protection for human health and the environment, and limiting the impacts on industry, and several Ministers stressed their view that this balance should not be changed in the final compromise. Environment Ministers, and also the Commission, strongly supported the UK Presidency's aim of reaching political agreement on REACH at the November Competitiveness Council. Ministers' views were also sought on two specific issues within the dossier, in order to inform the continuing negotiation. The Council was fairly evenly split on the question of whether substances in articles should be subject to a separate, specific regime. The final question was o n the notification of substances of very high concern, where the Presidency approach was widely supported although a number of Member States thought there was scope for an exemption where exposure of humans and the environment to such substances could be excluded.

Council adopted a set of conclusions on climate change. The conclusions underlined the EU's commitment to delivering on its Kyoto Protocol targets and its financial commitments on climate change, and agreed our approach for the forthcoming COP11-COP/MOP1 in Montreal. We looked forward to the adoption of the Marrakech accords, and expressed our wish to obtain agreement on a process for beginning negotiations at Montreal on a post-2012 framework.

Also in relation to climate change, we heard a point from Poland under Other Business that suggested some issues for review in relation to the EU's emissions trading scheme.

At lunch we were joined by-the Chair of the European Parliament's Environment Committee, Karl-Heinz Florenz, and began our discussion of "Better Regulation", which was continued in a formal Council debate after lunch. There was strong support within the Council for the view that better regulation tools, and in particular impact assessments, could help in delivering better environmental outcomes in the most effective way. It helps to provide a mechanism for the integration of environmental considerations into all Community policies, as the Treaties require. A number of delegations noted the importance of considering the costs of inaction in evaluating the options, and there was widespread agreement that impact assessment must assist in political decision-making, not replace or delay it.

A relatively short list of AOB points included, in addition to the emissions trading item above, information from the Commission on its communication on tackling the climate change impacts of aviation emissions, and on progress on its proposal for a review of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy. Spain and Portugal reported on the 5th meeting of the Ibero-American Forum of Environment Ministers, and the Netherlands raised the issue of the need for adequate funding for environmental matters in the 7th Research Framework Programme and the Competitiveness and Innovation Programme.

Denmark requested an urgent future discussion on the potential benefits of, and the need for further EU funded research on, genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Luxembourg submitted a paper calling for a discussion focused on the need for change to the EU's approvals regime for GMOs. The Commission suggested that a full debate would be best timed after a WTO hearing on GMOs expected early next year. The Presidency concluded that a significant number of delegations wanted a debate, and it was agreed that the Commission would produce a short paper as the basis for a short, initial discussion at the 2 December Environment Council.

In my oral statement to the House on Wednesday 26 October I said that the Chief Veterinary Officer and I had ordered a general review of our quarantine arrangements and procedures to be undertaken. I am pleased to announce today that Professor Nigel Dimmock, Emeritus Professor of Virology at Warwick University has agreed to chair the review.

The terms of reference for the review are:

to review avian quarantine arrangements and procedures for captive birds; and

to make recommendations on any changes needed to policies or procedures, including guidance, to improve biosecurity, compliance with relevant legislation and clarity of accountabilities

The review will be led by Professor Dimmock and the membership will be drawn from independent experts in a range of fields including virology, logistics, veterinary science and animal behaviour. The review team will examine the current arrangements for the quarantine of captive birds; they will be able to talk to practitioners and experts in the field as well as examining existing guidance and procedures. They may also want to visit quarantine premises.

Debby Reynolds, the Chief Vet, and I have asked Professor Dimmock to report his findings as speedily as possible. We hope to receive his report, which we will publish, within around one month.

I am most grateful to Professor Dimmock for taking on this important task. The advice of his expert review team will enable us to ensure that our avian quarantine arrangements are as up to date and effective as they can be in the face of the significant challenges we face from the rapid worldwide spread of highly pathogenic zoonotic disease.

On 26 October, President Mahmud Ahmadinejad of Iran addressed a conference in Tehran on "A World Without Zionism". In his speech, he is reported to have called for "Israel to be wiped from the map", and said that "the Islamic world will not let its historic enemy live in its heartland", "the new wave of (attacks) in Palestine . . . will erase this stigma from the Islamic world" and that "anybody who recognises Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury".

As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in his press conference at the European Council at Hampton Court on 27 October, these sentiments are completely unacceptable. I welcome the clear condemnation by the United Nations Security Council on 28 October and the statement by the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, expressing his dismay. They have spoken for the world. Israel is a long-standing member of the United Nations with the same rights and obligations as every other. Under the United Nations Charter, Iran, like other members of the organisation, has undertaken to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.

Mr Annan has also said he intends to place at the top of his agenda when he visits Iran in the next few weeks the Middle East Peace Process and the right of all states in the area to live in peace within secure and recognised boundaries free from threats or acts offered. I welcome that.

At the informal summit of European Union Heads of Government at Hampton Court on 27 October, the Presidency issued the following statement:

"EU leaders meeting at Hampton Court today condemned in the strongest terms the comments in respect of the State of Israel attributed to President Ahmedinejad of Iran. Calls for violence, and for the destruction of any state, are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community.

Such comments will cause concern about Iran's role in the region, and its future intentions. The fact that these comments were made on the same day as a horrific attack on Israeli civilians should reinforce the lesson that incitement to violence, and the terrorism that it breeds, are despicable and unacceptable acts. For its part, the EU remains committed to a solution to the Arab-Israeli dispute based on the principle of two states living side-by-side in peace and security. It urges all parties in the region to do their utmost to bring that vision to fulfilment".

In addition, on 27 October, the Foreign Office summoned the Iranian Chargé d'Affaires in London on behalf of the European Union to protest at the remarks. Many of our European partners and other countries have done likewise.

We welcome too the international community's forthright condemnation, and their reaffirmation of the right of Israel to exist. We welcome particularly the statements by officials of the Palestinian Authority and other governments in the region.

We remain profoundly concerned at Iran's links to groups trying to undermine peace in the Middle East through violence, including Palestinian Islamic Jihad which claimed responsibility for the horrific attack at Hadera in Israel on 26 October. The EU has said that Iran's policies towards the Middle East Peace Process and terrorism are among the factors it will consider when formulating its policy towards Iran.

President Ahmadinejad's remarks also underline the imperative for Iran to take steps to address international concerns about the intentions of its nuclear programme, and to provide objective guarantees that that programme is for solely peaceful purposes. We call on Iran to meet urgently and in full the requests of the International Atomic Energy Agency's Board of Governors, to suspend fully all of its uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, and return to talks with the E3/EU on the basis of the Paris Agreement.

The Canadian Minister of Health, Ujjal Dosanjh, convened an international meeting of Ministers of Health in Ottawa on 24–25 October to discuss global pandemic influenza readiness. I attended for the United Kingdom.

There were Health Ministers and delegates from 30 countries covering all parts of the world.

There was participation at the highest level from a number of UN and other international agencies dealing with various sectoral aspects of preparing for pandemic flu, including the World Health Organisation (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), World Bank, and the recently appointed UN Coordinator for pandemic influenza. The European Commission was also represented.

The purpose of the meeting was to raise the political priority attached to international collaboration in preparing for a human influenza pandemic, to stress the need for transparency between countries and institutions, and to give full support to the leading role of multilateral institutions.

Four themes were discussed:

The need for inter-sectoral collaboration on animal and human health issues;

Improving surveillance and capacity-building;

Vaccine and anti-viral development, supply and access;

Risk communication.

A communiqué was agreed. A copy has been placed in the Library. It sets out in more detail the priority areas agreed on for further action, and lists some key current and forthcoming activities round the world. A list of all participating Ministers is attached to the communiqué.

The main conclusions were:

There is a need to distinguish between avian flu (birds), seasonal flu and pandemic flu;

A call for increased research on avian influenza viruses, including their ability to spread from animals to humans;

There is a need to increase capacity for early detection, diagnosis and response, and for exchange of information between the agriculture and health sectors at the local, national and international levels;

The need for expansion and integration of the network of relevant WHO collaborating centres and FAO-OIE reference laboratories, for the rapid identification of virus strains;

The need to develop bio-security guidelines for the poultry sector to help farming communities ensure appropriate animal and public health standards for the raising, handling and transporting of potentially flu-bearing animals;

The need to develop effective partnerships with media and other key stakeholders for the exchange and dissemination of information.

Ministers recognised the need to build capacity and plan in all countries, facilitated by appropriate national and international investments and resource sharing. But all stressed the need to work through and with multi-lateral organisations. In particular, they welcomed the upcoming WHO/FAO/World Bank meeting on avian and pandemic influenza in Geneva from 7–9 November, where many of the issues they managed to highlight in a relatively short meeting will be looked at further.

The meeting was successful in raising political awareness and commitment across all WHO regions of the need both for avian influenza control measures as well as the need to strengthen preparedness for pandemic influenza in humans.

Ministers noted a number of activities already ongoing or planned in regions around the world, and some additional activities were proposed, including a meeting next year of Regulatory Authorities to address common regulatory challenges to expedite vaccine registration and availability.

I have today placed in the Library a copy of the draft Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2004–05 (Amending Report 2005–06) and the draft Police Grant Report (England & Wales) 2005–06 (Amending Report 2005–06). Last year we laid before the House an Amending Report for 2003–04 to take account of changes to Office of National Statistics (ONS) population data. I also announced that there would be a further Amending Report for 2004–05 this year that would similarly take account of changes to ONS population data. The purpose of the 2005–06 Amending Report is to take account of adjustments to pensions' projections for Derbyshire and Lancashire used to determine 2005–06 pension allocations.

The consultation period on the proposed Amending Reports will end on the same date as the consultation on proposals for the 2006–07 police and local government finance settlements to be put before Parliament later this year. This will allow local police authorities some additional time to consider the effects of the Amending Report in their budgeting proposals. My hon. Friend, the Minister for Local Government, will make a statement in due course about the Government's proposals for Local Government Finance in 2006–07. Authorities may wish to take this into account in considering their response to this consultation.

Notes:

1. Rounded to the nearest £100,000. Grant as calculated under the Local Government Finance Report (England) and Local Government Finance Report (Wales). This includes the Metropolitan Police special payment, and the effects of floors and ceilings.

2. RSG figures for the City are allocated to the Common Council of the City of London as a whole in respect of all its functions.

3. Welsh figures are provisional. Allocation figures are inclusive of floor payments for Dyfed-Powys, Gwent, North Wales and South Wales.

Notes:

1. Rounded to the nearest £100,000. Grant as calculated under the Local Government Finance Report (England) and Local Government Finance Report (Wales). This includes the Metropolitan Police special payment, and the effects of floors and ceilings.

2. RSG figures for the City are allocated to the Common Council of the City of London as a whole in respect of all its functions.

3. Welsh figures are provisional. Allocation figures are inclusive of floor payments for Dyfed-Powys, Gwent, North Wales and South Wales.

The purpose of the Informal Meeting of EU Heads of State or Government on 27 October was to set a clear direction on how Europe responds to the challenge of globalisation. There is a strong sense in the European Union that we need to reconnect Europe with the concerns of its citizens and a strong feeling among the leaders of the EU that we have to get Europe moving in the right direction.

The European Commission produced a paper for the meeting—European Values in the Globalised World—that sets out very clearly: the challenge facing Europe; what Member States should do in response; and, what might most effectively be done at European level. There was broad agreement to both the analysis in the paper and its ideas on the way forward.

The consensus was that while Europe sometimes needs to do more and sometimes needs to do less, in each case it needs to do it better.

There was strong support for the Commission proposals to reduce the amount of regulation and to ensure that future regulation does not damage the competitiveness of the European economy.

We also discussed the Commission's proposal for a globalisation adjustment fund. This is not about bailing-out failing firms or standing in the way of globalisation, but about helping those individuals affected by change to retrain and to acquire new skills. The Commission will now develop a full proposal on this.

EU leaders also agreed further work in some key areas for Europe's future competitiveness, economic prosperity and security. The Commission, the UK Presidency and the incoming Austrian Presidency will decide how to take work forward in the areas of:

Research and Development: We need to encourage greater business and industrialinvestment in areas such as nanotechnology, biotechnology, and Pharmaceuticals so that Europecan have world-beating companies in the technologies of the future. And we need to look atpossible new ways of supporting innovation, for example through the venture capital market orexploring the scope for increased European Investment Bank funding.

Universities: We need to find ways of raising the level of our universities, in particular by developing stronger links between universities and business.

Addressing the demographic challenge: We need to share practical solutions for family-friendly policies, better child care, and work life balance provisions. We also need to tackle barriers to the greater participation of older workers in the labour market.

Energy: The Commission paper makes clear that global demand is increasing while supply remains tight. We need to: diversify the sources of our energy; develop a properly integrated European Grid and a genuinely open energy market; ensure a coherent and operational approach to the EU's relationship with major energy suppliers, for example Russia and OPEC; and, put energy efficiency and clean technologies at the heart of our agenda.

We also agreed that the Commission, building on the Hague Programme, should look at further work on illegal immigration, crime and security. Taking account of recent Spanish and French ideas on tackling illegal immigration, we need to work more effectively in partnership with source and transit countries, particularly Sub-Saharan and North Africa. We shall: hold an EU-African Ministerial conference on migration issues; strengthen our border controls, including through the use of latest technology, for example biometrics; accelerate plans for a rapid reaction capability of immigration officers; and, make sure that EU funding and development aid are more strategically targeted.

On crime and security, we must work more effectively with countries outside the EU on Justice and Home Affairs issues, such as terrorism and human and drug trafficking. We shall develop an EU counter-terrorism strategy focused on: preventing radicalisation; protecting our infrastructure; and, ensuring better co-operation and exchange of information so that our law enforcement can effectively pursue terrorists and respond to attacks.

In these areas there will be an interim report to the December European Council, and final reports during the Austrian Presidency in the first half of next year.

Javier Solana, High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and Secretary-General of the Council of the European Union, working with the Presidency, will take forward work on the CFSP aspects of defence and security. We shall look to improve our capabilities by: increasing levels of research spending; exploiting opportunities for research collaboration; tackling capability gaps (air to air refuelling, heavy lift); and, collaborating as partners on training. We shall ensure that our crisis management structures can meet new demands on them including responding to natural disasters. We shall look to increase CFSP funding. We shall bring forward a comprehensive EU strategy for Africa in December.

As Presidency, the Government also made clear that agreeing a broad direction for Europe's economic development, and some priorities for action at a Community level, would help to set the context for agreeing the next financial perspective for Europe's budget from 2007 to 2013. We shall try to reach agreement on this at the December European Council.

Finally, EU Leaders agreed three statements at the meeting:

Iran: We condemned in the strongest terms the comments in respect of the State of Israel attributed to President Ahmadinejad of Iran. Calls for violence, and for the destruction of any State, are manifestly inconsistent with any claim to be a mature and responsible member of the international community, and raise serious concerns about Iran's role in the region and its future intentions.

Syria: We welcomed the report of the UN International Investigation Commission under Judge Detlev Mehlis and expressed our full support for the UN Security Council's determination to see justice done in this case.

South Asian Earthquake: We expressed our sympathy and solidarity for all those affected by the South Asian earthquake, and pledged to do all that we can to help with this on-going tragedy as winter approaches.

I have placed copies of the Commission paper and the statements in the Libraries of both Houses.

I announced in July that because of the very substantial increase in the estimated cost of the proposed Stonehenge tunnel there would be a detailed review of the options to ease congestion on the A303 and improve the setting around Stonehenge.

I am announcing today the terms of reference and working arrangements for a review of the options. A copy of the terms of reference has been placed in the Library of the House.

There will be an opportunity for everyone with an interest in this important issue to contribute to the review process with a full public consultation beginning next January.

The review will carefully assess a number of options together with the results of the public consultation exercise before making recommendations to Government early next summer.

I hope that it will then be possible to decide on an option in keeping with the special requirements of the location that is realistic, affordable and deliverable.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the BFI inspection report on Perth and Kinross Council today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05, Perth and Kinross Council administered some £24 million in housing benefits, about 11.6 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The council had made significant improvements in the time taken to process new claims from 71 days in the second quarter of 2004–05 to 48 days by the end of 2004–05. However, this was still within the bottom quartile of performance for all councils.

Delays were occurring at all stages of the claims process. These were most significant in registering claims, identifying the need for further information and referring appropriate cases to the Rent Officer within statutory time limits.

Inaccurate performance was being reported against the Statutory Performance Indicator for the speed of processing changes of circumstances. The council was reporting an average of eight days to process a change yet the findings from a sample of cases showed that it was taking an average of 26.5 days.

Quality issues were identified in 30 per cent. of the cases sampled. Benefit had been paid on incomplete claim forms, incorrect dates had been used resulting in underpayment of benefit, and requests for backdating had been overlooked.

Inadequate control and poor monitoring of performance meant that members and senior officers had insufficient assurance about true levels of performance. This was compounded by a failure to implement audit recommendations.

Further assurance and internal security issues were found in the quality of verification, post opening arrangements, recruitment and vetting of benefits staff, procedural guidance and management checking.

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

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the BFI inspection report on Tandridge District Council was published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05, Tandridge District Council administered some £11 million in housing benefits, about 28 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. In June 2005, BFI carried out an inspection on Tandridge District Council's administration of overpayments.

Inspectors found there was a great deal of commitment and professionalism in the council's efforts to administer overpayments, together with a determination to improve performance. Good practices enabled the council to recover 16 per cent. of outstanding overpayment debts in the first quarter of 2005–06 alone.

However, the Council did not always use the correct effective date when calculating overpayments, and some claims could have been suspended more promptly to limit overpayments. Decision letters to benefit customers need to be improved, as they did not always indicate when overpayments were recoverable.

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 BFI inspection report on West Dunbartonshire Council was published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05, West Dunbartonshire Council administered some £41 million in housing benefits, about 22 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The council was selected for inspection of its counter-fraud arrangements because it reported to the Department that it had not achieved any sanctions between April 2003 and March 2005.

BFI found that the council's overall performance in countering fraud was poor. Although the council had an anti-fraud strategy the management structure of the benefits service did not create a strong counter-fraud environment or focus and there was a lack of management control over the counter-fraud work that was done.

West Dunbartonshire Council acknowledged its shortcomings in this area and is committed to improving performance, including developing an action plan to address the recommendations made in BFFs 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 BFI inspection report on Dacorum Borough Council was published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05, Dacorum Borough Council administered some £29.5 million in housing benefits, about 24.5 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure.

In 2004–05 the council was taking an average of 63 days to process new claims for housing benefit and council tax benefit and had significant backlogs of work. The introduction of a new benefits IT system in 2003 and the absence of expert full-time staff had caused problems and the backlogs and underlying reasons for them were never fully addressed. Effective recruitment since late 2004 has led to improvements and the average processing time for new claims was 42 days for the first quarter of 2005–06 and the backlogs are now cleared.

Good practices included adopting the Department's Verification Framework from April 2005, monitoring workflow, and prioritising changes of circumstances to reduce overpayments. However, processing changes of circumstances deteriorated from an average of 14 days in 2004–05 to 25 days in the first quarter of 2005–06.

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

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the BFI inspection report on Aberdeen City Council was published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05, Aberdeen City Council administered some £49 million in housing benefits, about 9 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The inspection covered Aberdeen City Council's administration of overpayments.

The council displayed many strengths including: an excellent quality checking regime; 90 per cent correct classification of overpayments; calculating overpayments correctly, within 14 days; correctly deciding whom overpayments should be recovered from; and a good audit trail.

More could be done to recover large debts from housing associations and improvements were needed in the control of overpayments work and the council's write-off procedures.

The council is working with BFI's Performance Development Team to improve its action plan to recover overpayments.

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.

The Pathways to Work model was launched in seven Jobcentre Plus Districts in October 2003 and April 2004. These Districts were:

Derbyshire

Renfrewshire, Inverclyde, Argyll and Bute

Bridgend, Rhondda, Cynon and Taff

East Lancashire

Somerset

Gateshead and South Tyneside

Essex

I would like to update colleagues on the very encouraging results from the pilots and announce implementation dates for the next phases of rollout.

We are seeing an 8 percentage point increase in the number of people coming off incapacity benefit within six months. This remains an early tentative but extremely encouraging finding. The evidence from the Pathways to Work pilots continues to far exceed our expectations. The number of people with a health condition or disability in the seven pilots who have found work now exceeds 17,000. Over 14,000 incapacity benefit customers have voluntarily accessed some element of the choices package to help them move back towards work. This includes 6,660 people who have attended the innovative Condition Management Programme, delivered through our successful partnership with the Department of Health, NHS and Primary Care Trusts.

Overall, more than 21 per cent. of all new customers who have a Work Focused Interview go on to access choices provision. Pathways to Work is making a real difference to the lives of people on incapacity benefit. We are undertaking a rigorous evaluation of the programme and that evaluation will inform our programme.

In the December 2004 Pre-Budget Report my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced the expansion of Pathways to Work to an additional 14 Jobcentre Plus districts. These Districts serve Local Authority areas with the highest concentrations of incapacity benefit customers. This will allow us to focus resources on those areas where Pathways to Work will have the greatest impact.

The expansion will be implemented in three phases from October 2005 through to October 2006.

I can therefore announce that the first phase of this expansion has today been launched in the following Jobcentre Plus Districts:

Cumbria

Glasgow

Lancashire West

Tees Valley.

The remaining Districts to follow next year are:

From 24 April 2006: Barnsley, Rotherham and Doncaster; City of Sunderland; County Durham; Lanarkshire and East Dunbartonshire; Liverpool and the Wirral; Greater Manchester Central; Swansea Bay and West Wales;

From 30 October 2006: Eastern Valleys; Greater Mersey; Staffordshire.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the BFI inspection report on Wansbeck District Council was published today and copies have been placed in the Library.

In 2004–05 Wansbeck District Council administered some £15 million in housing benefits, about 49.5 per cent. of its gross revenue expenditure. The council's overall performance in administering housing benefit and council tax benefit met minimum requirements.

Strengths included the speedy processing of new claims and good access for customers at six "Infopoints". Infopoints had been developed through consultation with local communities and were in locations that best supported local people. More training for Infopoint staff was needed to improve their knowledge of housing benefit and council tax benefit procedures so more enquiries could be answered at the first point of contact and ensure that claim forms had been correctly completed.

There were shortcomings in other key areas. The Verification Framework had not been fully introduced; there was little effective use of management information and limited management control of counter-fraud investigation activity. There were significant delays in the identification and processing of requests for reconsideration and appeals. These need to be better monitored and controlled.

Communication with landlords was ineffective. There was no liaison forum and landlords had not been informed of legislative changes.

Counter-fraud investigations had not always been carried out in accordance with legislation or Departmental guidance. An IT system has been used since April 2004 to help with the classification and recovery of overpayment debt but much old debt remains unrecovered.

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