The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, the Baroness Ashton of Upholland, has made the following written ministerial statement in the other place today.

"I am today announcing the outcome of the recent consultation on Civil and Family Court Fee Increases. The Consultation Paper was published on 23 September and the consultation closed on 18 November. Some 50 responses were received from the judiciary, legal profession and other stakeholder bodies.

After careful consideration of these, my right hon. and noble Friend, the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor has, with two exceptions, decided to proceed with all the fee increases proposed. Three Statutory Instruments containing the new civil, family and magistrates' court fees were laid before the House on 20 December 2005 and will take effect today. A report analysing the responses to consultation in detail will be published shortly.

The Lord Chancellor has decided not to introduce at this stage the proposed increase from £210 to £380 of the fee for an application for ancillary relief. Consultees expressed particularly strong concerns about the size and timing of this proposal. There were also concerns that a detrimental impact on access to justice in this context could also harm any children of the family. It will be necessary to look again at this fee following the planned review of the system of exemptions and remissions.

The Lord Chancellor has also decided not to pursue the proposed increases to the fees for issuing lower value monetary claims. Some consultees were concerned that these fees were disproportionately high relative to the amount claimed. These increases would also run counter to our longer-term strategy of achieving a better match between income and cost within the system.

The increases will raise about £10.6 million additional income in the current financial year, £43 million in a full year. They are necessary to ensure that Her Majesty's Courts Service can balance its budget and meet its cost recovery targets for this and future years. As the Consultation Paper made clear, the need to raise this income and the underlying fees policy were not in question; the issue was whether the particular package of increases proposed was most apt to meet the need.

A key objective of that package, with which the majority of those who commented agreed in principle, was to harmonise the fees, which shall enable more effective allocation of cases to the lowest appropriate level of judiciary. This in turn will benefit court users by enabling many cases to be dealt with more quickly.

The Government's policy remains that court fees should generally be set to reflect (on average) the cost of the service provided. Where they can afford to do so, it is right that litigants using the civil courts, rather than the taxpayer, should meet the cost. This ensures that the taxpayers' contribution to the cost of the civil and family courts is focused on funding the cost of the system of fee exemptions and remissions, in order to ensure that less well-off citizens are not denied access to justice. Setting fees generally at levels

lower than the full cost would mean that corporations and other wealthy litigants would benefit from taxpayers contribution—increasing cost and putting pressures on other budgets like legal aid.

The current increases form part of our longer term strategy for court fees. Its objectives are to ensure that the system:

meets the cost recovery targets set for civil, family and probate business (including, as appropriate, the cost of investment to modernise the courts);

protects access to justice through a well-targeted system of exemptions and remissions;

ensures that the taxpayers' contribution to the cost of the court system remains affordable;

so far as practicable, broadly matches the level of particular fees or sets of related fees to thecost of the particular processes and type of case concerned.

This year, we plan to undertake two major reviews as the next steps in delivering this strategy.

The first will be a fundamental review of the system of exemptions and remissions to ensure that it adequately protects access to justice and is operated consistently. This review will be overseen by a steering group of stakeholders, including representatives of the Civil and Family Justice Councils, which I will chair.

The second will review the structure of the system, that is the points at which fees are charged. The key objective will be to achieve a closer match of income and cost drivers, in particular through the introduction of trial fees. This is necessary both to make the system fairer as between different types of litigant, and make it easier to ensure that cost and funding remain in balance as workload changes. This review will also consider the various specific suggestions for changing the fee structure raised by respondents to consultation."

I am announcing today that a new order has been made under section 54 of the Reserve Forces Act 1996, so that reservists may continue to be called out into service to support operations in Iraq. The new order is effective until 3 January 2007 and replaces the previous order that expired earlier this month.

During the course of the last year, some 2,000 reservists were called out and accepted into service to support operations in Iraq. Details of the next tranche of reservists to be called out were announced to the House on 6 December 2005, Official Report, column 86WS. Some 700 reservists are involved and they will be deployed to theatre from May, where the majority will complete six month tours. We remain very appreciative of the continuing support and commitment shown by reservists, their employers and their families.

The arms embargo in Iraq continues under United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546 with exemptions for supplies of arms and related matériel required by the Government of Iraq (GOI) or the Multi-National Force (MNF) to serve the purposes of the resolution.

Following a thorough review of its procedures for processing export licence applications to Iraq, Her Majesty's Government will consider as exempt from the embargo exports to the GOI, the MNF, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Iraq, diplomatic missions in Iraq and entities contracted or subcontracted to GOI or the MNF. Export licence applications to these end users will not therefore require the approval of the Gol or MNF prior to approval of the application. For exports serving the purposes of UNSCR 1546 to entities other than these, Her Majesty's Government will seek the approval of the GOI or MNF to ensure that the proposed export is exempt from the embargo. Her Majesty's Government will keep the Government of Iraq informed on a quarterly basis of all exports of military equipment to Iraq.

My reply of 12 December 2005, Official Report, column 1652W to the question put by the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Sir Menzies Campbell) stated that officials had identified a few instances during the administration of President Clinton where the US authorities had requested permission to render a detainee through UK territory or airspace. I added that officials continued to search the records.

Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials have now completed a search of all relevant records back to May 1997. This search has turned up one further case, also in 1998; the Government declined a US request to refuel a flight carrying two detainees in route to the US.

I have placed in the Library of the House a copy of the "Respect Action Plan", which is launched today.

The "Respect Action Plan" sets out the Government's intention to broaden the current approach to tackling antisocial behaviour through addressing disrespect in every walk of life. We intend to deepen the approach by tackling the causes of antisocial behaviour, intervening early where problems occur and the agenda goes further than before by empowering communities themselves to challenge disrespect and encourage positive behaviour.

Broadening our approach will be accomplished through measures which include addressing school discipline and attendance. The plan stresses the critical role of schools and parents in tackling disrespectful behaviour, persistent truancy and inadequate supervision of excluded children. We also want to ensure that young people are active and learn how to make a positive impact as individuals in our society. There is a strong emphasis on expanding the role of sport, constructive activities and volunteering as positive routes to nurture a culture of respect among young people.

The cross-Government drive to address problem families and support good parenting is at the heart of our strategy to build a code of respect for the 21st century. By deepening our approach, we intend to intervene in families in crisis and provide support and practical advice. The plan promises a major new programme of projects to work intensively with the most problematic families who can cause such distress within our communities

And we will take our approach to dealing with antisocial behaviour further by ensuring that respect is promoted across government and throughout our programmes, funding and inspection regimes. Neighbourhoods will be empowered to ensure that local services deal quickly and effectively with the disrespectful behaviour of a minority. Our aim is to bring speedy, visible and reparative justice through a raft of measures which extend the powers available to address low-level crime and antisocial behaviour.

The "Respect Action Plan" is available on the web at: www.respect.gov.uk

In accordance with article 677 of The Companies (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, copies of the Companies Registry Annual Report 2004 have been placed today in the Libraries of both Houses.

In accordance with Article 81 of The Credit Unions (Northern Ireland) Order 1985 and Section 100 of the Industrial and Provident Societies Act (Northern Ireland) 1969, copies of the Credit Unions Annual Report 2004 have been placed today in the Libraries of both Houses.

Ports in the United Kingdom play a vital role in supporting the national economy and contributing to sustainable development. The Government are committed to maintaining and enhancing that role through our broad approach to ports policy and through the decisions we take on individual ports applications. We aim to exercise our responsibility in respect of applications as promptly as possible, consistent with the need to consider all relevant factors and allow all interested parties sufficient opportunity to comment.

I can now report to the House that, as part of that process, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport my hon. Friend the Member for Halton (Derek Twigg) announced on 21 December that he was minded to approve the proposal from Hutchison Ports UK for a container port at Bathside Bay at Harwich, Essex. He noted, however, that there are some matters which require further clarification, including making sure that the right conditions are imposed on the development to secure the necessary highways improvements in good time to provide congestion relief. A similar letter, covering planning and listed building appeals related to the development, was issued by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister. The Government believe this expansion in deep-sea container port capacity is justified by the economic benefits it will bring regionally and nationally. But we understand that there should be controls imposed on the development, to provide new road and rail infrastructure so that congestion does not increase, to provide compensatory habitats for wildlife displaced by the scheme, and to reduce other environmental impacts such as noise, pollution and the visual impact.

My hon. Friend had already announced in July last year that he was minded to approve the proposal from P&O Ports for a new container port at London Gateway, near Thurrock in Essex. Working in conjunction with my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, who had announced in parallel that he was minded to approve the proposed adjoining logistics centre at London Gateway, we have invited representations regarding road access and other matters both on that proposal and now on Bathside Bay. We will consider any representations carefully before moving to final decisions.

My hon. Friend is also considering a separate proposal from Hutchison for providing further deep-sea container port capacity through the reconfiguration of the Felixstowe South site in Suffolk. He, together with my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, expects to make announcements on that shortly.

The ports industry is responding to demand for capacity in other traffic sectors as well. On 21 December my hon. Friend also made a final decision approving the application from Associated British Ports plc to construct a short-sea container terminal at Quay 2005 in Hull. After carefully considering the likely impacts on local residents, and balancing them against the wider economic benefits, the Government are satisfied that this project will overall bring significant benefits to the city of Hull and the region as a whole. The Government are also satisfied that the project's likely impacts on nature conservation sites will be adequately compensated for by the creation of replacement habitat in the Humber estuary.

Following my statement of 21 November in which I announced that the Government had decided to commission an independent, wide-ranging review of policing at airports, I am pleased to announce today, that I have appointed Stephen Boys Smith, a retired Home Office Director-General, to lead the review. I expect the review to be completed by late spring.

The review will aim to identify a sustainable approach to the policing of airports that takes account of the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders in protecting an airport and in particular addresses the need for funding arrangements that are objective and transparent. The review will compare the present method of policing airports with that of other modes of transport and will consider whether the principle of designation can be made to work. If it cannot, the review is asked to propose alternative options. The full terms of reference are:

to review the role of the police service at airports, using as a base-line the recommendations of Sir John Wheeler's 2002 review of airport security. The Review will take account of any other relevant reports and will consider how the airport manager, the police and other stakeholders at the airport can best work together, given their respective roles and responsibilities, including under the National Aviation Security Programme. Account will also be taken of the extent of any overlap in security activities at airports and the scope for efficiencies;

to compare the present approach to the policing of airports with that applied to other modes of transport to establish any differences or similarities in policing approaches, roles, responsibilities and accountabilities that may apply. This will include the current review into the BTP;

to develop a model—with options recognising that different airports may require different approaches—for the policing of airports;

to develop criteria upon which an objective assessment can be made as to whether an airport should be designated for policing purposes. Then to consider whether, on the basis of these criteria and taking account of voluntary multi-agency risk assessments (MATRA), the principle of the existing designation process can be made to work; and if not, to propose alternative options;

to consider options and mechanisms for funding policing at airports in the light of any findings or recommendations that emerge from the review, taking account of the resources committed separately to security by airport operators and others. The Review will take into account the economic impact of any recommendations that it makes;

to consider any requirement for changes in legislation.