The Cabinet Secretary and the First Civil Service Commissioner will tomorrow launch consultation on a new Civil Service Code. The Civil Service Code, which was introduced in 1996, sets out the duties and responsibilities of civil servants. Copies are available in the Library of the House.

The new Code is the result of work between the Government and the Civil Service Commissioners to ensure that the Code is relevant and accessible to all civil servants. The Code sets out the core values of the Civil Service and the standards of behaviour expected of all civil servants in their dealings with Ministers, the public, other organisations the Civil Service works with and its many customers.

In publishing the new Code for consultation, the Government wish to place on record its appreciation to the former First Civil Service Commissioner, Baroness Usha Prashar, for her contribution in taking forward work on the new Code.

Comments are invited on the new Code. The consultation period will run until Friday 21 April 2006.

Copies of the new Code will be placed in the Libraries of the House.

My noble Friend the Secretary of State has made the following written ministerial statement in the other place today:

"I am pleased to announce that Her Majesty The Queen has appointed Sir John Brigstocke KCB as the inaugural Judicial Appointments and Conduct Ombudsman. The appointment is for a period of five years in the first instance, and will expire in January 2011.

Sir John Brigstocke has a distinguished record of achievement in the Royal Navy, and I am sure his appointment will be widely welcomed."

The provision for the Government Indemnity Scheme is made by the National Heritage Act 1980. The scheme facilitates public access to loans of works of art and other objects for public display made to museums, galleries and other such institutions by private owners and non-national institutions. It does this by indemnifying lenders against loss or damage to objects they loan. Loans covered by the scheme must be for public benefit. The scheme also covers loans of such objects for study purposes within borrowing institutions where this would contribute materially to the public's understanding or appreciation of the object loaned. Examples of this are enhancing interpretation or explanation to the public of objects, or bringing into the public domain the conclusions of any study.

In the six month period ended 30 September 2005, a total of 854 undertakings were given to indemnify objects on loan to national and non-national institutions under section 16 by the relevant Departments. The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA), which manages the scheme on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, issued a total of 666 undertakings to national museums and 73 undertakings to non-national museums in England, the Scottish Executive Education Department issued two undertakings and the National Assembly for Wales issued one.

Finally, the Government Art Collection issued 112 in the same period.

The value of contingent liabilities in respect of undertakings given at any time under section 16 and which remained outstanding as at 30 September 2005 for national museums are £2,038,824,046 and are £1,286,220,079 for non-nationals in England. The value of section 16 contingent liabilities as at 30 September 2005 for the Scottish Executive Education Department are £22,035,000; £34,009,500 for the National Assembly for Wales, and £4,750,000 for the Government Art Collection.

The value of non-statutory undertakings given to Her Majesty in respect of loans from the Royal Collection and which remained outstanding as at 30 September 2005 are £198,160,725; £259,000 for non-national museums issued by the MLA, and £25,000 issued by the Government Art Collections.

The total value of loans out by national institutions as remained outstanding at 30 September 2005 is £378,260,895.

The limit on the contingent liabilities which may be incurred in relation to the Government Indemnity Scheme for non-national museums and galleries in England approved by the Treasury in May 2004 was £1,200,000,000. As a result of an increase in the number of temporary exhibitions put on by the non-national museums and galleries, and in the value of the objects included in such exhibitions it has proved necessary for this limit to be temporarily increased to £1,287,000,000 effective until May 2006. The Government Indemnity Scheme will be reviewed in 2006 to see if a permanent increase of the limits on the contingent liabilities which may be incurred under the scheme is justified.

On 5 December 2005, I informed the House that I had issued for consultation a provisional local government finance settlement for 2006–07 giving indicative grant increases for that year and for 2007–08. The consultation period closed on 11 January. I intend to lay before the House shortly the Local Government Finance Report (England) 2006–07 which will establish the amounts of revenue support grant and non-domestic rates to be paid to local authorities in 2006–07 and the basis of their distribution.

Today the Social Exclusion Unit in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is publishing a major report entitled "A Sure Start to Later Life: Ending Inequalities for Older People".

The report highlights:

that significant progress has been made in tackling social exclusion among older people. Pensioner poverty is down from 28 per cent. in 1996 to 20 per cent. in 2004. The numbers experiencing multiple disadvantage has dropped from 23 per cent. to 17 per cent. since 1997. But, there is a need to make further improvements for the most excluded;

there is a need for a concerted effort to the tackle social exclusion, disadvantage and deprivation facing some older people. As the population is ageing it is important to tackle exclusion now to avoid greater problems in the future; and

that we need to change the way we view older people. Poverty, decline and exclusion are not an inevitable part of ageing. We need to get services right so that all older people have the opportunities to participate in their local communities.

That tackling the exclusion facing older people requires:

A move from crisis management to prevention

Joining up services around users

Individual and community empowerment

The report sets out proposals for a more responsive model of services for older people that addresses these issues, and which builds on the approach of Sure Start in galvanising communities and reshaping children's services. The Sure Start to later life approach will use the same methods as the children's model to bring together services around older people, and to provide a single, accessible gateway to a wide range of services in the community. A pilot programme called "Link-Age Plus" will test out the Sure Start approach for older people.

The report contains 30 action points to be taken forward by Government Departments, which as a whole represent a comprehensive plan to tackle social exclusion among older people. The Implementation Team in the Social Exclusion Unit will monitor the progress made by the Departments on individual action points and will work to ensure that the overarching goals contained within the report are pursued across Government.

Copies of the report have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. Further copies can be downloaded from http://www.socialexclusion.gov.uk/page.asp?id=573

In July 2004 we announced that we were to fund an additional 170 training places for dentists. A Joint Implementation Group (JIG) comprising representatives of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE), the Department of Health and the National Health Service was established to manage the expansion programme. Of the 170 places, the JIG allocated 89 on a permanent basis to the nine universities with existing undergraduate dental schools enabling each of them to increase their annual intake to 75 new students. There are currently two dental schools in London, with the remaining schools located in Bristol, Birmingham, Sheffield, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle upon Tyne.

The JIG then allocated the remaining 91 places to the existing schools on a temporary basis in order to hold a competition for the permanent allocation of these places. In response to an invitation to all higher education institutions the JIG received bids from eight of the nine universities with existing dental schools for further expansion and seven bids (subsequently short-listed to six) from universities wishing to establish new dental schools. After short-listing, there were bids for 578 places under consideration. In acknowledgment of the quality of these bids and the importance of the needs they addressed, additional funding was found to increase the number of places on offer to 100.

The JIG applied the following criteria to the assessment of these bids: geography, innovation, quality, potential to widen participation in higher education, value for money and the viability of the proposals for recruiting academic staff. The majority of the bids were of very high quality offering a wide range of innovations in recruiting students and staff and teaching methods. Strategic/geographical considerations were therefore of particular significance.

For example, the JIG noted that there are five dental schools/dental teaching hospitals in the North, but none south of a line from Bristol to London. On the other hand, levels of dental disease are generally higher in the North, except in areas where drinking water is fluoridated. Areas distant from the main conurbations (and therefore from the existing dental schools) often have fewer dentists in relation to population than other areas.

The JIG submitted its recommendations to the HEFCE Board in December 2005 and, at its meeting on 26 January 2006, the Board decided to approve:

the bid from the Universities of Exeter and Plymouth for a new Peninsula Dental school with places for 62 students to be admitted annually from 2007

the bid from the University of Liverpool in conjunction with the University of Central Lancashire for the development of 32 outreach training places for dental

students in Lancashire and Cumbria, subject to further discussion of points of detail; and

the University of Leeds to be allocated six new places to develop outreach training for dental students in Hull.

On 5 December 2005, I informed the House that I had issued for consultation a provisional police finance settlement for 2006–07 giving indicative grant increases for that year and for 2007–08. The consultation period closed on 11 January. I intend to lay before the House shortly the Police Grant Report (England and Wales) 2006–07 which will establish the amounts of Police Grant to be paid to police authorities in 2006–07 and the basis of their distribution.

I have published the Government's response to the public consultations carried out on its proposals for the future of electoral registration and the regulation of political donations in Northern Ireland.

The consultation response outlines how the Government intend to move forward with regard to reforming the arrangements for electoral registration and political donations in Northern Ireland.

Copies of the response have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Following appropriate consultation and in accordance with Section 10 of the Intelligence and Security Act 1994, I have appointed the right hon. Michael Ancram QC DL MP as a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee in place of the right hon. James Arbuthnot MP.

The DTI has today published its Annual Statement of Common Commencement Dates (CCDs) and other forthcoming proposals. This shows the extension of CCDs to all domestic regulatory areas of DTI. The Statement lists those regulations that will come into force on 6 April and 1 October 2006. Other sections of the report show the in-force date of European and other domestic legislation, which are not aligned with CCDs.

The document has today been placed in the Libraries of the House and on the DTI and Small Business Service websites at:

http://www.dti.gov.uk/ewt/common—comence5.htm/. http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/ detail?r.s=sl&type=ONEOFFPAGE&itemId= 1075320304.

The Dartford—Thurrock Crossing Road User Charging Scheme accounts for 2004–05 are published today under section 3(1)(b) of the Trunk Road Charging Schemes (Bridges and Tunnels) (Keeping of Accounts) (England) Regulations 2003. A copy of the accounts will be placed in the House Library. Copies are available from the Vote Office.

Further to my statement to the House on 5 July 2005, I am today publishing guidance on the operation of the Transport Innovation Fund (TIF). Copies are today being placed in the Library of the House, published on the Department for Transport website and sent to all local highway authorities and Regional Development Agencies in England.

Through the fund we will be able to direct resources towards the achievement of two key objectives—tackling congestion and improving national productivity. The guidance I am publishing today explains how we will (a) support schemes aimed at tackling local congestion through demand management and better public transport, and (b) support schemes which meet national productivity objectives.

Schemes to tackle congestion

The guidance explains how local authorities can apply for funding from TIF to support the costs of smarter, innovative local packages which couple demand management, including road pricing, with improved public transport. It follows the award, on 28 November 2005, Official Report, column 3WS, of £7 million of pump-priming funding for seven areas in England to assess the feasibility of such schemes. The new guidance explains the process for bidding for TIF funds for such schemes and offers local authorities the opportunity to enter into a partnership with the Department to develop their proposals.

There will be a second opportunity to bid for TIF pump-priming funds in July this year. TIF funding is open to bidding by all authorities in England, regardless of whether they are awarded pump-priming funds or TIF partnership.

For schemes to tackle local congestion, some local authorities may wish to bid for TIF funding to, amongst other things, support bus schemes. Such authorities will want to be reassured that there are suitable mechanisms for involving private operators. The Transport Act 2000 provided two mechanisms for this—Quality Contracts (about which guidance was published in February 2005) and Statutory Quality Partnerships. Guidance on SQPs, including how they relate to TIF supported schemes, will be issued shortly. In this context my Department is considering ways in which SQPs, and existing or future partnership arrangements, could deliver major improvements in bus services as part of a package to improve traffic flows in cities outside London. My officials are discussing with the Office of Fair Trading how to ensure that these partnerships are consistent with competition law.

Schemes with benefits for national productivity

The Transport Innovation Fund will also be available for packages and schemes which are expected to make a major contribution to national productivity, but for which existing sources of funding are insufficient. The Department will suggest, for further evaluation, schemes which have been identified earlier, and which appear likely to meet the criteria set out in the guidance, and to assist in this process it will be seeking the views of the Regional Development Agencies on potential candidates and priorities. Accordingly, there will not be any form of bidding process for productivity schemes.

Decisions on the final allocation of TIF funds between these schemes will be taken following appraisal of their business cases against the criteria set out in the guidance document, alongside the bids for congestion schemes.

Today we have published a consultation document on the implementation of the provisions in the Railways Act 2005 relating to network changes. The consultation covers the guidance which the Secretary of State is required to issue on circumstances in which rail closures should be allowed. It also covers when more minor modifications should be allowed, and will replace existing guidance that becomes obsolete when the Strategic Rail Authority is formally wound-up later this year.

The Government want more passengers to use the railways. Indeed, Britain now has the fastest growing railway in Europe. The Government are also committed to increasing investment in the railways. But from time to time, as in any industry, changes to service provision will be necessary to reflect passenger and freight demand. That is why there needs to be an open and transparent process to allow these changes to be made. The Railways Act 2005 allows that to happen—hence this consultation.

This guidance will ensure that safeguards and standard practices are applied to any proposals for changes on the rail network. For the first time, statutory guidance will be put in place on rail closures, making procedures clearer and more transparent. It will also ensure certain procedures are taken into account before any rail closure can be considered. The draft guidance requires that:

All alternatives are considered.

A full consultation takes place and that this includes passenger groups.

The current and future impact on passengers are considered as well as the safety, economic and environmental costs or benefits.

In contrast with current procedures, where the Secretary of State determines closure proposals, the independent Office of Rail Regulation must be satisfied that a robust economic analysis has been performed.

The document published today seeks views on the proposed implementation of this legislation.

Copies of the consultation have been laid in the House Library and the deadline for responses is the 21 April 2006. The existing procedure for closures will remain in place until the responses to the consultation have been considered and a final version of the new guidance has been laid before Parliament. It will continue to be administered by the Strategic Rail Authority during this period. This will be the Authority's sole responsibility after 31 March 2006, and will only require a minimal number of staff.

On behalf of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, the Benefit Fraud Inspectorate (BFI) has today announced its Phase 14 programme of work.

BFI inspections in this programme will include councils whose published performance figures indicate that they take longer than most to process claims for housing benefit. There can be a number of reasons for comparatively slow processing of claims. BFI inspection will determine the reasons for delays and seek to provide remedies. The councils include: Gateshead metropolitan borough council, Portsmouth city council, Shepway district council, Stevenage borough council and Walsall metropolitan borough council. Where this has been achieved, the councils will have the opportunity to demonstrate improvement in recent performance.

It is important to deter fraudsters by applying sanctions, including prosecutions; therefore BFI will inspect two authorities that in comparison to their caseload have applied few sanctions, including successful prosecutions. The authorities are Elmbridge borough council and Exeter city council.

BFI will also inspect four other authorities to provide assurance on a range of reported performance. These authorities are Dudley metropolitan borough council, Milton Keynes council, Reading borough council and Rushcliffe borough council.

I am pleased to announce that planned inspections of Castle Point borough council and South Ayrshire council will not go ahead because both councils have shown significant improvements in their performance.

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. During its inspections, BFI undertakes a thorough analysis of service standards and is careful to understand the reasons for under performance. Where a council has recently improved and has effective recovery plans in place, BFI will take this into account in the final inspection report.