My noble Friend the Minister for Communications, Technology and Broadcasting, Lord Carter of Barnes, has made the following statement.

I am pleased to confirm the agenda items for which BERR has responsibility at the forthcoming Transport, Telecommunications and Energy Council (Telecoms Council) in Brussels on 31 March 2009.

There are only two substantive agenda items, the first of which is the adoption of Council conclusions on the Commission’s Communication for an accessible information society. The UK welcomes and supports the timing of this communication which is in line with recommendations recently made in the cross-Government report “Delivering Digital Inclusion - An Action Plan for Consultation”. Both the cross-Government paper and the Digital Britain report are also looking at what the Government can do to stimulate take-up and access of digital technologies in the UK.

This will be followed by an exchange of views on the impact of the economic downturn on ICT and how ICT can boost the EU’s economy. As the Government’s interim Digital Britain report highlighted, ICT is one of the sectors which we all rely upon to underpin our whole economy, as its effective utilisation can deliver productivity gains to our citizens and enterprises. This discussion will provide an opportunity to introduce our thinking for taking Digital Britain forward, and listen to the plans and proposals other Ministers are considering to enable ICT to accelerate longer term growth.

In addition to these two substantive items, there are four further items for which BERR has responsibility listed under any other business. The first of these will be an update from the Council presidency on negotiations on a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on interoperability solutions for European public administrations (ISA Programme). The UK supports the proposed programme as its predecessors have proved successful in delivering guidelines, common frameworks, studies on cross-border communication and IT—enabled service platforms for the delivery of community policies and activities.

The presidency will then provide information on the recent 112 Day. To mark 112 Day in the UK, I wrote to other Government Departments who could play a role in raising awareness of the pan-European emergency number. We are currently undertaking follow up work on this with the Foreign Office and Identity and Passport Service (IPS).

The Commission will then present their Communication on mobilising information and communication technologies to facilitate the transition to an energy-efficient, low- carbon economy. The UK agrees with the aims of this Communication which seeks to raise awareness of the potential ICT has to improve efficiency of European enterprises, including public sector, systems and processes.

Lastly, the presidency will provide an update on the review of the EU regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services. On the same day as the Council, the European Parliament are voting in Committee stage on this review package, followed by their plenary vote on 22 April. I will shortly be writing to hon. Members with explanatory memoranda on the Commission’s response to the Council common position, and will take the opportunity to update hon. Members on the progress of negotiations.

The Czech presidency are also hosting a ministerial lunch where Estonia is likely to be invited to make a presentation on their forthcoming conference on cyber security in Tallinn. Commissioner Reding will present the forthcoming communication on Communication and Information Infrastructure Protection. I understand the communication will recommend broad standards on the resilience of critical ICT infrastructure and on member states’ national response capacity to ensure the provision of telecoms services.

On 25 March, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) published a report setting out its findings on the effectiveness of the Payments Council in meeting its objectives. The Payments Council started work in March 2007, following an agreement in November 2006 by the OFT-chaired payment systems taskforce that a new body be created to provide strategic direction for the UK’s payment industry. The taskforce set three key objectives for the Payments Council:

to lead the future development of co-operative payment services in the United Kingdom;

to ensure that the payment system is open and accountable; and

to ensure the operational efficiency, effectiveness and integrity of payment services in the United Kingdom, through a focus on issues which cross schemes.

The taskforce agreed that the OFT would carry out a review of the effectiveness of the new governance body (subsequently named the Payments Council), after two years of its operation. This was to ensure that the objectives of the new body were being met and delivered on in practice. This statement highlights the key findings and recommendations in the OFT review of the operations of the Payments Council.

The OFT report concludes that the Payments Council is a definite improvement on what prevailed before its creation. The Payments Council’s consultation on a national payments plan, setting out the strategic direction it should pursue over the next five to 10 years, was widely welcomed by stakeholders, and contributed to its objective on openness and accountability. The introduction of the faster payments scheme (FPS) in May 2007 represented a substantial innovation. Users of the system will be able to make telephone and internet payments within a matter of hours, rather than over three working days as under the BACS system.

While the introduction of the faster payment scheme was a real achievement, the rolling out of faster payment services by many banks to their customers has been relatively slow. The report finds that the Payments Council should be more proactive in following up its initiatives with members and should also consider widening its membership and making more effective use of user groups, to ensure that end users get the benefits envisaged.

The OFT report recommends that the Payments Council increases the emphasis on its integrity objective in future. Although the safety and security of payment systems have not been compromised, the Payments Council has not added value quickly enough, and this is an area where it needs to improve. The OFT considers that the Payments Council should commission an accountancy firm to report in two years on how well it has performed against its integrity objective. The report (or the executive summary of it) should be published in the Payments Council’s Annual Review, and the Payments Council should outline how it intends to address any action points identified in it. Following the review from the accountancy firm, the Payments Council should self-assess against its integrity objective using the same procedure described below for its other objectives.

The OFT also recommends that the Payments Council provides a self-assessment against progress every two years on:

its strategic direction and openness and accountability objectives;

recommendations of the taskforce where these have not been met; and

recommendations coming out of this OFT report.

This self-assessment should contain the results of an open consultation with stakeholders on progress against objectives. The OFT may still choose to look into specific aspects of the Payments Council’s performance against objectives, if it considers there to be sufficient reason.

The Government welcome the OFT work to review the effectiveness of the Payments Council, and welcomes the recommendations made. I am writing today to the chair of the Payments Council to note the Government’s continued interest in the future work of the Payments Council.

The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and I are today publishing the Government’s response to the report from the hon. Member for Truro and St. Austell (Matthew Taylor) “Living, Working Countryside”.

In September 2007, the Prime Minister asked the hon. Member to undertake a review on how land use and planning can better support rural businesses and deliver affordable housing and to report to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Minister of State for Housing and Planning. The final report of the review, with detailed recommendations, was published in July 2008. The review identified the specific challenges facing rural areas but recognises that, “contrary to an often outdated view of the countryside, the economies of rural and urban England are much more alike than many people might imagine”. The Government will therefore give local authorities more flexibility to tackle the issues their communities face.

Our response sets out our proposals to take forward most of the review’s 48 recommendations to continue to encourage a prosperous rural economy and improve the delivery of affordable rural homes. This will help businesses, councils and the wider community, particularly in the current challenging economic conditions, and will assist rural communities in becoming more sustainable.

We welcome the review as giving important emphasis to what it takes to develop and sustain a strong rural economy, and improve access to a range of housing. In response to the review’s recommendations, we are announcing new approaches which local planning authorities and rural communities should adopt to improve the rural economy and encourage more affordable housing to be built in the countryside in appropriate places.

This includes:

ensuring that master planning is properly understood, and widely used, and running a competition to encourage good practice. In this context, “master planning” primarily means spatial master planning, as an approach to achieve the sustainable expansion of small or medium-sized settlements in particular.

setting up a practitioners’ working group to explore ways to incentivise landowners to use the existing rural exception sites policy, where local planning authorities can grant permission for small scale housing development as an “exception” to their normal policies of countryside protection.

bringing together a number of existing planning policy statements covering economic development topics into a single new planning policy statement on planning for prosperity. This will be published for consultation shortly.

publishing proposals for taking forward the use of community land trusts which can enable local communities to work together to meet their own housing needs, alongside details to create protected areas where shared ownership homes need to be retained for future purchasers. These proposals too will be published for consultation shortly.

A copy of the Government’s response is available in the Library of the House.

Following a review of the Department’s delivery bodies which support business, consumers and the public sector in resource efficiency, DEFRA has decided that from April 2010, Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) will lead in the provision of such advice and support. This will provide a streamlined, more efficient service and better value for money to the taxpayer.

The review covered the following organisations:

Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP)

National Industrial Symbiosis Programme (NISP)

Envirowise

Construction Resources and Waste Platform (CRWP)

Centre for Reuse and Remanufacture (CRR)

Action Sustainability (AS)

BREW Centre for Local Authorities

All were involved and consulted throughout the entire review process.

The review also considered the role of Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) in supporting business resource efficiency, including through Business Link as the primary access for business support.

Over the last three years, DEFRA has invested £650 million in a range of programmes that help organisations and the public use resources more efficiently. With this funding our delivery partners have delivered environmental benefits and cost savings for business. They should be rightly proud of their achievements.

The review identified that a single delivery body was the most efficient way of providing resource efficiency services to businesses, the public sector and households; and that such a single point of contact would also ensure greater ease of access for customers. WRAP was identified as the natural focus for this effort, providing the widest range of relevant services, and having the necessary management capability.

This change will support the “Improving your Resource Efficiency” product provided by RDAs through Business Link under Government’s Business Support Simplification Programme (BSSP).

Over the coming year, WRAP will work with DEFRA and the other delivery bodies to determine how best to implement this fully integrated service from April 2010.

My right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Defence, the Secretary of State for International Development and I would like to inform the House about our plans for conflict funding for the next financial year.

In October 2007 the Government announced a new Public Service Agreement for Preventing and Resolving Conflict (PSA 30). The 2007 comprehensive spending review (CSR) settlement set out the programme resources available for supporting implementation of PSA 30— £109 million through the Conflict Prevention Pool (CPP), £73 million through the Stabilisation Aid Fund (SAF) and an additional call on the Treasury reserve for peacekeeping costs, currently capped at £374 million. The peacekeeping budget currently covers both the UK’s assessed contributions to UN, OSCE and EU international peacekeeping missions, as well as certain discretionary peacekeeping activity. In the CSR settlement it was agreed that the new CPP would continue to be the first port of call if assessed (obligatory) peacekeeping costs rose above forecast.

The UK’s total available conflict resource for FY 2009-10, leaving aside the cost of UK military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, was therefore set at £556 million —£109 million CPP, £73 million SAF, £374 million peacekeeping budget.

A year into the CSR settlement we face a large projected increase in the UK’s assessed peacekeeping contributions caused by:

an increase in peacekeeping activity through the UN and the European Union. This reflects a positive trend; for example, the UN mission in Darfur moving towards full strength. And it also reflects some new commitments. These include the decision by the Security Council in Resolution 1863 to provide a package of logistical support to the African Union mission in Somalia and its decision to reinforce MONUC, the UN mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), following the renewed hostilities in eastern DRC.

exchange rate changes. The Government are billed by the UN, EU and OSCE in US dollars and euros. While the impact of this in financial year 2008-09 has been partly offset by the effects of forward purchasing our foreign currency requirement, the fall in the value of sterling means that our costs will be significantly larger in 2009-10 than in the past.

In this context we have agreed the following:

We will earmark £456 million from the £556 million available for 2009-10 to cover the projected rise in assessed peacekeeping contributions allowing us to meet our legal obligations. This is significantly higher than the current £374 million peacekeeping allocation from the Treasury reserve and would leave only £100 million from the CSR settlement to fund all other conflict activity, including discretionary peacekeeping previously funded from the reserve (estimated at some £70 million in 2008-09).

To offset the impact on UK conflict prevention, stabilisation and discretionary peacekeeping activity, the Department for International Development (DFID), Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and Ministry of Defence (MOD) will provide an additional £71 million from Departmental budgets

We will therefore have £171 million from which all discretionary conflict prevention, stabilisation and peacekeeping activity will be funded. There will be five strategies: the SAF Afghanistan and CPP South Asia programmes will be merged; so too the SAF Iraq and CPP Middle East and North Africa programmes. A new wider Europe programme will fund activity in Russia/Commonwealth of Independent States and the Balkans (both currently individual programmes). The Africa programme will continue. A separate programme will be earmarked for thematic work, including support to international institutions to maintain our influence in international missions and security sector reform. The strategies will be managed tri-departmentally as is the case now.

Although DFID, the FCO and MOD are providing significant additional resources we are still unable to sustain funding levels to all regions. We have therefore undertaken an exercise to prioritise UK discretionary conflict expenditure more tightly on countries where the risk and impact of conflict is greatest. An outline of the revised programmes is provided below.

The total allocation for South Asia, including Afghanistan, will now be £61.3 million. This will allow us fully to sustain current levels of conflict related activity in Afghanistan, reflecting the very high priority which we attach to stabilisation in that country. A large proportion of the available resources will be spent on stabilisation programmes in Helmand, including on capacity building of the provincial institutions, communications with the Afghan people, counter narcotics and the rule of law. The priority given to this region sees a continuation of current levels of financial support for India/Pakistan issues, Sri Lanka and Nepal and an increase in support for work on the Afghanistan/Pakistan border.

In Africa, under a revised programme totalling £43 million, we will continue to give significant resources to both peacekeeping and conflict prevention work in countries such as Sudan, Somalia and the DRC. The balance of resources will necessarily shift away from West and Southern Africa towards East Africa and the Horn in line with PSA 30 with a few exceptions.

In Wider Europe, the total allocation will now be £33 million. This will allow us to maintain our national contribution to United Nations Forces in Africa (UNFICYP), the UN peacekeeping operation in Cyprus, in 2009-10. NATO has informed us that the current UK contribution to KFOR, the NATO peacekeeping force in Kosovo, is no longer required and we will therefore make plans to draw this down. We will fund a reduced level of commitment to EU and OSCE operations in the Balkans and the Caucasus, and continue to fund conflict prevention work in the Balkans.

In the Middle East, we will prioritise work in Iraq, Israel/Palestine and Lebanon within a revised programme of £18 million. A majority of the resource available will support stabilisation activity in Iraq. The allocation will also allow us to continue to support the emerging conflict prevention programme in Yemen.

The £6.5 million thematic programme including support for international organisations will provide resources for a security sector reform advisory capacity, a peacekeeping training capacity, defence education within priority countries, and support for the United Nations’ Rule of Law Unit, Department of Peacekeeping Operations and Peacebuilding Support Office.

The need to prioritise within the limited resources available means that we have taken a decision to discontinue funding the CPP programme in Latin America. We will maintain the UK’s significant contribution in the region on such issues as human rights and democracy; countering the illegal drugs trade; and climate change. Our embassies will also continue to work alongside international partners including the UN on conflict issues.

Within the £171 million we will retain a small central reserve to act primarily as a buffer against fluctuations in the exchange rate and increases in assessed peacekeeping or other conflict related costs. The likely cost of the assessed contributions will be reviewed regularly, so that any likely underspend or overspend against the upper limit of £456 can be identified and addressed.

This process has involved a series of difficult decisions and we will not be able to fund all areas of activity to the same level as in previous years. However, we are confident that the rigorous approach to prioritisation which has been taken, as well as the additional £71 million allocated by Departments, should allow us to maintain our significant contribution to international peacekeeping, and to fund essential conflict prevention and stabilisation activity in priority regions.

In my written ministerial statement of 14 May 2008, Official Report, column 61WS, I informed the House that the Youth Justice Board had decided to issue rectification notices to STC Milton Keynes Limited, the contractor responsible for the delivery of services at Oakhill secure training centre.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families and I wish to inform the House that the Youth Justice Board has decided to withdraw the rectification notices imposed on STC Milton Keynes Limited. The contractor has addressed all of the deficiencies which had been identified and the centre is now able to operate at full capacity.

Ofsted carried out an inspection of the centre in December 2008 and their report which was published yesterday gave the centre an overall quality rating of “satisfactory”.

The next step is for the contractor to consolidate the positive changes and build on the improvements made to date. The Youth Justice Board will continue to monitor the service being delivered at the centre and will take the necessary actions to resolve any problems identified and drive forward improvements.

In my role as the Government’s anti-corruption champion I am pleased to inform the House that I have today laid before Parliament the draft Bribery Bill for pre-legislative scrutiny (“Bribery - Draft Legislation” Cm 7570). This is in accordance with the Government’s Legislative Programme as set out in the written statement by my right hon. and learned Friend the Leader of the House of Commons on 4 December 2008, Official Report, column 12WS.

The Bill describes a modern, clear and consolidated law that will support our commitment to high ethical standards generally and will equip our courts and prosecutors to deal effectively with bribery of all kinds whether it occurs at home or abroad. I believe these provisions strike the right balance between clarity and detail, so as to allow for both legal certainty and the effective differentiation between bribery and the legitimate giving and receiving of advantages.

Our current criminal law of bribery is old and anachronistic and can be difficult for prosecutors, courts and members of the public. Statutory law is fragmented and dates back to around the turn of the 20th century. It is unconsolidated, resulting in inconsistencies of language and concepts between the various provisions and one or two small but potentially significant gaps in the law. The scope of the common law offence is unclear, adding to inconsistency and overall complexity. These issues have been noted at home and abroad, most notably by the OECD Bribery Working Group. It is clear that, from a purely legal perspective, the case for reform is strong.

This is, however, much more than a desire for an orderly statute book. While the United Kingdom is recognised as one of the least corrupt countries in the world we do not underestimate the threat posed by bribery. If it is not kept in check bribery can destroy the integrity, accountability and honesty that underpin ethical standards in public and commercial life. By its very nature insidious and difficult to root out, bribery worldwide weakens democracy, impedes sustainable development and can undermine respect for human rights by supporting corrupt regimes.

As advances in technology and communication enable ever more sophisticated means of committing and concealing crimes, we must ensure that our law provides our courts and prosecutors with the tools they need to combat such crime effectively. Over the years it has become clear that a law that has narrow national focus will not fulfil this role. The global economy is a reality. Modernisation of the law is therefore a priority, not only to deal effectively with those who offer or accept bribes in our business or public sectors, but also to reinforce transparency and accountability in our international business transactions.

Law reform is one of the key elements of the UK’s strategy against foreign bribery, which I am co-coordinating in my role as Government anti-corruption champion as announced in my statement of 2 October 2008. Concerted multilateral action is essential to tackle the global impact of bribery and related issues such as money laundering. Co-operation with our international partners is producing significant progress in areas such as the tracing, recovery and repatriation of money laundered misappropriated assets. In addition we are supporting effective implementation of the UN Convention against corruption, the OECD Bribery Convention and the Council of Europe’s Criminal Law Convention on Corruption.

The Bill builds on the Law Commission proposals set out in its report “Reforming Bribery” in November 2008. I would like to express my gratitude to the Law Commission for its excellent report. The Bill’s principal provisions create two general offences; one dealing with the giving, promising, and offering of a bribe and the other with agreeing to receive or acceptance of a bribe. It provides a new discrete offence of bribery of a foreign public official and a new corporate liability offence of negligently failing to prevent bribery. The detail of these and the other remaining provisions of the Bill are explained in full in the explanatory notes published along side the Bill. My officials have shared details of our proposed legislation with colleagues in Scotland. It will be for the Scottish Ministers to consider whether any similar changes will be necessary to Scots law.

I will attend the first Transport Council of the Czech presidency which will take place in Brussels on 30 March.

There will be a progress report and policy debate on the latest situation on the proposed amendment to Directive 1999/62/EC on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures—the “Eurovignette directive”. We support the principle of the “polluter pays” and therefore the broad aims of the directive. However, we have concerns with some of the proposals, including a requirement to introduce earmarking.

The Council will aim to reach a general approach on a proposed amendment to the directive on the organisation of working time in road transport. The amending directive aims to permanently exclude the genuinely self-employed from the scope of the working time rules for mobile workers and provide additional flexibility to industry on night work limits. I expect to be able to agree to the general approach.

Following the recent Commission Communication “Action Plan for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in Europe”, the Council will be asked to adopt conclusions. The Government support the objectives of the ITS action plan to reduce congestion, tackle environmental issues, provide reliable travel information and improve safety. We welcome the recognition in the conclusions of the contribution that technology can make to meet those objectives.

Within the SESAR project for Single Sky implementation, the Commission has recently produced a master plan for air traffic management in Europe. The Council will be asked to adopt a decision endorsing the master plan and a Council resolution on it. The UK has been a firm supporter of the SESAR project from the outset. We recognise the contribution the project can make to improvement of the European air traffic management system, while helping to mitigate the impacts of aviation on the environment. In order for the project to begin its second phase (development), we should endorse this resolution and request the SESAR joint undertaking to complete membership agreements with industry at the earliest possible opportunity.

Under AOB, the presidency will report on progress of the legislative proposals of the Single European Sky (SES) package. It is expected that the European Parliament in plenary session will by then have voted on these proposals. The first of them is a regulation amending the four regulations adopted in 2004 which established the Single European Sky. The amending regulation aims to improve the efficiency of air traffic management (ATM) across the EU by introducing targets that ensure all member states contribute to an overall improvement in the performance of the ATM system. The second is an amending regulation extending the responsibilities of the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) to the safety of aerodromes, air traffic management and air navigation services. The UK has been a firm supporter of the Single European Sky since its inception in 2004. We are content with progress in negotiations and look forward to these proposals being adopted as soon as possible.

Finally in aviation, the presidency will seek political endorsement for a future Council decision to sign a comprehensive air transport agreement with Canada. The UK is supportive of this agreement, which would deliver the phased opening of aviation markets and investment liberalisation for EU and Canadian carriers, as well as other commercial freedoms and improved regulatory co-operation.

In maritime transport, there will be a progress report and policy debate on a draft regulation on the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway. We support the aim of the regulation, following provisions already agreed for other transport modes, and we will continue to work closely with the Commission and member states on the details.

Also in maritime transport, the Council will be asked to adopt conclusions arising from two recent Commission Communications. The first, “strategic goals and recommendations for the EU’s maritime transport policy until 2018”, has as its aims, acceptable to us in principle, the promotion of European shipping and related industries, which are safe, secure and environmentally friendly, while remaining efficient, adaptable and globally competitive. The second Communication is an action plan with a view to establishing “a European maritime space without barriers”. This is a concept which we can support in principle. It is designed to extend the community’s internal market by simplifying administrative procedures for intra-EU maritime transport, particularly short sea shipping, in order to improve the efficiency and competitiveness of this sector, as well as to deliver environmental benefits. I expect to be able to agree to both sets of conclusions.

Under AOB, the Council will report on the draft regulation establishing the second “Marco Polo” programme, following recent negotiations with the European Parliament. The Marco Polo programme provides community financial assistance to improve the environmental performance of the freight transport system. This proposal intends to stimulate more applications for funding by increasing participation by small enterprises, simplifying administrative procedures, increasing funding intensities and redefining and lowering the eligibility thresholds for project proposals. The Government believe that these amendments should allow the Marco Polo II programme to fully deploy its potential, so we strongly support the proposed revision.

Also under AOB the Commission will report on the Galileo satellite navigation programme and on its recent proposal for an amending regulation on airport slot allocation.