On 14 January 2009, I informed the House that the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform intended to introduce a Working Capital scheme as part of the Government measures to enhance financial stability and support increased lending to business. Its implementation was subject to EU state aid clearance which was granted by the Commission on 24 March.

I am pleased to inform the House that on 31 March the Department signed a guarantee agreement with Royal Bank of Scotland PLC (RBS) and National Westminster Bank PLC (NatWest) to provide guarantees in respect of portfolios of loans that will enable RBS and NatWest to increase their lending to UK businesses.

The agreement with RBS and NatWest is the first of its kind under the Working Capital scheme. It represents an important step towards achieving the Government’s aim of getting increased credit flowing to UK businesses during these difficult times.

RBS and NatWest have agreed that the capital released by their participation in the scheme will be redeployed in support of lending to credit-worthy SMEs and mid-corporates. This forms part of the £16 billion of additional lending to businesses they committed to on 26 February. This additional lending commitment took effect from 1 March.

Discussions are well advanced with two other banks in relation to their participation in the scheme.

The scheme runs until 31 March 2011.

My noble Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform has made the following statement.

The Government have a wide-ranging regulatory reform programme which we began in 2005. Today the Government are setting out next steps to ensure future better regulation.

Given the economic situation, it is important that Government focus on delivering real help for business now. Following the consultation launched last year, the Government have therefore decided not to implement a system of regulatory budgets at this stage. Rather we will undertake a programme of better regulation measures tailored to the present exceptional economic circumstances.

There is clearly a need for new regulation in some areas now—such as climate change, and financial services in response to the current banking crisis. Moreover, delaying measures which businesses have already planned for can be disruptive. But during the recession and recovery we have a particular reason to look very carefully at whether we should delay planned new regulation and avoid introducing new regulation which increases burdens on business except where there is a clear case for action now. For example, the Government have already delayed implementation of legislation on display of tobacco in small shops until 2013, to help this particular retail sector.

To provide greater rigour to this process of review during the present economic downturn and with a view to economic recovery my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has decided to establish a new better regulation sub committee of the National Economic Council. The new Committee will take on the responsibilities of the panel for regulatory accountability. This Committee will scrutinise planned regulation and proposals for new regulation that will impact on business. The new Committee will take account of the views of business in coming to its conclusions.

The Government will also be working closely with EU partners to further embed the EU better regulation agenda and to ensure the current pressures on business are taken into account when new European regulation is being considered.

From this summer, the Government will also publish a forward regulatory programme. Business will be able to plan better as the programme will include existing and possible future regulatory proposals.

In 2005, we announced that we would cut the administrative burdens of regulation by 25 per cent by May 2010—i.e. £3.4 billion. We have already delivered £1.9 billion and are on track to deliver on our promise. Looking forward, the Government will adopt new simplification targets for 2010-15 which will address all regulatory costs on business.

The Government will also set up a new external Regulatory Policy Committee whose role will be to advise Government on whether they are doing all they can to accurately assess the costs and benefits of regulation. Building on the work of Philip Hampton, this body will also advise Government on whether regulators are appropriately risk based in their work; however, it will not have the power to require changes in the behaviour of independent regulators.

I am today publishing a consultation document on proposed changes to the local authority (LA) building control charging regime in England and Wales.

The principle of empowering LAs to charge for carrying out their main building control functions related to building regulations has been Government policy since the late 1970s. It derives from the “user pays” principle and avoids putting further pressure on all those who pay council tax. The charge-setting process was devolved to individual LAs in 1999 through The Building (Local Authority Charges) Regulations 1998.

Following representations from stakeholders, we carried out a review of the charging regime and developed a number of proposals to address the perceived deficiencies and modernise the charging system. We consulted on the broad principles of the proposed approach as part of the consultation on the “Future of Building Control” last year and received support from the majority of respondents.

We are now seeking views on the detailed proposals which will build on the current devolved charge-setting process to LAs in order to:

Introduce more flexibility and discretion, remove some restrictions and ambiguities, and enable LAs to more accurately relate their charges to the actual costs of carrying out their main building control functions (that is, plan checking and inspections) for individual building projects as appropriate, thereby providing fairer charges.

Introduce more transparency into the building control charging regime, with a view to safeguarding income.

Further improve the competitive environment within which LAs and private sector approved inspectors (AIs) compete and the standards within which they operate.

The charging proposals also reflect the fundamental changes we propose to introduce to the building control system following the “Future of Building Control” consultation, in particular introducing a risk assessment approach to inspection of building work.

This consultation, which closes on 25 June 2009, is accompanied by an impact assessment. A copy has been placed in the Library of the House. It can also be accessed via the Communities and Local Government website at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/lachargingregimeconsult

On 19 January, Official Report, column 19WS, I informed the House of the successful completion of the EDF takeover of British Energy. On 24 September last year, the then Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, my right hon. Friend the Member for Barrow and Furness (Mr. Hutton), wrote to the Business and Enterprise Select Committee to inform members of EDF’s takeover offer for British Energy. I would now like to update the House regarding the sites undertaking, which was referred to in that letter, copies of which were placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

The European Commission as part of its clearance of the acquisition of British Energy received certain undertakings from EDF that are slightly different from those agreed in the sites undertaking entered into between EDF and HM Government and these are as set out in the announcement of the Commission’s decision on 22 December 2008. The sites undertaking has therefore been amended to reflect these developments.

The Commission asked EDF to offer further undertakings which have had the effect that the disposal of Dungeness or Heysham should happen unconditionally soon after EDF’s takeover of British Energy has completed, rather than making the sale conditional on EDF getting planning permission to build two EPRs at each of Sizewell and Hinkley Point as was the case under the sites agreement negotiated with the Government.

Together with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development, I would like to update the House on the current situation in Sri Lanka, our continuing concern and the action we have been taking.

The fate of civilians caught up in the fighting in the north of Sri Lanka between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is the most pressing concern. It is vital that they are able to move away from danger to safety.

The last remaining territory held by the LTTE continues to shrink. Currently it measures less than 20 square kilometres. Since January more than 60,000 internally displaced persons (EDPs) have left the conflict area and moved into Government-controlled territory. Over 10,000 have moved within the last week. But credible reports suggest that well over 100,000 remain trapped within the conflict zone. These civilians have been displaced numerous times over the past 18 months and are living under constant threat from the continued heavy fighting. Despite the lack of verifiable reporting from the conflict area there are credible reports of civilians being killed and wounded every day, including in the ‘no fire zone’. We condemn the killings of civilians in the strongest possible terms and continue to urge all parties to take action to avoid further civilian casualties. Both the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE must abide by their obligations under international humanitarian law and ensure the protection of civilians at all times.

It was our concern for civilians that led my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to call for a ceasefire on 14 January. I have since repeated that call on numerous occasions: in phone calls with both the Sri Lankan President and Foreign Minister; in public statements; and in concert with other countries.

We renew that call today for an urgent humanitarian ceasefire. We call on the LTTE to allow the remaining civilians to leave the conflict area and to desist from enforced recruitment of civilians. But the actions of the LTTE cannot excuse any failings by the Sri Lankan Government to meet the higher standards naturally expected of democratic Governments in a conflict.

We have also been active with partners in the EU, the UN and the Commonwealth. Following discussions at the General Affairs and External Relations Council on 23 February, EU foreign ministers publicly called for a ceasefire and made clear their concern for civilians trapped by the fighting. Sri Lanka continues to be discussed within the EU and we support a proposed EU high-level troika to Sri Lanka at the earliest opportunity.

At the UN we have been working for some time to ensure that the Security Council is fully briefed on the situation in Sri Lanka. We supported the visit by the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, John Holmes, to Sri Lanka in February and his subsequent briefings to the Security Council. We also welcome the continued engagement by the UN Secretary-General who has made clear his views on the deteriorating situation. This involvement by the UN means that the Government of Sri Lanka can be in no doubt about the concerns felt by the international community over the humanitarian situation.

At the recent meeting of the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, although Sri Lanka was not on the agenda, we nevertheless took the opportunity to raise our concerns over developments in Sri Lanka, particularly the humanitarian crisis.

In addition to calling for a ceasefire we continue to call for unhindered access for humanitarian agencies to the civilians displaced by the fighting, including those still trapped in the conflict area. There is an urgent need to increase the quantity and frequency of food and medical shipments to those affected by the fighting. Humanitarian agencies—specifically the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross—also need unhindered access to enable independent observation of the security screening of civilians and the running of the IDP camps. It is vital that these camps are temporary and that the IDPs are returned to their homes as early as is safely possible. We urge the Government of Sri Lanka to abide by its public commitment to return 80 per cent of IDPs by the end of the year.

The appointment by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, of my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun (Des Browne) as his Special Envoy to Sri Lanka was a measure of the UK’s commitment to contribute to an improvement in the humanitarian situation and to the search for a sustainable political solution to the conflict. It should be seen as such. We have been disappointed that the Government of Sri Lanka continues to reject the appointment, despite earlier assurances from the President that his Government would engage with an envoy. We will continue to press the Sri Lankan Government to reconsider. In the meantime my right hon. Friend the Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun will engage with representatives of other countries, UN agencies, non-governmental organisations, parliamentarians and community representatives with an interest in Sri Lanka.

As well as upping our diplomatic efforts we have also been taking practical steps to contribute to an improvement in the situation. Since September 2008 the Department for International Development (DFID) has committed £5 million of humanitarian assistance to Sri Lanka. Of this sum, more than £4 million has already been allocated in support of agencies providing protection and assistance work for IDPs. This includes £835,000 that DFID has transferred this week to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and to the International Organisation for Migration. A sum of £915,000 pounds is being held in reserve so that we can continue to respond immediately to further needs as they arise.

We recognise that the LITE is a terrorist organisation and that the Government of Sri Lanka has a need to root out the threat from terrorism. But the over-riding need is for an immediate end to the tragic humanitarian crisis. We want to see an end to the conflict and a serious drive to achieve a sustainable political settlement that takes fully into account the legitimate concerns of all Sri Lanka’s communities—Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims. As part of this process the Government of Sri Lanka needs to tackle seriously the problem of human rights violations and the culture of impunity that underpins it. We urge the Government to ensure that all violations, including recent attacks on the media, are thoroughly investigated so that those responsible are brought to justice. The Government will continue to engage with political parties across all communities in Sri Lanka to support progress in all of these areas.

The Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) Council will be held in Luxembourg on 6 April 2009. My noble Friend Lord Bach, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the Scottish Minister for Community Safety (Fergus Ewing) and I will attend on behalf of the United Kingdom. The following issues will be discussed at the Council:

Justice Ministers will be asked to reach a general approach on the draft framework decision on the prevention and settlement of conflicts of jurisdiction. This instrument is intended to promote dialogue and closer co-operation between member states’ competent authorities with a view to preventing double jeopardy situations.

The Commission will present a proposal to amend the 2003 Council framework decision on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography. The revised proposal aims to tackle the challenges to the criminal law across Europe posed by the speed of change of internet related child abuse, and issues around the management of sex offenders who travel to commit offences. The UK supports work on combating the sexual exploitation of children including the distribution of images of child sexual abuse, and measures that further enable member states to tackle sex offenders who cross borders.

The Commission will present a proposal to amend a 2002 framework decision on combating human trafficking. The original framework decision introduced an obligation on member states to have in their national laws some common minimum offences and penalties for this conduct. The Commission’s proposal will revise and update that framework decision and will need to be negotiated at working group level before it can be presented to the JHA Council for agreement. To be fully effective this instrument will need to achieve the right balance between prevention, enforcement and victim care.

The presidency will inform Justice Ministers about the conclusions of a conference that took place in Prague on 17 and 18 March on the standing of vulnerable victims in criminal proceedings.

The Council will revisit the discussion on the appointment of the new Europol director since an agreement was not reached at the last Council.

The presidency will seek political agreement on the directive for a single application procedure for third-country nationals. The proposed directive comprises two parts. The first would prescribe a single application procedure for a single permit for third-country nationals to reside and work in the territory of a member state. The second part would prescribe a common set of rights for third-country workers legally residing in a member state. The UK has not opted into the draft directive.

There will be a presentation to update the Council on the European security research and innovation forum by Mr Dragutin Mate, the chairman of ESRIF and former Interior Minister of Slovenia. ESRIF is currently completing a report that is intended to chart the EU’s security research and innovation requirements over the next 10 to 20 years. The UK supports the objectives of ESRIF and the production of its final report.

During the Mixed Committee with Norway, Switzerland, Iceland and Lichtenstein, Ministers will be asked to report on progress in implementing the second generation of the Schengen information system (SIS II), in the light of the Council conclusions adopted at the last Council which identified the need to resolve problems in the central system. The UK remains of the view that we need a decision in June on the future of SIS II. The Council is also expected to adopt conclusions on the development of the SIRENE bureaux. These are not relevant to the UK since they concern arrangements for the operation of the current Schengen information system, to which the UK is not a party.

The presidency will present to the Mixed Committee the current state of play on the implementation of the regulation establishing the visa information system (VIS). The UK does not participate in that regulation.

Lastly, the presidency is expected to congratulate Switzerland on the successful completion of its air borders evaluation allowing it to lift checks on persons at its air borders on 29 March 2009.

Under AOB in the main Council session, there will be a presentation by the Commission on the state of negotiations relating to the EC re-admission agreement with Morocco. The UK welcomes progress made by the Commission but wants to see these efforts taken forward, especially in view of the time that the mandate has been opened. There will also be a report on the state of play in relation to ratification of the EU-US extradition and mutual legal assistance agreements. The Commission will provide Justice Ministers with an overview of the EU funds available to support e-justice. Finally, information will be provided on the visit between VP Commissioner Barrot and Czech Minister of Interior Langer to the US.

In accordance with Section 57 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, I have re-appointed the right hon. Sir Paul Kennedy as Interception of Communications Commissioner from 11 April 2009 to 10 April 2012.

In accordance with Section 59 of the same Act, I have also re-appointed the right hon. Sir Peter Gibson as Intelligence Services Commissioner from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2012.

The renovation of Middlesex Guildhall has now been completed on time and within budget by Kier Group Plc. The building has been handed to the Ministry of Justice to carry out the final phase of works.

This is a major milestone in the development of a Supreme Court for the United Kingdom. We remain on track to deliver a fully functioning Supreme Court in time for the opening of the legal year in October 2009.

This renovation has breathed new life into a previously tired building, which sits in one of the most historic and recognisable public spaces in the world. The renovation works have been completed to the highest standard, as appropriate for its setting and required for a Grade II* listed building.

The Ministry of Justice will now take forward the final phase of works.

As announced in July 2008, work will soon begin to ensure the security provision at Middlesex Guildhall is in line with other high profile central government and court buildings.

I will ensure the House is kept updated on the progress of establishing the Supreme Court as work continues.

I am today publishing a report on Departments’ and Agencies’ performance on handling Members’ and Peers’ correspondence during 2008. Details are set out in the table below. The 2007 correspondence statistics can be found on 20 March 2008, Official Report, column 71WS. Departmental figures are based on substantive replies unless otherwise indicated.

The footnotes to the table provide general background information on how the figures have been compiled.

I attended the first Transport Council of the Czech presidency, in Brussels on 30 March.

There was a progress report and policy debate 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”. Presenting its latest compromise text, the presidency explained that the draft amending Directive would give member states flexibility to add an element for external costs (e.g. environmental or congestion) to any distance-based charges they levied on lorries. I supported the inclusion of congestion charging from the outset, and restated the UK’s opposition to earmarking of revenues.

The Council reached a general approach on an amendment to the Directive on the organisation of working time in road transport. The presidency outlined its compromise text, which would allow member states to exclude self-employed road transport workers from the scope of the Directive, if they wished. The text of the general approach was acceptable to the United Kingdom.

The Council adopted conclusions on the Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) action plan, which aims to promote the increase of ITS deployment across the EU, to support cleaner, safer and more efficient road transport. The conclusions were acceptable to the UK.

The Council adopted a decision endorsing the master plan for air traffic management in Europe (a part of the SESAR project for Single Sky implementation) and a Council resolution on the master plan. Both were acceptable to the UK.

The presidency and Commission reported on the good progress made on the legislative proposals comprising the Single European Sky package. These are: a regulation amending the four regulations adopted in 2004 which established the Single European Sky; and 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. I look forward to the formal adoption of these proposals, which are an important step towards completion of the SES.

The Council endorsed the recently agreed comprehensive air transport agreement with Canada. I look forward to the signature of this important agreement in the near future.

In maritime transport, there was a progress report and policy debate on a draft regulation on the rights of passengers when travelling by sea and inland waterway. The presidency outlined the aims of the draft regulation, which are to provide new rights for passengers with reduced mobility and to improve general passenger rights. I noted the progress made on this proposal and stressed that the final outcome of the negotiations should reflect an appropriate balance between the interests of passengers and those of the vessel operators.

Also in maritime transport, the Council adopted conclusions arising from two recent Commission communications, “Strategic Goals and Recommendations for the EU’s maritime transport policy until 2018”, and an action plan with a view to establishing “a European maritime space without barriers”. Both sets of conclusions were acceptable to the UK.

The presidency reported on the draft regulation establishing the second “Marco Polo” programme. This should allow the Marco Polo programme to fully deploy its potential, and we strongly support it.

Under AOB, the Commission reported on the Galileo satellite navigation programme. It announced its plans to make two new legislative proposals, one revising the regulation which established the Galileo supervisory authority, and the other on policy for access to the Public Regulated Service (PRS) for Government-authorised users.

Also under AOB, the Commission presented its proposal to amend the airport slots regulation so as to suspend temporarily the ‘use it or lose it’ rule for airport slots, with the aim of helping airlines in the economic downturn. This would enable the EU industry to adjust supply to falling demand. I agreed that this was a sensible short term proposal, but stressed that it should be restricted to the summer season, and an extension should be considered only with an accompanying impact assessment looking at consumer/competition implications. I also pressed for a wider review of the slot allocation regulations to be undertaken by the Commission in 2010, to include an examination of how environmental considerations could be taken into account more fully. The Commission agreed to the UK request and underlined the temporary nature of the proposed suspension to those member states with concerns.

Over lunch, there was a discussion of the effects of the economic situation on the transport sector and measures to help mitigate the impact. I pointed to the real economic benefits secured from liberalisation of the transport sector, which are consistent with single market developments, and I emphasised that reduction of carbon emissions has to continue to be taken into account.

In July 2007, the Government published they White Paper “Delivering a Sustainable Railway”. Within this the Government set out they High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for the railways, detailing the outputs they wanted the industry to achieve by the end of the five year period from the 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2014—known as Control Period 4 or CP4. These outputs covered the areas of capacity, reliability and safety.

In terms of capacity, targets for the accommodation of extra demand were produced for each of the main London termini and major cities. The White Paper indicated that a total of 1,300 additional carriages were expected to be required to meet these requirements. So far 423 of these additional carriages have been ordered, even before the start of CP4.

I am pleased to announce to the House that today that my Department has signed a deed of amendment to its franchise agreement with London Eastern Railway Ltd, which trades as National Express East Anglia (NXEA) and is part of National Express Group plc.

This contractual variation will enable NXEA to add 188 carriages to its existing fleet, boosting capacity into London Liverpool Street by providing approximately 11,000 extra seats during the morning three hour peak period by December 2011.

NXEA will lease 120 new Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) carriages, that will be built by Bombardier Transportation UK Ltd in Derby. These trains which have a capital cost of £ 160 million will be owned by Lloyds TSB General Leasing (No.8) Limited, a subsidiary of Lloyds TSB Bank plc. This is the first time this bank has provided finance for trains. The trains will principally be used on the Stansted Express route, enabling a cascade of rolling stock within the franchise to lengthen other services.

NXEA will also lease 68 Class 321 EMU carriages which are currently in use on the London Midland franchise where they are due to be replaced in July 2009. These carriages will receive an internal refresh.

NXEA will increase car parking space at four stations (Broxbourne, Audley End, Harlow Town and Diss), install two carriage washers and increase its workforce to implement the scheme.

Network Rail will be undertaking infrastructure enhancements to facilitate the changes to NXEA’s operations, including platform lengthening, power supply upgrades and two passing loops.

This is one of the largest contract changes negotiated with a Train Operating Company (TOC) during its franchise term since privatisation of the railways in 1997. I hope to make further such announcements over the next 12 months, although this requires TOCs to co-operate in providing my Department with affordable and value for money proposals which meet the capacity requirements for their franchise areas.

In Great Britain, we already provide protection against direct discrimination and harassment that arises because the victim is wrongly perceived to belong or subscribe to a particular race, religion or belief, or to have a particular sexual orientation. Direct discrimination and harassment arising from association with a person of a particular race, religion or belief or with a particular sexuality are also prohibited.

The Government’s response to the consultation on reform of discrimination law¹, published on 21 July 2008, set out how we proposed to deal with direct discrimination and harassment based on perception and association in the Equality Bill. But we also made it clear that we would need to consider carefully the terms of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Coleman case², published on 17 July 2008, before determining the final approach for the Equality Bill.

I am today announcing that we have decided to extend the prohibition against associative and perceptive direct discrimination and harassment to other strands and areas where this does not currently apply. The Equality Bill will therefore prohibit direct discrimination and harassment based on association and perception in respect of race, sex, gender reassignment, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief and age and in relation to both employment and areas beyond this, such as goods, facilities and services.

This extension will implement the Coleman judgment in Great Britain and the extension to other protected characteristics is in keeping with the aims of the Equality Bill to simplify and strengthen the law.

¹Cm 7454

²Coleman v Attridge Law and another (Case C-303/06).