I can confirm that the fourth unnamed defendant referred to in my Statement on 14 June (Official Report, cols. WS 22–24) has now been told of the charges he faces. He is Lance Corporal Darren Paul Larkin of the 1st Battalion of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers. The charges relate to incidents which allegedly took place on or about 15 May 2003 in a camp just to the west of Basra.

My right honourable friend the Minister for Housing and Planning has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act received Royal Assent on 13 May. The Government intend to bring the provisions of the Act into force over the coming months through a series of commencement orders. It is the convention that no part of an Act should be brought into effect earlier than two months after Royal Assent other than in exceptional circumstances.The Act contains a number of powers enabling the Secretary of State to make subordinate legislation such as regulations or orders. The first commencement order will bring the enabling powers to make subordinate legislation into effect, and it is intended that this order will be made in the second half of July. Subordinate legislation will then be made. Our general approach is to bring substantive provisions of the Act relating to England into force by further commencement orders, which will take effect at the same time as the relevant regulations or orders.The following timetable sets out an indicative timetable for these commencement orders.

My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.Today I am publishing revised tables for the Indices of Deprivation 2004. The index is based on a total of 37 indicators and the tables published on 28 April contained two errors.IMD 2004 is a major improvement on previous deprivation indices, introducing two new domains—crime and living environment—and a very significant new small area geography: super output areas. It makes available a much better evidence base to improve policy making and delivery at all levels. But these improvements make it a much more complex index to produce. Despite a long and very detailed period of consultation, and extensive prepublication checks, there have been some teething troubles. I very much regret that these errors have occurred.The errors occurred in creating the two new domains in the index—living environment and crime. In the former, one set of data was input in the wrong rank order. In the latter, there was a technical error in the way in which the data were smoothed to deal with inaccuracies introduced by small numbers of particular crimes.These errors have now been corrected, and very extensive checks have been made both by the contractors, and at the request of Ministers by independent experts, to ensure as far as possible that there are no further such errors in the index. I have placed revised tables in the Library.

My honourable friend the Minister for Children (Margaret Hodge) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.Widespread concern has been expressed about the quality and validity of evidence given by medical expert witnesses following the recent appeals against convictions of mothers alleged to have been responsible for killing their children.Medical evidence from expert witnesses plays an important part in court proceedings. Proceedings in the criminal and family courts are different from one another and do not follow the same processes. Requirements differ between them in relation to standards of proof, rules of evidence and admissibility of material. In criminal procedures, the competency of witnesses and the evidence of the prosecution can be challenged. The prosecution has to establish facts beyond reasonable doubt. In civil proceedings, evidence is assessed against a threshold of proof that is based on the balance of probabilities, though there too the input of expert witnesses may be tested by the parties to a case and by the court, before judicial determinations are made.The concerns surrounding the reliability of expert witnesses are both complex and substantial and are worsening the already acute problem which the family courts are experiencing in finding experts of high standing to give medical evidence in proceedings, particularly where child abuse is suspected. None the less, these issues of concern go beyond child protection or children's cases and involve the scientific basis for medical evidence given both in criminal and civil courts, and extend to other areas, such as forensic pathology.We have already taken a number of steps. I have, as indicated in my Statement of 23 February 2004, issued guidance to local authorities in Local Authority Circular (2004)5, asking that they review the cases of children who are the subject of current care proceedings or where local authorities are exercising responsibility for children who are currently the subject of care and related orders. The results of an initial survey have today been placed in the Library. The survey was carried out by the Association of Directors of Social Services, and asked questions relating to the first stage review we asked local authorities to undertake. This first stage review covered all of the cases of children who are the subject of current care proceedings. This stage did not cover children who were already the subject of a care or related order. These cases will be reviewed as a second stage review and a more comprehensive picture will be obtained once this second stage has been completed.Of the 150 local authorities with social services responsibilities, 130 have responded to the survey. The 130 local authorities reported that the number of cases in which disputed expert medical evidence features, or is anticipated to feature, is relatively small, arising in only 47 out of the 5,175 cases. There were a total of nine cases where the impact of this evidence on the live proceedings is already known. In one of these cases there has been a change in the local authority's care plan. In a further 38 cases, the proceedings are not yet sufficiently advanced for it yet to be clear whether the disputed medical evidence will result in a change to the care plan. The further survey of the second stage review, which is now being commissioned, will ascertain the extent to which the review of existing orders, perhaps 30,000 in number, has led to changes in current care plans. The results of this second survey will also be placed in the Library.None the less, the results of this initial survey should not give rise to complacency that the interests of children and their families are being optimally served. We are, therefore, also announcing today a programme of work to determine how best to ensure the availability and quality of medical expert resources to the family courts. Sir Liam Donaldson, the Government's Chief Medical Officer (CMO), will lead this work and plans to involve a wide range of interests, including judicial, legal, clinical specialities, scientific, statistical and consumer interests, as well as health regulatory bodies. The CMO will determine how this work will be taken forward.I also wish to take this opportunity to highlight the publication, on 14 May 2004, of the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the family cases of

My honourable friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Ruth Kelly) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.In July 2002, Ron Sandler published his report into the medium and long-term savings industry in the UK. He found that the savings market was daunting for the consumer, that the industry's products were complex and opaque and that there were weak competitive pressures on providers of financial products. He identified a number of formidable challenges for the Government, the regulator and for the industry. He recommended the introduction of a suite of simple regulated products—with capped charges, investment risk controls and no exit penalties—to build on the existing stakeholder pension and CAT-mark regime and to entrench competition in the market, stripping out substantial elements of cost.I can today announce some important steps forward which will offer a robust basis for the future of the savings industry—one in which effective competitive forces can be made to work for the benefit of consumers, the wider economy and, ultimately, the industry itself.First, in response to Ron Sandler's recommendations, the FSA has successfully market-tested a new basic advice regime for stakeholder products. This would reduce the time taken for a typical pension sale from several hours to approximately 30 to 40 minutes. In the future, employees would be able to buy a pension or other stakeholder product in their lunch hour.The FSA has today launched its consultation on the details of the new basic advice regime. The regime reflects the simpler, risk-controlled nature of stakeholder products while maintaining consumer protection.Secondly, I can today announce that the charges on the new stakeholder regime will be excellent value for consumers, while allowing lower-income consumers greater access to financial products.The Government have always maintained that the price cap for stakeholder products should reflect the economics of the stakeholder market.Therefore, in 2003, the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions commissioned research by Deloitte on the market impact of a range of price caps to inform the Government's decision on the price cap. This research is being published today. We have also consulted widely with consumer groups and industry.For the deposit account product, the Government have decided that the interest rate earned should be no lower than 1 per cent below the Bank of England base rate. This product will replace the cash ISA for which the price cap was set at 2 per cent below the base rate and therefore represents even better value for money for consumers.For the medium-term product, the Government have decided to set the cap at an annual management charge of 1.5 per cent for the first 10 years that the product is held and 1.0 per cent thereafter. This will provide excellent value for money for consumers while giving providers satisfactory returns and the scope for price competition under the cap.In the pension market, the stakeholder pension has already had a huge impact. Nearly 2 million stakeholder pensions have been sold and charges have been driven down right across the industry. When the price cap was set in 2000 it allowed for advice to be charged for separately. However, the market has not evolved as expected, with very few firms separately charging for advice. The result has been that the industry has been reluctant to sell its products to lower-income consumers. We have listened to representations from consumer groups and from the industry. The Government have therefore decided to raise the cap on the annual management charge for the stakeholder pension product to 1.5 per cent for the first 10 years that the product is held and 1.0 per cent thereafter, matching the cap set for the new medium-term product and encouraging long-term saving. This will allow the cost of basic advice to be incorporated under the cap, while maintaining excellent value for customers.The Government would expect there to be significant price competition under these caps and in particular prices to be lower than 1 per cent for substantial numbers of stakeholder products sold, for example, without advice or to group schemes. We intend to review the new caps in three years to assess their impact on competition in the market.We realise that, for less efficient providers these charge caps represent a challenge. But it is only right that firms are challenged so that our objectives of good deals for consumers and increasing efficiency are met. But for those firms that can exploit innovative and efficient ways of distributing stakeholder products, these charge caps represent an excellent opportunity for profitable growth and so I hope that they will be welcomed by the financial services industry.The Treasury consultation document is available in the Vote Office and the Library of the House.

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Hewitt) has made the following Written Statement.The Government were expecting to receive a decision from the European Commission in summer 2004 on the Government's proposed restructuring aid to British Energy plc. Receipt of a positive decision is a condition of the proposed restructuring of the company.Due to the need to complete final assessments in relation to the financing of the company post-restructuring, it will now not be possible for the Government to present all the necessary information to the Commission in time to enable the Commission to take a decision before its summer break. Consequently, I now expect the Commission to take a decision in the autumn 2004.British Energy continues to make progress on its restructuring, which remains subject to a number of significant uncertainties and important conditions. As I have said previously, the Government's contingency plans to fund the administration of the company should any of the restructuring conditions not be met or the restructuring fail for any other reason will, therefore, remain in place.

My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Nigel Griffiths) has made the following Written Statement.I am pleased to announce that in accordance with the requirements of the Chemical Weapons Act 1996, I have today laid a report before the House on its operation during 2003.

My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Gerry Sutcliffe) has made the following Written Statement.I aimed to publish the Government's response to the Office of Fair Trading report on the estate agency market in England and Wales by 18 June, but we have received a number of recent representations on the report which we are still considering. I expect the response to be published shortly.

The Travel Office contact, managed jointly by the two Houses, has been let for a number of years to American Express. This contract will expire at the end of August.Following a full open competition under EU procurement rules, it has been decided to award the new contract to Carlson Wagonlit Travel (CWT). CWT will offer a wide range of services, including an office within the Palace of Westminster, access to preferential prices for both air and rail travel, foreign exchange and an Internet self-booking facility for those who wish to book online. It is expected that the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations will apply, and the jobs of existing staff in the Travel Office will thus be protected.