The Minister of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change (Mr. Mike O'Brien): My right hon. Friend the then Secretary of State for the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform wrote to the Business and Enterprise Select Committee in September to inform members of EDFs takeover offer for British Energy. I am placing copies of his letter in the Libraries of the House.
The Council reached political agreement on the Commissions third energy package on the functioning of the internal energy market. There were discussions of the climate and energy legislative package and energy security. The Council agreed conclusions on energy efficiency.
Discussions on the internal energy market were based on compromise presidency texts and focused on a level playing field clause, put forward by a number of member states as a way of allowing Governments, which have secured ownership unbundling in their domestic markets, to control takeovers by vertically integrated companies. The final presidency compromise text met their concerns and political agreement was reached on this basis. This will allow the Council to prepare a common position, which will form the basis of negotiation with the European Parliament.
There was a wide-ranging debate on the 2020 climate and energy package. The presidency argued that in the current financial crisis it was even more important for the EU to maintain political leadership on climate issues and urged member states not to lose momentum on progress. The Commission and presidency both considered that it was possible to reach agreement on the package by the end of the year.
In the debate, member states addressed a number of issues (interim targets, the inclusion of aviation, the transport target and sustainability, a review clause and renewable projects of European interest) set out in questions issued by the presidency to steer the debate. The presidency concluded that, despite concerns about the financial crisis, there was a common desire to move forward and discussion with the European Parliament should continue.
The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Jane Kennedy): I am today depositing copies of the annual report on the number of incidents of fly-tipping recorded by local authorities on the Governments Fly-capture database in 2007-08. This report gives detailed information on the number and type of incidents, the type of land where the incident occurred and the estimated cost to authorities of dealing with it.
I am pleased to announce that there was a reduction of 7.5 per cent. in the number of recorded fly-tipping incidents from 2006-07. I am also pleased to highlight the good work carried out by local authorities in increasing the number of enforcement actions against fly-tipping by 26 per cent. from the previous year.
This report is also available from the DEFRA website at: http://www.defra.gov.uk/ENVIRONMENT/localenv/ flytipping/flycapture.htm
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jacqui Smith): On 8 January 2008 I wrote to the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) asking them to consider a multi-year deal for police officers starting in September 2008. In my letter I made clear that, if the PNB agreed to this proposal, then the settlements that form part of such a deal could be implemented in full.
On 15 October 2008 the PNB recommended to me a multi-year pay deal for police officers starting in 2008. This deal is for an award of 2.65 per cent. from 1 September 2008, 2.6 per cent. from 1 September 2009, and 2.55 per cent. from 1 September 2010. This means by 2010 a police constable will be able to earn up to £36,500, 50 per cent. more than in 1997. It includes a reopener clause that would be triggered by changes in the two criteria of economic and labour market conditions and recruitment and retention.
I am pleased that we have agreed a multi-year pay deal for the police that is one of the fairest pay deals in the public sector. All involved in the negotiations have worked hard, and in a spirit of co-operation. I have the highest regard for the police and the tireless work they do to protect and serve the public. This deal gives police officers and their families valuable financial certainty for the future and I hope that it will reach their pay packets in full in time for Christmas. This deal will also
provide the benefits of stability to the police service, and demonstrates discipline in the face of temporarily high inflation and current economic conditions.
I have also agreed, for the period of this settlement, that the Home Secretary will be bound by a decision of the Police Arbitration Tribunal (PAT) as to whether the re- opening criteria have been met. I would of course carefully consider any recommendation made to me by the PNB or PAT about a subsequent substantive adjustment to the settlement arising from this process.
I confirm that as a result of this agreement I will end the current consultation process for a police pay review body and that the Government will not take any legislative steps to introduce a police pay review body during the lifetime of this Parliament.
I believe that this agreement signals a new stage in the relationship between the two sides of the Police Negotiating Board. I hope that we can now work together to improve policing for both the police service and the public.
The Minister of State, Home Department (Mr. Phil Woolas): This year sees the biggest changes to Britains immigration and border security system for 45 years. Our policy will deliver strong borders, a selective migration system and an expectation that newcomers earn the right to stay. Our ambition is that migration policy maximises benefits for Britain and manages local impacts.
This strategy underpins our Australian style points system, reforms to spouse visas and requires us to modernise visit visas. Earlier this year, my predecessor published our strategy for comprehensively overhauling our visit visa system. Today we are publishing a further statement on the first of these changes with the creation of a separate category for business, sport, entertainer and special visitors. Copies are being placed in the Library of the House.
In respect of business visitors we are bringing currently separate immigration rules and concessions together in one coherent visa; and making clear what business visitors can do here and what they cannot. We believe, after consulting stakeholders, that having a list of permissible activities is a good way of defining them.
We are introducing a new visa to provide for visiting sports-people based on the current concessionary arrangement. Our purpose here is to ensure that the contribution of overseas visiting sports people to the UKs sporting tradition continues as now, while making clear the circumstances in which sports people can come to the UK outside of the points-based system for participation in sport.
Similarly, we are introducing a new visa to provide for visiting entertainers and the circumstances in which they may come to the UK in that capacity, outside of the points-based system. In effect, we are retaining the
current concessionary arrangement while removing two criteria relating to festivals that add little value to the current arrangements.
Lastly, there are a number of groups of visitors for whom specific immigration rules have been introduced as a need was identified or for which concessions existed outside the rules. The new special visitor visa brings these together although the specific criteria that currently apply to each of these categories would be retained.
The Leader of the House of Commons (Ms Harriet Harman): I am today announcing details of the House of Commons calendar until October 2009, details of which can be found on the Leaders Office website at www.CommonsLeader.gov.uk.
The House will rise for the Christmas recess at the end of business on Thursday 18 December 2008, returning on Monday 12 January 2009. The constituency recess week will begin at the end of business on Thursday 12 February, the House will return on Monday 23 February. The House will rise on Thursday 2 April for the Easter recess, returning on Monday 20 April. The Whitsun recess will begin at the end of the sitting on Thursday 21 May and the House will return on Monday 1 June.
The House will rise for the summer on Tuesday 21 July, returning on Monday 12 October. The Friday dates for consideration of Private Members Bills will be 27 February, 6 March, 13 March, 20 March, 27 March, 24 April, 8 May, 15 May, 12 June, 19 June, 26 June, 3 July and 16 October.
We are making this joint statement in recognition of the concerns expressed by members of the armed forces community about the possible impact on the service which the Pensions Appeal Tribunal (PAT) (England and Wales) provides for them as a result of implementing the Act.
To reflect the special nature of a jurisdiction serving those who alone in this country contract with the state to lay down their lives in its service and in recognition of the special relationship between service personnel and the Government as characterised by Command Paper (CM 7424The Nations Commitment: Cross-Government support to our armed forces, their families and veterans), it has been decided to establish a War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation Chamber within the first-tier tribunal to ensure that service personnel can benefit from the advantages of being within the new tribunal structure, whilst ensuring that the unique nature of the jurisdiction is not compromised or diluted.
The implementation of the Act will bring benefits to this jurisdiction, including extended rights of appeal, a guarantee of continued judicial independence, the ability readily to draw upon suitably qualified judges and medical experts within the wider tribunal system if required, greater judicial support and influence; a more efficient administrative support; and access to the entire Tribunals Services hearing venue network. None of this will be at the expense of the level of service now provided by the Pensions Appeal Tribunal (England and Wales). Our aim in making this statement is to ensure that the armed forces community are reassured that the valued features of the PAT are preserved and protected in the new system.
This joint statement explains the basis on which the work of the PAT (England and Wales) will transfer into the first-tier tribunal under section 30 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007, if Parliament approves the draft Transfer of Tribunal Functions Order 2008.
That order transfers the functions of the PAT (England and Wales) into the first-tier tribunal. That tribunal enjoys a statutory guarantee of continued judicial independence under section 3 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, as amended by section 1 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. The present PATs do not have such a guarantee although in practice they are independent of Government. The transfer also makes it possible for there to be a further appeal on a question of law against assessment decisions by claimants in all parts of the United Kingdom, something which is not possible under the existing statutory framework.
The first-tier tribunal will be divided into a number of chambers by an order made under section 7 of the 2007 Act. The First-Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal (Chambers) Order 2008 provides for the first-tier tribunal to be organised into chambers, including a separate war pensions and armed forces compensation chamber. The order assigns all of the functions of the current PAT (England and Wales) to that chamber. The order has the concurrence of the Lord Chancellor and the Senior President and has been laid before Parliament.
Procedural rules specific to the war pensions and armed forces compensation chamber have been drafted and signed by the Tribunal Procedure Committee, following consultation with ex-service organisations, their advisers and the President of PAT (England and Wales) The rules have been submitted to the Lord Chancellor and have been laid before Parliament. In establishing rules that are specific to this chamber those who currently use PAT (England and Wales) will have the same level of procedural protection as users of the PATs in Scotland and Northern Ireland, as rules will be made with the specific needs of this jurisdiction only in mind. Members of the armed forces community were concerned that this protection would not be provided if the chamber shared rules with other chambers in the first-tier tribunal.
In further recognition of the special relationship, other measures have been taken to ensure that appeal panels must include those who understand the particular nature of service in the armed forces, and for the jurisprudence in Scotland, Northern Ireland and England and Wales to remain consistent.
The Senior President of Tribunals has produced a draft practice statement on composition of tribunals. The President and Deputy President of the PAT have been consulted on the draft and are in agreement with it. The draft practice statement requires the continued use of service members on hearing panels within the war pensions and armed forces compensation chamber and maintains their present role without diminution or alteration. The Qualifications for Appointment of Members to the First-Tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal Order, as laid before Parliament, requires that service members have considerable experience of service in Her Majestys naval, military or air forces.
A decision made at a hearing of an appeal in this chamber will normally be dealt with by a three member panel of one judge, one service member and one medical member. Alternatively, but only where the chamber President considers it appropriate, a decision at a hearing may be dealt with by a four member panel of one judge, one service member and two medical members. Panels are expected to strive to reach a unanimous decision.
Appeals from the war pensions and armed forces compensation chamber and from the PATs in Scotland will lie to the upper tribunal created by the 2007 Act, which will take over the jurisdiction of the Pension Appeal Commissioners. Assessment appeals from the PATs in Northern Ireland will also lie to the upper tribunal and entitlement appeals will continue to go to the Pension Appeal Commissioners in Northern Ireland who are themselves judges of the upper tribunal. We therefore expect that the jurisprudence will develop in a common and coherent way across the United Kingdom.
The Lord Chancellor will in addition establish within three months an advisory steering group for armed services work with an independent chair. Representatives of charities who represent appellants at appeal hearings and proposed by COBSEO will be invited to join this group, as will representatives of the judiciary and administration for the PATs in Scotland and Northern Ireland. The remit of the group will include consideration of the implementation of existing procedures, changes the Government or tribunal proposes to make to the procedures, and the applicability of any such changes across the jurisdictions.
The Lord Chancellor will ensure that staff deployed on armed services work will be staff who understand armed services requirements and who will work in effective liaison with the organisations who represent users.
Branding will continue to be distinct so that users understand they are dealing with a specialist armed forces jurisdiction.
The aim of making this statement is to set out how the valued features of the PAT are preserved and protected in the new system in recognition of the unique role of the armed forces community, and in acknowledgement of the concerns that were raised in response to the consultation on implementation of Part 1 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act.
Following a debate on the draft conclusions presented by the presidency on the greening of transport, the Council failed to achieve unanimity. It is likely that the Council will return to this issue in December.
There was a policy debate on the proposal for a directive on cross-border enforcement in the field of road safety. A key issue in the debate was whether the proposal could be adopted under the first pillar, as currently intended by the presidency and supported by some member states, or whether it should be a third pillar (Justice and Home Affairs) issue. The UK expressed its view that the third pillar would be the correct legal base. Pointing out the UKs strong record in this area, we recognised the concerns and underlying objectives of the proposal, but stressed that it was necessary to go forward with practical measures. The majority of member states supported a third pillar approach. Following this debate, work will continue in the working group and Coreper, and it is expected that the issue will return to the Council in December.
The Council agreed conclusions on third countries participation in the inclusion of aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme, following agreement on the EC directive earlier in the year. The conclusions were acceptable to the UK.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|