| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
The change in the resource element of the DEL arises from:
(i) a transfer of £45,846,000 administration spend from the climate change group located in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC);
(ii) a transfer of £34,000 administration spend to Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) for skills strategy;
(iii) a transfer of £152,512,000 programme spend from the Climate Change Group located in DEFRA to DECC
(iv) a transfer of £34,000,000 Non-voted Departmental Unallocated Provision (DUP) to the DECC;
(v) take up of End Year Flexibility for Investing in Communities Invest to Save Budget (ISB) of £56,000.
The change in the capital element of the DEL arises from:
(i) a transfer of £402,030,000 from the Climate Change Group located in DEFRA to DECC; (ii) a transfer of £16,000,000 Non-voted Departmental Unallocated Provision (DUP) to DECC.
The change in the depreciation budget is due to:
(i) £3,102,000 transferring to DECC for the machinery of government transfer;
(ii) a transfer of £12,050,000 non cash costs from Natural England to DEFRA across non-cash categories;
(iii) re-profiling of Forestry Commissions (FC) Budget of £3,000,000 across non-cash categories.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Departmental Expenditure Limits
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (David Miliband): Subject to Parliamentary approval of any necessary Supplementary Estimate, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL) will be increased by £128,154,000 from £2,080,557,000 to £2,208,711,000. The administration budget will be decreased by £18,000 from £430,535,000 to £430,517,000. Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital are as set out in the following table:
| Change | New DEL | ||||
| Voted | Non-Voted | Voted | Non-Voted | Total | |
| (1 )The total of 'Administration budget' and 'Near cash in Resource DEL' figures may well be greater than total Resource DEL, due to definitions overlapping. (2 )Capital DEL includes items treated as resource in Estimates and accounts but which are treated as Capital DEL in budgets. (3 )Depreciation, which forms part of Resource DEL, is excluded from the total DEL since Capital DEL includes capital spending and to include depreciation of those assets would lead to double counting. | |||||
The change in the resource element of the DEL arises from:
I. £18,000 transfer of administration budget to DIUS for Government Skills.
I. Take up of £10,800,000 other current EYF in respect of restructuring.
II. Take up of £6,500,000 other current EYF in respect of adverse currency fluctuations.
III. Claim on the Reserve of £24,500,000 other current in respect of Consular Premiums.
IV. Claim on the Reserve of £24,000,000 current grants in respect of the International Subscriptions cost sharing agreement.
V. Transfer of £4,700,000 from the Home Office for work on migration.
VI. Transfer of £1,000,000 other current from DfID in respect of the Returns and Reintegration Fund.
VII. Transfer of £200,000 other current from DfID in respect of bilateral project work in Africa.
VIII. Transfer of £11,120,000 other current to the Security and Intelligence Agencies for expansion and capability.
IX. Transfer of £1,800,000 other current to MoD for counter-narcotics work in Afghanistan.
X. Transfer of £270,000 other current to the Security and Intelligence Agencies for expansion and capability.
XI. Transfer of £104,000 other current to the Home Office in respect of gratis visas for Zenit St Petersburg fans.
XII. Transfer of £10,000,000 other current to capital in respect of capital pressures, in particular FCO Services capitalisation.
I. To reflect the estimated indirect resource impact of the introduction of the IFRS Financial Instruments trigger point 1 on unrealised gains for forward purchase of Stirling contracts of £80,000,000, with an offsetting debit in impairments.
II. Transfer of £39,400,000 other current from RfRl to RfR2 in respect of Peacekeeping pool funds in Africa.
III. Transfer from depreciation to near cash other current of £20,000,000.
IV. Transfer of £6,900,000 other current to British Council in respect of exchange rate fluctuations and the cost of the Turner exhibition in China.
V. Budget neutral increase in A-in-A and administration costs of £20,000,000 for services provided to partners across government, including FTN telecom charges.
VI. Budget neutral increase in A-in-A and other current of £22,000,000 for Consular fees.
VII. Budget neutral increase in A-in-A and other current of £309,700,000 for UKBA charges following the MoG change.
VIII. Budget neutral increase in A-in-A and other current of £600,000 in respect of FCOS interest payments.
I. A claim on the Reserve of £27,600,000 current grants in respect of the take up of the balance of Peacekeeping pool funds of which £13,925,000 for Africa and £13,675,000 for Rest of World.
II. Transfer of £15,350,000 current grants from MoD in respect of the Stabilisation Aid Fund of which £13,600,000 is for work in Afghanistan and £1,750,000 for work in Iraq.
III. Transfer of £1,000,000 current grants from DfID in respect of global conflict prevention work.
IV. Transfer of £6,516,000 current grants from DfID in respect of conflict prevention work in Africa.
V. Transfer of £216,000 current grants from DflD in respect of work in Ghana by the Carter Centre.
VI. Transfer of £916,000 to DflD in respect of management of Stabilisation Aid Fund projects in Afghanistan.
I. Transfer of £39,400,000 other current from RfRl to RfR2 in respect of Peacekeeping pool funds in Africa.
The change in the capital element of the DEL arises from:
I. Transfer of £10,000,000 other current to capital in respect of capital pressures, in particular FCO Services capitalisation.
Binyam Mohamed
The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (David Miliband): On 5 February I made an oral statement to the House on the case of Mr. Binyam Mohamed, following the judgment handed down in the High Court on 4 February. As I underlined in the debate that followed, we are working as fast and as hard as we can to secure Mr. Mohamed’s release from Guantanamo Bay and return to the UK.
I now wish to update the House regarding progress made in Mr. Mohamed’s case.
Senior Government officials, including Her Majesty’s Ambassador to the United States, have held further talks with the US Administration in recent days. President Obama issued Executive Orders on 22 January which established a review of the cases of all those detained at Guantanamo Bay. Following our representations, the US Administration has now agreed that Mr. Mohamed’s case should be treated as a priority in this process. We continue to work with the US to achieve a swift resolution.
We have long been concerned with reports of Mr. Mohamed’s welfare and medical condition. Yesterday I met with Mr. Mohamed’s US military defence counsel, Lt. Col. Yvonne Bradley, and her account underlined these concerns. The US Government has also agreed that Foreign Office officials should visit Mr. Mohamed as soon as possible. The visit will help us make preparations for his return, should the review confirm a decision to release him. The team will include a medical examiner, who would take part in any return, so that he may assess Mr. Mohamed’s condition himself and report back.
I will keep the House informed on this issue.
Home Department
Intercept as Evidence (Progress Report)
The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Jacqui Smith): The Privy Council Review of intercept as evidence was published on 30 January 2008.
In his statement to the House of 6 February 2008 my Right Honourable Friend the Prime Minister affirmed his commitment to the principle of using intercept as evidence and the case for doing so provided that national security could also be protected. He also agreed that the
programme of work recommended by the Report be taken forward, with the objective of legislation. At the same time, the Privy Council Review itself, acknowledged that before legislation could be brought forward, further extensive work was required.
I am pleased to be able to report on progress. I am also having placed in the House Libraries copies of a progress report to my Right Honourable Friend the Prime Minister on behalf of the Advisory Group of Privy counsellors, comprising the Right Honourable Sir John Chilcot, the Right Honourable Sir Alan Beith MP, the Right Honourable Michael Howard QC MP, and my noble Friend the Right Honourable Lord Archer of Sandwell. I should like to express my thanks to the Advisory Group for their diligent and constructive support for this programme of work. I should also like to echo their praise for the “commitment and thoroughness with which the interception community has sought to address the issues”.
The Privy Council Review rightly recognised that interception is of vital importance to public protection and national security. It also recognised that the issues raised by the potential use of intercept product in evidence are complex. This has proved to be the case, as the Advisory Group’s report makes clear. However, we have now reached the end of the programme’s first phase, with work to design in detail the model recommended by the Privy Council Review, now largely complete. Work is now in hand to flesh out the detailed guidance required in advance of testing the practicalities of the model.
However, it is clear a number of key issues remain to be resolved if the objective of facilitating the prosecution of terrorist and other serious crime with the assistance of intercept as evidence is to be achieved. As the Advisory Group observes there is an intrinsic tension between meeting legal needs and the operational requirements identified by the Privy Council Review. It is also not yet clear whether the key safeguard of our being able to revert to the current regime should implementation fail would itself be legally sustainable.
The Government agrees with the Advisory Group that “securing the intended increase in successful prosecutions while ensuring fairness of trials remains difficult and may not prove possible in most complex cases”. The Government agrees on the importance of a further stage of work being taken forward urgently to test the viability of the model developed.
The Government’s intention remains to be in a position to bring forward legislation for use of intercept as evidence as soon as possible. However, it believes, given the importance of interception for national security, including the ability to prevent and disrupt serious crime and terrorism, that if the results indicate that there is no practical solution, they should be accepted. Equally, if it is necessary to take further time to iron out the detail of an apparently workable solution, we should do so rather than be driven by the legislative timetable.
Immigration and Nationality Services (Fees)
The Minister for Borders and Immigration (Mr. Phil Woolas): I am today laying regulations on fees for immigration and nationality services.
The Government review the fees on a regular basis and makes appropriate changes as necessary. We have continued with our strategic approach to charging; setting certain fees on the basis of the value of the service as well as cost recovery in a number of areas.
Some fees will continue to be set at or below levels that reflect the administrative costs of the service. These fees must be set out in regulations before both Houses of Parliament and are subject to the negative procedure. Other fees continue to be set at levels above the normal administrative costs of the service. This allows us to generate revenue which is used either to set certain fees below cost recovery or to deliver the Government's wider objectives such as the doubling of resource for enforcement announced in March 2007, and the fund to manage the transitional impacts of migration announced in July 2008. These fees must also be specified in regulations before both Houses, but are subject to the affirmative process.
Today I laid regulations setting the fees charged above cost recovery. I am announcing our proposals for all the immigration and nationality fees we intend to charge during 2009/10 in order that Parliament may consider these regulations in context. For transparency, I have included the estimated unit cost for each route, so that it is clear which fees are set at or below cost recovery and the degree to which certain other routes are not.
Finally, we have also proposed fees for several new processes and services we provided previously free of charge. These new services were specified in the Fees Order laid on the 21 January. The fees for these services will be set in negative regulations. Full details on how to apply for these services will be provided on our website, www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk.
A full table of fees for 2009-10 is set out at Annex A.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |