Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord St John of Bletso: My Lords, while it is very encouraging that additional funds have been allocated to policing, will greater funds be allocated to providing more detectives who are qualified to investigate e-crimes with the National High Tech Crime Unit?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, that has been a part of our overall strategy. It is our intention to ensure that we have that dedicated expertise. Like the noble Lord, the Government fully recognise the importance of that.
In her contribution to the debate, the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, raised the issue of whether we should establish a department of homeland security. Obviously this has been a part of the protracted national debatethe issue arose during the course of proceedings on the Civil Contingencies Billand our view is that it is not required. There is more discussion to be had on how we continue to take counter measures and it is important in that debate to focus more on the different structures of government.
We believe that our approach provides for the enhanced resilience that we will require in the future. Some countries have a homeland security ministerial profile and others do not. It is hard to say which approach works best and whether there is a wrong or right approach. What is more important is the level of investment in resilient staff that we have managed to
9 Dec 2004 : Column 1080
achieve and the importance that Ministers place on the issue. In both respects, the United Kingdom is performing very strongly.
Ministerial accountability for matters of resilience is clear. The Home Secretary is the lead at Cabinet level; he is supported by Nick Raynsford as Minister for civil resilience, Hazel Blears as Minister for counter-terrorism and Ruth Kelly as Minister responsible for the Civil Contingencies Secretariat. The Cabinet Office co-ordinates activity across government under the Security and Intelligence Co-ordinator, Sir David Omand. So there is a clearly understood and definable structure. All other Ministers have a responsibility and role to play in giving support to that.
I have spoken for some time because I felt it was only right to go through as many of the issues as I could. In summing up, I want to say this: I think it is right that we place the emphasis as we do. It is right that the NISCC is an inter-departmental centre that draws together a range of skills from across government. All the staff in those departments should be praised for their efforts in this important field.
However, the protection of the critical national infrastructure could not take place without the considerable input of the private sector. As we said at the outset, it runs most of the UK's CNI and devotes notable effort to supporting the NISCC across the breadth of its work and activity. Its contribution to the UK's security is worthy of particular note.
It is clear that the Government have put in place the right mechanisms to ensure that the CNI is protected to the best of our abilities. Our defensive measures are among the best organised in the world, and are widely acknowledged as being so. The risk of electronic attack is growing, due to the increased sophistication of technology. It is important to remember that the very technology that enables business and facilities growth in the United Kingdom can also be the route by which it can be undermined unless the risks are properly appreciated and protected against.
We have committed considerable time, considerable resource and dedicated effort to tackling this issue. But we are not complacentwe recognise that there is more to do, and, of course, we have the will to do it.
House adjourned at twenty-one minutes past five o'clock.
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Northern Ireland has made the following Ministerial Statement.
Earlier today, I placed in the Libraries copies of the annual report on the implementation of the regional development strategy for Northern Ireland 2025 (RDS), covering the period 200304. Implementation of the RDS is not simply a process for the Department for Regional Development; it is a shared process involving a wide variety of public and private organisations, businesses, voluntary and community organisations and individuals. Annual reporting on the implementation of the RDS involves assessment of progress being made against a number of critical threshold indicators (CTIs) and each of the strategic planning guidelines (SPGs) contained in the strategy.
The RDS sets out a regional brownfield target of 60 per cent by 2010 for towns with a population of 5,000. Recent information provided by the Department of the Environment shows a fall from almost 88 per cent in 200102 to 81 per cent in 200203.
Progress is also measured against each of the SPGs. The information is published annually in the monitoring report and is available on the department's website. With only three years monitoring, it is not possible to draw any significant conclusions on the data collected so far.
During 2003 and 2004, the department engaged with a wide range of stakeholders in the public and private sectors and in the community. A series of four sub-regional seminars were held in the north-west, the south-east, the west rural and the north-east. The aim was to identify the development needs of sub-regions and to examine the potential of the RDS to provide a framework through which those needs could be addressed.
The Planning (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 2003 requires the department to examine emerging development plans for "general conformity" with the RDS. In March 2004, the department received the draft Magherafelt area plan for consideration, and a statement of general conformity was issued in the same month.
The annual report comments on the RDS commitment to a five-year reviewa focused assessmentof the strategy to be carried out in 200506. The purpose of the focused assessment is to consider any aspects of the RDS where in-course adjustments to strategic guidance would be important prior to a major review at the 10-year point. Work has already commenced on a review of regional housing
9 Dec 2004 : Column WS58
figures, and I expect to make an announcement on that shortly. The focused assessment process will provide the opportunity for consultation on the outcome of this housing work.
The Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor (Lord Falconer of Thoroton): My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
In its report Voting for change: An electoral law modernisation programme, the Electoral Commission has made proposals and recommendations for electoral reform to address the needs of the voter and make elections more accessible; to protect the integrity of the democratic process; and to modernise electoral registers. The commission advocates the modernisation of registers, which would involve the introduction of individual registration, a building block on which safe and secure arrangements for voting away from polling stations could be delivered.
Our response welcomes many of the Electoral Commission's recommendations and sets out our priorities for change. They are focused on three key outcomes: engaging more people in the political process; building public confidence in the electoral system; and delivering electoral services in a way that is more efficient and more responsive to the needs of the voter.
We are committed to maintaining the security and integrity of the electoral process and to enhancing its openness and transparency. We will ensure that any innovative methods of voting that are introduced will be as secureif not more securethan the traditional methods. Specifically, we propose, when parliamentary time allows, to introduce measures to make ballot papers more secure; to establish new offences around electoral fraud and personation; to provide for clear English guidance to accompany postal ballot papers and for guidance to key statutory forms to be available in different languages and alternative formats for those who need them; and to give greater access to observers at polling stations and at other stages of the electoral process, such as the count.
We are sympathetic to the principles of individual registration and appreciate the benefits that it might bring, but we are concerned about maintaining a simple and clear system and comprehensive registers. We are therefore considering the options to support voting away from polling stations with an approach that preserves the completeness and integrity of electoral registers.
We hope that the publication of this response will substantially move forward the modernisation agenda for elections. Copies of this government response to the Electoral Commission's report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
9 Dec 2004 : Column WS59
Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |