The high cost family case planning process is being enhanced to improve efficiency and the service we offer providers and counsel. We have taken on board feedback from representative bodies and have improved the process for agreeing a contract.

What has changed?

From 3 June 2019, when a provider notifies the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) that a care case will be high cost, they will upload signed contract documentation to the Client and Cost Management System (CCMS) and apply immediately for a new cost limit of £32,500 via a cost amendment.

An interim CCFS plan will only be required if estimated costs exceed £32,500 at any point before the case concludes.

A final CCFS form must be submitted with the supporting Final Assessment Streamlining Tool (FAST) checklist documentation when the case concludes. This change will apply to both single counsel, QC and two counsel cases.

Why are you doing this?

The new CCFS notification process will allow providers and counsel to seek increased payments on account at an earlier stage against the £32,500 limit, aiding cash flow. It will also reduce the number of interim CCFS form submissions and the number of interactions via CCMS between providers and the LAA.

Work is presently being undertaken to set a higher initial cost limit for QC and two counsel high cost cases. We aim to publish this before the end of June.

Further information

Family High Cost Cases Guidance – for full details of the new process, high cost contract documents, case plans and supporting online training modules.

With your permission Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about British Steel.

It was announced this morning that the court has granted an application by the Directors of British Steel to enter an insolvency process. Control of the company will now pass to the Official Receiver – an employee of the Insolvency Service – who will run a compulsory liquidation.

The Official Receiver has made clear that British Steel employees will continue to be paid and employed and the business will continue to trade and supply its customers, whilst he considers the position of the company. In fact, employees were paid early with the May payroll being run yesterday, through cash being advanced by the company’s lenders.

As the House will recall, I made a statement on 1 May, setting out details of a bridging facility that the government agreed to provide to ensure that British Steel was able to meet its obligations under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) which fell due on 30 April.

The government provided the facility to purchase allowances worth £120 million against the security of 2019 ETS allowances which are currently suspended pending ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement.

Without this facility British Steel would have faced a financial pressure of over £600 million – the ETS liability plus a £500 million fine. This would not only have placed British Steel into an insolvent financial position, but the charge, attached to its operational assets, would have been likely to prevent any new owner from acquiring these assets in the future.

This transaction demonstrated the government’s continuing willingness to work closely with all parties to secure the long term success of this important business.

Following this agreement, the government has worked intensively with the company for many weeks to seek solutions to the broader financial challenges it has been facing.

The government and individual ministers can only act within the law, and this requires that any financial support to a steel company must be made on a commercial basis.

In the case of the ETS facility, this was based on the security of future ETS allowances.

In order to provide liquidity to the business in the face of its cash flow difficulties the government was willing to consider making a cash loan to the company and worked hard to investigate exhaustively the possibilities of this. However, the absence of adequate security; no reasonable prospect that any loan would have been repaid; and the shareholder being unwilling to provide a sufficient cash injection itself, meant that this did not meet the required legal tests.

I am placing in the Library of the House the Accounting Officer’s assessment of these proposals, drawing on professional and legal advice, which concludes:

It would be unlawful to provide a guarantee or loan on the terms of any of the proposals that the company or any other party has made, or any others we have considered. You must note that such an offer cannot be made legally, and that by making it you would be in breach of the Ministerial Code.

The insolvency removes Greybull from day to day control of British Steel. Given the government’s willingness to help secure British Steel’s future, demonstrated in the ETS facility, and the discussions that have taken place in recent weeks, the government will work closely with the Official Receiver and prospective new owners to achieve the best outcome for these sites. The government has provided an indemnity to the Official Receiver, who is now responsible for the operations, and we will take every possible step to ensure that these vital operations can continue, that jobs are secured, and that the sites at Scunthorpe, Skinningrove and on Teesside continue to be important centres of excellent steelworking.

During the days and weeks ahead I will work with the Official Receiver, the special managers and with a British Steel support group of trade unions, management, suppliers, customers and the local communities to pursue remorselessly every possible step to secure the future of these valuable operations.

Mr Speaker, this is a very worrying time for everyone associated with British Steel. Each one of British Steel’s sites has a proud record of steelmaking excellence and I am determined to see it continue. Britain and the world will continue to need high quality steel, and British Steel is amongst the best in the world.

Today is a very big setback for these operations, but it is far from being the end and we will take every possible step to secure a successful future for these vital assets – both people and plant.

Composites – materials made from 2 or more different materials that, when combined, possess additional qualities such as extra strength or heat resistance – are among the most promising research and industrial developments in decades. Composites such as carbon fibre have propelled progress in the aerospace and automotive sectors, with UK companies such as Airbus and Rolls-Royce optimistic about the future of composites.

But the composites sector is still growing, often regarded as immature and, following severe historical outcomes to some UK businesses, further industry commitment is still uncertain.

Innovate UK and the US-based Institute for Advanced Composites Manufacturing Innovation (IACMI), under UK Research and Innovation’s (UKRI) Funding for International Collaboration programme, have identified several priority areas of growth. In this competition, up to £1.7 million is available for international projects to develop disruptive technologies in the global composites market.

Stronger together

The competition will enable collaborative research and development projects between the UK and US within the composites sector that can produce a new product, industrial process or service. Projects must be disruptive, involve a technological risk and reach large international markets.

Areas projects can focus on include:

• sheet moulding compounds reinforced with carbon fibre
• non-destructive testing tools for automotive manufacturing
• development of automotive grade carbon fibre-reinforced polymers
• closing the loop on automotive carbon fibre prepreg manufacturing scrap

Projects must involve a UK business and/or UK research and technology organisation, and must include a partnership with a US project team. Applicants must contact the Knowledge Transfer Network to be put in touch with a US project team.

Competition information

• the competition opens on 29 May 2019 and the close date is at midday on 21 August 2019
• organisations of any size may apply
• total eligible project costs can be between £100,000 and £1 million, with a maximum grant of up to £300,000 for UK applicants
• an online briefing event will take place on 6 June 2019

During April, there was two new detentions of foreign flagged vessels in a UK port.

1. In response to one of the recommendations of Lord Donaldson’s inquiry into the prevention of pollution from merchant shipping, and in compliance with the EU Directive on Port State Control (2009/16/EC as amended), the Maritime and Coastguard agency (MCA) publishes details of the foreign flagged vessels detained in UK ports each month.

2. The UK is part of a regional agreement on port state control known as the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Paris MOU) and information on all ships that are inspected is held centrally in an electronic database known as THETIS. This allows the ships with a high risk rating and poor detention records to be targeted for future inspection.

3. Inspections of foreign flagged ships in UK ports are undertaken by surveyors from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. When a ship is found to be not in compliance with applicable convention requirements, a deficiency may be raised. If any of their deficiencies are so serious they have to be rectified before departure, then the ship will be detained.

4. All deficiencies should be rectified before departure.

5. When applicable, the list includes those passenger craft prevented from operating under the provisions of the EU Directive on Mandatory Surveys for the safe operation of regular ro-ro ferry and high speed passenger craft services (1999/35/EU).

Notes on the list of detentions

• Full details of the ship. The accompanying detention list shows ship’s International Maritime Organization (IMO) number which is unchanging throughout the ship’s life and uniquely identifies it. It also shows the ship’s name and flag state at the time of its inspection.
• Company. The company shown in the vessel’s safety management certificate (SMC) or if there is no SMC, then the party otherwise believed to be responsible for the safety of the ship at the time of inspection.
• Classification society. The list shows the classification society responsible for classing the ship only.
• Recognised organisation. Responsible for conducting the statutory surveys: and issuing statutory certificates on behalf of the flag state
• white (WL), grey (GL) and black lists (BL) are issued by the Paris MoU on 01 July each year and shows the performance of flag State. *Deficiencies The deficiencies listed are the ones which were detainable. Further details of other deficiencies can be provided on request.

SHIPS DETAINED IN APRIL 2019

Vessel Name: TANGO SOL

GT: 4369

IMO: 9155901

Flag: Cook Islands (Black list)

Company: Tango Shipping & Trading Ltd

Classification society: Bulgarian Register of Shipping

Recognised organisation: N/A

Recognised organisation for ISM Doc: N/A

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: N/A

Date and place of detention: 5th April 2019 at Hartlepool

Summary: thirty-three deficiencies with one ground for detention

Defective item	Nature of defect	Ground for Detention
15150 – ISM	Not as required	Yes

This vessel was released on 8th April 2019

Vessel Name: CHRISTOS THEO

GT: 32983

IMO: 9565118

Flag: Marshall Islands (White list)

Company: Cuma Shipmanagment Ltd

Classification society: Nippon Kaji Kyokai

Recognised organisation: Nippon Kaji Kyokai

Recognised organisation for ISM Doc: Nippon Kaji Kyokai

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: Nippon Kji Kyokai

Date and place of detention: 23rd April 2019 at Southampton

Summary: twenty-one deficiencies with one ground for detention

Defective item	Nature of defect	Ground for Detention
Emergency source of power – emergency generator	Not as required	Yes

This vessel was released on 29th April 2019

DETENTIONS CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS MONTHS

Vessel Name: KUZMA MININ

GT: 16257

IMO: 7721263

Flag: Russian Federation (Grey list)

Company: Murmansk Shipping Co

Classification society: RMRS

Recognised organisation: RMRS

Recognised organisation for ISM Doc: RMRS

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: RMRS

Date and place of detention: 18th December 2018 at Falmouth

Summary: thirteen deficiencies with six grounds for detention

Defective item	Nature of defect	Ground for Detention
01220 – Seafarers’ employment agreement (SEA)	Expired	Yes
18314 – Provisions quantity	Insufficient	Yes
01139 – Maritime Labour Certificate	Expired	Yes
01101 – Cargo Ship Safety Equipment (including exemption)	Survey out of window	Yes
10104 – Gyro compass	Inoperative	Yes
01104 – Cargo Ship Safety Radio 9 (including exemption)	Survey out of window	Yes

This vessel was still detained on 30th April 2019

Vessel Name: POSEIDON

GT: 1412

IMO: 7363217

Flag: Iceland (White list)

Company: Neptune EHF

Classification society: NA

Recognised organisation: NA

Recognised organisation for ISM Doc: DNV-GL

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: DNV-GL

Date and place of detention: 19th July 2018 at Hull

Summary: ten deficiencies with two grounds for detention

Defective item	Nature of defect	Ground for Detention
02106 – Hull damage impairing seaworthiness	Holed	Yes
07113 – Fire Pumps	Insufficient Pressure	Yes

This vessel was still detained on 30th April 2019

Vessel Name: TECOIL POLARIS

GT: 1814

IMO No: 8883290

Flag: Russian Federation (Grey list)

Company: Tecoil Shipping Ltd

Classification society: RMRS

Recognised organisation: RMRS

Recognised organisation for ISM DOC: RMRS

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: RMRS

Date and place of detention: 6th June 2018 at Immingham

Summary: twenty-seven deficiencies with eight grounds for detentions

Defective item	Nature of defect	Ground for Detention
10105 – Magnetic compass	Inoperative	Yes
10104 – Gyro compass	Inoperative	Yes
11129 – Operational readiness of lifesaving appliances	Not as required	Yes
10127 – Voyage or passage plan	Not as required	Yes
15150 – ISM	Not as required	Yes
11104 – Rescue boats	Not properly maintained	Yes
11101 – Lifeboats	Not ready for use	Yes
01117 – International Oil Pollution Prevention (IOPP)	Invalid	Yes

This vessel was still detained on 30th April 2019

Vessel Name: CIEN PORCIENTO (General Cargo)

GT: 106.

IMO No: 8944446.

Flag: Unregistered.

Company: Open Window Inc.

Classification society: Unclassed.

Recognised organisation: Not applicable.

Recognised organisation for ISM DOC: Not applicable.

Recognised organisation for ISM SMC: Not applicable

Date and place of detention: 4 March 2010, Lowestoft

Summary: thirty deficiencies including seven grounds for detention

This vessel was still detained on 30th April 2019

Notes to Editors • The MCA is a partner in the Sea Vision UK campaign to raise awareness and understanding of the sea and maritime activities. Sea Vision promotes the importance and economic value of the sector and works to highlight the exciting range of activities and career opportunities available to young people within the UK growing maritime sector.

• Follow us on Twitter: @MCA_media

For further information please contact Maritime and Coastguard Agency Press Office, on: +44 (0) 2380 329 401 Press releases and further information about the agency is available here.

An Environment Agency partnership project to conserve native white-clawed crayfish in Nottinghamshire is now in its third year.

The Signal Crayfish Control Project, led by the Nottinghamshire Biodiversity Action Group, hopes to build on the success of the past two years, to support recovery of white-clawed crayfish in Nottinghamshire.

Native white-clawed crayfish have been in decline since non-native American signal crayfish escaped into UK waters in the 1970s. These larger, invasive crayfish outcompete native species for food and habitat and carry a disease fatal to the UK species.

Peter Haynes, Biodiversity Officer at the Environment Agency in the East Midlands said:

Last year the project in Nottinghamshire saw the capture of 5,702 signal crayfish, which followed on from the capture of 7,800 signal crayfish in the previous year. This is a great result and after two years there are indications that the numbers and size of the non-native crayfish are reducing, which is a real positive.

We have been working with the Nottinghamshire Biodiversity Action Group and Nottinghamshire City Council and, most importantly, an army of volunteers to control the invasive signal crayfish in west Nottinghamshire.

Whilst we are encouraged by the signs of change, we still have a long way to go until we are satisfied our native crayfish populations are protected. We are also looking at creating ‘ark’ havens for the white-clawed crayfish to secure their future by relocating them to areas free from the invaders.

White-clawed crayfish, named for the pale colour of the underside of their claws, are the country’s largest native freshwater crustaceans. Generally growing to 30 – 40mm in length, some can live up to 12 years and reach 120mm long from tip to tail.

Invasive species pose a serious threat to our native wildlife and cost the UK economy £1.8 billion a year. Everyone can do their part to prevent the spread of invasive species and protect native ones by taking care to follow the biosecurity steps of thoroughly checking, cleaning and drying their clothes and equipment any time they have been in the water.

For more information visit the Non-native Species Secretariat website.