The PCA’s initial analysis of the first reports submitted by the pub companies highlighted three key themes:

• the small number of Market Rent Only (MRO) tenancies agreed
• the high number of tenancies subject to forfeiture, seizure or abandonment
• the use of legal notices to oppose the renewal of tied tenancies on their existing terms.

Mr Newby said: “The information submitted by the pub companies and the monthly MRO data being published by them confirm the picture suggested by earlier PCA research. It is a picture of tied pub tenants experiencing what they perceive to be significant barriers to exercising their MRO option in a timely and straightforward fashion.

“I have written to the pub companies and this will be the focus of the next round of bi-lateral meetings with each CEO in October. I want to get behind these figures and know what is driving the high rate of tenant departures, including the extent to which tenant churn may be preventing them from exercising their rights under the Code.

“Additionally, all tied pub tenants who have received a MRO proposal will shortly be asked to complete a PCA questionnaire setting out their experiences of the MRO process and its outcome. I will use this information and the responses from the pub companies to target further interventions to secure tenants’ access to MRO.”

The PCA also wants to examine whether the new rules on pre-entry information, training and business plans introduced under the Code are having the intended effect of ensuring that people taking on a tied tenancy are fully prepared and supported to succeed.

And he will be looking in detail at cases where pub companies have issued notices under section 25 of the Landlord and Tenant Act (LTA) 1954 to oppose the granting of a new tenancy to an existing tied pub tenant for any evidence of links between tenants requesting MRO and LTA proceedings to take possession.

The Code requires pub companies to provide the PCA with an annual compliance report which provides detailed and accurate accounts of how they have complied with their obligations under the Code, of any breaches raised or alleged by tied pub tenants and the steps taken as a consequence, as well as what the pub companies have done to ensure compliance with the Code.

The PCA required pub companies to submit information relating to the status of their tied estates, the management of their tied agreements, the conduct of their tied rent assessments and handling of MRO requests as well as the impact of proceedings under the LTA.

Notes to editors:

1. The compliance reports cover the period from the introduction of the Pubs Code on 21 July 2016 to 31 March 2018.
2. Full statement from the PCA including compliance reports are available at www.gov.uk/pca
3. Any queries should be directed to office@pubscodeadjudicator.gov.uk

The Honourable Ministers responsible for Trade in the UK, G Hollingbery and in SACU and Mozambique, herein represented by B. J. Kenewendo of Botswana, met in Cape Town, Republic of South Africa, today, 28th August 2018.

We welcomed the significant progress made on a future UK, SACU, and Mozambique EPA that will ensure that the parties maintain the current market access and replicate the effects of the existing EU-SADC EPA, which will ensure continuity of trade relations between the UK, SACU and Mozambique once the EU-SADC EPA no longer applies to the UK. In this regard therefore:

Last year, the Chancellor announced more than £1 billion of funding to stimulate further and faster roll-out of full fibre networks, and drive the next generation of mobile connectivity.

As part of this, Government’s £190 million Local Full Fibre Networks (LFFN) Challenge Fund was launched to boost commercial investment in networks across the whole of the UK.

Successful projects in this third round of funding will enable gigabit capable connections to key public buildings and businesses and also encourage broadband providers to create additional connections to local homes and businesses.

Minister for Digital, Margot James said:

We recently set out our ambition for a nationwide full-fibre broadband network by 2033, and initiatives like this will be instrumental in achieving that. We want to hear from any local authority interested in taking part, so we can work closely with them on their plans to help them secure funding.

The final decision on funding will be made by the Local Full Fibre Networks Investment Panel, who will assess the proposals, placing particular importance on a number of areas, including:

• Rural focus: Projects demonstrating the effectiveness of Local Full Fibre Networks delivery in rural locations and hard-to-reach areas
• 5G or Barrier Busting: Projects focused on overcoming obstacles to the commercial roll-out of fibre and 5G
• Public Sector Productivity: Projects targeting improvements to public sector services, such as enabling schools to access new cloud based educational tools, or allowing medical professionals to remotely monitor patient health
• Market Development: Projects deliberately targeting the development of the full-fibre market in a particular area, including incentivising aggregation

Following the successful first two rounds of grant funding, a new process has been designed to allocate the remaining £95 million from the Local Full Fibre Networks Challenge Fund.

There will be no fixed date for formal submissions – instead, local bodies with an interest in bidding for the Challenge Fund are invited to submit an informal expression of interest to the programme. Government officials will then enter into a dialogue with them to assess their project and where appropriate help them shape their approach.

Local bodies are now being invited to submit an expression of interest

This programme is part of the government’s expanded £31 billion National Productivity Investment Fund aimed at improving productivity, which is key to raising living standards. This fund has already earmarked £740 million specifically for improving Britain’s digital infrastructure, ensuring the UK is match-fit for the future as part of our modern industrial strategy.

• Government to invest £92 million of Brexit readiness money on plans for independent satellite system
• 18-month study will look at the design and development of UK programme
• This will inform the decision to create the system as an alternative to Galileo
• The UK Space Agency will lead the work with full support from the Ministry of Defence

The money has been allocated from the £3 billion Brexit readiness fund announced at last year’s Budget and will be rolled out over the coming months.

Satellite navigation systems like GPS are increasingly important for commercial, military and other critical applications, from guiding aircraft, ships and emergency services to helping millions of people find their way on car journeys. A recent government study estimated that sustained disruption to satellite navigation would cost the UK economy £1 billion per day.

The government has been clear that the UK wants to remain involved in the Galileo programme, and is negotiating with the European Commission to this end.

But without the assurance that UK industry can collaborate on an equal basis now and in the future, and without access to the necessary security-related information to rely on Galileo for military functions such as missile guidance, the UK would be obliged to end its participation in the project.

The UK Space Agency is leading this phase of the work to look at options for a British Global Navigation Satellite System, which would fully meet UK security requirements and support the UK’s sovereign space and cryptography sectors. This significant new investment will develop specific technical proposals with the Ministry of Defence playing a full role in support.

The 18-month engineering, design and development project will deliver a detailed technical assessment and schedule of a UK global positioning system.

This would provide both civilian and encrypted signals and be compatible with the US GPS system.

UK industry has been instrumental in developing Galileo technology and encryption, and this experience will be used in developing the alternative, with a number of multi-million-pound contracts available for British space companies.

Business Secretary Greg Clark said:

“Britain is a world leader in the space industry and satellites. We are investing in an alternative option to Galileo to ensure our future security needs are met using the UK’s world-leading space sector.

“Our position on Galileo has been consistent and clear. We have repeatedly highlighted the specialist expertise we bring to the project and the risks in time delays and cost increases that the European Commission is taking by excluding UK industry.

“Britain has the skills, expertise and commitment to create our own sovereign satellite system and I am determined that we take full advantage of the opportunities this brings, backed by our modern Industrial Strategy.”

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said:

“The danger space poses as a new front for warfare is one of my personal priorities, and it is absolutely right that we waste no time in going it alone if we need an independent satellite system to combat those emerging threats. This alternative system and the UK’s very first Defence Space Strategy which I will launch later this year will be a further boost to military skills, our innovative businesses and our genuinely world-leading role which has seen us make such a key contribution to Galileo.”

Dr Graham Turnock, CEO of UK Space Agency said:

“We remain confident in the strength of our space sector and look forward to working in partnership with them on the exciting prospect of a national satellite navigation system.”

Even if the decision was taken not to create a UK independent satellite system and the UK remained a full member of Galileo post-Brexit, this work would support UK jobs and expertise in areas including spacecraft and antenna design, satellite control systems, cryptography and cyber security. It will also support the UK’s growing space sector.

Growing space sector

Britain’s space industry is going from strength to strength. Last week (22 August) the European Space Agency’s (ESA) revolutionary British-built wind measuring spacecraft Aeolus was launched. The spacecraft was built by Airbus Defence and Space in Stevenage and other British businesses provided critical elements to the mission, including a camera, software and propulsion systems.

At the Farnborough International Airshow in July, the government committed £31.5m to support the development of a spaceport in Sutherland in Scotland and commercial operations from the site, which could be the first in Europe and will see rockets lift off from UK soil.

Horizontal launch sites also have significant potential in a future UK spaceflight market, which could attract companies from all over the world to invest in Britain. Sites such as Newquay, Glasgow Prestwick and Snowdonia will be boosted by an additional £2m fund to grow their sub-orbital flight, satellite launch and spaceplane ambitions.

Low cost access to space is important for the UK’s thriving space sector which builds more small satellites than any other country, with Glasgow building more than any other city in Europe.

The UK Space Agency is driving the growth of the space sector as part of the Government’s Industrial Strategy with major initiatives including the £99m National Space Test Facility at Harwell, and the UK continues to be a leading member of ESA, which is independent of the EU.

The plight of the Rohingya community is one of the largest refugee crises in recent history. And it is one of the most pressing humanitarian and human rights crises facing this Council, our Council, today.

A year on the Rohingya population of Rakhine State were subjected to a campaign of the most truly horrific violence, resulting in grave violations of their human rights and indeed expulsion and deportation from their homes. It is this Council which has a duty to ensure they receive justice and the prospect of a peaceful future.

The report issued yesterday by the UN Fact-Finding Mission is the most authoritative account yet of the crimes committed against the Rohingya community. The report details widespread rape and murder committed by the Burmese military; the systematic oppression and persecution they have suffered for many years; and the patterns of violence and violations committed elsewhere in the country.

This Council is charged by the international community with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security. Crimes against humanity such as those detailed in the Fact-Finding Mission’s report threaten international peace and threaten security. Forced deportations across borders, such as the Rohingya suffered into Bangladesh, are unfriendly acts, but also threaten international peace and security. So it is incumbent the Council should consider the report in depth once the Fact-Finding Mission have made their final presentation to the Human Rights Council in September.

But let us be clear, those most affected by this crisis now reside in Bangladesh. As we have already heard, over 700,000 Rohingya refugees, joining more than 300,000 displaced people in previous rounds of violence. Bangladesh, together with the UN and other humanitarian organisations, has indeed saved many thousands of lives. Bangladesh have also, working with the UN and international NGOs have taken significant steps in recent months to mitigate the worst effects of the monsoon season.

As we have already heard, indeed so movingly from Ms Blanchett, the Rohingya need our continued support. Their needs range from food, shelter, clean water to education, livelihoods, and specialised assistance – and we must not forget this -they need specialised support and assistance for those victims of sexual violence.

The UN’s Joint Response Plan remains desperately underfunded and it is imperative that we all step up and play our part.

But the solution to this crisis – let us be clear – lies in Burma. The Rohingya deserve justice. The Fact-Finding Mission has concluded that what happened in Rakhine last year warrants “the investigation and prosecution of senior officials in the Tatmadaw chain of command, so that a competent court can determine their liability for genocide in relation to the situation in Rakhine State.” With so much at stake, it this Council has a duty to ensure there is no impunity for such acts.

As our Prime Minister’s Special Representative on Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict, let me assure this Council, let me assure Rohingya community: this is a key priority for our Prime Minister, our Government, and for myself.

And the Rohingya must be able to return home to Rakhine safely, voluntarily and importantly, with dignity. That means more than returning to IDP camps on the Burmese side of the border, but real progress towards a more just long-term solution and state of affairs in Rakhine.

As a result of this Council’s concerted action, though we have seen some steps forward.

The Burmese government has engaged with Special Envoy Christine Schraner Burgener whose diplomatic work we support. They have signed an MoU with UNHCR and UNDP. They have established a Commission of Inquiry to look into reports of human rights violations.

These steps are welcome. They have not been easy for the civilian government, whose action remains constrained by the military, but more needs to be done. The steps taken are not enough.

The Burmese authorities need to provide UNHCR and the UNDP unconditional and unqualified access to northern Rakhine. Until these UN agencies can operate effectively, it is impossible to argue that conditions in Rakhine are anywhere near what is required for the safe, voluntary, and dignified repatriation that this Council has called for.

There is an urgent need for domestic acceptance and accountability in Burma. It is essential that the Burmese government sets out how its Commission of Inquiry will be able to investigate these crimes with full impartiality, how it will access UN information, and how it will be linked to a judicial process to hold accountable those responsible and let us be clear– particularly those in the military.

It is far from clear that any mechanism established by the Burmese authorities can do this, which is why the UK supports keeping open the option of justice delivered through international mechanisms.

We need to see practical progress on implementing the Rakhine Advisory Commission’s recommendations. That includes recommendations on economic development, which are part of the solution, but it also includes those related to the rights of the Rohingya, including a pathway to citizenship.

These recommendations taken comprehensively, as they were set out by the revered and respected late Kofi Annan, remain the best blueprint for a long-term solution in Rakhine.

So what does it mean for us? What does it mean for the Security Council? It means, in our view, that the Council should do three things:

Firstly, continue to assist Bangladesh and the UN in providing protection and assistance to the Rohingya population and their host communities.

Second, take concerted action to push for justice and the prospect of a peaceful future that the Rohingya community deserve. This includes holding a serious discussion on the conclusions of the Fact-Finding Mission’s report.

And, thirdly, support those in Burma who are pushing for progress. But we should also be prepared to use the full range of tools at this Council’s disposal to apply pressure against those – including the Burmese military – who obstruct it. The United Kingdom has done this within the European Union where we have sanctioned seven senior Burmese military officials.

But we all accept that this crisis is complex and has deep roots. It will not be solved overnight. But let us also be clear, it will not be solved without continued engagement and action from this Council.

So as we mark one year on from the violence of August 2017, this Council should shoulder its responsibility and do justice to the gravity of the attacks on the Rohingya community.

We should not be just discussing and debating. We need to be acting, acting to bring an end to the appalling ethnic cleansing, to help those suffering refugees, and bring justice for the victims of appalling crimes.

And I appeal to all fellow members, let us put aside our differences. Let us act on the principles of our Charter and on our obligations in front of us. Let us act in the interests of Leila, let us act in the interests of Youssef, let us act in the interests of tens of thousands of Leilas and Youssefs. Let us act for the sake of humanity.