First report of Session 2010-11 : Documents considered by the Committee on 8 September 2010, including the following recommendations for debate, the Cotonou Agreement; a twelve-point EU action plan in support of the MDGS; European security and defence pol

Twenty-first report of Session 2010-11 : Documents considered by the Committee on 9 March 2011, including the following recommendations for debate, use of passenger name records for law enforcement purposes, report, together with formal Minutes

Forty-first report of Session 2010-12 : Documents considered by the Committee on 14 September 2011, including the following recommendations for debate, Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy; Financial management: prevention of Fraud

How complaints are handled determines the quality of the relationship between consumers and public services. The best performing organisations welcome complaints as a way of engaging consumers. A failure to recognise the importance of complaints leads to insufficient redress for the individual, limits the impact that complaints have in improving services, and alienates the public. In some parts of public services, there are encouraging signs of increased attention to good complaints handling. However, Government as a whole cannot be said to be complying with best practice in complaints handling or adapting to the needs and expectations of today's citizen. Success depends on the right leadership. The Committee recommend that: there should be a minister for government policy on complaints handling; the primary objective of the Cabinet Office review of complaints handling in Government should be to change attitudes and behaviour in public administration at all levels in respect of complaints handling; in respect of complaints from MPs handled by ministers, replies must be accurate, clear and helpful and with no sharing of confidential information or delegation of responsibility for responding; the Government should create a single point of contact for citizens to make complaints about government departments and agencies; and the Government should provide leadership to those responsible for various parts of administrative justice, to ensure that there is a clear and consistent approach to sharing, learning and best practice.

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

Around 80% of online gambling in the UK is conducted with operators which are not licensed here. In December 2012 the Government published a very short draft Gambling (Licensing and Advertising) Bill to require overseas gambling operators to obtain a Gambling Commission licence. The overseas-based remote gambling operators generally opposed the Bill, on the grounds it was unnecessary for consumer protection, might drive consumers to cheaper unlicensed operators and was principally intended to bring overseas operators within the UK's tax regime. Much of the UK-based gambling industry, sports bodies and organisations working to combat problem gambling supported the principle of the Bill. Almost all those who gave oral or written evidence to the Committee raised the issue that the enforcement regime would have to be rigorous in order to provide any of the benefits to consumers. The Committee supports the principle that gambling should be regulated on a ’point of consumption' basis. The Committee also notes the concerns raised about taxation of the online industry. The Government stated that the ability to bring all operators serving UK consumers within the tax net is a consequence, but not the prime motivation, of the draft legislation. The Committee notes in this regard that, in setting a tax rate for remote gambling, the Treasury should bear in mind that too high a rate would be liable to drive customers and companies into the unregulated, black market.

This report notes mounting concern that UK Armed Forces may be falling below the minimum utility required to deliver the commitments that they are currently being tasked to carry out let alone the tasks they are likely to face between 2015 to 2020 when it is acknowledged that there will be capability gaps. The Committee is concerned that UK Armed Forces will be continually operating at the maximum level envisaged by the Defence Planning Assumptions. The Committee is not convinced that this aspiration can be achieved by co-operation with our allies given the challenges of aligning political with operational needs. The SDSR identified seven military tasks and the Defence Planning Assumptions that underpin them. However the Review fails to show how decisions such as those on the Aircraft Carriers and Nimrod MRA4 will lead to the Armed Forces being able to undertake those military tasks. The Committee has serious concerns over the realisation of what is called "Future Force 2020", the Government's intended shape of the Armed Forces from 2020, particularly as the provision of the necessary resources is only a Government aspiration, not Government policy. The MoD must reform, and ensure substantially improved transparency and control over, its finance and budgetary practices. When committing to undertake new operations the Government should state from the outset where that operation fits in the Defence Planning Assumptions and which of the military tasks it is meeting. The Committee is concerned that the Government seems to have postponed the sensible aspiration of bringing commitments and resources into line, in that it has taken on the new commitment of Libya while reducing the resources available to MoD.