| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Business Research and Development
15. Mr. Breed: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his proposals for fiscal incentives for investment in business research and development. [6193]
Mrs. Liddell: The 2 per cent. cut in corporation tax announced in the Budget, combined with the abolition of tax credits for pension funds, provides a better environment for long-term investment, including investment in research and development.
Mr. Breed: Does the Economic Secretary accept that perhaps even more of companies' funds should be
invested in research and development? Does she also agree that further incentives, by way of providing allowances against additional corporation tax, might be a better use of tax receipts?
Mrs. Liddell: The hon. Gentleman asks a sensible and interesting question, but I shall refer him to the statement that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor made on the Budget. The purpose of reducing corporation tax and abolishing tax credits for pension funds was specifically to ensure that companies could take their own decisions on research and development by retaining more of their profits.
If the hon. Gentleman cares to check the most recent figures for research and development--those of 1995--he will find that there was a 2 per cent. drop in research and development in the United Kingdom. I believe--and the Government believe--that companies that are able to invest more of their own retained profits have a much greater opportunity to invest them in research and development.
Mr. Nicholas Winterton:
I warmly welcome the Government's Budget decision to improve capital allowances--something for which I have been campaigning for a great many years. But does not the hon. Lady accept that the increase in interest rates--they will have gone up three times in seven weeks under the new Government--will be counterproductive, particularly to manufacturing industry, which will not be able to invest and may well start making people redundant when it faces increased competition because of the value of the pound?
Mrs. Liddell:
I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman should make that point as it allows me to return to the Dispatch Box and say that if the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer had been prepared to accept the advice of the Governor of the Bank of England, action would have been taken on interest rates at an appropriate time. It was the complete failure of the previous Chancellor to have the courage to accept the advice of the governor that has created a number of interest rate rises in recent months.
Rev. Martin Smyth:
While I welcome the Government's response, does the Economic Secretary agree that good firms will seek to invest in research and development--some have been following the foresight plan--but that the Treasury does not seem to be fulfilling
Mrs. Liddell:
I am interested in the hon. Gentleman's point; indeed, I shall return to the point that I made earlier. One reason why the Government cut corporation tax was that the Treasury believes that more money should be invested by companies in accordance with their own priorities. The Treasury does not believe that companies should be forced into having to make dividend payments that might not be in line with their best interests in future. I acknowledge the importance of research and development--particularly in Northern Ireland and in my country, Scotland, especially for high-tech, small companies. It is important that we create a climate in which companies feel free to make those investments without extraneous pressures on them.
16. Mr. Love:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he expects the register of government assets to be completed; and when he will publish the results. [6194]
Mr. Darling:
The Government are planning to complete the register of Government assets and will publish it by November, as we promised in our manifesto.
Mr. Love:
May I take this opportunity to welcome the fact that the Government are producing their register in November? Their willingness to publish the results show that they are committed to openness and transparency in their economic policy. I also welcome the fact that, for the first time since the Domesday book, the Government have a complete list of what they own. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government can make more informed use of their assets by knowing exactly what they own?
Mr. Darling:
Many people would find it astonishing that the Government have not, until now, known what they own. As my hon. Friend said, for the first time, this November we will be able to show what the Government own. We intend to publish that register because it will enable the Government to make decisions about how best to use public assets in a way that people find acceptable and put them to their optimal use.
Bosnia (War Criminals)
3.30 pm
The Secretary of State for Defence (Mr. George Robertson): With permission, Madam Speaker, I should like to make a statement about indicted war criminals in Bosnia Herzegovina.
At about 8 o'clock this morning London time, British troops serving with the NATO-led stabilisation force in Bosnia took action to detain two individuals against whom the International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia--the ICTY--had served sealed indictments.
One was Simo Drljaca, the former police chief of the municipality of Prijedor; a town near Banja Luka in Bosnia Herzegovina. The other was Milan Kovacevic, director of the Prijedor hospital.
The two individuals had been indicted by the ICTY for complicity in genocide, for acts against the Bosnian Muslim and Croat people, in the municipality of Prijedor, between 29 April 1992 and 31 December 1992. In 1992, Drljaca was the Deputy Minister of the Interior of Republika Srpska and thereafter the chief of police in Prijedor. Kovacevic was formerly president of the executive board of the municipality of Prijedor.
The first indictee, Drljaca, was challenged this morning by SFOR personnel. He immediately drew a pistol and shot and wounded one of our soldiers. The other soldiers then returned fire in self-defence and Drljaca was fatally wounded. Two other people who were with Drljaca were detained. They have been transferred to The Hague. Three handguns were recovered at the scene.
Drljaca and the wounded soldier were transferred by helicopter to Tuzla military hospital. The British soldier was wounded in the leg, but is not seriously injured. Milan Kovacevic was detained at the hospital and has now been arrested by the ICTY and transferred to The Hague.
Those detentions took place in accordance with the stabilisation force's mandate from the North Atlantic Council, as NATO Secretary-General Solana has made clear. The action had the specific authority of the Secretary-General, the Supreme Allied Commander Europe and the North Atlantic Council. SFOR troops have instructions to detain indictees if they come across them in the course of their normal duties, and providing the tactical situation permits. The SFOR mandate has not been changed. The injury to our soldier and the death of Drljaca illustrate the grave risks involved in such operations and the courage and selflessness of those who serve us.
I am sure that the House will join me in congratulating and commending the courage and professionalism of the British forces involved. I am very proud of their performance, which was up to the highest military standards.
The Government have made it clear repeatedly that they believe that all those indicted for war crimes should face trial at the International Tribunal at The Hague. I strongly held that view when I was an Opposition spokesman, and I repeated my personal commitment--and that of this Government--at the press conference that I held in Sarajevo in May.
With the Chief of the Defence Staff, General Guthrie, I went to Pale on the same visit and told the Bosnian Serb member of the Bosnia Herzegovina presidency, President
Krajisnik, of our serious interest in indicted war criminals and, I have to say, we formed the clear impression that the Republika Srpska authorities intended to do little to discharge their solemn obligations. They were not, and have not since been, left in any doubt about the resolve of Britain and our allies to bring to justice those accused of such terrible acts. We will take action when it is practical and sensible to do so.
Thousands of British troops have now served in Bosnia in United Nations and NATO-led operations. They have served to bring peace and stability to a small country whose people have suffered unimaginable horrors. Our troops, like those who acted this morning, serve with skill, professionalism and a genuine commitment to restore a semblance of normality and unity to Bosnia Herzegovina. We owe them and their families a huge debt and today is a good day to make that very clear.
Sir George Young (North-West Hampshire):
I welcome the right hon. Gentleman's statement and confirm that the Opposition give their full support to the action taken by British troops as part of the NATO operation in Bosnia. I assure the House that we strongly support action taken to bring to justice indicted war criminals charged with genocide and other serious crimes.
We join the right hon. Gentleman in wishing a speedy recovery to the injured British soldier and in commending British troops for the bravery that they have displayed under fire. Does not that bring it home to everybody that peacekeeping missions inevitably bring some risk to life and limb?
I quite understand that these are highly sensitive matters and that the Secretary of State will not want to divulge additional details. However, would I be right in saying that the mandate has not changed, but the way in which it is being implemented may have been changed? Was that discussed at the recent NATO summit?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |