| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Joint Projects (French Armed Forces)
10. Mr. MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will list the joint projects currently undertaken with the French armed forces; and if he will make a statement.[6516]
Dr. Reid: Today, on Bastille day, I am delighted to say that defence co-operation with the French armed forces is extensive, both bilaterally and multilaterally. As my hon. Friend knows, the joint projects that we have with the French are too numerous for me to list here today.
Mr. MacShane: I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. Is he aware that a year ago British warplanes flew over the Champs Elysees to salute the new Labour values of liberty, equality and fraternity? Does he agree that for three reasons--co-operation on the ground in Bosnia, procurement to create an effective European arms industry and, most important, ensuring that France plays a full and
integrated role in the North Atlantic alliance and in European defence matters--Britain and France must co-operate as fully in the future as we have in the past?
Dr. Reid: Yes, indeed. That co-operation will be taken further on Wednesday when my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence meets Mr. Alain Richard. I am glad to reassure my hon. Friend that military co-operation with our French allies is as wide as ever, whether it be on the ground in Bosnia, over the skies of Iraq, through the many joint activities with the Royal Navy or through the procurement of the common new-generation frigate. Although there is no United Kingdom participation in the Bastille day parade, we are reciprocating last year's invitation in that we have invited the French air force, under the auspices of the Franco-British European air group, to participate in this year's Lord Mayor's show on 8 November. We look forward to developing even further our mutual co-operation with our French allies.
Mr. Sayeed: If NATO were required to defend Hungary, French forces would be involved. Will the Minister explain how NATO would defend Hungary if it were attacked? Hungary is surrounded by non-NATO members with large armed forces.
Dr. Reid: I am not entirely sure what that has to do with French integration into NATO. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that all states that become members of NATO enter as full members, so the treaty obligations for the defence of any of those members apply to all the other members, and this country will carry out its obligations.
Anti-personnel Land Mines
11. Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what representations he has received in respect of his policy on anti-personnel land mines.[6517]
Mr. George Robertson: I have reviewed a wide range of representations welcoming the Government's policy on anti-personnel land mines.
Helen Jones: I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Will he reassure my constituents who have written to me on this matter that the exceptional use of land mines will be confined largely to circumstances in which the lives of British troops are at risk? Will he also reassure the House that if such land mines were to be used, we would de-mine those areas after hostilities had ceased?
Mr. Robertson: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The exceptional circumstances in which the military might ask for those instruments to be used would be limited. The decision would be taken by Ministers, and any such decision would be reported to Parliament. In such exceptional circumstances, all land mines would be plotted and would be taken up.
May I take this opportunity to clarify something that I said at Defence questions a month ago? I am advised that, contrary to my earlier understanding, it is not possible at present for my Department to say categorically that all anti-personnel land mines laid by Britain in the past were subsequently taken up. I now understand that
one mine laid in the Falklands is unaccounted for, and that a number were not removed after the Gulf conflict. We currently know of 12 mines that were left in Iraq, and my Department is trying urgently to establish the full facts.
Dr. Tonge:
Will the Secretary of State again clarify the words "exceptional use"? Is he saying that, if a military commander wishes to use land mines, in the interests of the British armed forces, he will go to the right hon. Gentleman and his decision will have to be ratified by the House before he is allowed to use those mines? That seems a strange way of conducting a military campaign.
Mr. Robertson:
I assure the hon. Lady that there is nothing unusual about it. We would agree to suspend our moratorium on the use of anti-personnel land mines only if we were satisfied that, in a specific operation, the security of our forces would be jeopardised without them. As in many other cases, the military commanders and chiefs of staff would come to Ministers to seek agreement. Parliament would not be ratifying the decision, but would be informed of it.
Clergy Stipends and Pensions
36. Sir Sydney Chapman: To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, if he will make a statement on the annual amount and proportion of the Church Commissioners' revenue allocated to clergy stipends and pensions.[6500]
Mr. Stuart Bell (Second Church Estates Commissioner, representing the Church Commissioners): In 1996, the commissioners' total expenditure on behalf of the Church was £136.2 million. Of that, £32.5 million, or 24 per cent., went on stipends, and £79.6 million, or 58 per cent., went on pensions for the clergy.
Sir Sydney Chapman: I thank the hon. Gentleman for his answer, and welcome the Church Commissioners' achievement in recreating a diversified and prospering asset base in order largely to meet the cost of clergy pensions and stipends. Will he confirm that the commissioners have also achieved the objective of having 50 per cent. or more of their funds in equities? Does not the recent movement of the stock markets augur well for the ability of the Church Commissioners to play an even greater part in meeting the cost of, in particular, clergy pensions in the next financial year?
Mr. Bell: I thank the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. He will know that, in 1996, the return on assets of some £3,000 million was 17 per cent. That was a good achievement on the part of the commissioners. Income last year was £145.8 million, and the year before that it was £137 million. I can confirm that 70 per cent. of the commissioners' stock exchange assets are in UK stocks and shares. The market is buoyant, the economy is doing well and there is every confidence in the future. That is good news for the Church, for those who rely on the Church and for anyone who wants to see just how well the Church Commissioners can invest their money.
Mr. Cohen: Did my hon. Friend note the silly and unreasonable court judgment that was reached at the end
of last week--that clergymen do not have a terrestrial employer? It is recorded that water was once turned into wine, but not that hot air can be turned into wages. Will my hon. Friend assure us that the Church Commissioners will be a responsible employer on earth?
Mr. Bell: When I attended the Durham miners' gala on Saturday, my noble Friend Lord Dixon said that I was God's shop steward. The decision at the industrial tribunal last week related to the actual work of the clergy, and to whom the clergyman owed his duty in the cure of souls. It is not, however, for the Church Commissioners to involve themselves in the decisions of industrial tribunals. As I implied in my response to the hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Sir S. Chapman), their work involves dealing with assets, and investment of those assets, in the interests of the Church.
Investment Income
37. Mr. Simon Hughes: To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, what are the policies of the commissioners for maximising the investment income of the Church of England.[6501]
Mr. Stuart Bell: The commissioners are anxious not only to maximise investment income but to maximise the value of the assets themselves. As I said in response to an earlier question, the commissioners' portfolio has been repositioned. Of our stock exchange investments, we have 70 per cent. invested in United Kingdom shares; 10 per cent. in shares elsewhere; 11 per cent. in United Kingdom fixed interests; and a large portfolio of agricultural and other property.
Mr. Hughes: I thank the Minister and take this opportunity to welcome him to his new job and wish him well. The Church of England has performed a minor miracle in rescuing itself from some unwise investment decisions much more quickly than investors normally do. Has it addressed the Budget's implications for its investments and, in particular, the effect of the removal of tax credits on dividends, which must have a severe impact? If that reduces the Church's income, what will it do to persuade its earthly or other masters to take action in its interests in the coming year?
Mr. Bell: I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his kind comments. I have had discussions with the Church Commissioners on the removal of advance corporation tax to ascertain its impact in future years. We may make submissions to my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. Bayley: Does my hon. Friend agree that in the case of investment in land or in rights over land, such as shooting rights, a body such as the Church Commissioners should balance the maximisation of its income from those assets against other considerations, such as public access to that land?
Mr. Bell: I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It is always the intention of the Church Commissioners to maximise the value of their investments in relation both to income and to the value of the asset. Clearly, they must reconcile
that aim and the impetus of their investments with wider social considerations such as the one to which my hon. Friend refers.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |