| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Philip Hammond (Runnymede and Weybridge): On behalf of Mrs. Lilly Shaw, I too thank the Minister for his expression of sympathy and thank the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for taking the lead in the case of Mr. Stanley Shaw, who, although a constituent of mine, is a citizen of New Zealand.
This is not a time for recrimination or blame. Granger Telecom is based in my constituency and I ask the Minister to acknowledge the active, key role taken by the company over the past couple of months in seeking to secure the hostages' release.
Will the Minister confirm that the advice to which he referred, which was given to the company, principally consisted of drawing the company's attention to the published advice to travellers? As of today, that advice lists 16 countries, including Sudan, Algeria and Sri Lanka, to which travellers are advised not to travel under any circumstances. British companies are doing business in many of those countries. Has the Minister reviewed all the internal correspondence at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and all the records of conversations between his Department and the company? Is he absolutely sure that the company was sent an unambiguous message from the British Government about its presence in Chechnya? I have visited the company since the tragic events took place, and I formed the impression that the message sent from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was not in totality as unambiguous as the Minister would have the House believe.
Mr. Lloyd:
I associate myself with the hon. Gentleman's message to his constituents and their family.
I stick by the information that I have given the hon. Gentleman previously. The advice was unambiguous. I must point out that Granger Telecom met Foreign Office officials directly and did not come to talk about other countries such as Sudan. I do not want to get into a slanging match across the Dispatch Box, but I repeat that I am absolutely of the view that the advice given was specific and could not have been misinterpreted.
Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham):
On behalf of the Opposition, I join the Minister in expressing anger and outrage at the brutal, cold-blooded murders of Darren Hickey, Peter Kennedy, Rudolf Petschi, and Stanley Shaw. I agree with the Minister that the House's thoughts and sympathy must go first and foremost to their families who are having to come to terms with these senseless killings in the war-torn region that the men were helping to rebuild.
I thank the Minister for the details that he has given of the discussions that his Department is having with the authorities in Moscow, but will he give us a better idea of what British resources he expects to put at the Russian authorities's disposal to establish who was responsible for this atrocity? Will he also tell us, perhaps in an effort to clarify what was known by the Foreign Office, when he knew that there were separate negotiations over the release of these men, and whether the Foreign Office was consulted about them?
Will the Minister confirm reports that the company advising on negotiations with the kidnappers was Control Risks and say whether he had any contact with that company? Will he further confirm, as my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr. Hammond) asked him to, that his Department really did provide clear and unambiguous advice to Granger Telecom and that the Department of Trade and Industry was also providing advice to companies operating in Chechnya? If so, could copies of that advice be made available?
Will the Minister say how, in the advice that he gives to companies, he distinguishes between countries that are dangerous and countries that are potentially lethal? Are there any other British or Commonwealth citizens in the Chechen Republic? If so, what advice have they been given, and are there any plans to help them leave the republic safely? Will he comment on reports that 10 people are still being held in captivity in Chechnya?
Finally, in the light of these tragic deaths, what lessons can be learned? Will the Minister be changing the Foreign Office procedures for informing companies about the dangers of operating in hostile regions?
Mr. Lloyd:
Let me say once again as forcefully as I can that I have absolutely no doubt that the advice given was unambiguous and clear and could lead only to the conclusion that Chechnya was too dangerous a place in which to operate and that British citizens should not have been there. There is no question of reviewing the nature of that advice. It is already very clear and still stands for anyone who seeks our advice and, indeed, for anyone who ignores it.
We are aware of, I think, two other British citizens still in Chechnya. Our advice to them and those working with them has again been clear and direct, especially in the light of the taking of the hostages. Our advice to that organisation was clear and continues to be clear.
On resources offered to the Russians, I repeat that it is a matter of practical reality that the writ of the Russian authorities does not easily run in Chechnya. That is why my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary asked Foreign Minister Ivanov to communicate with Chechen President Maskhadov in order that the Chechen authorities should begin to pursue the question of what happened and to bring those responsible for it to justice. We shall seek to bring our influence to bear at that level.
The British Government's position on the question of hostages and ransom demands has always been very clear. We do not pay ransoms. The Government confirmed that policy, which obtained under the previous Government, at an early stage. In the interests of British citizens, that is right. Nor do we advise others to pay ransom. As a Government, we were not involved in any negotiations.
Granger Telecom communicated with those responsible for taking the hostages and has been active in seeking the release of such hostages. As the issue must initially be one for the company, I am not in a position to provide any details of the process of those negotiations. At this stage, it is right and proper that information should be made available to the families before it comes into the public domain. The company has agreed with me that the families are entitled to the utmost frankness in the provision of whatever information they need to cope with their almost insupportable loss.
Mrs. Angela Browning (Tiverton and Honiton):
May I thank the Minister for his condolences to Rudi Petschi and his family, who lived in my constituency? The Minister said that he will investigate the matter. These callous and tragic deaths deserve a thorough investigation that will assist us should we ever need to go through anything similar again.
I draw the Minister's attention to a specific piece of information which deserves scrutiny. He said that the Foreign Office had no warning that an attempt was to be made to rescue the hostages. I know how difficult it is to unscramble messages about what happened. However, yesterday, the Russian section of the BBC monitoring service in Caversham supplied me with a statement that it released at 0615 hours on Sunday from the head of the Chechen security services, which identifies that they knew where the hostages were--in a hamlet on Russian soil close to the Chechen border--and anticipated that Russian forces were likely to mount a rescue. Clearly, that needs to be investigated. Given that that information was in the public domain at 6.15 am on Sunday, will the Minister investigate why the Foreign Office did not know about the threat until the news broke yesterday?
Mr. Lloyd:
I thank the hon. Lady, too, for her opening remarks. I recognise that for her, as for others with a constituency interest, this is a difficult time. The four Members of Parliament who are most directly involved saw me some weeks ago precisely because they wanted to express their concern.
The hon. Lady must accept that Chechnya is a region where there is almost daily rumour, claim and counterclaim. Rather sadly, there is nothing unusual about the report that she read out. Such a report does not necessarily lead immediately to any practical action. I am aware of such statements, and certainly undertake to get to the bottom of the matter in order to piece together a proper picture of what happened and to see whether there are lessons to be learned.
In the context of the Chechnya of today, we are not dealing with a state organised in the way that we would expect elsewhere. We are dealing with a situation where banditry is the rule of law; unfortunately, our citizens were murdered by precisely that banditry.
Mr. Ian Taylor (Esher and Walton):
The Minister will be aware that the parents of Darren Hickey work and live in my constituency, and I am grateful to the Minister for his condolences, which I obviously share. The Hickeys have been through a very difficult time, as have the families of the other hostages, and no news was easily available. I appreciate the fact that the Minister explained the difficulty that our embassy in Moscow has in contacting people in Chechnya.
First, will the Minister--without again going into the details of what form of notice might have been given to the company--accept that the contract was a very substantial contract to a very serious company, Granger Telecom, which it was carrying out in association with a BT engineer; and that, therefore, the Government must have at least been aware of its significance, in the middle of Chechnya, bearing in mind its situation vis-a-vis Russia?
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |