| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
British Council
Mr. Cox: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will make a statement on British Council work, funded by her Department, to support civil society, human rights and democracy in East and West Africa. [66199]
Clare Short: The British Council manage, under contract to the Department for International Development (DFID), a number of projects in East and West Africa which involve support for civil society, human rights and democracy. In East Africa these include a £1.4 million civil society programme in Kenya which funds a range of democratisation and human rights initiatives, a project to strengthen the capacity of the Ugandan National Electoral Commission and programmes to empower women in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania.
The focus in West Africa is Nigeria. There, the British Council manages a fund for small scale good government initiatives to strengthen accountability and transparency, human rights, democracy and training in conflict management. The annual budget was increased to £500,000 for this financial year, in particular to help with the transition to democratic rule now under way.
19 Jan 1999 : Column: 425
In addition, good government is an operational area for the British Council's grant in aid funding in East and West Africa, part of whose costs have been met by my Department.
Mr. Caplin:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment she has made of the use of funds donated to the Palestinian Authority by the European Union. [64594]
Mr. Foulkes:
The European Union, including individual Member States, has made a major contribution to supporting the Middle East Peace Process by providing 54 per cent. ($1.7 billion) of total development assistance to the Palestinians since 1993. This includes over 650 mecu provided directly by the European Commission to the Palestine Authority. My Department maintains good links with EC officials in Brussels and the West Bank and Gaza, and participates in the Maghreb/Mashreq Working Group at which aid policy towards EC projects for the Palestine Authority is discussed. To enable Member States to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of EC aid we pressed for an evaluation of the EC's recently expired five-year programme of assistance for the Palestinians. We understand that this evaluation is soon to be finalised, and expect to receive the findings shortly.
Mrs. Gillan:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to her answer of 11 January 1999, Official Report, column 23, if she will list (a) the countries and (b) the projects in respect of which overseas expenditure was misappropriated through corruption or fraud in 1996-97 and 1997-98; what prosecutions have taken place in respect of these amounts, and with what outcome; and if any of the money has been recovered. [66595]
Clare Short:
In each of the following projects the amount shown was not properly accounted for and we have concluded that this was, or may have been, due to fraud. To date no prosecutions have been mounted and none of the money has been recovered although some locally engaged staff have been dismissed in two of these cases. Investigations are still proceeding into each of the 1997-98 cases. I cannot of course give details of these ongoing cases which could prejudice any proceedings which might take place.
1996-97: Zambia: Health and Population Sector, £6,287. The loss from a locally operated imprest account was investigated thoroughly but there was insufficient evidence against any individual for a successful prosecution. Arrangements for financial management have since been tightened.
1997-98: (1) Bangladesh: Population and Health Consortium, £45,633; (2) Kenya: National Museums, £1,000. The figure for 1997-98 in my answer of 11 January 1999 included an estimated amount of £11,660 which has since been fully and properly accounted for.
Mrs. Gillan:
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to her oral answer of 16 December 1998, Official Report, column 954, on
19 Jan 1999 : Column: 426
Zimbabwe, when the review of the Government's overall relationship with Zimbabwe was announced; what are the terms of reference of the review; what progress has been made; what plans she has to publish its conclusions; and if she will make a statement. [66488]
Clare Short:
As I said in my letter of 14 January 1999, I am not quite sure how to make the position any clearer than I did in the House on 16 December. I had hoped that the hon. Lady would by now understand the process in which my Department is currently engaged.
Since this Government's creation of the Department for International Development and publication of the White Paper on International Development, we have been engaged in a process of consulting and reviewing our country strategies across the world, to bring them into line with the new principles, policies and objectives contained in the White Paper. As part of this process, we are reviewing our Zimbabwe strategy, as I mentioned in my answer to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) on 16 December 1998. Some of the new strategies have already been published, and the new Zimbabwe strategy will be published in early 1999. This will help to make clear the differences between our approach and that of the previous Administration.
I have already explained to the House that our policy in Zimbabwe will be based on eliminating poverty, partly by promoting a transparent and poverty-focused approach to land reforms. We have also made this clear to the Government of Zimbabwe. We are not reviewing that policy: it has been clear since we formed our Government.
Mr. Hesford:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health if, in relation to paragraph 26.3 of the Mental Health Code of Practice for England, he will indicate (a) who takes the decisions on what would be in the child's best interest, (b) who the subsection is primarily aimed at and (c) for what reasons the subsection is drafted in wide terms. [65181]
Mr. Hutton:
Paragraph 26.3 of the revised Mental Health Act Code of Practice, laid before Parliament on 3 December 1998, was included to ensure that visits by a child to a patient detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 are considered in relation to the child's best interests as well as the patient's, and that such decisions are recorded and monitored. The child should be treated as an individual with his or her own needs, and any decision to allow a child to visit a patient should be a positive one that it would be in their best interests.
Directions have already been issued to the three special hospitals regarding arrangements for visits by children. We intend to issue separate guidance as soon as possible to assist all other hospitals that take detained patients, and social services departments, in drawing up child visiting policies. This will be subject to prior consultation. Decisions on whether a child should visit will be the responsibility of the hospital managers, and hospital policies will set out the arrangements for deciding whether a child should visit a patient. Such arrangements will need to take account of the significant role that those
19 Jan 1999 : Column: 427
with parental responsibility have in allowing such visits. Written hospital policies will also set out those circumstances when parental consent alone will be sufficient to allow a child to visit a patient, and where this is not sufficient, who else should be involved in the decision-making process.
Recording of visits will allow hospital staff, with local social services departments, to monitor visits and regularly review the desirability of continuing visits by a child should the particular circumstances surrounding the patient, or the ward, change. The environment in which visits by children take place will be important when considering the child's best interests.
Paragraph 26.3 of the Code is drafted in wide terms to ensure that all visits by children are considered in this way. In the majority of cases, decisions will be straightforward, and will not affect current visiting practices. However, where hospitals or units care for mentally disordered offenders or those patients with more severe forms of mental illness policies on visiting will need to be more detailed and rigorously enforced.
Mr. Love:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health what progress has been made on the implementation of the Calman/Hine report on the organisation and delivery of cancer services in the North London region; and if he will make a statement. [65063]
Mr. Hutton:
In that part of the London Region which was formerly within the North Thames Region, the majority of health authorities have focused initially on breast cancer services and have agreed standards of care for their cancer units based on the guidance "Improving Outcomes in Breast Cancer" published in July 1996. Progress has also been made on the designation of those units that will provide services for colorectal, lung and gynaecological cancers. Work is planned within the new London Region to harmonise the standards and processes adopted by the different health authorities and to jointly agree future milestones for the designation process. Also provisionally designated centres are continuing to develop protocols of care for each cancer.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |