|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Hain: The United Kingdom enjoys a long-standing and close friendship with Jordan. We conduct a substantive bilateral dialogue at all levels, including regular high-level contact. Both my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and I have visited Jordan this year, and HM King Abdullah of Jordan will pay a state visit to the United Kingdom in November 2000. We look forward to this with enthusiasm.
Mr. Hain: We continue to assess export licence applications for Pakistan on a case-by-case basis against the national criteria and those in the EU Code of Conduct, taking into account the answer given by my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Central (Mr. Lloyd) on 10 July 1998, Official Report, columns 687-88W. The Government have taken time to consider the situation in Pakistan and the wider region following the coup in October 1999 before deciding on a number of licence applications.
The Government have now refused 26 standard individual export licence applications for Pakistan. We have also refused Pakistan as a permitted destination on one open individual export licence and approved its inclusion on one other such licence. We have reached these decisions following careful consideration of each licence application against the stated criteria.
We remain concerned about defence exports to Pakistan, in the light of last year's incursion at the Kargil sector of the Line of Control in Kashmir, the military coup, the possibility of diversion to undesirable end-users and continued regional tensions. We have refused licences for certain military equipment to Pakistan because we do not judge that they meet our criteria.
The Government have issued 20 standard individual export licences for a narrow and well defined range of equipment, eg naval spares, bomb disposal equipment, goods for civilian end-users. We have assessed that issuing licences for this equipment would not contravene our national criteria, nor those in the EU Code of Conduct. Details of all licences issued will appear in the 2000 Annual Report.
5 Jul 2000 : Column: 220W
Mr. Derek Twigg: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on that part of the Government's response to the International Development Committee on the Future of Sanctions (HC 473) concerning the imposition by the United Kingdom of unilateral financial sanctions. 
Mr. Hain: I regret that the statement is incorrect. The UK has imposed unilateral financial sanctions on several occasions. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells) for drawing my attention to this oversight in a recent adjournment debate in Westminster Hall, on 29 June 2000, Official Report, column 260WH.
Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what amounts of Iraq's supplies of (a) botulinum, (b) anthrax, (c) aflatoxin, (d) gas gangrene and (e) ricin remain unaccounted for; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Hain: Iraq took four years to admit it had a biological weapons (BW) programme. Even after a further three and a half years work, the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) could not compile a comprehensive technical, industrial and scientific assessment of Iraq's BW programme. This was because of Iraq's failure to provide a credible full, final and complete disclosure of its programme, as required by the United Nations, or to co-operate with UNSCOM in clarifying its declarations. There have been no UN weapons inspections in Iraq since December 1998, hence the importance we attach to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) gaining access at the earliest opportunity.
Mr. Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what amount of Iraq's supplies of (a) tabun, (b) sarin, (c) mustard gas and (d) VX gas remain unaccounted for; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Hain: Although the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) was able to destroy, remove or render harmless large quantities of chemical weapons (CW), their components, precursors and major production equipment, there remain significant gaps in their understanding of Iraq's CW programme. Even accepting the figures for CW agents and precursors unilaterally destroyed by Iraq in contravention of United Nations Security Council resolution 687, there are discrepancies in Iraq's declarations on the number of weapons filled with chemical agents and the number used during the Iran/Iraq war or lost after the Gulf War. Questions remain on the production and weaponisation of VX, CW production equipment and CW precursors. There have been no UN weapons inspections in Iraq since December 1998, hence the importance we attach to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) gaining access at the earliest opportunity.
5 Jul 2000 : Column: 221W
8. Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent discussions she has had with her EU counterparts to discuss aid for humanitarian and reconstruction purposes in Kosovo; and if she will make a statement. 
The EC is now taking the lead, and has agreed programmes in health, energy, water supply, housing transport and economic reconstruction costing 360 million euros, of which the UK contribution is £50 million.
Clare Short: We keep the humanitarian situation in Kosovo constantly under review, including through our close contacts with the multilateral humanitarian agencies. We have contributed £2.5 million in this financial year to UNICEF's operations in the Balkans.
10. Mr. Stevenson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will make a statement regarding her Department's policy on the Qinghai component of the China Western Poverty Reduction Project, to be considered by the World bank on 6 July. 
Clare Short: Britain supported this project in the bank board meeting in June 1999 because it would bring significant benefits to 1.7 million of the poorest people in China. They represent four different ethnic minorities, they live in very remote and inaccessible villages and many of them are barely scratching a living. It will give poor people from a range of ethnic groups the opportunity to meet their basic needs. It will deliver a wide range of benefits such as increasing food production, providing safe water and improving access to basic social services. We also supported the Board conclusion that no funds would be disbursed on the Qinghai component of the project until an independent inspection panel had conducted an investigation, and pending further environmental and social assessments.
5 Jul 2000 : Column: 222W
20. Mr. Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if she will make a statement on her Department's policy on the Qinghai component of the China Western poverty reduction project. 
Clare Short: The report by the independent inspection panel, and bank management's response to it, will be discussed at a World bank board meeting in early July 2000. We will be looking very carefully at the conclusions of the inspection panel report, and the bank management's response to it, in advance of the bank board meeting.
Mr. Stevenson: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment she has made of the independent Inspection Panel's findings about the World Bank's practice in identifying and comparing alternatives to the Qinghai project. 
Clare Short: In response to the claim in the inspection panel report that they have not considered alternatives to the Qinghai project, the World bank state that they have explored a range of developmental options in some detail, covering both whether resettlement is the most appropriate response, and whether the area chosen for that resettlement is appropriate.
Mr. Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment she has made of the independent inspection panel's findings that the World bank's relating to (a) its indigenous peoples policy and (b) its operational directive on involuntary resettlement in respect of the Qinghai project. 
Clare Short: We have looked very carefully at the conclusions of the independent inspection panel, which raises a number of important issues regarding social safeguards and resettlement policy. The Report and the response to it from bank management will be discussed at a board meeting on 6 July 2000. At that meeting we will be seeking to satisfy ourselves that the World bank has in place the necessary social safeguards before this project begins.
Britain supported this project in June 1999 because it would bring significant benefits to 1.7 million of the poorest people in China. We also supported the board conclusion that no funds would be disbursed on the Qinghai component of the project until an independent inspection panel had conducted an investigation.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|