---

Political Engagement

23. Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the joint report of the Electoral Commission and the Hansard Society entitled "An Audit of Political Engagement". [166165]

Mr. Peter Viggers (Gosport) (Con): I understand from the chairman that the report was designed to promote discussion and debate about political engagement in the United Kingdom. The audit uses 16 indicators of engagement based on a survey of the public by MORI. A copy of the report has been sent to all Members of Parliament, and copies have been placed in the Library.

Ms Walley: Given that 5 million fewer people voted in the 2001 general election than in the 1997 election, and given the widespread concern in the House about voter turnout, what more can the Electoral Commission do to make sure that politics matters to all age groups, including 18-year-olds and perhaps even younger people?

Mr. Viggers: The purpose of the audit is to take a snapshot of public engagement in politics in the United Kingdom. The first audit is intended to act as a baseline against which future trends in political engagement can be measured annually. The aim is to help to inform everyone working to tackle the problem of political disengagement. The audit was developed with a practical application in mind so that we can facilitate action by individuals and institutions involved in politics.

CHURCH COMMISSIONERS

The hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners, was asked—

Ministers of Religion (Employment Rights)

24. Mr. Huw Edwards (Monmouth) (Lab): If he will make a statement on the Church Commissioners' support for employment rights for clergy and other ministers of religion. [166166]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. David Lammy): I have been asked to reply.
 
19 Apr 2004 : Column 20
 

The Church Commissioners support the principle of employment rights for clergy and other ministers of religion, with certain exceptions, such as the right not to work on Sunday.

Mr. Edwards : I thank my hon. Friend for his answer, and I hope that that principle includes protection against unfair dismissal for clergy in the Anglican Church. Could my hon. Friend give an assurance that the Church Commissioners will consider bringing clergy within the remit of anti-discrimination legislation as well?

Mr. Lammy: The Archbishops Council has moved fast to tackle important reforms, and its clergy terms of service review group is working with dioceses, clergy, laity and the unions to consider relevant recommendations.

Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend understand that following the deliberations of the McClean committee, the clergy and others are waiting for a reaction, hopefully in short order? Can he urge the Church Commissioners to move as quickly as possible so that this can be resolved?

Mr. Lammy: My hon. Friend has tremendous experience in this area, and has continued to campaign on the issue. The McClean committee reported in January, the General Synod considered the matter in February, and the Archbishops Council looked at it at about the same time. I hope that they will offer conclusions on the recommendations as soon as possible.

Church Repairs (VAT)

25. Miss Anne McIntosh (Vale of York) (Con): How many churches benefited from the grant to reimburse VAT on repairs in 2003-04. [166167]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (Mr. David Lammy): I have been asked to reply.

Two thousand nine hundred and thirty-nine listed places of worship benefited from the grant in 2003–04. Of those, 2,123 were Church of England buildings.

Miss McIntosh : Can the hon. Gentleman tell me what the cost of administering the grant was, out of that total sum?

Mr. Lammy: I know the hon. Lady has great expertise in these matters. I answered a question on the matter when I last stood in for my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough (Sir Stuart Bell). May I write to the hon. Lady with those figures?

 
19 Apr 2004 : Column 21
 

Iraq and Middle East Peace Process

The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair): With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on my visit to the United States from 15 to 16 April. In New York I met the UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, and in Washington I met President Bush. With them both, the two main points of discussion were Iraq and the middle east peace process.

There is no doubt that the present situation in Iraq is very difficult. Since mid-March the US has suffered 123 military fatalities, of whom 112 were killed in hostile action. One Ukrainian soldier was also killed during recent disturbances in Al Kut. A number of contractors have been targeted since the middle of March. In addition to a number of US civilians killed, one British, one Italian and one Canadian security guard, two Finnish businessmen, three German citizens and one Dutch contractor have been killed.

Most security incidents continue to occur in the so-called "Sunni triangle" north-west of Baghdad. This includes the town of Fallujah, where the US marines have set up a cordon against Sunni insurgents. US forces are also deployed around Najaf, where Moqtada al-Sadr's supporters are still ensconced. There is currently a pause in military activity in Fallujah and Najaf to allow discussion with those involved. I hope the whole House will join me in passing on our deepest sympathy to the families of all those who have died, including the civilians, Iraqi and western citizens.

We should not lose sight of what is happening across the majority of the country. Some 2,300 schools have been rehabilitated; $32 billion has been pledged for reconstruction; electricity generation is now above pre-conflict levels; higher oil production over the past four months has given Iraq $2 billion more in revenues than we expected even last November; and Iraqis are enjoying the benefits of a new Iraqi currency worth 40 per cent. more than the discredited Saddam dinar.

Of course there will be resistance, as we are seeing in Fallujah and Najaf. It is absolutely clear what is going on there. All those who think they will lose out when Iraq becomes democratic—former Saddam supporters, foreign terrorists, militias led by extremist clerics—have a vested interest in seeking to delay or disrupt the transition towards democracy. They portray themselves as opponents of American occupation. In fact, they are opponents of allowing the Iraqi people the chance to choose their own leaders in free and fair elections. It is essential that the forces of reaction and terror do not prevail.

The vast majority of Iraqis want a prosperous, stable, democratic Iraq, at peace with its neighbours; a force for good in the region and the world; international forces staying not a day longer than they have to; Iraq's wealth, which is Iraqi wealth, and Iraq's oil, which is Iraqi oil; and a country that is a sovereign, independent state governed by Iraqis for the benefit of Iraqi citizens. That is exactly what the coalition want. We are on their side against the small minority of those trying to disrupt this vision, and we have a political and military strategy to achieve it.

Our work on reconstruction and investment in Iraq must continue, so that all parts of Iraq know that they have a place and a future in the new Iraq. We will
 
19 Apr 2004 : Column 22
 
redouble our efforts to build the necessary capability of the Iraqis themselves to take increased responsibility for security and law and order. We will hold absolutely to the 30 June timetable for the handover of sovereignty. We will work with the UN Secretary-General's representative, Mr. Brahimi, and all members of the UN Security Council to secure a new Security Council resolution to set out the new arrangements.

The UN should have a central role, and it should be developed still further once the occupation ends on 30 June. The UN will have a vital role in the electoral and constitutional processes in 2005, and in co-ordinating international reconstruction assistance. I welcome the proposals made by Mr. Brahimi for this transition. As he says, the most important milestone is the election to be held in January 2005. Before then, there will be an interim Government from 1 July, to be formed before the transition, led, as he said, by a Prime Minister, with a President to act as head of state and two Vice-Presidents.

I also welcome Mr Brahimi's suggestion of a large national conference to promote dialogue, consensus-building and reconciliation in Iraq, and to elect the consultative assembly to serve alongside the Government in the period up to January 2005 and to help prepare for elections.

That is the vision. We will stay the course until it becomes the reality, and I hope that the whole international community will come together to support it. Whatever people's views of the wisdom of the war in Iraq, it must surely be in everyone's interest, not just in Iraq but across the world, for this vision of hope and democracy in the future of Iraq to prevail and to succeed.

I also discussed the middle east peace process with Kofi Annan and President Bush. We condemn the targeted assassination of Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantissi, just as we condemn all terrorism, including that perpetrated by Hamas. We have to break out of this vicious cycle of suicide bombings and retaliation. Israel needs security, and the only lasting security will come from the stability of a solution to the middle east peace process with two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace.

That is why we welcome the Israeli proposal to withdraw from Gaza and parts of the west bank. The road map remains the best way to peace, and disengagement from occupied territory can be an opportunity to return to it. Disengagement is not the final step; it has to be an important first step on the road to a final settlement.

There was criticism that last week's announcement prejudged the issues of Palestine's final status: it should not and it does not. It is a statement of fact that those final status negotiations, when they come, cannot ignore the reality on the ground, but all issues, I repeat, are to be decided in that negotiation.

Israeli withdrawal also provides a chance for full engagement by the international community. The Quartet should seize this opportunity to help the Palestinian Authority take the necessary economic, political and security measures so that a viable Palestinian state becomes not just a concept but a real possibility. I hope that a meeting of the Quartet can take place as soon as possible, and in any event not later than May to discuss this issue.
 
19 Apr 2004 : Column 23
 

Among the other issues that I discussed in both New York and Washington was Cyprus. I am sure that the House will join me in paying tribute to Kofi Annan, both for the skill and distinction with which he has led the UN during difficult times and specifically for the work that he has done on Cyprus. I hope that the people of Cyprus will see the benefits of the United Nation's plan and vote for it in the referendums on Saturday.

I believe passionately that all these issues need to be seen in their wider context, for they are all linked. We are firm in response to terrorism and states proliferating weapons of mass destruction, but we must also be firm in tackling the breeding grounds of terrorism. That means broadening out the international agenda and confronting the issues upon which the terrorists pray: poverty, conflict and religious and ethnic strife.

Both the UN Secretary-General's high level panel on the future of the UN and the G8, chaired this year by the US and next by the UK, can help establish to this broad and common agenda and set a forward direction for the whole international community. It is more essential than ever that they do so.

---