---

21 Jun 2004 : Column 1222W—continued

Iraq

Mr. Tynan: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to whom the Coalition Provisional Authority is accountable; and what responsibilities this places upon the United Kingdom. [178852]

Mr. Rammell: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to him on 15 June 2004, Official Report, column 798W. The UK and the US set out their views of their responsibilities in their joint letter to the President of the Security Council of 8 May 2003, which the Security Council noted in resolution 1483(2003). I will place UNDoc. S/2003/538 in the Library of the House.

Mr. Ancram: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to his answer of 26 May, Official Report, column 1637W, on Iraq, to whose private offices the telegram concerned was distributed; and when the telegram was shown by officials in those private offices to Ministers. [179121]

Mr. Straw [holding answer of 17 June 2004]: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave him on 26 May Official Report, column 1637W.

Sudan

Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the current security situation in the Shilluk Kingdom, Sudan. [179703]

Mr. Mike O'Brien: We are very concerned by reports that civilians have been targeted and that thousands of people have been displaced. We are following the situation closely and are in contact with all parties in the area, including the Verification and Monitoring Team (VMT) which is responsible for investigating and reporting on breaches of the cessation of hostilities. We raised the matter with the Sudanese Foreign Minister during his visit to London on 11 May and EU Heads of Mission, including our Ambassador in Khartoum, visited on 27 May. EU Heads of Mission intend to make representations to the Government of Sudan over the reports of attacks on civilians by Government of Sudan-allied forces.

Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will ensure that African and international peacekeepers operating in the Western Darfur area of Sudan extend their activities to southern Sudan. [179164]

Mr. Mullin: The mission of the African Union-led Ceasefire Commission operating in Darfur is to monitor compliance with the 8 April humanitarian ceasefire agreement between the Government of Sudan, the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army and the Justice and Equality Movement. The Commission's mandate does not extend to southern Sudan. A separate Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on a cessation of hostilities was signed on 15 October 2002 between the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army. An addendum to the MOU was signed on 4 February 2003. This cessation of hostilities is being monitored by the IGAD-led Verification and Monitoring Team.
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1223W
 

Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the international community will be committing troops to monitor the peace process in Sudan. [179165]

Mr. Mullin: We expect the Sudanese parties to conclude a peace agreement this year. The United Nations are planning to support the implementation of the eventual peace agreement and that the international community will contribute personnel to the mission.

Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps the international community is taking to ensure the peace process in Sudan is monitored. [179166]

Mr. Mullin: The Sudan peace talks in Kenya are being held under the auspices of the regional organisation the Intergovernmental Authority on Development. In addition to the Sudanese parties and the countries of the region, these talks are attended by the United Kingdom, the United States, Norway, Italy, the United Nations and the African Union. We expect the eventual peace agreement to be monitored by a mission led by the United Nations.

Turkey

Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to Turkey over (a) the jailing of journalist Hakan Albayrak of Milli Gazete and (b) the fining of Vakit newspaper; and if he will make a statement. [177813]

Mr. MacShane: I am very concerned to learn about the jailing of journalist Hakan Albayrak of Milli Gazete and the fining of Vakit newspaper. But we should not let these decisions detract from the considerable progress Turkey has made on freedom of expression, including the release of Leyla Zana, the first broadcasting in minority languages in Turkey, and the passing of a new press law during this last week which contains further measures to increase freedom of the press. I am convinced that these significant developments and proposals for a new Turkish Penal Code will lead to further improvements in Turkey.

I take every opportunity to urge the Turkish Government to make rapid and demonstrable progress in the practical implementation of the reforms they have passed to safeguard human rights and freedom of expression, and to remove remaining constraints on freedom of expression. We will raise the case of Hakan Albayrak and the fining of Vakit newspaper at the next round of the UK's bilateral dialogue with Turkey on human rights this July.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

Business Fraud

Brian Cotter: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many complaints have been received by the Office of Fair Trading in relation to (a) business to business and (b) business to consumer scams in each of the last five years. [179261]

 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1224W
 

Mr. Sutcliffe: The information requested is not readily available. I have asked the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading to write to the hon. Member to give a fuller answer.

Brian Cotter: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action her Department has taken against rogue businesses that are operating business to business frauds. [179262]

Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 17 June 2004]: As a consumer protection enforcement body, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has investigated certain business to business scams operating in the UK and, with overseas counterparts in the International Consumer Protection Enforcement Network (ICPEN), scams targeting UK business from overseas. Examples include the Spanish European City Guide and bogus requests to register under the Data Protection Act. It is currently working with the Health and Safety Executive on bogus requests to register under the Health and Safety Act.

Brian Cotter: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether Stop Now orders can be used against rogue companies that are operating frauds specifically aimed at other businesses. [179264]

Mr. Sutcliffe [holding answer 17 June 2004]: An Enforcement Order under Part 8 of the Enterprise Act 2002 can only be sought against a business that harms the collective interest of consumers.

An Order cannot be sought where there is detriment from business to another business.

Electricity Generation/Supply

Mr. Tynan: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent assessment she has made of the average cost, including commissioning and decommissioning costs, in pence per kilowatt hour, of electricity generated from (a) coal, (b) natural gas, (c) nuclear power, (d) on shore wind, (e) off shore wind, (f) photovoltaic and (g) biomass sources. [178315R]

Mr. Timms: The Department published estimates of the cost of electricity generation from a variety of low carbon technologies, including commissioning and decommissioning, in a report by the Interdepartmental Analysts' Group (IAG) made in February 2002 available at: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/greenhousegas/index.shtml. The IAG's estimates for 2020 are shown in the following table.

Technology	p/kWh
Onshore wind	2.0–2.5
Offshore wind	2.0–3.0
Nuclear	2.6–4.0
Gas	2.3–2.9

The Performance and Innovation Unit at the Cabinet Office also published similar estimates in its 2001 Energy Review. These are available at: www.number-10.gov.uk/su/energy/1.html. The following table shows the PIU estimates for new plant in 2020 for nuclear, onshore and offshore wind and gas-fired generation.
 
21 Jun 2004 : Column 1225W
 

Technology	p/kWh
Onshore wind	1.5–2.5
Offshore wind	2.0–3.0
Nuclear	2.5–4.0
Gas	2.0–2.3

For the energy White Paper the Department also commissioned additional external modelling work, which produced the following estimates, including estimated costs of both gas- and coal-fired generation (with and without carbon capture and storage).

Technology	p/kWh
Gas 2000(18)	2.2–2.4
Gas 2020	2.1–2.2
Coal 2000	3.6–3.9
Gas (capture and storage) 2000	3.5–3.7
Gas (capture and storage) 2020	3.0–3.2
Coal (capture and storage) 2000	5.7–6.1
Coal (capture and storage) 2020	4.5–4.9
Nuclear 2010	3.4–3.7
Nuclear 2020	2.7–3.0

⁽¹⁸⁾ In this table, "2000" means plants built in the decade 2000–10, and so on.

Work undertaken for the Renewables Innovation Review covering wind generation costs is also available at: www.dti.gov.uk/energy/renewablcs/policy/oxeraresults.pdf. Their estimates for 2010 and 2020 are shown in the following table. This modelling work includes cost estimates for additional investment in the transmission system to handle an increased share of offshore wind generation as well as the cost of providing back-up capacity for intermittent sources of generation such as wind.

	2010	2020
Onshore wind	2.7–3.6	2.5–3.2
Offshore wind	4.4–5.5	3.0–4.6

The Renewables Innovation Review also includes a comparison of cost competitiveness of renewable versus conventional energy generation technologies in 2003, estimating current cost of solar photovoltaic electricity under UK conditions for integrated systems at around 37 p per kWh, and current costs of biomass generation in the 5–7 p per kWh range. Costs of individual projects will vary depending on specific circumstances.

---