Appendix 2: Memorandum from the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office
I am writing about two requests for information
from the Committee which the Government has been considering,
and to follow up one issue from the Foreign Secretary's oral evidence
session in February this year.
Firstly, the Government has decided not to provide
further information about its economic analysis of the Tanzania
air traffic control (ATC) licence application.
The Committee's letter of 27 March 2002 requested
a summary of the Government's internal analysis of this application.
The Government has looked very carefully at this issue. It has
concluded that it would not be possible to provide the Committee
with a meaningful and balanced summary of the analysis that protected
the commercial confidence of other parties, and which did not
at the same time risk harming the frankness and candour of internal
discussion. Such information is exempt from disclosure under Exemptions
2 and 13 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.
As the Foreign Secretary explained in his letter to the Committee
of 2 May this year, the Government considers that the Code of
Practice does apply to the provision of information to Select
Committees. I apologise for the lengthy delay in responding to
the Committee's request.
Secondly, it has also been decided not to provide
the Committee with the Criterion 8 paper requested in the Committee's
letter of 18 November 2002. Again, to release this paper would
risk harming the frankness and candour of internal discussion
and, as such, it is exempt from disclosure under exemption 2 of
the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information.
The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry's
statement on 19 September 2002 (Official Report 19 September 2002
Col 309-311W) has already set out the considerations the Government
will take into account when assessing the impact of a strategic
export licence application on the proposed recipient country's
sustainable development.
At the Foreign Secretary's oral evidence session,
David Chidgey MP alleged that UK-produced oversized handcuffs
were being exported to the US, where they were then transformed
into leg-irons. He suggested that this showed UK export controls
were failing. We have looked at the evidence he recently provided.
However, on the evidence provided, we are unable to confirm that
UK-manufactured handcuffs are being used as a basis for leg-irons.
Having checked our licensing records, we can confirm that, since
we introduced the ban on the export of torture equipment, no licence
has been issued for the export of oversized handcuffs from Hiatts
to the United States. We therefore do not accept that there has
been a failure of the UK export control legislation.
We carefully consider all export licences for
oversized handcuffs. We would not issue a licence where there
is a risk the goods will be used in contravention of the Consolidated
Criteria or diverted under undesirable conditions. We have passed
Mr Chidgey's evidence to HM Customs and Excise for them to investigate
and have written to him informing him of this.
August 2003
| 
