|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Llew Smith: To ask the Solicitor General which departments of the United States Administration were visited by the Attorney General during his visit to Washington in February 2003; and what the purpose of each meeting was. 
The Solicitor-General: I refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave him on 24 March 2003, Official Report, column 21W, and the reply I gave to the hon. Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Glenda Jackson) on 30 November 2004, Official Report, column 48W.
Ross Cranston: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what assessment he has made of the level of successful appeals against convictions to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division between 2000 and 2004, with particular reference to the implications for the funding of the Criminal Defence Service; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Lammy: Between 2000 and 2004, in those applications where leave to appeal had been granted, on average 33 per cent. of appeals against conviction were successful. During the same period the overall annual spend from the Criminal Defence Service (CDS) Budget in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division varied between £5 million and £10 million. In the context of a current annual CDS Budget of approximately £1billion, it is not considered that total spend in the Court of Appeal is excessive, nor that it threatens delivery of other CDS priorities.
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs what steps have
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1227W
been taken to disseminate information on best practice in the application of freedom of information guidance to Government Departments. 
Mr. Lammy: My Department has provided support to Freedom of Information (FOI) practitioners in Government Departments through the FOI Practitioners Group forum as well as through the e-forum website. The Practitioners Group has provided a useful forum to discuss in depth the practical impact of FOI and the application of the suite of guidance issued by my Department on 26 October 2004. To provide more in-depth support on particular issues facing Government Departments, my Department has issued working assumptions on the application of exemptions to particular classes of information. The Access to Information Central Clearing House provides daily support to all Whitehall departments. My Department also ran training seminars for all Whitehall decision makers prior to 1 January.
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether the Immigration Appeal Tribunal has considered the case of Mr. Aaron Chisango; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Lammy: Permission to appeal was granted by the Immigration Appeal Tribunal (IAT) on 2 February 2005. The appeal has been listed for hearing by the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal on Monday 9 May 2005, in accordance with The Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004 (Commencement No. 5 and Transitional Provisions) Order 2005 (SI 2005 No. 565 (C.25)).
Mr. Gill: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs if he will list those cases in which legal aid has been (a) awarded and (b) applied for but not awarded to families in Leicester, South since 1997. 
The following table outlines numbers of certificates (a) issued and (b) applied for but not issued in the family and non-family categories of civil legal aid for the Commission's Leicester contracting bid zone.
|Issued family||Issued non-family||Total application||Not issued family||Not issued non-family||Total application|
Andrew Mackinlay: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs pursuant to his answer of 17 March 2005, Official Report, column 462W, on the Royal Marriage, whether the spouse of HRH the Prince of Wales will be the Princess of Wales consequent on the marriage to be held on 9 April; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Leslie: Following her marriage, Camilla Parker Bowles will be HRH the Duchess of Cornwall and the Duchess of Rothesay in Scotland. As was made clear at the time of the announcement of the marriage, she will be Princess of Wales but will not use the title.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the Government of Chile's adherence to end user certificates in respect of arms exports from the UK. 
Mr. MacShane: We believe that the Government of Chile issue end user certificates in respect of arms exports in good faith and that they take appropriate steps to safeguard UK-origin defence equipment. The UK Government undertake monitoring in the recipient country of arms supplied by UK manufacturers when we believe that this would genuinely help to minimise the risk of diversion and where such monitoring is practical. In addition, UK overseas Posts have standing instructions to report any misuse of UK-origin defence equipment. Evidence of misuse would be taken into account when the Government assess any subsequent licence applications for the end-user and we may also, if appropriate, revoke related licences.
Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he has held with the Government of Chile concerning the prosecution of General Pinochet and other officials of the 1973 to 1990 regime; what assistance has been offered for forensic research; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Rammell: My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has not discussed this issue with the Government of Chile. The Government have not received any request for forensic research. While it would be inappropriate to comment on specific cases still in process, we warmly welcome any measures taken by the Chilean Government to address past human rights abuses.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which Articles in the proposed Constitution for the European Union include provisions which are not already in force by virtue of existing treaties; and which of the Articles making new provisions have been subject to debate in Parliament. 
Mr. MacShane: A Commentary analysing the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and comparing its provisions with the existing EU Treaties was published on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website: www.fco.gov.uk and laid before Parliament on 26 January. It was published as Command Paper 6459 in time for Second Reading of the EU Bill. The Commentary, in analysing every Article of the draft Treaty, sets out which provisions are new and explains where the Treaty provision derives from if it is not new. There has been considerable parliamentary scrutiny of all parts of the Constitutional Treaty, including during debates on the Convention on the Future of Europe and the Intergovernmental Conference in 200304. In addition, Parliament will be able to comment on the Treaty during the passage of the EU Bill.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State forForeign and Commonwealth Affairs whether the Courts of the United Kingdom will be bound by the terms of the Charter of Fundamental Rights if the proposed Constitution for the European Union is adopted. 
Mr. MacShane: The Charter of Fundamental Rights as set out in part 2 of the EU Constitutional Treaty will become part of UK treaty law by virtue of the EU Bill. The Charter binds only the EU's own institutions, and binds member states only when they are implementing EU law.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which body was responsible for drafting the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Community and Union; who the representatives of the United Kingdom on that body were; at which Heads of Government Council it was agreed that the Charter should be part of the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for the European Union; and what parliamentary procedures occurred in the United Kingdom relating to it prior to signature of the Treaty for the Constitution on 29 October 2004. 
Mr. MacShane: The Charter of Fundamental Rights was drafted in 2000 by a Convention of representatives of member state Governments, National Parliaments, the European Parliament and the European Commission. The UK Government's representative was my noble Friend Lord Goldsmith, and his alternate was Martin Eaton. The UK's National Parliament was represented by the noble Lord, Lord Bowness and my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths). Their alternates were my hon. Friend the Member for Eastleigh (Mr. Chidgey) and my noble Friend the Baroness Howells of St. Davids. The UK was also represented through the European Parliament by Andrew Duff MEP and Timothy Kirkhope MEP. Their alternates were Graham Watson MEP and Philip Whitehead MEP.
The Charter was agreed as a political declaration at the Nice European Council in December 2000, where Heads of State and Government also agreed to review its legal status at the next intergovernmental conference (IGC).
4 Apr 2005 : Column 1230W
The UK Government agreed to the incorporation of the Charter of Fundamental Rights into the EU Constitutional Treaty at the June European Council in 2004.
There has been considerable parliamentary scrutiny of all parts of the Constitutional Treaty, including the Charter of Fundamental Rights, during the Convention on the Future of Europe and the IGC in 200304. In addition, Parliament will be able to comment on the treaty during the passage of the EU Bill, and the public will be able to vote on it in the referendum.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|