Appendix 3: Memorandum from
the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
SECTION A: UPDATES
The Committees would appreciate updates on the
following topics. The aim should be to provide as far as possible
information which can be published, but where important information
can only be provided in confidence, the Committees would of course
prefer to receive this rather than not.
1. REVIEW OF
THE EU ARMS
EMBARGO ON
CHINA—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE MAY
2004
The review of the embargo instigated by the
European Council continues. The EU's General Affairs and External
Relations Council discussed this subject on 11 October, and will
continue to take a keen interest in this subject.
2. REVIEW OF
THE EU CODE
OF CONDUCT—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE MARCH
2004
Significant progress has been made towards text
for a new Code of Conduct, and the current draft is consistent
with the UK objectives discussed previously with the Committees.
In particular, there is strong support for making applications
for brokering, intangible technology transfer, transit and transhipment
licences subject to the Code's criteria.
3. CRITERION
EIGHT (SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT)—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE MARCH
2004, INCLUDING PROGRESS
TOWARDS A
COMMON INTERPRETATION
OF THE
CRITERION AND
PROGRESS IN
THE WORK
OF THE
COARM WORKING PARTY
ON THESE
ISSUES
As the Committees are aware, the UK is participating
in an ad hoc group, which also comprises representatives from
France, Germany, Netherlands and Sweden, which was mandated in
February 2004 to produce a draft "Users" Guide' on Criterion
8 of the EU Code of Conduct.
The aim of this guide is to promote greater
consistency in Member States' assessments of licence applications
against Criterion 8, without precluding the need for individual
judgement. Further considerations are that the guide should be
simple and practical to use, and should point users towards easily
accessible data of use in making such assessments.
This ad hoc group met for the third time on
29 September, and presented a draft document to the wider COARM
meeting on 15 October. It is anticipated that a final version
will be agreed at the subsequent COARM meeting in December.
4. INTERNATIONAL
EXPORT CONTROL
REGIMES—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE MARCH
2004
Nuclear Suppliers Group
The Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Plenary was
held in Gothenburg on 26-28 May. During the Plenary the Group
accepted Lithuania, Estonia, Malta and China as Participating
Governments. This recent expansion broadens the NSG membership
to include all EU states, and all Nuclear Weapons States.
The Plenary adopted a "catch all"
mechanism into the NSG guidelines. This provision provides a national
legal basis to control the export of nuclear related items that
are not on the Control Lists. The Plenary adopted measures to
modernise the NSG Information Exchange Meeting (IEM) and to improve
the Group's outreach activities. The Plenary agreed to strengthen
the relationship between the NSG and the IAEA.
The next meeting of the NSG was an intersessional
meeting, the Consultative Group, in Vienna from 20-22 October.
The UK co-sponsored two proposals to amend the NSG guidelines.
The first was to address recipient non-compliance with IAEA Safeguards
obligations, and the second to introduce a set of criteria governing
the supply of sensitive items and facilities to recipient states.
A substantive discussion on these proposals is expected at the
next meeting. Discussion on strengthening the relation ship between
the NSG and the IAEA continued.
Zangger Committee
The Zangger Committee met on 18-19 October.
The Committee began discussion on the proposed revisions to the
guidelines. Outreach activities were also discussed, and it was
agreed to provide a report of the Committee's work to the UNSCR
1540 committee.
Missile Technology Control Regime
The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR)
last met in Paris 13-14 April at its intersessional meeting, the
Re-enforced Point of Contact. The meeting discussed membership
issues, and agreed to accept Bulgaria's application. It also discussed
outreach activities. The MTCR most recently met in Seoul on 6-8
October for its annual Plenary. The Plenary admitted no new members
to the regime. There were, however, fruitful discussions on outreach;
transit, transhipment and brokering of MTCR-related items; and
China's potential MTCR accession.
Australia Group
The Australia Group (AG) met for its annual
Plenary in Paris from 7-10 June. As part of the Group's ongoing
work to keep its common control lists up to date and based on
sound science, participants agreed to add five plant pathogens
to the control lists. Discussion also focused on enhanced information
sharing, and the Group agreed to consider the issue of brokering
controls. Such controls could play a key role in curtailing the
activities of intermediaries and front companies. The next Plenary
meeting of the AG will be held in Australia in 2005.
Wassenaar Arrangement
The WA held its first General Working Group
meeting of the year in May. The meeting focused on taking forward
conclusions from the Plenary in December. The UK continues to
press for a denial notification system for military items (to
match that for dual-use items) and a consultation mechanism for
both types of controlled items.
Outreach discussions have taken place with a
number of target countries, including China, South Africa and
Brazil. The UK co-organised an Outreach seminar for NGOs, think
tanks, academic institutions, specialist media and representatives
from non-WA member states on 19 October 2004, to increase awareness
of the WA.
5. PROGRESS ON
APPLICATIONS OF
NEW EU MEMBER
STATES TO
JOIN INTERNATIONAL
EXPORT CONTROL
REGIMES
Nuclear Suppliers Group
Lithuania, Malta and Estonia—were accepted
as Participating Governments during the NSG Plenary in May 2004.
All EU Member States now participate in the NSG.
Zangger Committee
Of the new EU Member States, Cyprus, Estonia,
Latvia, Lithuania and Malta are currently not members. The UK
fully supports the participation of all EU states in the Committee.
The Missile Technology Control Regime
Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Slovenia
and Slovakia are not currently in the Regime, but all have submitted
applications. Discussion on outstanding applications will be held
at the forthcoming MTCR Plenary in Seoul (4-8 October), the outcome
of which is described above.
Australia Group
All of the new EU Member States are members
of the Australia Group. Estonian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese,
and Slovenian applications were accepted at the Plenary in June
2004.
Wassenaar Arrangement
Slovenia, Malta, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia
and Cyprus are not currently members of the WA. The UK has participated
in a number of intersessional meetings on membership and expects
WA Participating States to make progress on this issue at the
Plenary in December.
6. OUTREACH—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE JANUARY
2004, AND COMMENT
ON PURPOSE
AND EFFECTIVENESS
Since the beginning of 2004 the UK has conducted
outreach visits to China, Hong Kong, Macao, the United Arab Emirates,
Singapore, Serbia and Montenegro, Albania and Malaysia. We have
also hosted visits from Israel and Ukraine, co-organised a conference
for a number of EU Member States and (at the time) Acceding Countries
in Slovakia, and participated in a number of multilateral outreach
activities and conferences. In November we will be co-hosting
with the US the 6th International Export Control Conference, in
the DTI's headquarters building in London, at which over 150 delegates
will be attending, from around 50 countries.
The purpose of our outreach work is to assist
other countries to improve their export controls, and to learn
from their experiences. These countries range from those who already
have a competent set-up, to those who need advice on establishing
a robust export control system.
Our outreach programme is conducted by officials
from the FCO, MOD, HMCE and DTI. This cross-departmental approach
has enabled us to provide advice across the range of relevant
subjects. The US value our work and seek our participation in
theirs. Outreach has already contributed significantly towards
the UK's wider Counter Proliferation objectives. We have: helped
to reinforce Hong Kong's export controls; assisted in the development
of export control legislation in a number of Eastern European
countries; promoted the EU Code of Conduct outside the current
EU membership, such that several countries now ask our advice
as to whether a proposed export should be permitted; established
good export control links with South Africa, which have benefited
to our wider Counter Proliferation relationship with that country;
and encouraged Chinese export control reforms.
Of course, UK technical assistance alone is
not able to transform a poorly functioning export control system
into an effective one. However, if the country in question has
the political will to develop an effective system, and can devote
the necessary resources to this activity, support and advice from
countries such as the UK, who have experience of operating a rigorous
export control regime, can be valuable.
7. STRATEGIC
EXPORT POLICY
TOWARDS LIBYA—THE
GOVERNMENT'S
POLICY ON
REVIEWING THE
EU ARMS EMBARGO
AND ON
THE EXPORT
OF STRATEGIC
GOODS AND
TECHNOLOGIES TO
LIBYA
The EU arms embargo on Libya was lifted at the
11 October GAERC (General Affairs and External Relations Council).
The Government now considers all export licence applications to
Libya on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated Criteria.
8. IMPLEMENTATION
OF NEW
CONTROLS UNDER
THE EXPORT
CONTROL ACT—DEVELOPMENTS
SINCE MAY
2004, WITH COMMENT
ON HOW
THE GOVERNMENT
HAS ADJUSTED
IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE CONTROLS
IN THE
LIGHT OF
PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE,
SUCH AS
THE FARNBOROUGH
AIR SHOW
Licensing under the new controls and against Regulatory,
Impact Assessment (RIA) Estimates
This table covers applications received/registrations
from 1st Nov 2003 (ie the beginning of the six month implementation
period) to end of August 2004.
|
| Licence | RIA (forecast for 12 month period)
| Actual Nos applications/registrations received to 31August 2004
|
|
| OGL Registrations |
| |
| OGTCL | 550
| 239 |
| Miltech OGEL | 20-40
| 371 |
| "Individual Use" OGEL
| 170-200 | 239
|
| "Modcons" OGEL | Not estimated
| 128 |
| Standard Individual Licence applications
| | |
| SITCL | 900-1,500
| 81 (66 finalised at 31 August)
|
| SIEL (Miltech ITT) | 800-900
| 323* |
| WMD (new "end-use" controls)
| very small | 2
|
| Open Individual Licence applications
| | |
| OITCL | Not estimated
| 68 (54 finalised at 31 August)
|
| OIEL (Miltech ITT) | Not estimated
| 129* |
| WMD (new "end-use" controls)
| Not estimated | 15 (12 finalised at 31 August)
|
|
Processing times of licences introduced under the new controls
This table covers the period 1 November 2003 to end August
2004.
|
| Licence Group | Licence
| % completed within 20 or 60 working day target as relevant
|
|
| Standard Individual Licence applications
| SITCL
SIEL (Miltech ITT)
WMD (new "end use" controls)
| 64% **
c79%***
0% (only 2 applications received however)
|
| Open Individual Licence applications
| OITCL | 87%
|
| OIEL (Miltech ITT)
| c66%*** |
| WMD (new "end-use" controls)
| 92% |
|
| * These figures are based on licences issued for line items with an ML22 rating (for both physical and electronic transfers of technology)
|
| ** This represents a decrease in performance caused by events unrelated to the introduction of the new controls and outside of HMG's control, that is, the UNSCR on Iraq and the need to delay processing until its finalisation.
|
| *** These figures are (i) approximate as we do not differentiate between licences issued for physical and electronic transfers and (ii) based on licences issued for line items with an ML22 rating.
|
The Export Control Organisation (ECO) has not received as
many licence applications as predicted in the RIA revised after
the public consultation (numbers are more in line with pre-consultation
estimates). As the table above shows, the great majority of applications
that have been received have been processed swiftly. The introduction
of the new controls has not had an adverse impact on overall licensing
performance, with performance against Government targets improving
this year, to-date, on last year's performance figures. Also,
we have not received negative feedback from licence applicants.
Compliance visits have generally found that companies have
prepared well for the new controls, and, importantly, that only
a small number appear not to have sufficient awareness of them
or satisfactory compliance procedures in place. This is now being
addressed. Awareness visits to individual companies have confirmed
this, showing successful training for and implementation of the
new controls. A similar picture has emerged from feedback at regional
awareness seminars where knowledge of the new control environment
has been high. We intend to continue with our comprehensive awareness
and wider outreach programme to ensure that this is sustained.
The main industry requests for clarification have related
to the WMD end-use controls and HMG has been working with those
affected to explain in detail the practical effect of the new
legislation, to iron out any uncertainties. The main residual
concern raised by industry since the new controls completed their
coming into force in May, was regarding the application of the
WMD end-use control to those providing technical support to the
UK MOD and troops on deployment. This has been addressed by the
introduction of two new OGELs; the Military Goods: UK Forces deployed
in non-embargoed destinations OGEL and the Military Goods: UK
Forces deployed in Embargoed Destinations OGEL. The DTI guidance
is being updated.
Industry has previously expressed concerns about conflicting
advice from DTI on the new controls. ECO strives to give exporters
a consistent message, within the confines of a case-by-case approach
to licence applications. We take seriously any suggestions of
inconsistent generic advice. So far as all the instances brought
to our attention have in fact related to slightly different questions/situations.
The implementation of the Act was discussed at the October
Export Control Advisory Committee (set up to create a structured
dialogue between the Government and exporters), and at the October
Defence Market Access Forum, and no substantive concerns were
raised by industry.
It is too soon to draw any firm conclusions but so far the
new controls appear to be working as intended and at the same
time do not appear to have caused any major difficulties for either
industry or government. HMG will continue working with industry
to address any further issues which arise, and will also continue
to closely monitor the application of the controls.
Farnborough International Air Show
In respect specifically of Farnborough, it would appear that,
as a result of extensive awareness programmes and efficient licence
processing, no major problems were encountered by the organisers,
exhibitors or Government. We propose to adopt a similar approach
to future trade fairs.
ECO took steps to ensure that the organisers of and exhibitors
at the Farnborough exhibition were aware of the UK's export control
regime and its impact on them. HMG worked with the exhibition
organisers, the Society of British Aerospace Companies (SBAC)
in the run up to Farnborough on UK licensing requirements and
made a special guidance note on the relevant UK export and trade
controls available to the Farnborough organisers for dissemination
to exhibitors. We also put this guidance on the website alongside
the extensive guidance on the new controls. ECO provided awareness
material for exhibitors on the UKTI stand at the exhibition and
briefing on the new controls for UKTI and DTI staff who staffed
the UKTI stand.
The majority of licensable trade activities involving controlled
goods that took place at Farnborough were covered by the Open
General Trade Control Licence (OGTCL). Overseas exhibitors and
visitors were eligible to register to use the OGTCL and in excess
of 20 overseas companies exhibiting at Farnborough did so. Furthermore,
overseas parent companies registered on behalf of themselves and
in many cases several subsidiary companies. Allowing overseas
companies to register to use the OGTCL negated the need for these
companies to apply for individual licences and the resource implications
attached to processing these licence applications. We intend to
retain this approach for future trade fairs.
As expected, there were some instances where exhibitors and
visitors were planning to undertake licensable activities and
were unable to use the OGTCL, for example for the promoting and
marketing of long-range missiles and UAVs. The ECO ensured that
all Farnborough related applications and all applications for
Standard Individual Trade Control Licences (SITCLs) and Open Individual
Trade Control Licences (14 in total) received before and during
Farnborough were finalised in time.
ECO established a dedicated helpline to provide advice to
visitors to and exhibitors at Farnborough and we intend to follow
a similar practice for future trade fairs.
9. PROGRESS TOWARDS
A COUNCIL
REGULATION ON
TRADE IN
EQUIPMENT RELATED
TO TORTURE
AND CAPITAL
PUNISHMENT
Discussions at official level in Brussels continue on this
subject. However, given that the European Commission revised proposal
of 8 June 2004 introduced many new elements it is unlikely that
the Regulation will be adopted during 2004.
10. PROGRESS ON
IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE EU'S
"ACTION PLAN
FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF
THE BASIC
PRINCIPLES FOR
AN EU STRATEGY
AGAINST PROLIFERATION
OF WEAPONS
OF MASS
DESTRUCTION" OF
JUNE 2003
An EU Strategy against the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass
Destruction was agreed by the European Council in December 2003.
The Strategy, and its associated Action Plan (agreed in June 2003)
included both measures for immediate action, and measures for
the coming months and the longer term.
Progress in implementing the Strategy and Action Plan has
been good in a number of areas. For example, the Peer Reviews
of Member State' export control systems have been completed. The
Task Force overseeing the Peer Review process is currently working
on an action-oriented final report. The Report is likely to highlight
best practices and identify areas where implementation of Dual-Use
Items Regulation could be improved.
A model non-proliferation clause for all mixed agreements
with third countries was agreed in November 2003. This is an important
example of the EU mainstreaming Counter Proliferation policies
into its wider relations with third countries. This approach has
been tested to the full in the protracted negotiation of the EU-Syria
Association agreement.
Other positive developments over the past year include agreeing
a Common Position in favour of the universalisation of multilateral
agreements; the continuation of the EU programme to assist the
Former Soviet Union in disposing of WMD stocks; the promotion
of a catch-all clause in various export control regimes, a series
of outreach activities and EU endorsement of the Proliferation
Security Initiative (PSI).
The Strategy and its associated Action Plan were agreed as
living documents. As such they must be responsive to changing
priorities, such as, for example, the need to take action to encourage
all states to fully implement the recently adopted United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1540 and to back that up with the
offer of technical assistance.
11. COMMENT ON
REPORT "US WEAPONS
TECHNOLOGY AT
RISK" OF
THE US HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
OF 1 MAY
2004, AND SPECIFICALLY
ON ITS
FINDINGS RELATING
TO THE
BRITISH EXPORT
CONTROL SYSTEM
****
12. PROGRESS TOWARDS
A BRITISH
WAIVER FROM
THE US ITAR REGULATIONS
The terms of a United Kingdom waiver from the US International
Traffic in Arms Regulations were agreed with the US Administration
in May 2003. The waiver would apply to the export to the UK of
certain unclassified defence items and technical data. New legislation
as required by the US Arms Export Controls Act and the Security
Assistance Act 2000 was proposed in the first Session of the 108th
Congress, but was not enacted. The House International Relations
Committee continues to have difficulties with the agreed waiver
and published a report on the subject, as mentioned in the Committee's
question 11. Enabling provisions were again deleted from the Defense
Authorizations Bill in this Session. We shall discuss the US Administration
the way forward on ITAR and licensing issues in the light of the
Congressional language.
SECTION B: SPECIFIC LICENSING DECISIONS—2003, AND
FIRST QUARTER 2004
The Committees need to see sufficient information about the
Government's licensing decisions to come to a reasonable understanding
of why the Government has granted or refused a licence in any
particular case. This should include an intelligible description
of the goods, an indication of their value, the identity of the
end user, and the stated end use of the goods. In the case of
refusals and revocations, it should also include the reason for
refusal or revocation.
Where the Committees have requested information on a single
licence application, it is open to the Government to provide information
on other licence applications to the same country as well, if
the Government would like to do so. A possible alternative to
the past practice of laboriously compiling this information for
the Committees might be to provide the Committees in confidence
with the relevant case documentation, such as application forms
and end-user undertakings.
13. ALL REFUSALS
AND REVOCATIONS
DURING 2003
****
14. INCORPORATION SIELS
ISSUED DURING
2003 AND THE
FIRST QUARTER
OF 2004 FOR
THE FOLLOWING
DESTINATIONS (COUNTRIES
WHICH HAVE
NOT ALIGNED
THEMSELVES WITH
THE PRINCIPLES
OF THE
EU CODE OF
CONDUCT).
For incorporation SIELs, please also provide a description
of the finished equipment in which the exports were intended for
incorporation, and on the eventual end users of this finished
equipment, where this is known, and on any end-use conditions
attached to the export or use of the finished equipment.
(a) Australia,
(b) Bolivia,
(c) Brazil,
(d) Burma,
(e) China,
(f) Hong Kong,
(g) India,
(h) Indonesia,
(i) Iraq,
(j) Israel,
(k) Jordan,
(1) South Korea,
(m) Pakistan,
(n) Singapore,
(o) South Africa,
(p) Switzerland,
(q) Turkey,
(r) USA.
15. SPECIFIC LICENCES
ISSUED DURING
2003 AS FOLLOWS:
(a) Aruba: 10 submachine guns
(b) Australia: OIEL No 29. (This OIEL appears to allow
the export in unlimited quantities of any equipment on the entire
military list.)
(c) Fiji: equipment including 540 assault rifles and
101 general purpose machine guns
(d) Iraq: all licences
(e) Morocco: 200 submachine guns
(f) Turkey: OIEL No 30 for smoke hand grenades etc. OIEL
No 32 for wide range of components
(g) Yemen: SIELs for small arms ammunition and weapons.
sights
(h) Handcuffs: Barbados, Hong Kong, Malaysia and United
Arab Emirates (and to Hong Kong in the first quarter of 2004).
The Committees assume that these licences were for oversized handcuffs
ostensibly for use as handcuffs on prisoners with large wrists.
What steps did the Government take before granting these licences
to ascertain whether the handcuffs might be used as leg-irons
or shackles?
(i) Surface to air missiles: in 2003, Indonesia: OIEL
No 9, Malaysia: OIEL No 69, South Africa SIELs; and in first quarter
2004, Oman: OIEL No 8, Singapore: OIEL No 7, Turkey: OIEL No 8.
****
16. SPECIFIC LICENCES
ISSUED DURING
THE FIRST
QUARTER OF
2004, AS FOLLOWS:
(a) Angola: Armoured all-wheel drive vehicles
(b) Guyana: 40 submachine guns
(c) India: OIEL No 8—"Goods as specified by
the following entries of the EG(C)O 1994(as amended): ML4b, MLS,
ML10 b,d,e,f,g,h, ML11, ML14, ML15, ML16, ML171, ML18, PL5017,
ML21a & ML22".
(d) Israel: SIELs: Components for bombs; production equipment
for optical target tracking equipment; weapon control systems.
OIEL No 4: "components for surface to surface missile launching
vehicles, components for armoured fighting vehicles"
(e) Maldives: an explanation for the refusal of a licence
(f) Qatar: 69 submachine guns
(g) USA: 20,000 semi-automatic pistols
(h) Uruguay: 763 semi-automatic pistols
(i) Venezuela: Weapon day and night sights
(j) OIELs granted for the export of body armour, components
for body armour, bomb suits, military helmets, anti riot shields,
ballistic shields, to countries including: Antigua and Barbuda,
Bahamas, Barbados, Bermuda, Bulgaria, Sri Lanka, St Vincent, UAE.
(j) OIELs for wide-ranging equipment granted to Australia
(No 13), Brazil (No 9), Canada (No 14), Japan (No 11), Poland
(No 10), Singapore (No 10), Turkey (No 11), USA (No 27).
****
SECTION C: OTHER GOVERNMENT ACTIVITY
17. ACTION BY
CUSTOMS AND
EXCISE SINCE
JANUARY 2004
The Committee would be grateful for details of any prosecutions
relating to breaches of export controls: identifying court references,
including the name of the judge and court, the identity of the
defendant (if disclosable), the nature and details of the charges,
the fine imposed, the type and quantity of goods involved, and
the destination of the goods. The Committee would be grateful
to know the number of cases since January 2004 that have been
referred to specialist investigators, and the type and quantity
of goods involved. The Committee would also appreciate an indication
of the quantity of small arms and light weapons intended for export
stopped by Customs and Excise since January 2004.
Prosecution case
There have been no prosecutions in this period, but one case
is expected to come before the courts in November.
Cases adopted by specialist investigators
Five new cases have been adopted by specialist investigators
during the period in question. Customs cannot comment on the detail
of these cases which are either ongoing or in the court system.
It their policy not to comment on cases where no formal charges
have been brought, as to do so could prejudice ongoing enquiries
or future criminal proceedings.
Small arms and light weapons
Customs stopped a total of 81 firearms, 12 firearms parts,
286 rounds of ammunition 150 hand fired para illuminating rockets,
100 stun/training grenades and 700 thunderflashes.
18. DETAILS OF
PROMOTION ACTIVITIES
BY MINISTERS
FOR SPECIFIC
DEFENCE EXPORTS
SINCE OCTOBER
2003
Prime Minister
Czech Republic:
The Prime Minister spoke to Vladimir Spidla, the then Czech
Prime Minister, in the margins of the European Council on 13 December
2003, expressing support for the Anglo-Swedish aircraft Gripen.
FCO Ministers
Brazil:
The Foreign Secretary expressed his support for the Gripen
in his March 2004 meeting with the Brazilian Foreign Minister,
Celso Amorim
Singapore:
The Foreign Secretary's met with the Singapore Foreign Minister
Jayakumar on 15 April 2004, and expressed HMG support for Typhoon
(Eurofighter)
MOD Ministers
Answer to follow.
19. DETAILS OF
SURPLUS MILITARY
EQUIPMENT OFFERED
FOR SALE
BY THE
GOVERNMENT SINCE
JANUARY 2003, AND
OF THE
PURCHASERS OF
THIS EQUIPMENT
Military equipment that is surplus to the requirements of
HM Forces may be offered for sale by the Government through the
Ministry of Defence Disposal Services Agency (DSA). Information
on the more significant export sales of military equipment is
set out in the annual Report and Accounts of the DSA which is
available on their website www.dsa.gov.uk. A central record of
purchasers of military equipment is not available as a proportion
of all sales are handled through firms on contract to the Agency.
Military equipment sold to overseas purchasers requires a
licence to export and this information is recorded against the
buyer country in the quarterly report of Export Licensing Statistics.
The second quarterly report will be displayed on the websites
of the Department of Trade and Industry and Foreign and Commonwealth
Office shortly.
Equipment sold government-to-government, including surplus
equipment, is listed against buyer country in a table of government-to-government
transfers in the Annual Report on Strategic Export Controls. The
next Annual Report will be published in mid-2005
20. THE ANNUAL
REPORT STATES
THAT "IT
IS NOT
POSSIBLE TO
BREAK DOWN
EXPORTS COVERED
BY AN
OIEL AS TO
IDENTIFY INCORPORATION
CASES" (P
12). PLEASE EXPLAIN
WHY THIS
IS THE
CASE
There is currently no way to identify incorporation cases
from our IT system without manually screening all the applications
at the time of writing the Report. In addition, the nature of
OIELs is such that they do not necessarily specify end-users in
the permitted destinations; HMG nonetheless satisfies itself of
the integrity of the exporter and assesses the full-range of risks
associated with exporting the goods to the various destinations
before issuing such licences. This includes incorporation where
relevant.
September 2004
| 
