Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will make representations to the Laos authorities on the case of the 10 North Korea refugees held in Luang Prabang detention centre in Laos, who may be handed over to the Chinese authorities. 
All decisions on our overseas network have been based on the need to align our resources with our priorities, to maximise efficiency and ensure that the UK has a cost-effective and flexible network of
overseas representation. The UK continues to engage actively with Latin American Governments, with Ambassadors and their teams making regular visits where we do not have resident representation. We have also appointed honorary consuls in each of these countries. The UK and Latin America share many values and international concerns and I have no doubt that our strong links will continue.
Mr. Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 4 May 2006, Official Report, column 1808W, on Palestine, what factors are being considered in the review of the EU Police Mission in the Occupied Territories; and if she will make a statement. 
Margaret Beckett: The EU Police Mission in the Occupied Territories is under close review to ensure that it complies with the Quartets conditions on providing assistance to the Palestinians. The European Commission and member states are in close contact with the Mission, and an EU working group scrutinises the Missions regular reports. In addition, there will be a formal six-month review in July 2006.
Mr. Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what her assessment is of the implications of the recent decision by the European Parliament to proscribe the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam; and if she will make a statement. 
We welcome the EUs decision to list the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) as a terrorist organisation. The EU listing procedure is a means by which EU member states work together collectively to fulfil their obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 1373 to freeze the assets of terrorists without delay. The EU has repeatedly urged the LTTE to change their ways, to turn away from violence, return to the negotiation table and pursue peace through political means. It is hoped the listing will help the LTTE to see that they need to change their ways and move away from their path of violence. At the same time, the EU has asked the Government of Sri Lanka to rein in other paramilitary groups from carrying out attacks in Government-controlled areas. The only way forward in the conflict is a negotiated
settlement that satisfies the concerns and legitimate aspirations of all Sri Lankans and preserves democracy in Sri Lanka.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will make representations to the Vietnamese Government to call for the release of imprisoned Hmong Protestant leader Ma Van Bay. 
Mr. McCartney: We, with our EU partners, raise human rights issues with the Vietnamese Government at every suitable opportunity. We raised the case of Ma Van Bay, with our EU partners, in Hanoi in May. The EU expressed subsequently our concerns regarding this case to the Vietnamese Government at the latest meeting of the EU-Vietnam Human Rights Dialogue in Hanoi on 14 June. We, with our EU partners, will continue to press the Vietnamese to respond to our concerns regarding this case.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many times (a) she and (b) her predecessor met representatives from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to discuss whaling over the last 12 months. 
Mr. McCartney [holding answer 16 June 2006]: There have been no ministerial discussions between the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on this issue. Officials from both the Departments, however, work closely throughout the year to ensure our policy on whaling is communicated to countries that are currently members of the International Whaling Commission and to those who have an interest in cetacean conservation. We will continue to work together on these important issues.
Bill Wiggin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs with which countries (a) she and (b) her predecessor has discussed whaling over the last 12 months; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McCartney [holding answer 16 June 2006]: My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has not discussed whaling with any country in the last 12 months. Every year, in advance of the annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), the Foreign and Commonwealth Office issues lobbying instructions to its missions to seek support from their host countries for the UKs position on whaling. The prominent role we play within the IWC ensures no country can be in any doubt as to the importance we attach to whale conservation.
Mr. Pickles: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission how many (a) public relations and (b) marketing staff the Electoral Commission employs; what the annual wage costs were for staff in each category in the last year for which figures are available; and what the (i) job titles and (ii) functions are of each of these staff. 
Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that it does not categorise its staff in this way. However, it employs 10 staff whose duties it considers to fall, in whole or in part, within the two areas referred to. They consist of four press officers, two staff dealing with parliamentary affairs, and four staff working on voter information campaigns. Their total annual wage costs in 2005-06 were £116,404, £62,892 and £108,129 respectively.
David Lepper: To ask the Chairman of the Administration Committee if he will make a statement on the changes recommended by the Committee to the rules on broadcasting proceedings of the House and on filming and photography within the precincts. 
Mr. Doran: The Committee has recently made a number of recommendations on changes to the rules on broadcasting proceedings of the House and on filming and photography within the precincts. Mr. Speaker has agreed to these changes being made on a trial basis. The Committee will consider in December whether to recommend that they be made permanent.
From the return of the House in October, and for a trial period, a greater variety of shots of proceedings in the Chamber will be allowed than is the case at present, including a greater use of reaction shots in order to illustrate the mood of the House, and the provision of a low-level atmospheric sound-feed during divisions rather than the current complete silence.
From the same time, BBC Parliament will be released on a trial basis from the undertaking previously given to the Broadcasting Committee, to carry live Commons Chamber coverage regardless of proceedings at the same time in the House of Lords, on condition that the freedom to select proceedings in the Lords should be used only sparingly, and that Mr. Speaker should be consulted in such cases. A reporter voice-over will also now be permitted during divisions.
Two new interview points have been identified within the precincts: in the south west corner of Westminster Hall once the current works there have been completed, and on the Green in New Palace Yard, subject in the latter case to a permit from the Serjeant at Arms. Filming pieces to camera of a presenter walking across Central Lobby will also be permitted before 9 am on non-sitting days, similarly subject to a permit from the Serjeant at Arms.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Leader of the House what actions have been taken by his Department to implement (a) Procedure and (b) Modernisation of the House of Commons Select Committee recommendations since the 2001-02 Session; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Straw: The actions being taken by the Government in response to the reports of the Procedure and Modernisation Committees, so far as they are matters for Government, have been set out in written responses to those reports and subsequent debates on the floor of the House. The following tables give details in relation to each report.
|Government reply and any subsequent debate
|Government reply and any subsequent debate
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many antisocial behaviour orders have been applied for by the British Transport police in the last 12 months, broken down by (a) Government office region and (b) constituency. 
Derek Twigg: The British Transport police (BTP) have provided the following information on the number of antisocial behaviour order applications recorded by BTP Area; data is not collected by Government office region or by parliamentary constituency.
Gillian Merron: Through the local transport planning system and other initiatives, the Department encourages local authorities to set up authority-wide car share schemes and to promote car sharing as part of site specific workplace travel plans.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect on the cost of the Crossrail project of re-using (a) the Farringdon to Moorgate section of Thameslink and (b) the disused Moorgate to Liverpool Street mainline station link. 
Derek Twigg: I understand from Crossrail London Rail Links Ltd (CLRL) that reusing the section of Thameslink running from Farringdon to Moorgate for operational purposes would involve bringing the tunnel up to the surface near Farringdon and returning below ground near Moorgate. This is considered impractical, given that there is not sufficient space for tunnel portals in these areas. Therefore, CLRL has not carried out a cost assessment of this option.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps will be taken to ensure that listed buildings located at the sites of proposed Crossrail stations are not (a) damaged and (b) demolished. 
Derek Twigg: We have sought to avoid adverse effects on listed buildings wherever practicable. However, the construction of Crossrail would result in the demolition of two listed buildings and the modification of a further thirteen.
We are in the process of negotiating agreements with English Heritage and the relevant local authority, as appropriate, for those listed buildings that are affected by Crossrail works. These agreements will describe the mitigation required at each location. Impacts from construction works on any listed buildings which are not covered by a separate agreement would be controlled via mechanisms set out in the environmental minimum requirements that will be set for the project. Potential settlement impacts are dealt with in Crossrails settlement policy.