|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Hoon: The Antarctic Treaty preserves Antarctica for peace and science. Within this framework, however, tourism is a legitimate activity, providing it is undertaken safely and in line with the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty 1991.
Nevertheless, tourism activities continue to increase in the Antarctic Treaty Area and the UK has taken a leading role within the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meetings to ensure that safety and environmental concerns continue to be addressed. This has included, for example, securing agreement to require all tourism activities to have detailed search and rescue, insurance and contingency plans.
The vast majority of Antarctic tourism takes place under the self-regulatory framework established by the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO). IAATO sets stringent environmental standards for Antarctic tourism operators and manages the annual tourism traffic to Antarctica. The UK supports this self-regulatory framework, for example by restricting access to UK Historic Sites and Bases to IAATO operators, and works with IAATO to further enhance the management of Antarctic tourism.
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what progress was made towards achieving an international arms trade Treaty at the UN Review Conference on Small Arms in June; and if she will make a statement. 
Dr. Howells: The Government fully supports the initiative for a legally binding International Arms Trade Treaty to cover the trade in all conventional arms. We are leading the way in building the international consensus needed to secure agreement to the start of a formal process toward a treaty at the UN General Assembly this autumn. The UN Programme of Action on Small Arms and Light Weapons only covers a specific category of conventional arms and is part of a process that is politically, not legally binding. The Review Conference was not the right forum to progress the treaty initiative. However, we were pleased to see that a range of countries used the meeting as an opportunity to express support for work towards a treaty.
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions have taken place between her Department and Rolls-Royce on its contracts with companies owned and controlled by the Government of Burma. 
Mr. Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent representations she has made to the Governments of (a) China and (b) Russia on the discussion of Burma at the UN Security Council; and what the outcome was of those discussions. 
Margaret Beckett: The Chinese and Russian Governments currently do not support a discussion and resolution on Burma at the UN Security Council. We shall continue to encourage all Security Council members to support action to persuade the Burmese regime to promote political, economic and social development.
My right hon. Friend, the Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs, Ian McCartney, raised the situation in Burma with the Chinese Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs on 20 June and asked that China support a Security Council debate and resolution on Burma and encourage the Burmese Government to meet their human rights responsibilities. He also raised Burma with the Chinese ambassador on 21 June. Additionally, in his meeting of 13 June with the Chairman of the UK Friendship Group of the China National Peoples Congress, my right hon. Friend encouraged Chinese engagement to help resolve international issues. I have not made representations to the Governments of China and Russia regarding Burma.
Mr. Hague: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the prospects for securing UN Security Council (a) debate and (b) a resolution on Burma. 
Margaret Beckett: It is too early to make an assessment of the prospects for securing a UN Security Council debate or resolution on Burma. The Chinese and Russian Governments do not support such a debate or resolution. We shall continue to work with all Security Council members to support action to persuade the Burmese regime to promote political, economic and social development.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information the Government have received on whether North Korea (a) is training Burmese nationals in nuclear technology and (b) has transferred missile technology to Burma. 
Dr. Howells: The Government are aware of media reports from 2002-03 which alleged possible clandestine assistance from North Korea to Burmas military in the construction of a nuclear reactor. As a party to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, Burma has undertaken not to seek nuclear weapons, but has the right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology. Russia is assisting Burma, through the International Atomic Energy Agencys (IAEA) Technical Co-operation Organisation, to acquire a research reactor. This reactor would be under IAEA safeguards.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports the Government have received on the regime in Burma sending soldiers to Russia for military and nuclear technology training. 
Mr. McCartney: Burma's Deputy Foreign Minister U Khin Maung Win acknowledged in January 2002 that Burma had received "a proposal" from Russia to build a nuclear research reactor. Burma has also publicly noted that it continues to send trainees to Russia. We understand that there are currently over 1,000 students, the vast majority of them from the military: some of these are studying nuclear technology. We have no information on current levels of military co-operation between Russia and Burma.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what reports the Government have received relating to uranium exported by Burma to Russia, China and North Korea being re-exported to other countries. 
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will make a statement on the recent actions of Janjaweed militias in Chad; and what representations she has made to the Government of Chad about protecting refugees. 
[holding answer 6 July 2006]: We are aware that Chadian rebels and Darfur militia continue to mount cross-border attacks into Eastern Chad from Darfur, which has led to the displacement of 50,000 Chadians. We are also aware of reports of Darfur rebels continuing to be supported by Chad. We are
pressing the Government of Sudan to neutralise and disarm the Janjaweed and expel foreign fighters from Darfur as soon as possible, as required under the Darfur Peace Agreement. We are also pressing both Governments to fulfil their obligations under the Tripoli Agreement.
While in Chad leading a UN Security Council delegation in early June, our Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York raised the refugee camps with President Deby and encouraged him to ensure their full protection.
Global Opportunities Fund, Annual Report 2004/05, Cm 6665, 12 October 2005;
Annual Performance Report 2005, Cm 6709, 14 December 2005;
52 Annual Report of the Marshall Aid Commission, Year Ending 30 September 2005, Cm 6716, 19 January 2006;
Prospects for the EU in 2005 and the retrospective of the UKs Presidency of the EU, 1 July to 31 December 2005, Cm 6735, 31 January 2006;
Six-monthly Report on Hong Kong, JulyDecember 2005, Cm 6751, 1 March 2006;
Fiftieth Annual Report of the Foreign Compensation Commission for the Financial Year Ended 31 March 2005, Cm 6778, 4 May 2006;
Active Diplomacy for a Changing World, the UKs International Priorities, Cm 6762, 28 March 2006;
First Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2005-06, Annual Report on Human Rights 2005, Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Cm 6774, 2 May 2006;
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Departmental Report 1 April 200531 March 2006, Cm 6823, 8 May 2006;
Second Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2005/06, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2004-05, Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Cm 6791, 22 May 2006; and
Third Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2005/06, Public Diplomacy, Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Cm 6840, 7 June 2006.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what draft Bills have been produced by her Department since October 2005; how many were (a) examined and (b) are planned to be examined by (i) a departmental Select Committee and (ii) a Joint Committee; which draft Bills are still to be produced by her Department; when each is expected to be published; how many clauses each has; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what her practice is regarding meeting, discussing and taking into account the views and opinions of (a) private individuals and (b) representatives of organisations when drawing up and framing legislation to be introduced by her Department; and if she will make a statement. 
Margaret Beckett: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is not a Department with a heavy legislative programme. Subject to our international obligations, our practice is to seek a full range of views when drawing up and framing legislation. Formal and informal consultation is a key part of the policy making process. The FCO holds regular meetings with representatives of the principal stakeholder groups for our policy areas and with relevant experts. Organisations and individuals can also contribute to the Departments formal consultations, which abide by the Code of Conduct on Consultation. Known stakeholders are alerted to the fact that a formal consultation is taking place. As required by the code, the Department gives feedback on the response received and on how the consultation process influenced the policy decision.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will list the Deposited Papers placed in the Library by her Department since 2000; and when they were published. 
Mr. Hoon: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has placed 610 items in the Library of the House since 2000. The Library keeps a list of the documents including their date of deposit which I will forward to the hon. Member.
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the Council of Europes report on alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers of detainees involving Council of Europe member states; and what response she has made to the findings of the report at paragraph 10.5 in relation to the case of Benyam Mohammed Al Habashi. 
Dr. Howells: Dick Martys report of 7 June entitled Alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe Member States contains no new evidence in respect of the UK.
In the case of Benyam Mohammed Al Habashi, he was interviewed once by a member of the UK Security Services in Karachi in 2002, but the Security Services had no role in his capture in or transfer from Pakistan.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations the Government have made to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime regarding drug production and trafficking in (a) Pakistan and (b) Iran; and what assessment she has made of the effects of the level of production on the National Drugs Control Strategy in Afghanistan. 
Mr. McCartney: Pakistan and Iran are major drug trafficking transit countries to Europe. Production in these countries is much less significant than in Afghanistan. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) World Drugs Report of 2006 quotes 2,400 hectares of opium cultivated in Pakistan compared to 104,000 in Afghanistan in 2005. Iran cultivation figures do not feature. Regional co-operation is, however, an important element of the Government of Afghanistan's National Drug Control Strategy and efforts are being made to improve information sharing and develop closer working relationships with the neighbours with particular respect to border control, law enforcement and judicial co-operation. This is vital in order to crack down on drug trafficking and ensure that cultivation does not move across Afghanistan's borders into neighbouring countries. In 2005 the UK funded £1.55 million of regional projects, of which £618,000 was contributed to the UNODC Iran integrated border management project on the Iran/Afghan border. In 2006 we are funding £1 million of regional projects of which £400,000 is allocated to UNODC regional precursor control projects.
The UK has regular dialogue with the UNODC on drug trafficking in Pakistan and Iran. This is undertaken both on a multilateral and bilateral level. On the multilateral level, the UK is a strong supporter of the UNODC-managed Paris Pact process, a mechanism to co-ordinate action by all countries affected by the Afghan opiate trade, and plays a high profile role in these meetings. This provides an opportunity to work with priority transit countries to combat the trafficking of heroin from Afghanistan to Europe. At the Islamabad and Tehran Paris Pact meetings in March and September 2005 respectively, the UK pressed both UNODC and the international donor community to support our regional counter narcotics priorities. These are to develop operational cross border liaison, regional precursor control, and law enforcement training and equipment for Pakistan, Iran and Central Asian Republics bordering Afghanistan.
On the bilateral level, UNODC recognise that UK funding in support of UNODC programmes in Iran and Pakistan has been very helpful in allowing us jointly to address a range of counter narcotics issues. Our Missions in Tehran and Islamabad enjoy good relations and regular dialogue with the local UNODC offices. The UK has also played an active role in the development of a UNODC regional strategy for the countries along Afghan drug-trafficking routes.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what estimate (a) she and (b) the UN Office on Drugs and Crime has made of the size of the Afghan poppy crop in 2006. 
Dr. Howells: It is too early to assess overall levels of cultivation in 2006, but a significant increase seems likely following last year's 21 per cent. fall. This is worrying and due in part to a substantial increase in planting in the more lawless south, including Helmand Province. We will know this year's cultivation figures when the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime publishes its annual opium poppy survey in the autumn. There are some signs, however, that last year's reductions are likely to be sustained in areas where access to governance, security and development has improved. Sustainable drug elimination strategies take time, particularly when the challenges are as severe as they are in Afghanistan. The UK believes that the approach set out in the Government of Afghanistan's newly updated National Drug Control Strategy represents the best means of tackling the problem.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|