Examination of Witnesses (Questions 92-99)
MALCOLM WICKS
MP, MR GLYN
WILLIAMS, MS
JAYNE CARPENTER
AND MR
DAVID WHITEHOUSE
13 MARCH 2006
Q92 Chairman: Good afternoon, Minister.
Welcome to you and your colleagues. Could I ask you to introduce
your colleagues to the Committee?
Malcolm Wicks: Glyn Williams is
director of the Export Control Organisation, the ECO. Jayne Carpenter
is head of policy and business relations in the ECO and David
Whitehouse is head of ECO's Licensing Casework Group. I wonder
if it would be possible to make a very brief opening statement?
Q93 Chairman: If it is very brief,
that would be fine, yes.
Malcolm Wicks: I welcome the opportunity
to give evidence with my colleagues. The Committee has our written
answers to questions on the 2004 annual report and I certainly
attach great importance to export control and getting it right.
I am glad to have the Committee's input which I hope will strengthen
the system further. In its last report the Committee said that
it believed that the UK's export control system had improved substantially
during that parliamentary session and that the Act and secondary
legislation introduced in 2004, together with changes in reporting
practice and more joined up working between departments, had brought
us to a point where we had generally efficient and reliable export
controls. We obviously welcome that broad judgment. Over the past
18 months, we have faced the challenge of implementing the new
controls, some in areas which bring in activities not previously
subject to control. We have sought to do this effectively while
not overburdening business. We have also maintained a sharp focus
on processing licence applications as promptly as possible and
we could tell you more about that. We think the ECO wants to build
on this good performance this year for a continuous improvement
programme and again we could explore that with you in terms of
IT systems and the rest. At one level, the ECO like other parts
of government is about competent and cost effective public administration.
You will forgive me if in answers to some of those questions on
that aspect I bring in my colleagues who are the experts. At another
higher level, however, it is about our role in combating terrorism
and human rights abuses. That is a sensitive and complex question
and certainly I would welcome the Committee's advice as we strive
to get this right in the future.
Q94 Chairman: Thank you. We are very
grateful that you and your colleagues are here. We have given
your department some indication of the details in the questions
we might ask. This is not a memory test for people; it is about
searching for the truth. We do acknowledge the work the government
has done already, as you rightly point out. Can I start by asking
whether the Export Control Organisation reviews the internet for
contraventions of the export control system?
Malcolm Wicks: The brief answer
is that that is not a regular role of the ECO. We do not have
a dedicated official looking at that. We recognise the importance
of the internet of course. We have a restricted enforcement unit.
This is a fortnightly meeting of an interdepartmental committee,
chaired by our director, Mr Williams, on my right here, which
reviews intelligence relating to procurement attempts and possible
breaches of control. One of the actions they may take is to follow
up leads by reviewing a company's website. That is in addition
to other work we do through our DTI compliance officers.
Q95 Chairman: The reason I raise
that is, as you probably know, we have received evidence in the
last session from Mark Thomas that suggested that UK companies
were advertising torture equipment on the internet; that if you
looked at the websites of a UK company, TLT International, stun
batons and stun guns were for sale. If you looked at Army-Technology.com,
the website run by SPG Media, a UK company, again you were offered
introductions to Chinese and Korean arms manufacturers who advertised
stun batons. Stun batons are on the government's proscribed list
and they require a licence. They are weapons of torture. If journalists
can spot these things on websites, has your department a similar
track record of spotting UK companies who are advertising things
of that kind that they should not be advertising, certainly without
a licence?
Malcolm Wicks: Our general approach
is that having someone dedicated, say, full time to doing this
would not be cost effective. We rely much more on an intelligence
based approach in common with many other aspects of policing.
Mr Williams: We do not do detective
work on a speculative basis. We will follow up any leads that
we are given from any source and, as necessary, pass them on to
HM Revenue and Customs to follow up with their enforcement powers.
You are really referring to the brokering controls on internet
advertising of the Restricted Goods category. Clearly those are
relatively new controls. They have not been in force for two years
yet so we are still getting to grips with the compliance and enforcement
side of that. I think it is not unusual that in the early days
you will find examples.
Q96 Chairman: Does the department
not have a list of UK companies and their websites? From time
to time, does someone pop along and check whether they are engaged
in advertising kit that they should not be promoting without a
licence? I can log on and do that. Why cannot the Export Control
Organisation?
Malcolm Wicks: We are not saying
we do not. I said earlier that we will look at company websites.
I suppose the resource question is whether making this a regular,
daily part of the work would be cost effective. I suspect, like
a lot of these things, there is probably no right and wrong answer.
This is a relatively new organisation, a new area of policy, which
I think we should all be proud of and we want to get it right,
given the resources we have. We have as much interest as you in
rooting out wrongdoing. If the Committee urged us to look at this
we would look at it again. It is a question of just using resources
appropriately and effectively.
Q97 Chairman: Is it the responsibility
of the ECO to do that or, in your view, is it the responsibility
of HM Revenue and Customs because they are the enforcement agency?
Who is dealing with websites or who should be in principle if
they had the resources? Should it be the ECO or HM Revenue and
Customs?
Malcolm Wicks: My guess would
be that there is no one agency dealing with websites. If we had
reason to pursue an inquiry, we would use all available evidence
at our disposal. I am not sure it would be sensible to say that
we are websites and someone else is not. Customs will use that
as part of their policing activities. We work very closely with
Customs of course.
Q98 Mr Hoyle: You spoke about resources.
Does that mean the ECO is under-resourced?
Malcolm Wicks: No, I do not think
it does mean that. Whether we were talking about mainstream policing,
the secret service, which is not my province, or combating social
security fraud that used to be my province ministerially, nevertheless,
with the resources you have, however adequate, there is always
a judgment about how you use those resources. Much policing now
is based on what people call the intelligence led approach.
Q99 Mr Hoyle: You think they are
adequately resourced?
Malcolm Wicks: Yes.
| 
