|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Lammy: The Cultural Olympiad has been designed in such a way that creative and cultural organisations at all levels, from the largest national bodies to the smallest community groups, can participate. We are working with the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games to deliver this.
The Nations and Regions are developing plans to maximise the benefit of the London Games to all parts of the UK. In addition, I have recently announced that a network of Regional Creative Programmers in eight of the English Regions is to be established. Their role will contribute to the delivery of cultural events in all the regions in the run-up to and during the 2012 Games.
Mr. Caborn: The Department sponsors UK Sport, the UKs national anti-doping organisation, which is responsible for delivering the UK's national anti-doping programme. In the run-up to the 2012 Games, UK Sport will continue to deliver its anti-doping programme for all Olympic and Paralympic sports.
The chief medical officer at the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games (LOCOG), who was appointed in February, is responsible for the anti-doping programme during the 2012 Games, under delegation from the International Olympic Committee.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport whether Olympic regional creative programmers will be assigned to (a) London, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales and (d) Northern Ireland. 
Mr. Lammy: We are planning cultural events in the run-up to and during the 2012 Games to span the UK. The "Nations and Regions Group" of the London Organising Committee for the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games is developing plans to maximise the benefits of and engagement in the 2012 Games for their respective nations and regions. Participation in the Cultural Olympiad will be included within these plans.
The network of Creative Programmers being established will cover the eight English regions outside London. Colleagues in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are considering what arrangements would fit their plans to participate in the cultural programme. The Greater London Authority is also developing proposals on how to co-ordinate and deliver a pan-London cultural programme.
Mr. Lammy [holding answer 27 April 2007]: None. Staffing of libraries and library authorities is a matter for local authorities to decide, after considering available resources and local priorities, providing it does not affect the authoritys ability to deliver a comprehensive and efficient library service to the public as required under the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964.
Mr. Woodward [holding answer 27 April 2007]: Under the Communications Act 2003 Ofcom has the responsibility of periodically reviewing public service television broadcasting. The timing of such reviews is a matter for Ofcom, subject to a requirement that they take place at least once every five years. I understand that Ofcom intends to begin the next review in 2008.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what the regulatory requirements are for each public service broadcaster in relation to children's television; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woodward: Section 264 of the Communications Act 2003 requires Ofcom to regularly review and report on the extent to which public service broadcasters fulfil the purposes of public service television, including the provision (when the services are taken together) of a
suitable quantity and range of high quality and original programmes for children and young people.
Mr. Woodward: To date the Department has received 21 queries regarding the operation of premium rate telephone competitions in 2007. However, complaints about premium rate telephone competitions are a matter for the independent regulators, Ofcom and ICSTIS.
Mr. Austin Mitchell: To ask the Prime Minister what representations he made to his European counterparts during consultations on the Berlin Declaration; if he will place in the Library a copy of such representations; and if he will make a statement. 
The Prime Minister: I made no formal representations to EU counterparts on the Berlin Declaration. However the normal contacts took place at official level, and I discussed the declaration informally with Chancellor Merkel in the course of normal diplomatic contacts.
David Simpson: To ask the Prime Minister what percentage of paper used (a) for photocopying and (b) in printed publications by his Office was from recycled sources in each of the last three years. 
The Prime Minister: For these purposes my Office forms part of the Cabinet Office. I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him by my right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office (Hilary Armstrong) on 27 April 2007, Official Report, column 1330W.
Mr. Dai Davies: To ask the Prime Minister for what reason reference to Trident or its successor was not made in the policy review report Building on Progress: Britain in the World published on 17 April. 
The Prime Minister: Building on Progress: Britain in the World draws on the conclusions and discussions of the Ministerial Working Group on Britain in the World, and seminars for junior Ministers conducted as part of the policy review process. It sets out a high-level overview of the broad UK approach to foreign policy since 1997, what the UK has achieved, and what the UK should seek to achieve in the decades to come. It does not aim to cover every issue in detail.
My statement of 4 December 2006, Official Report, columns 21-24, set out in detail the Governments position on maintaining the UKs independent nuclear deterrent. The reasons for that decision were further explained in the White Paper The Future of the United Kingdoms Nuclear Deterrent (Cm 6994), published on the same day. The House voted in favour of the Governments decision on 14 March 2007.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the recommendations of the United Nations Panel of Experts on the strengthening of the current arms embargo set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1591; and what steps she has taken in response to the recommendations. 
Mr. McCartney: We supported the report by the Panel of Experts and its recommendations at the UN Sanctions Committee. It has not yet been transmitted to the UN Security Council (UNSC) nor has it been made public.
At a meeting of the UNSC on 16 April chaired by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, she made the case for further sanctions to impose on the Government of Sudan and rebel movements if they fail to abide by their agreements. We are working on a draft UNSC Resolution with other Security Council members to extend the UN arms embargo to the whole of Sudan, in line with the EU arms embargo.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many questions tabled by hon. and right hon. Members to her Department for oral answer have been transferred to other departments since May 2005. 
Mr. Hoon: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) has incomplete records of transfers of oral questions prior to November 2005. Subject to this caveat, our researches show that since May 2005 the FCO has transferred two oral questions.
Mr. Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will place in the Library a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding between the UK and Saudi Arabia on the sale of Eurofighter aircraft, signed in December 2005. 
No. This document is confidential between the two Governments. I am withholding the information as it would, or would be likely to prejudice international relations and harm the interests of the United Kingdom.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with her counterparts at the EU Council of Ministers on pressing the Government of Sudan (a) to accept and implement the full deployment of a strengthened international force with UN elements in Darfur and along the border with Chad, (b) to monitor the EU arms embargo to Sudan, (c) to help implement the Tripoli Agreement of February 2006 and (d) to extend the Sudan sanctions regime against key individuals. 
recalled that transition to a full African Union/UN hybrid force for Darfur was urgently required;
underlined the urgency of deploying a UN operation in Eastern Chad and the North-East of the Central African Republic;
called on both Sudan and Chad to refrain from further escalation and fully respect their commitments under the 2006 Tripoli Agreement; and
reiterated their readiness to consider further measures against any party which obstructs implementation of the peace agreements for Darfur.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the evidence presented to the UN Security Council of the transportation of arms and heavy weaponry into Darfur; and what reports on the matter she has received from the British Ambassador to the United Nations. 
Mr. McCartney: We supported the report by the Panel of Experts and its recommendations at the UN Sanctions Committee. It has not yet been transmitted to the UN Security Council nor has it been made public. Our Ambassador to the UN, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, reports developments regularly to my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. We continue to discuss the case for further sanctions in the UN.
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment the Government have made of the impact on humanitarian operations of a no-fly zone over Darfur. 
Mr. McCartney: The situation in Darfur is totally unacceptable. We are pressing our international partners at the UN Security Council (UNSC) to impose further measures on those responsible for the humanitarian crisis through their violations of UNSC Resolutions. Those measures include targeted sanctions against individuals engaged in violence or responsible for authorising it, an extension of the arms embargo to cover the whole of Sudan and measures to allow better monitoring of the illegal use of aircraft in Darfur. Further options remain under consideration, including a UNSC imposition of a no-fly zone. The humanitarian and security implications of such measures will be important considerations.
Mr. Love: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps she is taking to tackle the harassment of humanitarian aid workers by the Sudanese authorities in the Darfur region; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. McCartney: The UK played a prominent role with the UN and other partners in securing a joint communiqué on 28 March between the UN and the Government of Sudan on humanitarian operations in Darfur. This committed the Government of Sudan to remove bureaucratic impediments and respect the neutrality and independence of agencies involved in the relief effort.
We are pressing the Government of Sudan to implement their commitments in full, including in a letter that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development sent with five other foreign and development Ministers to the Sudanese Foreign Minister, Lam Akol. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary repeated this point when she chaired an informal meeting of the UN Security Council on 16 April.
Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if she will make representations to the business community to divest from Sudan on ethical and prudential grounds. 
Mr. McCartney: The restrictive measures adopted by the United Kingdom against Sudan are targeted to apply maximum pressure on those who engage in violence or who are responsible for authorising it. They include a travel ban and assets freeze on individuals who impede the peace process or constitute a threat to stability in the Darfur region. Members of the European Union also decided to go further than the arms embargo imposed by the UN and extend the embargo to the whole of Sudan.
We are now pressing our international partners at the UN Security Council to impose further measures on those responsible for the humanitarian crisis through their violations of UN Security Council Resolutions. Those measures include targeted sanctions against individuals engaged in violence or responsible for authorising it, an asset freeze of commercial entities owned by sanctioned individuals, an extension of the arms embargo to cover the whole
of Sudan and measures to allow better monitoring of the illegal use of aircraft in Darfur.
We have not yet considered taking steps to encourage disinvestment from Sudan by British companies. However, if the situation in Darfur does not improve then we will have to consider taking further measures.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|