Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120-131)
MR GARETH
THOMAS MP, MR
KENNY DICK
AND MS
KATE JOSEPH
1 MARCH 2007
Q120 Richard Burden: We will do that.
On the number of refusals on the grounds of criteria 2, 3 and
4, are there any more refusals under those criteria than there
are under Criterion 8?
Ms Joseph: I do not have information
in front of me about the total number of refusals under Criterion
2 or Criterion 3 or Criterion 4, which are the ones in which we
are most interested apart from Criterion 8, but I think the Committee
is probably aware that there have been many more refusals under
those criteria than under Criterion 8.
Q121 Richard Burden: If it is possible,
perhaps you would let us have a note of the number of refusals
under those criteria and comparing that with Criterion 8.
Mr Thomas: That will be done.
Q122 Mike Gapes: I want to ask you
about trafficking and brokering, but, before I do, I have a question
following on from what Richard Burden said. How joined up is our
work between DFID and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office? I say
this in the context that the FCO has been closing a number of
posts around the world, whereas DFID has offices in a number of
countries where we do not have diplomatic representation. Do you
think that is an anomaly? Is it not time that we had a more integrated
way of dealing with individual countries?
Mr Thomas: On the specific issue
of arms exports, the reason it is a cross-government process is
because individual departments will have strengths in different
areas geographically and in thematic areas of expertise too. The
purpose of a number of government departments being involved in
the process is to bring all that expertise together. In that sense,
the process works well. We work closely with other government
departments in these areas. The methodology that we use is one
that was agreed with other government departments. The DTI, if
you like, are the first point of call for that methodology to
be implemented. Yes, the process works well. One of the reasons
we are conducting a review about how we use the methodology around
Criterion 8 is to see whether there is anything else we can do
as a department to strengthen still further how we implement that
methodology. But that is, in a sense, our contribution to the
whole process. Other departments bring other strengths.
Q123 Mike Gapes: You have a DFID
office in some countries where you do not have a diplomat, for
example, yet you could probably do an assessment on human rights,
you could do other things in that country. I wonder whether it
works in the way it ought to or if in fact we almost have DFID
running its policy, mainly in Africa, and the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office working somewhere else.
Mr Thomas: As the Minister responsible
for Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, I slightly resent the
suggestion that we do not do things outside of Africa. I do genuinely
think the process works well. Where there are countries where
we have larger staffs, then we obviously have more expertise to
bring to discussions about that particular country. But it is
genuinely a cross-government process and we do work well together.
Q124 Mike Gapes: Perhaps we will
come back to this another time. Your boss, the Secretary of State
Hilary Benn, gave an interview in The Financial Times two
weeks ago, 14 February. You have alluded to the issue several
times in several different answers about the forthcoming review
of the Export Control Act. He said it will examine "whether
UK controls on international arms brokers, who act as go-betweens
in weapons deals, should be extended." Do you want those
controls to be extended?
Mr Thomas: The review that I have
been referring to is a review we are going to do ourselves of
the methodology, the implementation of which we are responsible
for leading on. As you say, there is going to be a review more
generally of the secondary legislation under the Export Control
Act. I think it is pretty clear that the top issue for consideration
in that review is going to be the issue of brokers.
Q125 Mike Gapes: Do you want the
controls extended?
Mr Thomas: I think there is a
good case for the review to look at the question of extension
to small arms and light weapons, for example, yes. I think the
review is going to look at that issue and I welcome that.
Q126 Mike Gapes: Do you think extending
the controls would reduce the supply of those illicit arms?
Mr Thomas: I think to reduce dramatically
the flow of illicit small arms and light weapons we are going
to need a comprehensive arms trade treaty. Frankly, that is the
single biggest priority internationally for making progress on
controls of those types of weapons and I am sure the Committee
is more than well aware of where we are in that process.
Q127 Mike Gapes: Do you think there
is a case for a register of all brokers?
Mr Thomas: Frankly, the system
we have at the moment where every application has to be considered
on its own merits is arguably stronger than the question of a
register, so we have an effective process at the moment.
Q128 Mike Gapes: Could we do both?
It is not either/or, is it?
Mr Thomas: You then have to make
a judgment about resources and how such a list would work in practice
and what the disadvantages might be of having such a list. I understand
the Committee is going to be meeting with other ministers who
are leading on those particular elements of the review and I suggest
that they are the appropriate people to talk to you about this.
Q129 Mike Gapes: Could you give us
some sense of the kinds of questions we might ask other ministers?
What does DFID want out of this review of the 2002 Act and perhaps
then we can press that agenda with other ministers?
Mr Thomas: It is very kind of
you to tempt me down that particular route, Mr Gapes, but I would
not dream of trying to put questions into your mouth.
Mike Gapes: I am quite happy to take
them.
Chairman: Sir John, I think, would like
to ask a question. Whether he can tempt you, I am not quite sure.
Q130 Sir John Stanley: In the Westminster
Hall debate on our previous report last week I pointed out that
this Committee had made a total of 34 recommendations in favour
of the extension of extraterritoriality for trafficking and brokering.
Some of us take the view that the present review is unnecessary,
but, anyway, the Government is going ahead with it. We are very
anxious that this particular aspect of the review is concluded
in the shortest possible timescale. Minister, can you tell us
what is your timetable for concluding the review?
Mr Thomas: I do not have a specific
sense of a timetable for the review. As I understand, you are
going to be meeting with other ministers who are leading on the
review and I think you would be better placed to ask that particular
question about timescale to them.
Q131 Chairman: I think we have come
to our allotted time. If you remember, Minister, you kindly offered
either through correspondence or a private session to discuss
the methodology issue further. I suggested, and my colleagues
agree, that we pursue that in writing at this stage. We are all
delighted that brokering is the top issue for the review. We are
very grateful indeed to you and your colleagues for attending
this afternoon and this is the first of what I hope will be a
number of occasions when DFID will have the opportunity to give
evidence to the Committee. Thank you very much indeed.
Mr Thomas: Thank you.
| 
