ANNEX B
Response to follow up questions from the International
Development Committee, Sixth Report of Session 2005-06, Conflict
and Development: Peacebuilding and Post-conflict reconstruction,
HC923 and the Government response, First Special Report of the
Session 2006-07, HC 172.
CONFLICT ASSESSMENT
1. The Government response to the Committee's
report discusses the creation of a new mandatory governance assessment
tool, the Country Governance Analysis, which will be carried out
in partnership with other Government Departments. Has this tool
as yet been used in any conflict prone or conflict affected state?
DFID introduced a new governance assessment
tool, the Country Governance Analysis (CGA) in 2007. The CGA is
mandatory for all countries where DFID is preparing 3 to 5 year
Country Assistance Plans. Between 17 and 21 countries are likely
to prepare CGAs in 2007. To date, none have reached the final
approval stage but several are near to finalisation, including
Sierra Leone, Malawi, Mozambique and Ghana.
DFID has established a Quality Assurance Mechanism
for CGAs which aims to strengthen and refine areas of the analysis.
This process includes a specific review of the extent to which
the White Paper commitment that CGAs include an analysis of the
causes of conflict and insecurity has been met. Through this process,
and other work, we will refine both the guidance materials and
the types of support offered to countries undertaking CGAs in
the second year of implementation.
MANAGING NATURAL
RESOURCE WEALTH
2. What progress has been made in discussions
within the Government about a definition of conflict resources?
A Whitehall working group (DFID, FCO, DTI, DEFRA
and MOD) has been established to identify and take forward actions
to tackle the trade in conflict resources. As part of this effort,
we are looking at the scope for an internationally agreed definition
of "conflict resources". We will need to weigh carefully
whether there is sufficient international consensus to agree such
a definition.
3. What progress has been made in discussions
within the Government about the creation of an Expert Panel in
the UN to monitor the links between natural resources and conflict?
The composition, role and process for establishing
an Expert Panel in the UN is being discussed by the Whitehall
working group alongside other possible mechanisms. We will be
meeting with NGOs and international partners to discuss this later
in the year.
WOMEN AND
PEACEBUILDING
4. What has been the outcome of the MOD audit
of training provision in relation to the national Action Plan
for the implementation of UNSCR 1325?
The audit concludes that British military personnel
generally receive sufficient training in relevant subjects to
be assured that they are compliant with the intent of UNSCR 1325.
The MOD is, nevertheless, following up two specific recommendations
from the audit: to ensure coverage of gender issues within cultural
awareness training; and to include reference to UNSCR 1325 within
relevant doctrine publications.
UGANDA
5. What difference has the creation of the
Joint Monitoring Commission for the North made to the activities
of a) donors b) the Government of Uganda?
The Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC) has helped
focus attention on northern Uganda and co-ordinate action to improve
the situation on the ground. The Government has used the JMC to
provide feedback on the peace process in Juba and to give donors
the opportunity to discuss issues arising. The JMC also oversees
the implementation of the emergency humanitarian action plan helping
to focus donors' humanitarian response. Feedback on progress is
provided at each meeting by line Ministries. Increasingly the
JMC is discussing issues associated with the resettlement of the
internally displaced as the security situation has improved. The
involvement of the districts has helped improve communication
between central and local government and increased central government's
accountability for delivering agreed actions.
6. Donors were providing US$200 million
annually for the IDP camps in the North of Uganda. Has there been
a change since our visit in February 2006? Is the Government of
Uganda now providing more resources, commensurate with needs,
to the North?
The United Nations Consolidated Appeal for Uganda
for 2007 is just under US$ 296 million which covers areas affected
by the LRA conflict, refugees and Karamoja. US$ 142 million has
been provided by donors so far. In the areas affected by the LRA
conflict the most recent information from the UN suggest that
of the 1.7 million people in camps at the end of 2005 400,000
have now returned home. A further 400,000 have moved to new satellite
sites, hopefully in transition to returning home. Both those returning
home and those in transit have continuing humanitarian needs which
the UN Appeal seeks to cover.
Since the IDC visit in February 2006 the Government
of Uganda has increased its financing to the North. It is estimated
that regular central government transfers to northern districts
affected by the conflict with the LRA increased from about US$
97 million in 2005-06 to about US$ 114 million in 2006-07. In
addition a special allocation of US$ 12 million was set aside
for priorities identified within the Joint Monitoring Committee's
Emergency Humanitarian Action Plan. A large proportion of this
money was provided to the Uganda Police Force to enable them to
increase their presence in both the IDP Camps and in areas where
people have begun to return home. Donors agreed that this should
be a high priority.
The 2007-08 budget is now being finalised. Line
Ministries have again been asked to set aside additional resources
for the North from their normal allocations. In addition US$ 14
million has been initially allocated for JMC priorities. Donors
have asked the Ministry of Finance for further information about
these plans.
| 
