Committees on Arms ExportsSupplementary written evidence from The Rt Hon Vince Cable MP Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills

LORD ALTON OF LIVERPOOL’S PRIVATE MEMBERS BILL (RE-EXPORT CONTROLS)

At the oral evidence session taken before the Committees on Arms Export Controls on 7 February 2012, you informed me that Lord Alton of Liverpool had made representations to the Committees that the Government is blocking House of Commons consideration of his Private Members Bill (Re-Export Controls). You asked if that is the case and if so why. I said that I would look into the matter and report back to you.

Lord Alton’s Bill, tabled in May 2010, proposed an amendment to the Export Control Act 2002 so that I would be required to make an order to prohibit or regulate the re-export of controlled goods subsequent to their original export from the UK.

The Government does not want UK origin goods, once exported, to be re-exported for undesirable uses. But we believe that we already tackle this to the extent that we can through our current export licensing system.

As the Committees know, the risk of undesirable re-export is embedded in our assessment of licence applications (criterion seven of the consolidated criteria). Where the risk of such a re-export is sufficiently high, an export licence will not be granted. If a re-export of concern comes to light we can and do factor that in to our assessment of subsequent licence applications for similar goods to that destination.

Once a good has left the UK, it is in practice under the jurisdiction of the destination country. We would be claiming that UK export controls applied, whereas in reality we would have no powers to enforce them. We are concerned that the effect of Lord Alton’s proposals would be to impose statutory obligations (backed by criminal penalties) on persons outside the UK, solely on the basis that they had purchased UK origin goods and technology. In our view such obligations would go against the UK’s long-stranding opposition to extra-territorial jurisdiction, and would in reality be unenforceable and therefore ineffective.

For the reasons set out above, the government decided to oppose Lord Alton’s Bill. The Bill received its First Reading in the Lords on 26 May 2010. It received its Second Reading in the Lords on 3 December 2010, with Baroness Wilcox formally expressing reservations on behalf of the Government. The Bill received its Third Reading in the Lords on 12 January 2011 and First Reading in the Commons on 27 January 2011.

The Bill was scheduled for Second Reading in the Commons on 13 May 2011 but it did not receive time for debate on the day and the Bill was opposed. The Bill was then due for debate on 21 October 2011 but the order to read the Bill lapsed on that day. We understand that the sponsor of the Bill in the Commons did not make it known if he was present in the Chamber when the short title of the Bill was read out. As a consequence, the Bill was not moved for Second Reading.

For completion I should note that the sponsors of the Bill have made representations to the Government requesting that the Bill would be allowed to move to a House of Commons Second Reading Committee. Aside from the rarity of such referrals, our responses have reiterated the Government’s opposition to the Bill, and that Ministers have not been minded to allow the Bill to proceed to a Second Reading Committee on that basis.

March 2012