|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey): In 199394, 69 per cent. of ODA's aid to developing countries which can be attributed to individual country programmes went to the poorest countries.
(i) technical changes in the definition used for aid to the poorest including: a reclassification of some emergency aid provided through multilateral agencies from multilateral to bilateral aid, reflecting the fact that the aid is made available for countries that ODA specifies and is thus bilateral in character. Since many of the recipientse.g., in the former Yugoslaviaare not amongst the poorest countries, this has the effect of reducing bilateral aid to the poorest. This accounts for a change of over 2 percentage points; a change in the OECD definition of income groups, lowering the threshold for low income countries from an annual income per head of $765 to $675. This accounts for a change of 2 percentage points;
(ii) some shift of aid expenditure from low income countries to lower middle income countries accounting for the remaining change of over 6 percentage points. This includes emergency aid in Bosnia and Angola, neither of which is classified by the OECD as a low income country.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Blatch): All those detained under the Immigration Act 1971, including overstayers and those electing to make a supervised departure or awaiting deportation, are
The general policy is that information held about a prisoner should be disclosed on request to him or her unless there are clear and justifiable security grounds, including the prevention of crime or the protection of third parties. The grounds on which information is withheld should be explained to the prisoner.
Lady Blatch has asked me, in the absence of the Director General from the office, to reply to your recent Question about the circumstances in which denial of access to television viewing for those serving prison sentences is used as a penalty for bad behaviour.
Denial of access can result from the disciplinary punishment of forfeiture of privileges. This can be imposed by a governor for up to 28 days on any prisoner guilty of an offence under the Prison Rules. The maximum period is 14 days for young offenders. The
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen): The Department of Transport's response to the consultation on the draft findings of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration (PCA) has been published as Appendix 4 to the PCA's Report entitled The Channel Tunnel Rail Link and Blight: Investigation of Complaints Against the Department of Transport, which was published on 9 February. This was a considered response prepared after consultation with Ministers and other government departments. It would be inappropriate for Her Majesty's Government to comment further in advance of the consideration of the PCA's report by the House of Commons PCA Select Committee.
Baroness Miller of Hendon: A New Framework for Agreement contains proposals as an aid to discussion and negotiations. Consent of the political parties, Parliament and the people of Northern Ireland is the key to further progress. There are no suggestions in the document for joint/tripartite authority over any aspect of the future governance of Northern Ireland.
"During questions on 14 December about the EC proposal which would set limits for nitrate in lettuce and spinach, you asked whether the Council could recall particular Commission proposals for implementing measures. In reply, I noted that Commission proposals have had to return to the Council but, when we spoke afterwards, I promised to write providing a full answer to your question.
"Article 145 of the Treaty, which deals with the delegation of implementing powers to the Commission, allows the Council to impose procedural requirements on the way the Commission exercises such powers: and also provides for those procedures to be codified in advance in a Council Decision. The Decision in question (No 87.373, known as the Comitology Decision) lays down three main types of procedure each involving Committees composed of representatives of Member StatesAdvisory Committee, Management Committee and Regulatory Committeechaired by the Commission, which deliver opinions on proposals for Commission legislation.
"Both the Management Committee and Regulatory Committee procedures, but not the Advisory Committee procedure, require proposals to be referred to the Council for decision in certain circumstances. Under the Management Committee procedure, a proposal must be referred to the Council where the Committee votes against it by qualified majority, while the Regulatory Committee procedure requires the proposal to be submitted to the Council if the Committee does not approve the measure by qualified majority. The Management Committee and Regulatory Committee procedures come in two variants but in each case the Council has a period of time in which to take a different decision. In addition, the Comitology Decision sets out a further procedure which may be applied when the Council confers powers on the Commission to take safeguard measures. This does not include a specific provision for a procedure involving a Committee; instead, any Member State may appeal to the Council.
"The Comitology Decision does not specify which procedure should apply to particular subjects. However, for important matters, including the management of the agricultural commodities and fisheries markets, food law, animal and plant health, the Council has in delegating implementing powers to the Commission specified one of the procedures, usually either the Management or Regulatory Committee, which provide for recourse to the Council. The Commission's proposal on nitrates in lettuce and spinach is, for example, subject to the Regulatory Committee procedure.
The Minister of State, Department of the Environment (Viscount Ullswater): The department has requested a report from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, who are accountable for the City Challenge Local Authority Grant given to the Bethnal Green City Challenge Company. The City Challenge Company has commissioned a report from independent auditors. Any further action by the department will be dependent on the contents of those reports.
|Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|