17 July 2006 : Column 993
House of Lords
Monday, 17 July 2006.
The House met at half-past two of the clock: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Leicester.
International Development: White Paper
Baroness Whitaker asked Her Majesty’s Government:
- How the recent
White Paper on international development addresses the main problems of
developing
countries.
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My Lords, the new White Paper is about delivering the promises of 2005. It responds to four big challenges: first, how to promote better governance in countries and globally; secondly, how to improve security, growth and public services to reduce poverty; thirdly, the need to tackle climate change; and, fourthly, reforming the international system so that it is better equipped to deal with international problems.
Baroness Whitaker: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that encouraging Answer. She will not be surprised to hear that I particularly applaud the new £100 million governance and transparency fund. Can she say how this might help women, who suffer the detriment of petty corruption in the provision of health, education, water and other services, arguably more than men, both because they have less means to pay bribes and because they often need to be the procurers of those services for their families?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, the fund is obviously still at an early design stage, and there will be consultation with civil society organisations on the issues. I expect support for women to arise. Assisting women is one of our commitments, and through that we are placing a big emphasis on education, particularly education for girls.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, first, I welcome the overall principles behind the White Paper. I am sure that your Lordships will agree with me that, although there may be differences of opinion on how to deliver the aims and objectives, they have wholehearted support across the House. What steps are Her Majesty's Government taking, in particular the Prime Minister, to reinvigorate negotiations in the margins of the G8 and beyond, following this weekend’s meeting, especially with regard to talks on trade?
Baroness
Amos: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady
Rawlings, for those statements of support, particularly given the
history of her Government on development, for which the budget fell
steadily up until 1997. We have made it clear that there needs to be a
particularly big push on trade, especially given its importance in
delivering our agenda. The noble Baroness will know that the talks
17 July 2006 : Column 994
Lord Harrison: My Lords, does my noble friend recognise the severe toll and the economic and human costs of the high level of road traffic accidents and deaths that occur in developing countries, often taking away the young people who are most needed for developing economies?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, my noble friend is right. It is not an area that we focus on sufficiently. There are high levels of road traffic accidents and death. In some countries, the numbers are as high as those dying from HIV/AIDS.
Lord Forsyth of Drumlean: My Lords, has the Prime Minister’s promise to match the public contributions made in support of the victims of the tsunami on Boxing Day 2004 been fulfilled?
Baroness Amos: No, my Lords, that promise has not been fulfilled. The British public were so generous that the limited capacity of the countries affected by the tsunami to absorb the money that they were receiving, not only from the British public but from the British Government and other Governments around the world, meant that we did not have to match those promises. The money is of course being spent in other ways.
Baroness Northover: My Lords, the White Paper is certainly welcome, especially the emphasis on climate change and good governance. However, does the noble Baroness agree that perhaps insufficient emphasis has been placed on the AIDS crisis, which threatens the development of sub-Saharan Africa as much as climate change? The G8 promised last year that, by 2010, all who needed treatment would receive it. Does this paper effectively chart how that will happen?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, as the noble Baroness will know, our strategy on tackling AIDS is set out in another paper called Taking Action, which is reaffirmed in the White Paper. So the White Paper does not go through all the arguments in Taking Action. They include action to close the funding gap, to improve the international response and to strengthen political leadership. We are on track to deliver the commitment on the provision of free medicines, though we do not have to do so until 2010.
The Lord Bishop of Newcastle: My Lords, while we on this Bench would welcome a great deal that is in the White Paper, I wonder whether the Minister would agree that one of the most serious omissions is the lack of any firm proposals to plug the gap through which illegal moneys are haemorrhaging from Africa to European tax shelters and that more needs to be done to help trace and reverse that serious capital flight.
17 July 2006 : Column 995
Baroness Amos: My Lords, there is a significant problem. That is precisely why the Prime Minister responded to the request from parliamentarians that we should have someone to champion anti-corruption. My right honourable friend Hilary Benn is the UK champion, and a cross-party and cross-departmental organisation, which includes the Metropolitan Police, has been set up to address these issues.
Lord Marsh: My Lords, can the Minister say where the diverted funds may have finished up?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I am happy to do that. Overall, our aid has increased from £2.1 billion in 1997 to £5.9 billion last year. We have spent 39 per cent of that through multi-lateral organisations such as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and others. Of our bilateral budget—the budget we spend with individual countries—we have spent 45 per cent in Africa and 38 per cent in Asia.
Iraq: UK Forces
2.44 pm
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty’s Government:
- What have been
the implications for Her Majesty’s Armed Forces deployed in
Basra of the recent declaration of a state of emergency in that
province by the Government of
Iraq.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): My Lords, I am sure that the House will wish to join me in expressing our sincere condolences to the family and friends of Corporal John Cosby of the 1st Battalion, The Devon and Dorset Light Infantry, who was killed yesterday in Iraq.
UK forces are undertaking tasks in support of the Basra security plan announced by Prime Minister Maliki under the authority of the state of emergency. The plan includes an increased Iraqi Army presence, a programme of projects aimed at improving conditions through development, and enabling support for better governance. UK forces continue to provide training, mentoring and other tasks in support of the Iraqi security forces.
Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, on these Benches we, too, send our condolences to the family of the corporal. Two other soldiers were wounded by a roadside bomb in a separate incident. Can the Minister confirm whether they were in a Snatch Land Rover? If that was the case, how many more soldiers will be killed or wounded before Ministers take action? Will the Minister responsible for the Defence Procurement Agency and the Defence Logistics Organisation now insist that those bodies set to immediately to provide commanders on the ground with an armoured option before they have to resort to Warriors?
17 July 2006 : Column 996
Lord Drayson: My Lords, as my right honourable friend the Secretary of State has announced, we are undertaking a review of our protected patrol vehicles in Iraq and on operations in Afghanistan. We anticipate taking action following that review, both on short-term solutions and on the longer-term solutions that we have already announced. However, I stress that, given its mobility and size, the Snatch Land Rover has an important role to play, particularly in areas such as downtown Basra.
Lord Garden: My Lords, we add our condolences to the family of the soldier who was killed and our hopes for a speedy recovery to the two soldiers who were injured. We also extend our sympathy to the families of the 100 Iraqi civilians killed in the past 24 hours. Does the Minister agree with the remarks last week of the US Army Chief of Staff, General Schoomaker? He said of Iraq:
He went on to say:If the Minister agrees, what does that mean for UK force planning over the next three years?Lord Drayson: My Lords, we have a plan, and we have seen the progress of that plan in recent weeks. It is a case of sticking to it and being patient for the results. We have transferred responsibility for Al Muthanna province to the Iraqi security forces in the past week, and we anticipate that in the next six months we will transfer three of the four provinces that are the responsibility of the United Kingdom in MND South-East, leaving only Basra. We expect all provinces in Iraq to be handed over to the Iraqi security forces over the next 18 months. We recognise the challenges in Basra, but we are seeing the effectiveness of the Basra security plan. We must be patient and allow the results to bed down and take effect.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, the noble Lord mentioned a review. When will it be completed?
Lord Drayson: Shortly, my Lords.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, why is the Ministry of Defence failing to notify the Royal British Legion and other charitable organisations relating to the Armed Forces of members of the Armed Forces who have been in Selly Oak hospital after being discharged on sickness grounds? Why has it also not passed information about the Royal British Legion to those people, who are suffering as a result?
Lord Drayson: My Lords, I do not have information on communication with the Royal British Legion, but I will look into the matter and write to the noble Baroness.
Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, if by the end of this year the Iraqi Parliament carries a resolution requiring the withdrawal of American and British forces from Iraq, and that resolution is opposed by the Iraqi Government, who will we listen to, the Government or the Parliament?
17 July 2006 : Column 997
Lord Drayson: My Lords, we should not speculate about events that may or may not take place. We have set out clearly the criteria under which we are supporting the establishment of the rule of law and democratic government in Iraq. The handover or transition of responsibilities in each province is managed by a joint committee for the transfer of security and responsibility. We have set out clearly the criteria under which that transition will take place. Our ability to hand over Iraq depends on the establishment of those conditions on the ground.
Lord Hurd of Westwell: My Lords, has the Minister seen the authoritative item on the front page of the International Herald Tribune today, which reports that the Iraqi security forces are regarded in large parts of Baghdad by Iraqis simply as the agents of Shia militias? Is it part of the criteria for our withdrawal, of which the noble Lord speaks, that the security forces to whom we hand over are actually proven in their integrity as servants of Iraq as a whole?
Lord Drayson: My Lords, I have not read the article to which the noble Lord refers, but I will read it. However, we know that in certain elements of the Iraqi police there are serious issues relating to sectarian allegiances. We have seen significant improvements in the performance and effectiveness of the Iraqi Army; we are seeing that on the streets of Basra now. Without doubt, its visibility and the effectiveness with which it is undertaking operations is testament to the excellent mentoring and training that it has received from UK forces and to its commitment and resolve.
Lord Anderson of Swansea: My Lords, my noble friend has mentioned the 18-month period of transfer, at the end of which it is anticipated that the regions will be handed over to Iraqi control. Will he indicate what he anticipates will be the numbers, and more specifically the spread of roles, of the British forces at the end of that period?
Lord Drayson: My Lords, it is not possible for me to set out specific numbers. As I have said, it depends on the development of conditions. We have set out our expectations of the timetable, which depends on the conditions on the ground. Generally speaking, we want our forces, as coalition forces, to be able, once handover has taken place in a province, to carry out a strategic overwatch role in the area and then to withdraw to the provinces where handover has not taken place.
Migrant Workers
2.52 pm
Lord Taylor of Holbeach asked Her Majesty’s Government:
- What steps they
are taking to ease pressures on public services and to assist local
authorities in areas where migrant workers are
concentrated.
17 July 2006 : Column 998
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, local authorities are in the best position to allocate the funding available to them to meet the changing needs of their populations, and the information that we have suggests that in general they are succeeding very well in doing so. We are keeping the situation under very close review and look forward to receiving the findings of the Audit Commission report on this subject.
Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply and for the reassurance that the situation is under review. I declare an interest as through my family business I employ migrant workers, and I know what a positive role they play in the economies of many rural areas. Is the Minister aware of the report commissioned by South Holland District Council? It clearly identifies the pressures that exist, which it is finding extremely difficult to cope with. The numbers involved are substantial. Particularly in housing and healthcare, we are dealing with considerably greater numbers than might have originally been anticipated by the Government or by anyone in the House. Is the Minister aware that, for example, 53 per cent of those workers would like to settle here? That is a permanent change.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord on making intelligent and good use of the migrant workers scheme and on his positive attitude towards it. We are aware that there are problems in some areas, but in general terms the scheme has worked extremely well. The information that I have suggests that nearly 400,000 A8 nationals have played a part in the worker registration scheme since its inception in early 2004. The noble Lord’s assertion that 53 per cent of them would like to stay in the United Kingdom raises an interesting statistic, but our information suggests that 94 per cent of workers in the scheme have no dependants in the United Kingdom and are making fairly minimal calls on what might loosely be described as the welfare state.
Baroness Shephard of Northwold: My Lords, it was a relief to hear that the Government were considering the impact of increased population caused by the arrival of migrant workers, and it is a given that many areas of our economy absolutely depend on their presence. A month ago, the House was told that no demands on our public services were caused by the arrival of migrant workers. I ask the Minister to confirm that, if the Government were planning a new town of, say, 25,000 people, there would be a requirement for GPs, schools and other services. If there is in a given locality an extra population of some 90,000, as we have in South Holland, why is no particular provision made for migrant workers?
Lord
Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Lord,
Lord Taylor, observed that migrant workers very much fit into a part of
our labour force that is mobile and flexible; therefore, making
specific provision in one area is a challenge. However, our information
suggests that local authorities are coping
17 July 2006 : Column 999
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Taylor, made an important point. In all the research that I have seen, migrant workers make less of a demand on public services than they contribute towards the economy of this country, but, by the very nature of their settlement and movement, they tend to put considerable pressure on certain local authorities. In the past, the Government used opportunities such as Section 11 of the Local Government Act 1966—the urban programmes. Do they have anything in mind to assist such authorities?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, as I said at the outset, the Audit Commission is carrying out a study of the implications of the Accession 8 migration programme for local authority services. We expect the findings to be delivered in the autumn and will study them with great care. We are aware that the arrival of a large number of new migrants can pose challenges for local authorities and local services and, for that reason, we work closely with the Local Government Association and listen carefully to its representations.
Lord Whitty: My Lords, would my noble friend accept that the pattern of migration, permanent and temporary, poses particular pressures on inner-city authorities as well as on some rural authorities? Would he ask his fellow Ministers from government departments that are disposing of public assets—including his own, the Ministry of Defence and the Department of Health—as well as local authorities to consider the possible use of those assets for permanent or temporary social housing, rather than simply for selling at the market price?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, my noble friend, as ever, makes an important point, and I am sure that that concern is among those that will be reflected as part of the process of reviewing the impact of migration under the scheme. I shall ensure that we pass his observation on to officials in the appropriate departments.
Earl Attlee: My Lords, has the Gangmasters (Licensing) Act been implemented?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: Yes, my Lords.
17 July 2006 : Column 1000
British Nuclear Fuels Limited
2.58 pm
Lord Jenkin of Roding asked Her Majesty’s Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): My Lords, the 2003 joint strategy review of BNFL concluded that the company’s focus should be on UK nuclear clean-up with value being realised from its other businesses. Statements have been made to the House on the sale of Westinghouse to Toshiba and the future sale of British Nuclear Group. The future of Nexia Solutions is being considered, possibly as part of a national nuclear laboratory. There is not expected to be any significant role for the BNFL corporate centre beyond March 2008.
Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, that is a much more encouraging Answer than I expected. If, indeed, Nexia Solutions is to be regarded as part of the national nuclear laboratory of which we learnt only last week in the energy review paper, that offers some prospect of the Government retaining, as was stated in the paper, a substantial research and development capacity. But where stands then the statement made by the noble Lord’s colleague, Malcolm Wicks, only two months ago in the context of the sale of Westinghouse and British Nuclear Group? He said:
- “In addition, we are considering
the future of BNFL's research and development arm, Nexia
Solutions”.—[Official Report, Commons, 18/5/06;
col. 1181.]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, as my honourable friend said, that was being considered. While, in the long term, the R&D required in any new nuclear build situation will come from the market, the Government are very concerned that in any transitional period the resource that is Nexia Solutions should be protected and should be available to the people where it is necessary.
Lord Livsey of Talgarth: My Lords, given BNFL's dubious previous safety record, will the Minister ensure that, whatever happens to the company and whoever takes it over, it will be fit for purpose in this Government's rush for new nuclear build for power stations? Will they ensure that the successor sees that safety is foremost?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, as I think I made clear in my original Answer, BNFL will almost certainly not exist beyond March 2008, and the various parts of it will go to other organisations.
Lord Inglewood: My Lords, given the importance of BNFL to the economy of west Cumbria, can the Government assure us that BNFL and its owners will continue to honour their moral and legal obligations to the people who live in that part of England?
17 July 2006 : Column 1001
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I repeat that BNFL, as such, will not continue to exist. Many of the facilities that it owns will go to other bodies, and those bodies will look at the facilities in the light of their own objectives and take the appropriate action. In reality, I do not think that that will mean significant changes in the location of its activities.
Lord Christopher: My Lords, I remind the House of my involvement in the company that is the subject of the Question. Does my noble friend accept the allegation that the safety record of BNFL is as bad as was suggested, certainly compared with the rest of industry in Britain?
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, it is always extremely difficult to give precise answers to those questions. However, the point is that this is not something that we need to go on being concerned about because, for very good reasons, the different parts of BNFL are being put under other bodies, most of which have good safety records.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |