20 July 2006 : Column 1405
House of Lords
Thursday, 20 July 2006.
The House met at eleven of the clock: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Leicester.
Lord James of Blackheath
David Noel James, Esquire, CBE, having been created Baron James of Blackheath, of Wild Brooks in the County of West Sussex, for life—Was, in his robes, introduced between the Lord Eden of Winton and the Lord Feldman.
Lord Rowe-Beddoe
Sir David Sydney Rowe-Beddoe, Knight, having been created Baron Rowe-Beddoe, of Kilgetty in the County of Dyfed, for life—Was, in his robes, introduced between the Lord Griffiths of Fforestfach and the Lord Morris of Aberavon.
Azerbaijan: Armenian Monuments
11.20 am
Baroness Cox asked Her Majesty’s Government:
- Whether
they will make representations to the Government of Azerbaijan about
the reported destruction of ancient Armenian monuments of cultural
importance by Azeri troops in
Nakhichevan.
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, Her Majesty’s Government are aware of and concerned by Armenian reports of the destruction and desecration of certain monuments and artefacts in Azerbaijan. We are also aware of and concerned by reports of the destruction of Azerbaijani cultural artefacts in territories under Armenian control.
We deplore such actions, no matter where or by whom they are committed. But the primary concern at this stage should be not the apportionment of blame but effective action to ensure the preservation of cultural and historical monuments on both sides of the current dispute. We consider this an issue for UNESCO to resolve and we are supporting its efforts to find a solution. We look to the Governments of Armenia and Azerbaijan, with the active engagement of UNESCO, to comply with their international commitments with regard to the safeguarding of cultural heritage.
Baroness
Cox: My Lords, I thank the
Minister for her reply. I assure her that, if there were comparable
evidence of widespread systematic destruction of Azeri cultural
heritage by Armenians, I should be the first to join her in condemning
that, but, to my knowledge, there is no such evidence. Is the noble
Baroness aware that I was in Nakhichevan when Azerbaijan was using
tanks to shell Armenian villages, forcing Armenians to flee their
homeland and their precious cultural
20 July 2006 : Column 1406
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, first, I pay tribute to the noble Baroness’s long-standing close interest in Armenia. We would urge both the Azerbaijani and Armenian authorities to co-operate with UNESCO and the Council of Europe in their investigations into allegations of destruction of cultural sites in Nakhichevan and/or Nagorno-Karabakh. That includes allowing uninhibited access to missions from those organisations.
Lord Archer of Sandwell: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the destruction of the monuments is not merely a heartless act of spite against the Armenian community but that it diminishes the world’s cultural heritage and is the legitimate concern of the international community? Do the Government support the call by the Council of Europe to permit a delegation of scientists, working with the International Councilon Monuments and Sites, to visit the area and report on its findings?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I entirely agree that it is not merely an act of spite—it is much more important—and that it is an issue for international organisations, which is precisely why we support the actions of UNESCO. The Government support the call by the Council of Europe.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, has there been any response from the Government of Azerbaijan to the proposal by the European Parliament of 16 February concerning the deliberate and systematic destruction of the Armenian cultural heritage in Nakhichevan? What is the Government’s view of the proposals, which are being discussed in the European neighbourhood policy context, that the European Commission and Council should facilitate the return of the people who were ethnically cleansed from the area of Nakhichevan from 1991 onwards and that they should incorporate in the action plan a clause protecting the few remaining sites from destruction?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I am aware of the resolution of the European Parliament of 16 February. We actively support the growing relationship that Azerbaijan has with the European Union through the European neighbourhood policy. The EU and Azerbaijan are currently negotiating the content of an action plan. Whether or not the clause to which the noble Lord referred is being actively discussed, I do not know, but I shall certainly find out. I undertake to inform the noble Lord.
Baroness Knight of Collingtree: My Lords, the Minister said that the Government support the actions of UNESCO. What are the actions of UNESCO?
20 July 2006 : Column 1407
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, UNESCO is working with both sides to try to ensure that damage is not inflicted on this wonderful cultural heritage. UNESCO is trying to ensure that a mission goes into Azerbaijan to discuss these things. It is working at an international level, trying to bring people together and trying to stop the destruction of the monuments.
Lord Clarke of Hampstead: My Lords, my noble friend has obviously given some comfort to the House by saying that the Government are aware of what has been happening with regard to the destruction of these very valuable and unique pieces of art. Whether talks take place with UNESCO or anyone else, will my noble friend find out what has happened to the thousands of stone crosses that are missing or have been destroyed since the takeover of that area? Will she please go further and ask the Government of Azerbaijan to allow Armenians to return to Nakhichevan to rebuild their cultural monuments and restore their cultural heritage?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I shall certainly make the point to the appropriate people and try to find out what has happened to the thousands of stone crosses mentioned by my noble friend. Cultural heritage is being destroyed in both Azerbaijan and Armenia. We call on both those countries to take appropriate action and stop inflicting damage on these things. We call on both sides to act.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, there seems little doubt that Azeri troops have inflicted deliberate—and apparently officially sanctioned—cultural damage on these grave sites, concreting them over and deliberately setting out to destroy them. Not only is that bad in every cultural sense, but it obviously does not help to resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.
Might we not go a little further than looking to the Azeris to halt their actions or hoping that UNESCO will do something? Could we not use very much stronger words to the Azeri Government and say that this is not helping the peace we all want to see in that part of the word and that it is putting an ugly stain on the reputation of Azerbaijan?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I entirely agree that this is not helping in either Azerbaijan or Armenia. The noble Lord is absolutely right to say that this has a direct impact on the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. It is important that discussions are taking place to try to resolve that conflict. We are working to do so with people like the Minsk group. In doing that, we must take account of the damage inflicted on the cultural sites, because it is part of a much wider problem.
Lord
Faulkner of Worcester: My Lords, may I ask my
noble friend about the state of the memorial in Baku to the British and
Commonwealth soldiers of Dunster Force, who died towards the end of the
First World War while attempting to cut off the supply of oil to the
central powers? Is she aware that the memorial was due to be opening by
His Royal Highness the Duke of Kent in September 2003, but
20 July 2006 : Column 1408
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I am aware of the site and that His Royal Highness was invited to open it but was unable to do so because it was vandalised. We have been assured by the Azerbaijanis that they will give it the protection it deserves, and we are not aware of any further damage since 2003.
Education: Dance and Drama Awards
11.28 am
Lord Harrison asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, in the coming academic year the Learning and Skills Council, which manages this programme on behalf of my department, will invest nearly £15 million in the dance and drama awards scheme. Thereafter, levels of investment in the scheme will be subject to the outcome of the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review.
Lord Harrison: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer and declare an interest as a supporter of the Hammond School of Dance and Education in Chester, whose young and gifted pupils recently received a national dance and drama award from the Secretary of State for Education and Skills. Given the job opportunities, especially in the cultural and entertainment industries, and given the fact that these dance and drama awards can go to young people from all backgrounds, will my noble friend seriously consider increasing the number of the awards and their worth?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I recognise the good work of the Hammond school and I agree that these awards—which were introduced by the Government in 1999 on the recommendation of the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, in his 1997 report—have been important for thousands of gifted and talented young people, who have been able to access the best training available whatever their economic background. As for job opportunities, the entertainment industry in this country is not some kind of ethereal and self-indulgent activity, but a core part of economic growth.
Baroness Sharp of Guildford: My Lords, although I welcome these awards—indeed, the Guildford School of Acting has benefited enormously from them—there is some concern that they do not reflect the full diversity of British society and culture. Does the Minister agree that there is a need to broaden the focus of training to include, for example, African and Asian forms of dance that British professional companies are practising but for which there are very few opportunities for training?
20 July 2006 : Column 1409
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I agree that it is important to open up opportunities for under-represented groups. I hope that the noble Baroness will be encouraged by the fact that the Learning and Skills Council funds a number of initiatives aimed at widening participation in these awards—for instance, it grant-funds participating schools to provide training and opportunities for under-represented groups and it funds training for students with disabilities.
Lord Harrison: My Lords, further to the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, about inclusivity, will my noble friend look at the nature of the awards, which require the student to find match funding? That may be a disincentive for some of the groups that should be encouraged to participate in these awards.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, the dance and drama award pays the majority of the student’s fees, leaving a relatively small contribution for the student to find, as my noble friend rightly says. In 2006-07, the student contribution was £1,200. To put this in context, before 1999 the award was not available at all, but nearly 10,000 students have now been through the scheme—I like to think of it as the Billy Elliot scheme—and are doing well in theatre, dance, ballet, opera and television.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, I declare an interest as a strong supporter of the Guildford School of Acting, formerly the Grant-Bellairs school, which is one of the most famous in the country. The school not only needs award support, but is always seeking to develop its capital infrastructure. Most support for that should come from the private sector, but is there any public sector support for capital developments and new buildings for the Guildford school and other such schools around the country?
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, I recognise the good work of the Guildford school, which has now been mentioned by two noble Lords. The music and dance scheme has slightly more funding to use for capital projects, but this fund follows the student.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, I rise with some diffidence as a former governor of the Guildford School of Acting. I strongly support what my noble friend Lord Howell and the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp, said.
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, the Guildford school is indeed well represented here. It could perhaps have a revue of its own.
Lord Dearing: My Lords, I was delighted to hear what has happened following the report with which I was involved in 1997. However, if poor parents have to find £1,200, that absorbs most of the £1,500 that the Government make available to poor students to encourage them to stay on after the age of 16. Does the Minister agree that that is a pity?
20 July 2006 : Column 1410
Baroness Crawley: My Lords, perhaps I can reassure the noble Lord by saying that the award students can also apply for income-assessed student support, which is like the old means-testing.
House of Lords: Questions to the Lord Speaker
11.34 am
Lord Trefgarne asked Her Majesty’s Government:
- Whether Members
of the House may table Questions to the Lord Speaker on those matters
which lie within the Lord Speaker’s
responsibilities.
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My Lords, the Lord Speaker is not one of those Members to whom questions may be addressed, as laid down in the Companion. The Speakership Committee did not recommend any change of practice. If the noble Lord thinks that such questions should be allowed, the appropriate forum to raise it would be the Procedure Committee.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for that Answer, which is, as always, very helpful. Is she aware that this Question was refused a place in the ballot for topical Questions just a few days after the noble Baroness took her seat on the Woolsack? Does she not think that it might be wise to remove from officials any risk of having to make controversial decisions in these areas, which sometimes might not have the universal acclaim of the Member concerned or the House?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I am extraordinarily pleased that I am not responsible for deciding on questions of topicality. The fact that we are debating the Question today perhaps suggests that little has been lost by waiting an extra week. I remind the House that in 2004 the Procedure Committee endorsed the Leader’s Group recommendation that,
Lord Renton: My Lords, the Minister may not be aware that the noble Baroness the Lord Speaker served in another place in a constituency close to the one in which I served. In her present position she would gladly, I am sure, accept any further responsibility that we place on her.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that intervention, although I am not entirely sure how the noble Baroness the Lord Speaker will take it. We have had a Lord Speaker for only two weeks, so it is important that we give the post a little time to bed down. I am aware that the noble Baroness is very conscious of the need to report back to the House on what she is doing and has undertaken to consult Members of the House on these issues when we return after the Recess.
20 July 2006 : Column 1411
Lord Tordoff: My Lords, does the noble Baroness not think that as a self-regulating House we might regulate ourselves not to ask Questions like this, which can be embarrassing? In any case the matter could be left for another four or five years and then a judgment can be made. So far, I believe that the noble Baroness the Lord Speaker is doing a thoroughly good job.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I think that it is important that we review the post. Noble Lords will know that I am sometimes frustrated at the pace of change in this House, but on this issue we should see what happens in practice. I remind the House of two things that came out very clearly in our discussions about the post. First, the House was absolute that it did not want a Lord Speaker ruling on points of order; and, secondly, there was a very clear reluctance to give the Lord Speaker a prominent role in the Chamber. We need to weigh all these issues up while recognising that, in areas of the Lord Speaker’s responsibility such as the outreach role, we may have to think about how activities are reported back to the House, but we can do it in ways that do not infringe on the core principles the House agreed.
Lord Cope of Berkeley: My Lords, although my noble friend Lord Renton is undoubtedly right in what he said about the noble Baroness the Lord Speaker, does the Minister recall, as the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, just indicated, that some of us went to some trouble to ensure in the arrangements made that the Lord Speaker was not drawn into exchanges in the House, both to retain the self-regulation which all Lordships prize very much and to avoid the opportunities for misplaced ingenuity which arise in another place in asking questions of Mr Speaker?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I could not have put it any better myself.
Lord Trefgarne: My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that my Question found its way on to the Order Paper today not because there was a slot available, but because I sacrificed another Question, for which I shall have to find another slot later in the year?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I was not aware of that, but I am sure that the noble Lord’s ingenuity will ensure that he finds another slot to ask his Question.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |