You are here: Parliament home page > Parliamentary business > Publications and Records > Lords Publications > Lords Hansard > Daily Hansard

Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

China: Human Rights and Tibet

Lord Willoughby de Broke asked Her Majesty's Government:

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We remain deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Tibet. We believe that these concerns are better addressed through our continuing human rights dialogues with China rather than repeated UN resolutions, all of which have failed to be adopted in the past. Through dialogue, we take every opportunity to raise our concerns with the Chinese authorities. We urge China to respect the distinct cultural, religious and ethnic identity of Tibetans and to enter into talks with the Dalai Lama in order to seek a lasting solution. My right honourable friend the Minister of State, Derek Fatchett, raised our concerns about Tibet during his recent visit to China.

Lord Willoughby de Broke asked Her Majesty's Government:

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Along with our EU partners, we remain deeply concerned about the human rights situation in Tibet. In Geneva, these concerns were expressed in statements by the EU Presidency, on behalf of all EU member states, on 23 March, 31 March and 23 April.

Venice Commission

Lord Morris of Castle Morris asked Her Majesty's Government:

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Her Majesty's Government have given thorough consideration to the merits of the United Kingdom becoming a member of the Venice Commission and have decided to do so with immediate effect.

The commission is a consultative body of independent experts whose principal work is in advising the new democracies of central and eastern Europe on

5 May 1999 : Column WA92

constitutional reform. It provided legal advice to the international negotiators in the run-up to and during the Kosovar negotiations in France in February and March this year. The commission has been a major contributor to electoral and constitutional reform in Albania and Croatia and is assisting the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina on constitutional reform and the revision of the parliamentary electoral law.

Balkans: Reconstruction

Lord Kennet asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether it has been agreed that the European Union is to pay for reconstruction in the Balkans; and if so, why.[HL2223]

Baroness Amos: The Government are working actively with the European Commission, EU member states and the international financial institutions to assess the reconstruction costs and longer term development needs in the Balkans.

A major effort will be required from the international community, in close co-operation with local people, and we expect the European Union will play a significant role as part of its ongoing support for transition efforts in the region.

Sudan

Lord McNair asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What is the outstanding Sudanese aid loan debt, if any, to the United Kingdom; and when such debt was incurred.[HL2211]

Baroness Amos: There is no outstanding Sudanese aid loan debt due to the United Kingdom.

Human Rights Act 1998: Statements on Compatibility

Lord Acton asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What is their approach to statements about the compatibility of new legislation with the convention rights set out in the Human Rights Act 1998.[HL2346]

Lord Burlison: A statement under Section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act must be made where, in the view of the Minister, the provisions of the Bill are compatible with the convention rights. In other cases a statement under Section 19(1)(b) of the Act must be made: such a statement is not one that the provisions of the Bill are incompatible with the convention rights but to the effect that the Minister is unable to make a statement of compatibility. A Section 19(1)(a) statement is a positive statement of compatibility.

If a Section 19(1)(a) statement is to be made, a Minister must be clear that, at a minimum, the balance of argument supports the view that the provisions are

5 May 1999 : Column WA93

compatible. Lawyers will advise whether the provisions of the Bill are on balance compatible with the convention rights. In doing so, they will consider whether it is more likely than not that the provisions of the Bill will stand up to challenge on convention grounds before the domestic courts and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. A Minister should not be advised to make a statement of compatibility where legal advice is that on balance the provisions of the Bill would not survive such a challenge. The fact that there are valid arguments to be advanced against any anticipated challenge is not a sufficient basis on which to advise a Minister that he may make a statement of compatibility where it is thought that these arguments would not ultimately succeed before the courts.

Section 19 of the Act applies where a Minister of the Crown is in charge of a Bill; that is either a government Bill or a consolidation Bill. Section 19 does not apply to Private Members' Bills: there is no duty to make a statement about their compatibility with the convention rights. Where the Bill is directly assisted by the Government, however, the Minister responsible for the policy should, as a matter of good practice, express the Government's views on compatibility with the convention rights during the Second Reading debate.

Human Rights Act 1998: Implementation

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether, when they decided to introduce the Human Rights Bill in 1998, they took a decision at that time to delay bringing it into force until more than a year after Royal Assent.[HL2220]

Lord Burlison: The Government have always recognised that there would be a gap between the Human Rights Act receiving Royal Assent and implementation of its main provisions. This is because of the need for extensive preparations before the Act can be brought into force. The Government are committed to implementing the Act as soon as is feasible.

Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they informed Parliament or the public, before or during the passage through Parliament of the Human Rights Act 1998, that they intended to delay bringing its provisions fully into force for more than a year.[HL2178]

Lord Burlison: The Government made their position clear during the passage of the Human Rights Act. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Home Affairs stated in another place on 21 October 1998 that implementation could not happen in the near future and a precise date for it could not be given. A similar point was made in a departmental news release on 9 November 1998.

5 May 1999 : Column WA94

Defence Evaluation and Research Agency

Lord Gregson asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What progress they have made on the study into the options for a public private partnership (PPP) for the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA).[HL2345]

The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Gilbert): A report on the public private partnership options for the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency was submitted to Ministers by the Ministry of Defence study team on 31 March 1999.

The report detailed the progress of the study to date, setting out the team's analysis and the proposed way ahead. In line with its advice, we have agreed that it should consult on the report's findings with key stakeholders, including other government departments, UK industry and academia, overseas allies, DERA staff and trade unions, before providing Ministers with a final recommendation in the summer.

We would hope to be in a position to make an announcement on the PPP option chosen by the time of the Summer Recess. However, it is important that all stakeholders are properly consulted and their views taken into account before a decision is taken on the final shape of the PPP.

A copy of the consultation document has been placed in the Library of the House.

Lord Gregson asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What progress has been made on the location of the permanent headquarters of the Defence Logistics Organisation.[HL2344]

Lord Gilbert: We have undertaken a comprehensive investment appraisal and business case study to inform a decision on the location of the headquarters of the Defence Logistics Organisation, DLO, following its foundation year. We are now able to announce that, subject to full consultation with the trade unions, the headquarters will be based from 1 April 2000 at Ensleigh in Bath. The headquarters will comprise only a very small proportion of the DLO's staff, but its new location is the best site to enable it to drive forward the revolution in logistic support, deliver the full scale of early business improvements expected from the newly unified organisation, work closely with the Defence Procurement Agency to develop the smart procurement initiative and become an integrated and responsive defence logistics team. Once agreement is reached with the trade unions, transition planning will begin in earnest with the aim of a step by step move to the new location by 1 April 2000.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page