| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The Lord Bishop of Wakefield: My Lords, perhaps the Minister is aware that the Church of England has 43 diocesan bishops. Our links with police forces are deep at every level. Not only ministers of the Church of England, but ministers of every denomination and of other faiths, have much for which to thank our police forces in relation to the support that they provide to the community.
In this short debate I believe that it would be inappropriate if, from these Benches, a tribute were not paid to the Government for the proposals that are being brought forward. I congratulate the Government on what appear to be sensitive moves that are made in a direction that I hope will improve the morale of the police force. I am sure that all noble Lords will agree that we are greatly blessed with excellent police forces in this country. Sometimes it is taken too much for granted. My hope is that these proposals will enable police at all levels to feel that they are deeply appreciated in what is sometimes a very difficult job.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, I am sure that the whole House is grateful for the words of the right reverend Prelate. He has spoken for all noble Lords in paying tribute to the activities and operations of the police forces in this country.
Lord Elton: My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Bradshaw, spoke about centralising powers and, in particular, the powers of the Home Secretary. I shall try to be brief, so I shall not mention how glad I am about much of what is in the White Paper, particularly on the complaints authority. I notice that it is proposed that codes of practice should be issued under the authority of the Home Secretary. In the past, codes of practice for police forces have passed through Parliament after close scrutiny. I hope that the Minister will reassure the House that that course is to be taken. Can the Minister tell the House about the national policing forum, which is yet another new body that is referred to in paragraph 7.23 of the White Paper but not, as far as I can see, in the Statement?
Lord Rooker: My Lords, given the size of the White Paper, many of the topics are not referred to in the Statement. By definition, the Statement can give only a broad flavour of the matters. I am not in a position to give chapter and verse. I shall write to the noble Lord on his first point. In terms of codes of practice, I do not know what is issued with the authority of the Home Secretary. My initial reaction is: who else would be expected to do that at a national level? On the issue of scrutiny and debate, there will be legislation which will be dealt with on the Floor of this House as it will be in the other place. If I find that there is something that I can tell the noble Lord before then, I shall write to him.
Lord Corbett of Castle Vale: My Lords, I commend the Minister for the emphasis in the White Paper on
encouraging the community to be part of preventing and combating crime. Does the Minister acknowledge the importance of patient and persistent work by police officers to rebuild the confidence in communities so that those communities co-operate with the police and are willing to give evidence in cases that can lead to the conviction of those charged with serious criminal offences? He will know, as I do, that in many parts of this country, members of communities are absolutely terrified about having anything to do with the police because of threats from communities and from criminals.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, my noble friend is quite right. It is estimated that something like 100,000 people are responsible for half the crime in the country. There are persistent offenders and there are persistent victims, and we have tried to address both. One issue related to the extended police family. It is possible that there will be more people in official positions who may be used as professional witnesses. They will be able to give evidence in courts. My noble friend is quite right in saying that people are intimidated into not giving evidence. Incredible patience is required to persuade members of communities, who suffer from threats and victimisation, to give evidence because they believe that afterwards they will be on their own again. We have to ensure that that fear is removed.
Middle East
6.30 p.m.
The Minister for Trade (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean): My Lords, with the leave of the House I shall now repeat in the form of a Statement an Answer which was given to a Private Notice Question about the Middle East in another place earlier this afternoon by my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary. The Statement is as follows:
-
XI am sure I speak for the whole House in expressing once again the shock and anger which I felt when I heard the news on Saturday night and on Sunday morning of the series of terrorist atrocities in Jerusalem and in Haifa, in north Israel. These atrocities killed at least 25 and injured over 180 people. They came on top of a series of other such terrorist attacks which have caused many deaths and in turn have put the people of Israel in fear of going about their normal lives.
XOn Sunday I spoke by telephone to Shimon Peres, the Israeli Foreign Minister, and then to President Arafat of the Palestinian Authority. To Mr Peres, I expressed my sincere condolences and those of Her Majesty's Government. To President Arafat, I stressed the imperative that the Palestinian Authority now properly detains terrorist suspects of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups and the need for him to take other action to remove this continuing threat which terrorists pose to the stability of the whole region.
XIsrael is entitled to take steps to ensure its security. Our approach to the peace process has been well set out by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister and myself, including in my address to the United Nations General Assembly on 11th November. We have fully backed the initiative set out by United States Secretary of State, Colin Powell, on 19th November and his appointment of General Zinni and Ambassador Burns as United States envoys to the region.
XAlthough the situation is now very grave—indeed, recisely because it is so grave—the case for peace remains as strong as ever. We in the United Kingdom and Her Majesty's Government stand ready to do all we can to help the parties resume substantive dialogue and to bring about the swift and full implementation of the Tenet and Mitchell committee recommendations. Distant and difficult though this aspiration may appear, we work towards a day when two states, Israel and Palestine, live peacefully together within secure and recognised borders, as called for by Security Council resolutions."
6.32 p.m.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for repeating the Statement. We on this side totally share the horror and concern that she and the Foreign Secretary on our behalf have expressed about the hideous slaughter in the latest round of suicide bombings of utterly innocent young people, children and others in Israel.
I am sure that the noble Baroness will agree that no state can continue to exist in modern times unless it has the full co-operation and support of its neighbours and other countries. That applies just as much to the future Palestine as to vulnerable little Israel and, indeed, to the Kingdom of Jordan which is next door. I know that there are many different opinions, but whatever one thinks about the heaviness of the Israeli responses to these atrocities and foul deeds, is it not now essential that Yasser Arafat takes command and ceases to harbour terrorists and to preside over a society which teaches terrorism to young children? From the very earliest age it teaches them to kill and to hate their Jewish neighbours in Israel.
XTerrorists" means not just those involved in violence and inevitable reprisals, but those who set out cold-bloodedly and deliberately to kill innocent civilians as part of their campaign. Therefore, is it not time that he quickly rounds up the Hamas and the Islamic Jihad people who openly claim responsibility for these murders before the slide to total war in the region gains momentum? If he cannot do that, is it not time for the democracies to support a search for someone who can effectively lead Palestinians forward to better times?
As we look on this horrific scene and use our good offices as best we can, my question is: have we done everything to ensure that the funds and links and organisations connected to Hamas and Islamic Jihad
are completely closed down? We have done a great deal in response to the earlier measures and the terrorism of September 11th. But are we quite sure that we have closed down every loophole and cut off every oxygen tube that we can to the hideous Hamas who are so openly claiming delight and responsibility for slaughtering innocent civilians and children in the streets of Jerusalem?6.35 p.m.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, I also thank the Minister for repeating the Answer to a PNQ put down in another place.
Over the weekend we have had the terrible suicide bombings in Haifa and in Jerusalem. As the Minister said, they resulted in 25 innocents being killed. The retaliation to that attack resulted in another number of innocents being killed. When we look at the blood-stained and fearful faces of children staring out of our newspapers, in a way it matters no more whether they are Palestinian or Israeli. They are alike the victims of a terrible retaliation, a dreadful battle of tit for tat. From these Benches, we feel that unless the eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth system of revenge ceases in the Middle East we shall inevitably slowly slide over the brink into an open war.
I support what the noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, said in terms of there being two certainties—I hope. One is the absolute necessity to protect and underpin the state of Israel. I trust that no one disagrees with that. All of us have an obligation to protect it. The other is that we recognise that there is a Palestinian authority that is on its way to becoming, hopefully, a state. There is no other internationally recognised way out of the crisis. In that crisis up to now, President Arafat, for all his weaknesses and flaws, is the one recognised figure with whom the state of Israel can negotiate.
In that context, it is vital that Mr Arafat identifies those in Hamas and Israeli Jihad and other groups who have been involved in terrorist activities. I ask the Minister whether she regards it as sensible to treat President Arafat himself as a terrorist. To associate him with Osama bin Laden is to make a huge mistake. President Arafat is an internationally recognised figure; he is the head of a state, albeit in the making; and he is not a terrorist in the sense that Mr bin Laden clearly is. It is dangerous to elide the two.
Perhaps I may ask the Minister the following questions. What representations have Her Majesty's Government made to Mr Arafat about identifying those terrorists in the ranks of Hamas and Islamic Jihad? What representations have been made with regard to Israel's continuing building of illegal settlements which does nothing to bring about a better context for peace? What representations have been made about military interventions in the West Bank and in Gaza which go far beyond normal legitimate police activities when they include the bombing by F16 bombers of peaceful communities?
Does the Minister see any new chance to bring back the only hope that there is, which is to resume negotiations as soon as is conceivably possible? Within
that context, is the breaking off of negotiations at every point when some crazed or absurd young person throws himself or herself into a suicide bombing a sensible way to continue? I finally ask whether it is altogether sensible that, while we strongly support the US initiative, it alone should be the one international arbiter at a time when, regretfully, it is regarded to some extent as partisan in that discussion in a way that the moderate Arab powers and the European Union are not.6.40 p.m.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Howell, and the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, for their comments on the Statement. I am sure that the whole House is united in the horror that both the noble Lord and the noble Baroness expressed about the weekend's events.
There are probably two guiding principles in our consideration of what has happened and what is happening. First, there should be peace with security for Israel and, secondly, there should be justice and a viable homeland for the Palestinians. I believe that those are the two tenets around which our policies are focused.
I shall deal with what the noble Baroness asked. To equate President Arafat with Osama bin Laden is not something that Her Majesty's Government would do. My right honourable friend, in answering questions this afternoon, made it clear that not only was that a term that we would not use, but it is a term that we will not be using.
Clearly, whatever the violence has been—and we are in a terrible vortex of violence where tit-for-tat reprisals seem the horrible and ghastly inevitability when one hears about one violent action and then a violent reaction—the fact is that dialogue is necessary in order to return to the peace process. For that to occur, a ceasefire is absolutely necessary. Both the noble Baroness and the noble Lord are right. Although the Palestinian Authority has condemned violence, and, for example, the assassination of Minister Ze'evi on the day it happened—in stark contrast to a real terrorist organisation, to return to the point made by the noble Baroness—the fact is that the Palestinian Authority has not done enough to apprehend the men of violence. Good intentions here are not enough. There has to be a greater effort to do that.
It is essential, as the noble Lord, Lord Howell, said, that President Arafat does not harbour the terrorists and that he makes efforts to cease to teach hatred in schools and to young people who are, sadly, and all too often, the victims of violence. It is not just a question of apprehending those responsible for violence; it is a question of keeping them under lock and key once they have been apprehended. All too often it seems that those who are apprehended for dreadful crimes find themselves back in their homes and on the streets very quickly.
As regards the point which the noble Lord raised about the future of President Arafat, let us be clear on one matter. He is the elected leader of the Palestinian
Authority. It is essential that we treat him as that; that we treat him as the person with whom we negotiate. It is up to the Palestinians if they choose to change their leader, but while they wish President Arafat to speak for them and to lead them, we must deal with him.I agree with the noble Lord as regards Hamas funding. We will consider any information which we receive on that organisation and any other terrorist group, and act accordingly in relation to any suggestion about the freezing of assets or other issues concerning the funding of such organisations.
These are very difficult times. I am sure that we all await the next ghastly, bloodstained announcements that follow one reprisal after another. The noble Baroness is quite right: we have to continue to make representations. She asked what representations had been made. I hope that the Statement from my right honourable friend made it clear that he made very strong representations to President Arafat on these points this last Sunday.
As regards illegal settlements, we raised the subject bilaterally. The noble Baroness will know that we raised it through out contacts with the EU and sometimes through a joint demarche.
We are always clear that any military intervention must be proportionate. In saying that, one has to remember that Israel has the right to live securely within its own borders. The Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have made these points and, as luck would have it, I saw the Israeli Ambassador in London this morning. That was a pre-arranged meeting. We hope to resume negotiations.
I take issue with the noble Baroness on some of the points she made about the United States being too parti pris, if I may put it that way. Let us not forget that the United States was behind the Mitchell recommendations and the Tenet recommendations. It has again put forward two ambassadors to the region in the person of General Zinni and Ambassador Burns. There are opportunities for a ceasefire if only the men of violence can be got under control. We have to look to President Arafat to do that.
6.45 p.m.
Lord Clinton-Davis: My Lords, does my noble friend agree that atrocities and assassinations are thoroughly bad, whoever commits them and that the level of hate, particularly among young Arabs, is to be deplored? Will Her Majesty's Government, therefore, advise that this is probably the last opportunity for the warring parties to get round the table and discuss the prospects of a lasting peace including that of the settlements?
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page