| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will ask the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission to take steps to rebuild the confidence of the Omagh bomb victims' support group in the Commission.[HL3757]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission is an independent body. It is not for Government to influence the commission's policy decisions, nor should government seek to interfere in the commission's relationships with other bodies or groups.
We have, however, drawn to the attention of the commission the comments made by the noble Lord. Rebo
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission has not provided practical support for the relatives of the Omagh bomb victims' civil action under Section 69 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; and, if not, why not. [HL3756]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: I understand that the commission has yet to consider the extent of support that might be provided to the Omagh Support and Self Help Group, but that an application is currently before the Commission's Casework Committee. When the matter has been determined the group will be advised of the outcome.
We have asked the Chief Commissioner, Professor Brice Dickson, to write to the noble Lord in due course to advise him of the Commission's decision.
Police Service of Northern Ireland
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How much, in total, the reuniforming, rebadging and reimaging of the Police Service of Northern Ireland is costing. [HL3754]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: All police officers have been supplied with new uniforms, which include the new badge. The total cost for the new uniforms is £4.5 million. Other costs are being incurred as part of the process of creating a modern police service, including, for example, new livery for police vehicles; these will be spread over three years and are expected to be in the region of £1.5 million.
Northern Ireland: Proposed Criminal Justice Inspectorate
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether consultation has taken place regarding a joint inspectorate for prisons, probation and police in Northern Ireland; and, if so, what is the Government's position on this issue. [HL3972]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Criminal Justice Review recommended the establishment of a statute-based, independent criminal justice inspectorate, and the Government have fully accepted this recommendation.
The Northern Ireland Prison Service, the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and the Probation Board for Northern Ireland, are included within the remit of the Chief Inspector of Criminal Justice. Consultations
are continuing with a number of organisations and agencies, with a view to adding to the list of organisations specified in the Bill.China: Family Planning Abuse Allegations
Lord Alton of Liverpool asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the letter by the Secretary of State at the Department for International Development to the Lord Alton of Liverpool dated 26 March, what is the nature of the allegations of family planning abuses in Hunan, Hubei and Fujian provinces which they have brought to the attention of the Chinese authorities.[HL3810]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos): The allegations which were drawn to the attention of the Chinese authorities were those which received wide coverage in the UK media at the time. The allegations concerned abandonment and murder by Chinese officials.
Cross-Channel Illegal Migration: Anglo-French Co-operation
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they are making progress on:
(a) discussions with the Government of France on joint initiatives and juxtaposed control for immigration and asylum purposes; and
(b) "legitimate gateways" for entry into the United Kingdom with the United Nations High Commission for Refugees; and
(c) when will they provide detailed information to Parliament on these matters.[HL3936]
The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Rooker): We continue to work closely with France to address the problem of cross-Channel illegal migration and achieve a situation in which the Red Cross Centre at Sangatte can be closed. A package of measures was announced following a meeting between my right honourable friend the Home Secretary (David Blunkett) and Daniel Vaillant in September. Since then bilateral discussion and a special Cross-Channel Commission subgroup has been set up to look specifically at the issue of Sangatte and how to deal with its residents. The group has met twice, in Paris on 13 February and in London on 18 March. A further meeting will take place shortly.
We look forward to pursuing these matters with the new French Government once one is in place and will naturally announce new measures as they are agreed.
Juxtaposed controls have been in place since June 2001 at stations in the United Kingdom (UK) and France served by Eurostar. Since 4 February, these controls have applied to all passengers intending to board UK-bound services, including those travelling
The provision of a legislative base for funding a resettlement programme, which would operate with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, is included in the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill. It will not be possible to begin any programme until that provision has cleared Parliament and received Royal Assent. My officials are at present, therefore, developing a best practice model in consultation with other government departments, and expert groups that could be the basis for a programme, should sufficient funding be available.
Rebo
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 was amended in 2001 by the Sex Discrimination (Indirect Discrimination and Burden of Proof) Regulations 2001 (SI 2001 no.2660) to reflect and implement the Burden of Proof Directive 97/80. The directive relates only to measures which encompass generally employment and vocational training. The Sex Discrimination (Indirect Discrimination and Burden of Proof) Regulations were made under powers which flow from the European Communities Act 1972 so consequently only the employment and vocational training aspect of the Sex Discrimination Act could be amended.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: There are no plans at present to make such changes to the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.
Baroness Ludford asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is the principle that justifies providing different burdens of proof for claims of unlawful discrimination in employment and non-employment claims under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 as amended.[HL2702]
Whether they will introduce amending legislation to provide for the same burden of proof for claims of unlawful discrimination in employment and non-employment cases under the Sex Discrimination Act 1975.[HL2703]
When they expect to bring forward legislation on late payment in commercial transactions to meet the requirements of the Late Payment Directive 2000/35/EC.[HL3676]
30 Apr 2002 : Column WA92
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Sainsbury of Turville): We aim to bring forward legislation to comply with the date for implementation of this Directive, which is before 8 August 2002.
I would like to thank the Better Payment Practice Group for their support. The members of the Group are: the Association of British Insurers, the Association of Chartered and Certified Accountants, the British Bankers Association, the British Chambers of Commerce, the Confederation of British Industry, the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, the Credit Management Research Centre, the Credit Services Association, the Factors and Discounters Association, the Forum for Private Business, the Federation of Small Businesses, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, the Institute of Credit Management, the Institute of Directors, the Institute of Exporters, the National Farmers Union, and the Union of Independent Companies.
Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils
Lord Gladwin of Clee asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When the outcome of the second stage of the quinquennial review of the Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils will be announced.[HL4052]
Lord Sainsbury of Turville: I am today able to announce the outcome of the second stage of the quinquennial review of the Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research Councils (CCLRC).
The first stage of the review recommended that the second stage of the review should focus on the issues associated with the implementation of a strategic ownership model, to encourage collective ownership by the user research councils of CCLRC's large facilities, addressing in particular the implications for the status of CCLRC and its accountability to Ministers and Parliament.
The second stage of the review has been led by the chief executive of the CCLRC, Professor John Wood, and conducted under the guidance an external review-board chaired by Sir Peter Williams, and the Office of Science and Technology. The review has been conducted in accordance with the latest Cabinet Office guidance and Cabinet Office and Treasury officials have had an opportunity to comment on the draft report and its recommendations.
The principal recommendation is that for its core business the CCLRC should remain a non-departmental public body (NDPB) and a research council. In addition, CCLRC should be given a strategic role, as identified in stage one, to act as a national focus for large facilities for neutron scattering, synchrotron radiation and high power lasers on behalf of the research councils UK. Further,
it should also co-ordinate the development for Research Councils UK of policies and strategies for the provision of access by UK scientists to leading-edge, large-scale facilities in these scientific areas, both nationally and internationally. The co-ordination and provision of strategic advice would be carried out separately from the day-to-day operation of CCLRC-owned facilities.There should be a common scheme for access to the large facilities for researchers sponsored by all the research councils. For those proposals that successfully undergo competitive peer review, there will be a "free at the point of access" arrangement.
CCLRC's funding arrangements should alter so that CCLRC receives direct funding from the Office of Science and Technology for providing, operating, maintaining, developing and upgrading its large facilities and their instrumentation. This would be on the basis that a rolling medium-term plan for the operational requirements of the large facilities be prepared by CCLRC and endorsed by Research Councils UK. This arrangement would ensure that the chief executive of CCLRC as accounting officer is clearly and visibly accountable for the value for money of all aspects of the delivery of science from these large facilities. In addition, there will be an external review of CCLRC's cost base and financial processes in advance of the changes to the funding arrangements.
I warmly welcome these recommendations and offer my thanks to Professor Wood and the review board.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page