| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: My Lords, is the Minister's department now staffed to a level which could actively and effectively implement a contingency plan? How many staff of his department have taken leave of absence due to post-traumatic stress syndrome arising from the foot and mouth outbreak since November last year?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I am not aware of statistics regarding absences. A number of people have been absent but I shall need to consult my personnel staff if it is appropriate to give a reply to that question.
The current staffing levels are as indicated in my Answer; they are broadly similar to what they were five years ago. There are some vacancies which are being filled. Indeed, we have filled a substantial number over the past four years. The interim contingency plan is operable with the number of staff provided. We can also trigger the deployment of additional resources from the private veterinary service, from students and from retired vets.
Lord Willoughby de Broke: My Lords, the Minister said that he relies on the Winslade case to justify the contiguous cull. Can he tell the House what scientific evidence was made available to the court in the case which was brought at short notice, as I hope he will be able to confirm? For example, were the papers written by Professor Donaldson, of the Pirbright Institute, made available in evidence to the court before judgment was passed? If not, how can the Minister possibly say that that case justified the contiguous cull?
Lord Whitty: My Lords, I can clearly say so because that was the decision of the judge and the court on the only occasion in the English courts on which the validity of the cull has been challenged. We were successful in resisting the contiguous cull challenge. In regard to the evidence, I would need to check the books, but it was effectively the same evidence which was received by Ministers and was available to
veterinary surgeons on the spot in determining exposure to the disease. That is the whole basis of the contiguous cull.The noble Lord and those who pursue this question are raking up potential difficulties which understandably existed among those most directly involved but which hide the fact that the cull was necessary in order to contain the disease. The legality was never in question. The appropriateness of the strategy is for others to judge; nevertheless it was carried out most effectively by the State Veterinary Service.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, we must move on. There is a most important Question to come and we need to be fair to all questioners.
Lord Williams of Mostyn: My Lords, I know that the noble Earl is pointing at the clock. We are in the 24th minute and the noble Lord, Lord Alton, has a very important Question on the Order Paper. The noble Baroness, Lady Byford, courteously gave way.
Middle East: Holy Places
3 p.m.
Lord Alton of Liverpool asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What is their policy towards the internationalisation of the holy places in the territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority and by the state of Israel.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, Her Majesty's Government attach great importance to ensuring access to holy places throughout Israel and the Occupied Territories. We remain concerned at the continuing stand-off at the Church of the Holy Nativity in Bethlehem. Some progress has been made through negotiations, including the release of a number of civilians and the provision of food. There are indications that a formula has been found which may be acceptable to the parties. We hope to receive further news on that soon.
I should also point out that Her Majesty's Government have condemned the further appalling loss of civilian life as a result of the suicide bombing yesterday evening in Rishon le Zion. The cycle of violence has to stop. Both sides must demonstrate,
through their actions, their commitment to peace. That requires a withdrawal, a sustainable ceasefire and the resumption of dialogue.
Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, I welcome what the Minister has said this afternoon in your Lordships' House. I agree with her that the cycle of violence will only be deepened by the appalling deaths yesterday of 15 Israeli citizens in a suicide attack. Such actions retard the objective of achieving the goal of peace. Neither the blind violence of terrorism nor the violence of war in revenge can create a way forward.
As the siege at the Church of the Holy Nativity enters its fifth week, can the Minister shed any light on the débâcle which took place yesterday when the careful arrangements agreed for the removal of 13 Palestinian militants from the church and the subsequent release of the remaining captives were reduced to chaos? Can she tell noble Lords how that occurred and whether Her Majesty's Government are now playing any role in brokering a way forward? Furthermore, can she shed any light on the condition of the captives who remain in the church? What access do they have to food and water?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, the suicide bombing incident yesterday was truly appalling. We recognise that President Arafat has condemned the attack, which is welcome. However, I think that Israel has a right to expect more. President Arafat has demonstrated unequivocally that he is prepared to take action against those responsible and to try to put in place measures to prevent further attacks.
With regard to the position in Bethlehem, I understand that this matter is still under discussion. Various newspaper reports have been written about what went on yesterday. What I can say to noble Lords is that Italy is a possible final destination for some of the armed Palestinians in the church. I cannot confirm the number because that is still a matter of dispute. Secretary of State Colin Powell has been in touch with various parties and the Italian Government are considering a request to take the Palestinian militants.
At this stage, I am not in a position to comment any further. There is still a certain amount of confusion as regards who said what to whom yesterday. No doubt that confusion will unravel in due course. We must hope that a solution is found as quickly as possible. As I came into the Chamber this afternoon, the most recent update was that we still do not have a definitive position.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, we on these Benches wish to associate ourselves with the Minister's condemnation of the recent suicide bombing incident which has led to terrible casualties. We express our profound sympathy for those who have been affected.
Turning to the Question before the House, perhaps I may also ask the Minister whether, in the slightly longer term—given the peace conference that is to take place—any consideration has been given to the proposals raised at the Camp David and Taba
negotiations; that is, giving international standing to the square mile which constitutes almost all of the most crucial holy places within both Israel and Palestinian territory: the Temple Mount, the Church of the Holy Nativity, the Wailing Wall and so forth? Discussions at the time turned on agreeing a form of "Vatican" settlement; that is, an area that would be neutral and guaranteed by all the great powers.Although I realise that the Minister will not be able to respond at the moment, would she consider whether some form of international control and even some possible "internationalisation" of that small area of holy places in Jerusalem might help to move away a little from the genuine horror of the events at the Church of the Holy Nativity and, before that, the conflicts which arose over the status of and access to the Temple Mount?
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: I am sure that the noble Baroness knows that the status of Jerusalem and its environs which comprise and embrace the holy places mentioned by the noble Baroness has been a matter which the parties had decided would be for "final status" talks. It is a great sadness to note that, given where we are at the moment, those final status talks now appear to be little more than a remote dream. However, I hope and believe that these issues will be revisited once more.
The noble Baroness is quite right to remind the House that the United States has proposed an international conference. We very much support that proposal because we want to re-establish the political process. We do not believe that anything can be solved through this unending cycle of violence. In the course of the next few months, but before the conference is due to be held, we shall be considering all the items that should be included on a conference agenda. I am sure that the status of the holy places will form a part of those considerations.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, we on these Benches also endorse the words of the noble Baroness, deploring the senseless and appalling slaughter outside Tel Aviv last night. It represents one more swathe of blood in this ghastly scenario. However, in even uttering such words, one wonders what good it is doing: we go on wringing our hands while the situation gets worse and worse.
Following on the comments made by the noble Baroness, Lady Williams, I wish to put to the Minister one question on the matter of the holy places. Did not the Barak plan propose quite detailed arrangements in Jerusalem for safeguarding the holy places on an international basis? The plan would have assured access for all those in the four quarters of Jerusalem. Is not that the kind of plan for which we should now be striving? Regrettably, and for reasons that I still do not fully understand, Chairman Arafat and his colleagues turned the plan down.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page