| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Zimbabwe
3.26 p.m.
Lord Freeman asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How they intend to respond to President Mugabe's declaration of a "state of disaster" in Zimbabwe.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos): My Lords, the Government of Zimbabwe have been slow to recognise the food crisis and to declare a state of disaster. The Department for International Development saw potential for crisis last year, arising from complex causes including the Zimbabwe Government's ill-managed land reform programme. The situation has now been exacerbated by drought. DfID commenced supplementary feeding programmes through non-governmental organisations in September 2001 and is currently delivering assistance to around 400,000 poor Zimbabweans.
Lord Freeman: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Will she accept that, although drought is certainly one factor, some of the causes of the food shortage and possible famine are man-made and are the responsibility of the Zimbabwean regime; for example, the illegal seizure of farm land and the failure to replant? Will the Minister ensure that emergency aid is given direct to the people of Zimbabwe and not through the present regime?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thought that I made it absolutely clear in my original response that some of the responsibility rests on the Government of Zimbabwe, in particular on their land reform programme. Indeed, UNDP last year stressed that it thought that the land reform programme was not sustainable. As to the second question, our bilateral feeding programme uses local NGO networks, churches and schools for distribution and we avoid local government structures to mitigate against politicisation of that process. I am aware that there are concerns. We are concerned that it is difficult to screen out political selection under the World Food Programme process. It is an area which we have picked up with the World Food Programme and which we shall monitor.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the lack of fuel in Zimbabwe may
be another reason why food, which must be given as humanitarian aid, cannot be brought to the people who deserve it?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I agree. Distribution is a problem, not only in Zimbabwe but in other parts of southern Africa which are also facing a crisis in terms of food availability.
Lord Blaker: My Lords, is the conference between Zanu-PF and the MDC, planned for next week on the initiative of President Mbeki and President Obasanjo, still expected to take place? If so, would not one of the most important issues for discussion be precisely the deplorable agricultural situation? On the commercial farms in particular, it is reported that many animals are suffering very badly and that production has fallen catastrophically.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, the next meeting is due to take place on Monday, 13th May. As noble Lords know, these meetings are being held under the auspices of the governments of Nigeria and South Africa. I do not know the agenda for that meeting but I am aware that there are concerns about the growing economic crisis in Zimbabwe. I anticipate that this is one of the issues that particularly the Government of South Africa will want to see addressed.
Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, do not the Human Rights Forum's shocking statistics—55 deaths and 960 incidents of torture from politically motivated violence between January and April—show what an unsuitable channel for aid is Mr Mugabe and his cronies?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, noble Lords will know that we have condemned all acts of violence in Zimbabwe. We are concerned that there continues to be harassment and violence, particularly towards the opposition. That is why we channel our aid through NGOs. As I said in response to the noble Lord, Lord Freeman, we are working with the World Food Programme, which is using local structures, including the chiefs structure, to ensure that any kind of complaint is investigated. If the problems continue, the World Food Programme will consider suspending food aid in those particular areas. We all hope that it will not come to that.
The Lord Bishop of Guildford: My Lords, does the Minister accept that the real disaster in Zimbabwe is the gross abuse of political power and that its victims are the institutions of law and order, religion, culture, the media and the very structures of society that make for any civilised community? Does she further accept that until those issues are addressed there is not a great deal that we can do except ameliorate some of the problems?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I agree with the right reverend Prelate that it is important that the institutions of law and order, culture, the media,
freedom of expression and human rights should be seen to be observed in Zimbabwe. We have all expressed concern about that. But, as I have said repeatedly in the House, we are dealing with an independent state which, given the economic crisis facing Zimbabwe, clearly does not put the concerns of its own citizens before its need for political power.
Lord Acton: My Lords, I believe my noble friend gave a figure of £400,000. In view of the state of the disaster, is this figure being kept under review and is there any chance of it being increased?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I apologise if I said £400,000; it is 400,000 people. We have committed £6 million for feeding programmes and emergency medical supplies through the UN system.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, has the Minister noted the reports of starvation in Matabeleland in particular? Is she satisfied that by arranging for the distribution of aid through the NGO community an even and fair distribution will occur as between Matabeleland and the rest of the country? Can she say what are the implications for Zimbabwe of the general drought and shortage of foodstuffs in southern Africa as a whole? Will that issue be considered at the G8 summit in June and discussed with NePAD on that occasion?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, we and the World Food Programme have people on the ground carrying out assessments. The channelling of money and food for distribution is across the board in Zimbabwe. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, is right. It is important that we look at all areas in Zimbabwe.
As to the impact on the region as a whole, there is a problem in that we have a food crisis in Malawi and in Lesotho as well as in Zimbabwe. There are shortages across the region. The price of grain has gone up considerably and there are distribution problems. I was at a meeting this morning where we were considering whether or not this issue would be raised in June as part of the G8 Africa action plan, but we have to await developments.
Baroness Sharples: My Lords, is the Minister aware that a great deal of food aid is disappearing into the black market? I know that as a fact from a friend who lives there.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, we do not have evidence that food aid is disappearing in that way. As I said in response to the noble Lord, Lord Freeman, in our feeding programmes we use local NGO networks, churches and schools for distribution. There have been some isolated incidents of violence and intimidation against distribution workers and attempts by militia groups to affect the targeting of the food. In all cases where that occurred, feeding was suspended pending resolution of the difficulties. As to the World Food Programme, it is committed to investigating all reports, and to resolve them it has deployed additional
programme and monitoring staff. Where serious abuse is confirmed it will suspend distribution if intervention at ministry level fails.
Lord Davies of Coity: My Lords, while recognising fully our responsibility to provide humanitarian aid, does my noble friend agree that in doing so we are likely to be propping up the very person who contributed largely to the disaster? Is there not more we can do to ensure that there are fair elections in that country to remove Mugabe from office?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, we are totally committed to free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. We have made it absolutely clear that we did not consider the outcome of the last elections to be free and fair. But we cannot punish the people of Zimbabwe.
Regional Assemblies
3.36 p.m.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement made in another place by my right honourable friend the Deputy Prime Minister. The Statement is as follows:
-
"Today, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and I are presenting our White Paper, Your Region Your Choice—more democracy, less bureaucracy. Copies are available in the Vote Office.
"Right across the United Kingdom and Europe there has been a growing recognition of the importance of regions as a focus of economic growth and social identity.
"This Government have challenged the notion that the only decisions worth making are those taken in Whitehall and Westminster. We recognise that people in Birmingham or Bradford, Liverpool or Lowestoft, Falmouth or Faversham, Newcastle or Norwich, deserve to have their voice heard as well. We believe that Britain as a whole cannot achieve its full potential unless all of our regions share in success and drive that success.
"When we offered devolution, we placed our trust in the people of Scotland and Wales. Today I am announcing measures to bring decision-making closer to the people of England by strengthening the regional powers and by giving them the choice of regional government.
"We trust the people to make that choice and, if they so wish, to choose to elect a regional assembly and give a new voice to their region. This White Paper gives effect to our manifesto commitment to provide for directly elected regional assemblies for those regions that want them.
"My interest in regional policy goes back over 30 years. In the early 1980s Michael Foot asked me to draw up a new policy framework to secure agreement for devolution for Scotland, Wales and
- the English regions—which, as some of you will remember, was causing us a local difficulty. The result was our Alternative Regional Strategy, published in 1982, which set out a framework for devolving power to Scotland and Wales and decentralising power to the English regions.
"Later, in 1994 I appointed Bruce Millan, the former Scottish Secretary and European Commissioner, to chair the Labour Party's Regional Policy Commission. His report, Renewing the Regions, said that,
'without strong regional policy rooted in the regions themselves, and without firm commitment to decentralisation we are unable to develop our national economy to its full potential'.
-
"Many of the ideas in this White Paper find their origins in those earlier pieces of work. I would like to express my appreciation to those who worked on these reports, some of whom are Members of this House today.
"This Government have always recognised the regions' potential. In 1997 we inherited one of the most centralised systems of government in the western world. We have changed that. In our first term we devolved power to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. And in England we restored democratic city-wide government to London—abolished by the Opposition. We reformed local government. We strengthened and broadened the Government Offices for the Regions. We set up nine regional development agencies, which in their first two years created or safeguarded more than 80,000 jobs. And we helped establish a network of regional chambers and assemblies, which have improved accountability and given the regions a new voice.
"Today's White Paper takes that a step further. It sets out a range of options for people in the English regions. But whatever they decide, this White Paper will strengthen regional policy across England.
"In all regions we are giving extra resources and greater flexibility to the regional development agencies. In all regions, regional chambers will have greater responsibilities and will have a greater role in regional planning. In all regions we will give extra responsibilities to the Government Offices to strengthen regional decision-making and to ensure that government is joined up in the regions. But for those regions that wish to proceed to directly elected regional assemblies this White Paper sets out the process.
"Members are well aware of the different needs and aspirations of our English regions. There is a strong and growing demand in some regions to have a distinct democratic voice and a greater say over their own future.
"The people of the English regions should rightly have the same choice that we gave to the people of Scotland, Wales and London. This White Paper is about striking the right balance; it is about trusting the people; it is about responding to the needs of a modern, diverse, and more progressive society; and
- it is all about creating the conditions for greater prosperity and reducing disparity in and between our regions.
"The key is flexibility. That requires a pragmatic approach and the consent of the people of the regions. Where there is a referendum in favour of them we will establish elected regional assemblies. And I believe where one or two regions lead, others will follow.
"This White Paper sets out the powers, functions and financial arrangements for these new elected regional assemblies. They will have real power and funding to improve the quality of life of people in their region—particularly by improving regional economic performance. Indeed, raising growth by just half a per cent for the worst-performing regions would increase our national wealth by £20 billion in 10 years. And, as my right honourable friend the Chancellor's Pre-Budget Report made clear, if all regions raised their productivity to the national average, the average person in the United Kingdom would be £1,000 a year better off.
"Regional assemblies will be responsible for developing joined-up regional strategies on issues such as: sustainable development; economic development and regeneration; skills and employment; planning; transport; housing; health improvement; and culture.
"Assemblies will have a range of powers to help them deliver those strategies. For example, they will allocate funding for economic development, housing, tourism, arts and sport. And they will be responsible for the regional development agencies—appointing the board and approving the regional economic strategy.
"Regional assemblies will be funded primarily by central government grant; and they will have complete freedom to spend that grant as they judge best. We will agree targets with them and provide a single pot for regional government.
"In addition, they will have the power to raise further funds through a precept on council tax and, indeed, through borrowing. Naturally, budgets will vary depending on the population of each region. But on current expenditure the budget for the North East would be around £350 million a year, and in the North West it would be around £730 million. On top of that, assemblies will have a direct influence over large amounts of central government's public expenditure—some extra £500 million in the North East and £1.3 billion in the North West. This is over and above the £3 billion spent by local authorities.
"Elected assemblies need to be big enough to properly represent the interests of the different communities in the region, but not so big that they become unmanageable. We therefore propose that assemblies should have 25 to 35 members. For an assembly of that size it is important that there is broad political representation in the assembly.
"In Scotland, Wales and London we have used the additional member system of proportional representation to elect the members of the
- Parliament and Assemblies. On balance we have decided to use the same system for English regional assemblies. The boundaries of each region will be the existing ones used by the Government Offices for the Regions and the regional development agencies.
"In addition to elected regional assemblies, we would like to see greater involvement of groups such as the business community, trade unions, voluntary organisations and environmental groups. We want to encourage the regional assemblies to draw on the experience and skills of individuals in the region who may not be able to stand for election themselves.
"We want to build on the experience of the Scottish Civic Forum, the partnership arrangements in Wales, the London Civic Forum and the arrangements introduced in a number of English regional chambers. Different regions may want to use different models and we are specifically asking for views on this. For example, there could be appointed assembly members who could play an active part in the role of assemblies but without the right to vote.
"Regional assemblies represent a new tier of political accountability. Regional assemblies will work closely with their local authority partners. However, in areas that currently have county and district councils, an assembly would add a third tier of government. We believe it would be more efficient and simple if, in those cases, we moved to a fully unitary system of local government. So where a decision is made to hold a referendum for an elected assembly—and only in those regions—there will first be an independent review of local government structures conducted by the Boundary Committee for England. This review—before the referendum—will examine the two-tier areas of the region and make proposals for a wholly unitary local government system. Existing unitary authorities in the region will not be affected.
"We believe that when a referendum is held voters should know what the proposed structure of local government would be and be clear who would do what in their area. I should emphasise that these reviews will take place only in those regions where a referendum will be held; and any restructuring of local government would take place only if there is a 'Yes' vote in that referendum.
"This White Paper sets out the process and timetable for establishing elected regional assemblies. Before we decide which region or regions should hold the first referendum, we will consult all the English regions on our proposals. The Secretary of State will decide whether a region should hold a referendum, primarily by assessing the level of public interest in the region. In reaching his conclusion, he will seek the views of the regional chamber, local authorities and other key stakeholders. We intend to introduce legislation to provide for referendums and local government reviews as soon as parliamentary time allows.
"Our intention is to allow for a referendum to be held before the end of this Parliament. After a region has voted for an elected assembly, we intend to introduce further legislation enabling assemblies to be established. This would make it possible for the first regional assembly to be up and running early in the next Parliament—under a Labour Government, of course.
"In conclusion, all English regions will benefit from our strong regional policy, and we will continue to develop the regional structures and agencies we put in place in our first term. In addition, our White Paper now offers the opportunity of a new constitutional settlement for the English regions—a choice which has been denied to them for far too long.
"The opponents of these proposals must answer this question: if devolution is good enough for Scotland and Wales, why would they deny that choice to the people of England? Our proposals today will give the regions of England new choices, new powers, and a new voice. By devolving power, we can elevate our democracy. By empowering our regions, we can engage people more effectively. By harnessing the energy of the regions, we can drive forward the nation's economic growth. By embracing diversity, we can strengthen the United Kingdom. And by liberating the potential of our regions, we will be helping Britain to prosper. I commend these proposals to the House".
3.49 p.m.
Baroness Hanham: My Lords, first, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. At least he has had a quieter background against which to deliver it, as he has not been competing against the "Byers Show" which has been taking place in the other House.
I should make it clear from the outset that on this side of the House we are against regional government. This Government have already carved up this country into three, and they have foisted a further layer of bureaucracy on London—all in the name of choice by the people—which they now extol for the regions.
In that regard, it is worth recalling that the votes in the three referendums that took place to bring about those changes accounted for less than 25 per cent of the population, and therefore expressed the will of a tiny minority of the electorate. Will there be a threshold of a significant proportion of the population taking part on this occasion?
The same problem is in prospect again. Allied to that is the prospect of further fractionalisation of this country into incoherent regions that bear little relationship to each other and in many cases do not have a commonality of interest within them. Devon, Cornwall, Northumberland and Durham would all vanish. Does the Minister recall the controversy over the loss of the Ridings in Yorkshire? How much worse
would be the loss of Yorkshire itself. Bristol is nearer to Brighton than it is to Falmouth, but it would be in a common region.Local government should be for local people and by local people. We do not need a further tier of government, which removes local accountability, is decided by proportional representation, introduces the possibility of fringe parties and creates more full-time, well rewarded political jobs. Nor do we need the inevitable reorganisation that is threatened—the abolition of the county councils, which are the historic seats of this country's government, established before the Domesday Book and well in advance of May 1997, the start of current history as seen by this Government.
There is little point in the Deputy Prime Minister saying that this will come about only by the will of the people. It has been the clear intent of this Government since the Prime Minister said that regional government could come about only if another tier of local government was removed, as is the case with the proposals that county councils should be shorn of their role in structural planning. Is it the intention that in the areas where regions are put forward, that will mean the end of the county councils?
It is also clear that, even if the electorate do not vote for elected regional assemblies, far greater powers will be given to those greatest quangos in the sky, the regional development agencies and the regional planning bodies. That means further powers in the hands of non-elected officials.
There are many questions that need to be asked. I hope and expect that there will be an opportunity to do so in a full discussion on the White Paper in this House. Until then, will the Minister say whether the Government are proposing that regional government will be established before or after a review of local government structures within it? As the Deputy Prime Minister said last year:
- "Of course we will need to make sure the structure of local government fits with any new regional tier, and that may require some adjustments".
Will the Minister give an estimate of the likely total costs of the establishment of the regional structure and the consequential reorganisation? On the basis of the costs associated with the Deputy Prime Minister's county council of Humberside, the rest would cost in the region of £2 billion to change. Is that a good use of taxpayers' money? Is the Minister aware that the Greater London Authority alone is spending £34 million a year on administration and that a precept on the council tax has increased by 30 per cent in two years?
Will the grant to be given by the Government be top-sliced from the local government grant? If so, does that anticipate a reallocation of resources for the rest? Will there be a review of the Barnett formula, which gives Scotland and Wales substantially greater funding per head of population than elsewhere, or will regions be bought by similar over-provision?
I understand that today is Europe Day. Is it not ironic that this announcement should be made today? It brings the federalisation of this country ever closer to a federalised Europe. Perhaps Kent will be joined with Calais, Flanders and Wallonia—as it is already in the Interreg programme—as a European self-governing region. Perhaps the Minister would like to tell the House whether the regional government that he proposes—or that the Deputy Prime Minister proposes—would be able to deal directly with European institutions, bypassing the scrutiny of Parliament and doing their own deals for funding. Truly, Romano Prodi must be dancing on his tippy toes at the prospect of so much influence in this land.
We believe that the general tide of post-war centralisation has gone too far under Labour. Under this Government, councils have been burdened with mountains of red tape and local democracy has been undermined. Regional government will not improve that; it will accelerate the trend. Far from giving power to local people, the proposals will take it further away. We do not believe that the White Paper has anything to offer that will enhance democracy in this country.
3.56 p.m.
Baroness Hamwee: My Lords, we on these Benches welcome the principle of devolved government. I had better follow that up quickly by saying that the detailed proposals will require and deserve detailed consideration. We are enthusiasts for democracy and we recognise and celebrate the diversity of our country. We believe that it is entirely appropriate for the announcement to be made on Europe Day, given the role of the regions in Europe.
I declare an interest as a member of the Greater London Assembly. I hope that the Government will learn from the London experience. An executive mayor with an assembly whose role is pretty much limited to scrutiny may be the worst model of all. From my quick look at the White Paper, it appears that the Government have learnt that lesson, at least in their proposals for an executive consisting of a leader and a cabinet, though I am not sure whether that is a public or a private Labour Party matter. We certainly need something closer to the parliamentary than the presidential model.
We are all aware of the electoral events in France, the Netherlands and our own cities over the past week. That highlights the need for every government to be relevant to their people. Electoral engagement follows power and delivery. Will the assemblies' powers be token or really strategic powers? Can the Minister assure the House that the assemblies will take down powers from central government, not take up powers from local government? Will they have all the relevant powers so that, for instance, health and housing—which I see are on the list—and tertiary education, to take but a few, are knitted in with economic and social development, as I believe they should be?
I said that powers should not be taken up from local government. We regard it as appropriate that no change is made to the local government structure until
elected regional government is in place. At that point, both local and regional tiers and the Electoral Commission can be involved in any change.Currently, there is an enormous raft of quangos. Will the regions have control, with power to define their shape and structure? I have never believed that the regional development agencies amount to democratic devolution; they are merely a degree of decentralisation. We shall need to examine the detail of the proposals on them. This may be one of the few points on which I agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham.
Will central government this time adopt a self-denying ordinance and keep their hands off regional issues? As happened with the Greater London Authority Bill, no doubt someone will count the number of references to the Secretary of State. I hope that they will not find that he scores higher than the new assemblies.
Are the Government prepared to learn from two years' practical experience? I can speak only for London, but there is also experience from Wales and Scotland. That experience was gained at various levels including the human level. A new body needs to be of a size which facilitates the dynamics of the political process. In my experience, which includes a year of chairing the London Assembly, 25 members is too small a number for the breadth of responsibility involved and quite the wrong size for a full meeting at which everyone considers himself or herself a "Front Bencher" as it were by virtue of that small size and wants to have his say. I am aware of the representational role but I believe that the figure of 25 to 35 members is too small. I believe that all assembly members should be elected. Local government has managed to lose co-optees; it clouds the issue of accountability to have appointees.
Does the Minister also recognise the need for shadow running? I know that the public want to see action and to see the pigeons banished from Trafalgar Square a week on Thursday following the election, but does the Minister accept that it is necessary for there to be sufficient time allocated to set up a new assembly? Two years into the process of working towards an effective operation in London I am still not sure whether I am involved in politics or in anthropology.
Will the Minister also acknowledge that where the scrutiny arm has powers these need to be effective? I give merely one example. It is no good allowing the scrutiny arm to veto the totality of a budget if it cannot alter and control the powers of virement of the executive with regard to that budget.
I refer to a serious point which I hope that we can correct with regard to London on the back of regional legislation. Does the Minister accept that access to information must be at least as good as it is in local government? In London we appear to have less access to policy development decisions of the Mayor than is the case at local level.
Does the Minister accept that the legislation should be a framework? I make that heartfelt plea as one of those who sat through the proceedings on the Greater
London Authority Bill. It is not possible to anticipate all the detail that will be needed when this new form of government is in operation and certainly not to get the detail right if it is imposed in advance.Will the Minister consider the need to address the relationship of government offices to regional assemblies? The Government Office for London is now larger than it was when the GLA was created. I am unpersuaded that extra responsibilities given to government offices will achieve regional or, indeed, much other accountability.
In conclusion, I hope that the Minister will accept the good wishes of these Benches in regard to those who embark upon what I hope will be a fulfilling and effective venture.
4.3 p.m.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, for her support and good wishes. I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham, that her party opposed devolution to Scotland but now supports it; it opposed devolution to Wales but now supports it; and it opposed devolution to London but now supports it. I understand from her remarks that her party opposes the regional government proposals in the document we are discussing. I am not sure when it may change its view in that regard.
I turn to the specific questions asked by the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham. She asked whether a threshold would have to be crossed in regard to a referendum. However, there is no reference to a threshold. The noble Baroness asked foursquare whether the proposals signalled the end of county councils. That matter was dealt with in the Statement. I draw the noble Baroness's attention to the relevant part of the Statement which states:
- "So where a decision is made to hold a referendum for an elected assembly—and only in those regions—there will first be an independent review of local government structures conducted by the Boundary Committee for England.
- This review—before the referendum—will examine the two-tier areas of the region and make proposals for wholly unitary local government. Existing unitary authorities in the region will not be affected".
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |