| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Amos: My Lords, as I understand the situation, there are parallel initiatives. Noble Lords will know that the governments of South Africa and Nigeria sought to facilitate dialogue between the two political parties in Zimbabwe. Commonwealth leaders suspended Zimbabwe from the councils of the Commonwealth. It is suspended for one year. That remains the position. The UK Government supports it.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, many international gatherings are considering Zimbabwe, and the situation gets worse. Bearing in mind that Mr Mugabe is a member of the Roman Catholic Church—I am not sure of what standing—does the Minister agree that it may be opportune for Her Majesty's Government and to the world community to ask the Vatican to intercede in this great tragedy?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, that is one suggestion. Noble Lords will know that we have sought to ensure that we pursue all avenues. We are concerned about Zimbabwe, particularly the deteriorating humanitarian situation and the economic mismanagement, which is having an impact on the countries in the region. I shall certainly take back the noble Lord's idea.
Lord Hughes of Woodside: My Lords, did the G8 summit discuss the problems of Angola? Coming out
of the war into peace has proved much more difficult than one imagined, both the scale of the poverty and the scale of the hunger caused by the war. What is being done to make sure that food aid especially is made available and to bring about a quick improvement to the situation?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, there was discussion of Angola. The G8 action plan makes reference to three specific conflicts where the international community, and in particular the G8 countries, feel that there needs to be concerted international action; that is, the Sudan, the DRC and Angola. We remain committed to work with the UN and others not only to get food aid into Angola but also to those from UNITA who are disarming and demobilising. We shall continue to do that, but the situation remains difficult in terms of distribution channels.
Lord Howe of Aberavon: My Lords, does the Minister accept that having tried to deal with problems in South Africa over a period of six years, I understand well the frustrating difficulties of trying to grapple with a situation of this kind from thousands of miles away? Does she further agree that if international pressure is to have the effect that we would all wish upon the catastrophic tragedy in Zimbabwe, it needs to be pervasive, comprehensive—not least throughout Africa—and sustained unflinchingly on every possible occasion?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I totally agree with the noble Lord. In my comments to this House I have made that absolutely clear. It is particularly important that that pressure comes from governments within Africa and from the neighbouring countries that are being severely affected economically by the mismanagement of the Zimbabwe economy.
Baroness Williams of Crosby: My Lords, can the Minister tell us what immediate steps are being taken by the G8 countries, including the United Kingdom, to deal with the unfolding tragedy in Malawi? It is estimated, as the Minister will know, that something like one-third of children are close to starvation? Can she say what steps are being taken urgently to try to relieve this unfolding catastrophe?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, the food aid and famine situation not only in Zimbabwe but across the southern African region is deeply distressing and difficult. Malawi is one example. We have been working with the World Food Programme. At a meeting in South Africa it laid out for the international community the situation facing the whole region. We have been working with it and with non-governmental organisations to facilitate the delivery of food aid to Malawi. The pressing and immediate issue is humanitarian, but we will continue to work with the Government of Malawi on a longer term, bilateral basis to try to ensure that such situations are not repeated.
Baroness Park of Monmouth: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the reaction of the African states to
Mr Mugabe at the African Union meeting presided over by President Gaddafi was not exactly reassuring? Can she tell the House precisely what we are to urge at the General Affairs Council on the 22nd of this month? Will we urge that pressure be brought to bear by all European countries on all their African partners to ensure that maize is planted now for next year? Will the question of HIV also be considered, as most of the HIV clinics, which are partly run by farmers' wives on farms, are closing? Finally, will anything be done to prevent the families of Ministers from travelling, not just the Ministers themselves?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, the noble Baroness will be aware that the travel ban is a European Union ban. I am sure that it will be considered again at the GAC meeting next Monday. It will be for the EU to decide whether to extend the ban as the noble Baroness suggests. We have been pressing our EU partners and working with them consistently over Zimbabwe, so that is not a new item on the agenda for consideration on Monday. The dialogue will continue.
On HIV/AIDS, the noble Baroness will be aware that that is an area in which we have continued our bilateral assistance to Zimbabwe because of the terrible impact that it is having on ordinary Zimbabweans.
Network Rail
2.52 p.m.
Viscount Goschen asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What influence they will have over the management of Network Rail.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the Government will not have new statutory or other powers over the management of Network Rail, but the Strategic Rail Authority will have a non-executive director on the board of the company and will set a framework within which Network Rail must deliver a required output.
Viscount Goschen: My Lords, given that Network Rail will be operated in accordance with the Strategic Rail Authority's strategic plan; that it will be regulated by the SRA; that its accounts will be incorporated in those of the SRA; and that the SRA, a government body, will be providing an equity cushion—a de facto guarantee—how can that company be determined to be a private company?
Secondly, will the Minister now answer the Question that I asked his noble friend Lord Macdonald of Tradeston on 27th June: how much will that synthetic structure cost the taxpayer in the additional costs of borrowing commercially, rather than on the gilt market?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, the noble Viscount is right to say that the National Audit Office has ruled that Network Rail will be a subsidiary of the Strategic Rail Authority and that the SRA's accounts will include Network Rail's assets and liabilities. That accords with generally accepted accounting principles. It is also true that the Office for National Statistics, which is of course an independent body, has ruled that Network Rail is not a public sector company. It made that ruling in line with the European standard of accounts 1995. Different rules are produced for different purposes. We as a Government intend as far as possible to accord with generally accepted accounting practice and have been outstandingly successful in so doing.
I am not familiar with the exact Question that the noble Viscount asked my noble friend Lord Macdonald, so I shall have to write to the noble Viscount about that.
Lord Barnett: My Lords, on the question of accounting practices, can my noble friend confirm that the Government are guaranteeing the overdraft of the new company? Under the new set of accounts that the Government will have to prepare under their latest Bill, will that not appear as a contingent liability of the Government?
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Yes, my Lords, my noble friend is entirely correct. That will appear as a contingent liability. The credit facilities will be provided by the SRA—they constitute a large sum at present because there has been a substantial lack of investment. Under the 10-year plan, we propose an annual investment in the railways, on top of running costs, of £4.6 billion a year on average, which is three times the figure devoted to the railways during the 10 years before 1997.
Viscount Astor: My Lords, is not the Answer that the Minister should have given to my noble friend Lord Goschen that Network Rail has fallen between two stools? It is not a government organisation, so it does not have the advantage of being able to borrow cheaply on the gilt market, which could save it hundreds of millions of pounds a year; but it is not a private company, so it does not have the advantage of private sector involvement and accounting ability? It is a mess.
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, as for the advantage of private sector accounting ability, Network Rail will have roughly 100 members, of whom about 40 will be from the rail industry. The rest will represent the public interest and the Strategic Rail Authority.
As for what Network Rail will have to pay for its finance, we shall see. Clearly, bridge finance will need to be provided—the current amount is up to £10 billion. But Railtrack was taking money from the taxpayer on a very large scale after privatisation and before we got a grip of it. Let us see. I think that
Network Rail will be able to arrange longer-term credit facilities, in the manner that Eurotunnel did rather successfully.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |