Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page


22 Jul 2002 : Column WA1

Written Answers

Monday, 22nd July 2002.

Algeria

Lord Moynihan asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether human rights issues were raised with the Algerian authorities by the European Union mission during their recent visit to Algeria and whether the mission raised the following issues: the use of force against demonstrators by the Algerian security forces; the deaths of civilians in the context of armed conflict; the disappearance of an estimated 4,000 people since 1993 following their arrest by the security forces; the intimidation of human rights defenders; and the lack of access for international observers.[HL5114]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos): The UK and our EU partners regularly raise with the Algerian Government our concerns about human rights violations in Algeria. The then FCO Minister, my honourable friend the Member for Exeter, did so during his visit to Algiers in September 2001. We continue to urge Algeria to comply fully with all its obligations under international human rights law, including the investigation of human rights violations, the intimidation of human rights defenders and to allow visits by special rapporteurs.

The European Union mission pressed the Algerian authorities for a response on the "disappeared". This was to follow up the list that had been sent by the Presidency in April 2001 and was also raised by the Presidency in December 2001.

Iceland: Visit by Chinese President

Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether any British citizens or residents were prevented from flying to Iceland by Chinese government action during the recent visit of the President of China to Iceland; and, if so, what representations they have made to China.[HL5191]

Baroness Amos: We understand that Iceland Air Prevented two British passport holders from flying to Iceland during the recent visit by President Jiang Zemin.

This was a matter for the Icelandic authorities.

Hong Kong

Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:

    Whether they consider that the action of police in Hong Kong in March and April, when they arrested and charged 16 Swiss and local practitioners of

22 Jul 2002 : Column WA2

    Falun Gong, together with the reported preparation of a new "subversion law", constitute breaches of the constitution of Hong Kong; and, if so, what action they propose to take.[HL5192]

Baroness Amos: The 16 Falun Gong demonstrators who were arrested in March have all been charged with public order offences. Their trial, which began on 17 June, is still continuing and Her Majesty's Government therefore cannot comment on the outcome of the cases. We have confidence in the impartiality of the Hong Kong judicial system which is independent from that of mainland China.

Under Article 23 of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administative Region (SAR) (in efffect Hong Kong's constitution), the SAR Government are required to enact laws on their own to prohibit, among other things, subversion. The SAR Government have committed themselves to undertake wide public consultation on the content of possible legislation, but have yet to announce any timetable for the consultation exercise or for the introduction of legislation. Her Majesty's Government welcome the commitment by the SAR Government to consult widely and consider it essential that any legislation is consistent with international human rights treaties.

Iran

Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What specific steps they and the European Union have taken in the past year to counter the use of capital punishment, torture and other means of repression in Iran.[HL5265]

Baroness Amos: We and EU partners have regularly made clear our concerns about such human rights issues in Iran. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary did so in Iran in September. The EU-sponsored resolution on human rights in Iran, which was put to the Commission on Human Rights in April, included references to both torture and public executions.

We also welcome the fact that the Iranian Parliament has approved a Bill aimed at enforcing the current constitutional prohibition of torture in Iran. Despite initial rejection of the Bill by the Guardian Council, the Parliament intends to resubmit the Bill.

Wilton Park

Baroness Whitaker asked Her Majesty's Government:

    How the Wilton Park Executive Agency performed against the targets agreed for 2001–02; and what are the agreed targets for the current financial year. [HL5342]

Baroness Amos: Wilton Park met all four of the agreed targets set for the 2001–02 financial year, for income, cost recovery, the number of conference

22 Jul 2002 : Column WA3

participants and cost per head to the FCO overall.Wilton Park's performance in 2001–02 and some of the targets for the current year are shown below.

2001–02 targets 2001–02 performance 2002–03 targets
Income£2,963,000£3,210,000£3,278,000
Cost recovery85.9%87.2%86.1%
Number of conference participants£2,400£3,033
Cost to FCO per participant£203£156

Wilton Park's targets have been adjusted from 2002–03 to give greater emphasis to service delivery. Measures for number of conference participants and cost to the FCO per participant have been dropped. Wilton Park's annual targets now work from framework targets for cost recovery (which is to recover all its cash costs i.e. excluding non-cash cost), quality of conference programmes and standards of service. New measures have been added for "excellent" ratings awarded respectively for conference programmes and for conference administration. The 2002–03 targets for the two new measures are:

"Excellent" ratings awarded for conference programmes: 56 per cent (an increase of 2 per cent on the informal target for 2001–02).

"Excellent" ratings awarded for conference administration: 89 per cent (an increase of 1.1 per cent on the informal target for 2001–02).


Diplomatic Immunity: Serious Offences

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract asked Her Majesty's Government:

    How many serious offences were committed in 2001 by persons entitled to immunity by virtue of their employment by Diplomatic Missions or an international organisation, and their dependants.[HL5363]

Baroness Amos: From a community of over 19,500 persons entitled to immunity, 21 serious offences, allegedly committed by such persons, were drawn to the attention of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in 2001. ''Serious offences'' are defined in accordance with the 1985 White Paper on Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges—i.e. as offences that would in certain circumstances carry a penalty of 12 months or more imprisonment.

Home Security Industry

Baroness Greengross asked Her Majesty's Government:

    What regulation is in place for the home security industry providing fire alarm, burglar alarm and similar services to the residential market. [HL2427]

22 Jul 2002 : Column WA4

The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Falconer of Thoroton): None. The Private Security Industry Act 2001 contains provisions for the Security Industry Authority to regulate security guards and other specified sectors of the private security industry under a licensing system in the near future, but this does not include operators that provide alarms and similar services.

Mental Health Bill, Clause 6 (4)

Lord Lucas asks Her Majesty's Government: What are their best estimates, based on what evidence, of the numbers of people who would fall within Clause 6 (4) of their draft Mental Health Bill (a) in total, (b) who have no criminal conviction for a serious offence, and (c) who fall outside the Mental Health Act 1983 due to the ''treatability'' concept that it embodies; and what their best estimates are, and based on what evidence, of the number of serious crimes committed each year by persons falling within each of the categories (a), (b) and (c) above.[HL5088]

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: No individual will be dealt with under the proposed legislation who does not meet all the conditions set out in Clause 6 of the draft Mental Health Bill. It is not a matter of different people being caught under different conditions.

The clause relates to the use of compulsory powers. Subsections (2) to (5) set out the four conditions which must be satisfied in all respects before any power to impose compulsory examination, assessment or treatment can be used. So these conditions and this clause relates to all those who come under compulsory powers, not just mentally disordered offenders or those who are a risk to others.

It is estimated that, in total 26,774 persons per annum could fall within Clause 6 of the draft Bill. The best evidence for this estimate comes from the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983 in relation to the 26,650 formal admissions to hospital recorded in 2000–01. In addition, however, forecasts derived from the Office for National Statistics Psychiatric Morbidity Survey of Prisoners indicate that 124 persons per annum could fall within Clause 6 as a result of being at substantial risk of serious harm to other persons due to a severe personality disorder. The latter group could fall outside the 1983 Act.

Central statistical databases do not hold information on the criminal convictions of all people admitted under the Mental Health Act 1983, other than for restricted patients and persons given unrestricted hospital orders by the courts. This additional information could be collected only at disproportionate cost. It is therefore not possible to estimate the total number of persons subject to Clause 6 of the draft Bill who do not have a criminal conviction for a serious offence. However, it is estimated that, of restricted patients and persons given unrestricted hospital orders admitted to hospital in

22 Jul 2002 : Column WA5

2000 under the 1983 Act, 664 were admitted for non-sexual or non-violent offences.

As indicated above, 124 persons per annum could fall within Clause 6 as a result of being at substantial risk of serious harm to other persons due to a severe personality disorder and could fall outside the 1983 Act.

In relation to the number of serious crimes commited each year it is not possible to determine the number of crimes committed by those falling within the draft Bill because some crimes are undetected by the authorities. Central statistical databases also do not record the criminal convictions of all persons subject to the 1983 Act. However, of the restricted patients admitted and the number of persons given unrestricted hospital orders by the courts under the 1983 Act, in 2000 a total of 929 had been charged or convicted of a sexual or violent offence (including arson). It is not possible to determine the number of serious crimes committed by those who have no criminal conviction for a serious offence for the

22 Jul 2002 : Column WA6

reasons stated above. Two hundred sexual or violent convictions are estimated to be recorded per annum by those at substantial risk of serious harm to other persons due to a severe personality disorder. The latter group could fall outside the 1983 Act.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page