House of Lords
Thursday, 10th October 2002.
The House met at three of the clock: The CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Portsmouth.
Developing Countries: Human Rights
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What agreements were reached at the world summit in Johannesburg to improve standards in governance and human rights in the developing world.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos): My Lords, the Plan of Implementation agreed at the World Summit on Sustainable Development re-affirmed existing agreements on human rights and stressed the importance of good governance in all countries. The Johannesburg summit recognised that good governance within each country and at the international level is essential for sustainable development. It also stressed the importance of peace, stability and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
Lord Astor of Hever: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Do the Government accept that the framework for promoting good governance has been seriously weakened by Libya's appointment to chair the UN Commission on Human Rights? Did the Government use the opportunity of the world summit to protest against that bizarre and worrying decision?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, noble Lords will be aware that the UN Commission on Human Rights is made up of 54 member states. Votes take place each year so it is difficult for any one country or any group of countries to gain a sense of who will be voted on to the commission. The noble Lord will know that serious lobbying takes place. There is no doubt that the human rights mechanisms of the UN have been weakened by that process. We did not protest at WSSD but we have made our views on human rights and on good governance in Africa absolutely clear. I am sure that the Libyans understand our views.
Lord Judd: My Lords, does my noble friend accept that in the context of Johannesburg there is widespread respect for the commitment and leadership that she and her colleagues have shown? Does she accept that in relation to what she said about good governance internationally, it is essential that we do not fall into the trap of saying, "Do as we say", as distinct from, "Do as we do"? Does she also accept that there is a major issue of credibility in the
environmental sphere, as the lion's share of pollution is caused by the industrialised, developed world, and that in that context it is absolutely essential to persuade our American friends to come on board in a collective policy?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his kind remarks. Those who represented the UK Government at the summit did so extremely well. While the results were not all that we would have hoped for, they were certainly much better than we had anticipated following the meeting held in Bali.
I agree that credibility is essential, and that is why the commitment on implementation that came out of WSSD is so important. Noble Lords will be aware that we have been in discussion with our colleagues in the United States. We do not share their concerns, for example, about the Kyoto Protocol. It is important that the United States comes on board in respect of this agenda and we shall continue to do all that we can to work with our American colleagues to enable that to happen.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the agreements reached at the world summit need to stick? There is a plan of implementation and it reads like a huge set of exhortations and aspirations. To be certain of delivery, can the Minister indicate how the plan is to be audited, including improvements to governance and human rights?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I totally agree with the noble Lord that it is important that the commitments stick. That is why the commitment to implementation that came out of WSSD is so important. There will be different mechanisms in terms of monitoring the commitments that have been made. The noble Lord will be aware that the UN has a key role to play, not just through the UN environment programme, but also through the UN Development Programme because the key point about the WSSD summit was that it brought together environment, development and other issues in a concrete way for the first time.
Zimbabwe
3.11 p.m.
Lord Blaker asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What is their present policy towards Zimbabwe.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, we want to see a stable, prosperous and democratic Zimbabwe. There is a strong international consensus behind that. We shall continue to press for regional efforts to restore good governance and the rule of law to Zimbabwe. Our condemnation of the Mugabe regime's policies will remain unequivocal but we shall continue to help those Zimbabweans suffering as a result of economic mismanagement and contempt for the rule of law.
Lord Blaker: My Lords, am I right in believing that member countries of NePAD and the new African
Union claim that good governance, human rights and the rule of law in African countries are matters for African countries alone but appear to be taking no steps to deal with one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes of the world, that in Zimbabwe? If that situation continues, is there not a danger that NePAD and the African Union will lose all credibility? Will Her Majesty's Government propose to the G8 countries that they suspend aid to African countries until they have taken steps to deal with the restoration of human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, the noble Lord is quite right. Central to the principles within NePAD, and within the African Union, are principles associated with human rights and good governance. They are core principles for the NePAD initiatives and for the African Union. I do not think that either organisation stresses that these are for African countries alone. What is important is for there to be a stress within the African Union and within NePAD for African leadership and a key African role in sorting out governance problems on the continent.
We are extremely concerned, as the noble Lord knows, about the situation in Zimbabwe. The noble Lord is quite right. There is a significant humanitarian crisis. As many as 7 million people—more than half the population—will need food aid by the end of the year. So it is important that we continue to work with our African partners and ensure that they understand the magnitude of this crisis.
At the recent SADC meeting Mugabe was scheduled to become the vice-chairman. That did not happen. I was pleased that the President of Tanzania was elected instead.
Lord Watson of Richmond: My Lords, on 22nd July the Minister admitted in this House that only £76,000 worth of assets of Mr Mugabe and his colleagues had been frozen by that stage. Can the Minister tell us whether there has been any progress on that paltry sum? Given the ineffectiveness of that sum as any kind of deterrent to Mr Mugabe, can the Minister say how she and Her Majesty's Government react to the call of the leader of the movement for freedom in Zimbabwe that the moment has now come for United Nations' intervention to be actively considered?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, there has been a slight increase in that sum. It now rests at some £120,000. As to the issue about the asset freeze, we are doing all we can to identify where those assets are. Noble Lords will know that if individuals and institutions want to move money around and to hide that money it is very difficult to find it. But we shall continue to put pressure where we can.
I think that the noble Lord must have been talking about the Movement for Democratic Change led by Morgan Tsvangirai. It is important for us to recognise and remember that the UN is already involved. The
UN is trying to cope, through the World Food Programme, with the significant humanitarian crisis in Zimbabwe.The United Nations Development Programmes (UNDPs) has been involved in the land reform process. It ruled earlier this year that that process was unsustainable.
Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General, has made some very strong comments already about the situation in Zimbabwe. We shall continue to engage with the UN on these matters.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, following the Minister's first Answer to my noble friend Lord Astor on the first Question, and in the light of the Prime Minister's comments last year that he would make Africa a major personal priority and a priority for the Labour Party, can the Minister tell us why he did not raise the issue of Zimbabwe in Johannesburg?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I presume the noble Baroness refers to my right honourable friend's statement to the World Summit on Sustainable Development. In Johannesburg my right honourable friend had a number of meetings in the margins of the summit meeting at which he discussed a range of issues affecting Africa.
We attended the World Summit on Sustainable Development because we had important things to say about sustainable development and about development and environmental issues.. This was a major UN conference which brought together what had been discussed in Doha, Monterrey and Kananaskis. For us to focus on one country when we had significant things to say about the sustainable development agenda would have reflected very poorly on this country.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page