| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Belfast Agreement: Cross-Border Bodies
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 9 December (WA 1) which indicated that there are no pension provisions currently for chief executives of cross-border bodies, whether the Comptroller and Auditor-General for Northern Ireland has commented on this issue; and, if not, why not.[HL703]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Comptroller and Auditor-General for Northern Ireland (C&AG(NI)) has not reported on this to date.
The C&AG(NI) is an independent Officer of Parliament and Ministers cannot therefore direct his work.
Food Safety Promotion Board
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on the 12 December (WA 48) concerning the Food Safety Promotion Board, when the North/South Ministerial Council agreed that the board's foreword should be in only English and Irish.[HL803]
Lord Williams of Mostyn: The North/South Ministerial Council has not made any decision on the languages to be used in the foreword to the Food Safety Promotion Board's annual report.
Aid to Post-conflict Countries
Lord Moynihan asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether the figures contained in CARE Afghanistan's report published on 30 September that in the four recent post-conflict settings, of Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda and East Timor, international donors spent an average of 250 dollars per person
in aid, while in Afghanistan they have pledged
75 dollars per person for 2002 and 42 dollars per person per year over five years.[HL350]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos): I do not dispute the accuracy of the calculations that have been made by CARE in its report but I would caution against drawing conclusions based solely upon this information. Comparisons between aid levels for Afghanistan and other post-conflict countries can be misleading. In 2002, the figure for Afghanistan is around 80 dollars per capita. One has to take purchasing power into account as well as economies of scale. The purchasing power of 1 dollar in Afghanistan is clearly a lot higher than in the Balkans; and Afghanistan is a much bigger country. Support to post-conflict countries should be based on an assessment of needs, not simple comparisons.
Reproductive Health: DfID Funding for International Organisations
Baroness Masham of Ilton asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How much the Department for International Development gave in each of the past five years to (a) Marie Stopes International; (b) International Planned Parenthood Federation; (c) British Pregnancy Advisory Service; (d) Pregnancy Advisory Service; (e) United Nations Population Fund; and (f) Family Planning Association (United Kingdom) for the purposes of abortion;[HL477]
How much the Department for International Development gave in each of the past five years to (a) Marie Stopes International; (b) International
- Planned Parenthood Federation; (c) British Pregnancy Advisory Service; (d) Pregnancy Advisory Service; (e) United Nations Population Fund; and (f) Family Planning Association (United Kingdom) for the purposes of family planning;[HL478]
How much the Department for International Development gave in each of the past five years to (a) Marie Stopes International; (b) International Planned Parenthood Federation; (c) British Pregnancy Advisory Service; (d) Pregnancy Advisory Service; (e) United Nations Population Fund; and (f) Family Planning Association (United Kingdom) for the purposes of any other reproductive health services other than abortion or family planning; and[HL479]
What were the total grants the Department for International Development gave in each of the past five years to (a) Marie Stopes International; (b) International Planned Parenthood Federation; (c) British Pregnancy Advisory Service; (d) Pregnancy Advisory Service; (e) United Nations Population Fund; and (f) Family Planning Association (United Kingdom).[HL480]
Baroness Amos: Data are not held centrally in the format requested. However, DfID supports a number of international sexual and reproductive health organisations that share our aim of reducing poverty and providing services and choice to poor people in accordance with the principles agreed at the UN Conference on Population and Development. All our funding supports the goal of universal access to reproductive health and is central to attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) specifically those related to maternal mortality, HIV/AIDS and child mortality. Without access to high quality reproductive health services and care, it is most unlikely that progress will be achieved in meeting the health MDGs. We will continue to support international organisations and NGOs which make an effective contribution to these goals, and of course the efforts of governments seeking to improve people's access to reproductive health services.
DfID funding to the organisations referred to is as follows:
| 1997–98 | 1998–99 | 1999–2000 | 2000–01 | 2001–02 | |
| Organisation | £000s | £000s | £000s | £000s | £000s |
| Marie Stopes International | 3,103 | 4,235 | 4,945 | 5,132 | 2,554 |
| International Planned Parenthood Federation | 5,850 | 5,500 | 5,500 | 5,500 | 4,500 |
| United Nations Population Fund | 11,500 | 13,120 | 15,000 | 40,050 | 24,213 |
DfID has not provided financial support to the British Pregnancy Advisory Service, Pregnancy Advisory Service or Family Planning Association (UK).
Baroness Masham of Ilton asked Her Majesty's Government:
What is their current policy towards providing funds to Marie Stopes International.[HL481]
7 Jan 2003 : Column WA176
Baroness Amos: DfID's funding policy to any non-profit making organisation or network, including Marie Stopes International, is based on its ability to effectively contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals; and to DfID's overall objective, the eradication of poverty.
Baroness Masham of Ilton asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What are the bilateral funding commitments of the Department for International Development to reproductive health services by country for the year 2001–02.[HL536]
Baroness Amos: The information requested is set out in the table below: Reproductive Health 2001–02 Commitments
| Country | Principal(1) | Significant(1) | £ thousands Total |
| Bangladesh | 940 | 6,000 | 6,940 |
| Ethiopia | — | 300 | 300 |
| Ghana | — | 25,000 | 25,000 |
| India | — | 500 | 500 |
| Kenya | — | 3,500 | 3,500 |
| Latin America regional(2) | 249 | — | 249 |
| Malawi | — | 250 | 250 |
| Montserrat | — | 539 | 539 |
| Mozambique | — | 11,339 | 11,339 |
| Nigeria | 159 | — | 159 |
| Non specific country(3) | 16,558 | 140,507 | 157,065 |
| Pakistan | 210 | 3,200 | 3,410 |
| Peru | 7,500 | — | 7,500 |
| South Africa, Republic of | — | 1,982 | 1,982 |
| Sudan | — | 220 | 220 |
| Tanzania | — | 35,250 | 35,250 |
| Uganda | — | 750 | 750 |
| Zimbabwe | 6,800 | 6,000 | 12,800 |
| Total | 32,416 | 235,337 | 267,753 |
(1) Prinicipal objectives are those which are fundamental to the design of the project or programme, without which it would not be undertaken. Significant objectives are those which, although important, are not one of the primary reasons for undertaking activities.
(2) Regional project on reducing the incidence of HIV/AIDS.
(3) Approximately £140 million of the significant commitment relates to the Global Health Fund.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
Baroness Amos: As we have repeatedly made clear, DfID supports HIV/AIDS prevention and care and UNFPA productive health programmes in China. Marie Stopes International (MSI) is assisting in the delivery of both of these. Under these programmes neither DfID nor MSI are supporting any coercive family planning practices in China. All UK assistance for reproductive health programmes is provided in support of the principles of free and informed choices set out at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994 and reaffirmed at the Cairo plus 5 meeting in New York in 1999.
Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they are aware of any involvement by Marie Stopes International in the Chinese one-child policy.[HL532]
In the light of China's now below-replacement fertility rate and ageing population, whether they
7 Jan 2003 : Column WA178
- will cease supporting population growth containment in China.[HL537]
Baroness Amos: UK assistance for reproductive health programmes in China, as elsewhere, is provided in support of the principles of free and informed choices set out at the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo in 1994, and reaffirmed at the Cairo plus 5 meeting in New York in 1999. We do not support population growth containment and have no plans to withdraw our support for the ICPD principles.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page