| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
G8 Summit: Government's Objectives
Lord Judd asked Her Majesty's Government:
- With particular reference to their commitment to NePAD (the New Partnership for Africa's Development), what will be their specific objectives at the G8 Summit in June 2003 with reference to each of the following:
(a) the end of dumping by the industrialised world in the poor world;
(b) the end of subsidies for goods exported by the industrialised world to the poor world; and
(c) the elimination of tariff escalation by industrialised countries, including the European Union, on processed goods exported by the poor countries of the world.[HL3054]
The Secretary of State for International Development (Baroness Amos): In the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the draft modalities of the agriculture negotiations put forward by the chairman of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture, Stuart Harbinson, include specific proposals on:
The UK objectives for the G8 summit included obtaining G8 commitment to making real progress in the WTO negotiations, particularly but not only to meet the concerns of African countries. These concerns include commitment to establishing fair rules for special and differential treatment (the "development box"), ensuring real reductions in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) agricultural subsidies and improving market access for developing country agricultural products. UK objectives more specific to Africa were to obtain G8 commitment to improving and harmonising preferential access schemes for African products, expanding the integrated framework for trade-related capacity building to low-income Africa countries, and obtaining agreement on a meaningful African trade initiative based on the French proposals.
The G8 agreed a statement on co-operative action on trade, which emphasises the importance of continuing to strengthen the multilateral system, and delivering the Doha Development Agenda. G8 leaders reiterated their commitment to the objective of duty-free quota-free market access for products originating from least developed countries and to improve the effectiveness and ease of use of their respective trade preference programmes, but no commitments were made on addressing export subsidies.
Lord Judd asked Her Majesty's Government:
(1) disciplines for food aid and export credits as well as export subsidies specifically to address the issue of dumping;
(2) the structure and targets for reductions in domestic support; and
(3) a tariff reduction formula, which also aims at tackling tariff peaks and tariff escalation.
Also, the European Commission's agriculture proposals to the WTO include provisions to:
(1) reduce export subsidies by 45 per cent;
(2) cut trade-distorting domestic support by 55 per cent; and
(3) reduce tariffs by 36 per cent.
The Commission's proposal specifically mentions the need to tackle tariff escalation.
With particular reference to their commitment to NEPAD (the New Partnership for Africa's Development), what will be their specific objectives at the G8 Summit in June 2003 with reference to each of the following:
5 Jun 2003 : Column WA185
(a) quota and tariff-free exports of agricultural produce and agriculture-related goods to the
- industrialised world including the European Union;
(b) a "development box" within the World Trade Organisation Agreement on Agriculture;
(c) the proposals by President Chirac for a moratorium on subsidies on all goods exported to Africa during current trade negotiations; and;
(d) implementation of the ICO (International Coffee Organisation) Coffee Rescue Plan.[HL3055]
Baroness Amos: UK objectives for the G8 Summit included obtaining G8 commitment to making real progress on the African concerns at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations. These concerns include commitment to establishing fair rules for special and differential treatment (the "development box"), ensuring real reductions in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) agricultural subsidies and improving market access for developing country agricultural products. UK objectives more specific to Africa were to obtain G8 commitment to improving and harmonising preferential access schemes for African products, expanding the integrated framework for trade-related capacity building to low-income Africa countries, and obtaining agreement on a meaningful African trade initiative based on the French proposals. The UK had no specific objective for the G8 meeting for the International Coffee Organisation (ICO) rescue plan but endorses the ICO quality improvement programme.
The G8 agreed a statement on co-operative action on trade, which emphasises the importance of continuing to strengthen the multilateral system, and delivering the Doha Development Agenda including through decisions at Cancun. Specific actions identified are: to achieve further substantial opening of trade in particular in areas of interest to developing countries; to strengthen WTO rules and disciplines; to reach a solution on access to medicines for developing countries; to help with capacity building for trade; and to improve preferences for poor countries. There was limited progress on an African trade initiative following US objections to the proposed export subsidy moratorium proposed. Two of the original French proposals were referred to in the implementation report by Africa personal representatives to leaders on the G8 African Action Plan, in which G8 leaders reiterated commitment to the objective of duty-free quota-free market access for products originating from least developed countries and to improve the effectiveness and ease of use of their respective trade preference programmes. They welcomed the efforts underway by the World Bank Group to examine the potential for effective market-based mechanisms to help to mitigate weather and commodity shocks.
Lord Carter asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Minister of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Lord Rooker): The Leader of the House of Commons announced today at Business Questions our intention to recommit the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill to Standing Committee.
We have taken this decision to enable us to bring forward provisions which will end the Crown's immunity from planning control, subject to certain safeguards. Given the substantive nature of the proposed amendments, I think it is important that the House of Commons is given the opportunity to debate these new provisions fully before the Bill resumes its remaining stages.
We will also be seeking to introduce further provisions which will help to implement the sustainable communities agenda.
Clearly this will mean that the Bill will not be able to complete its remaining stages in this Session. Motions have therefore also been tabled today to allow the Bill to be carried over into the next parliamentary session. We will be seeking to ensure that the Bill reaches the statute book as soon as possible in the next Session to lessen the impact of this slight delay.
We propose that the provisions relating to Crown development extend beyond England and Wales, which would involve the Scottish Executive pursuing a Sewel Motion in the Scottish Parliament. We are, of course, discussing this with the Scottish Executive, which has been kept informed of our proposals.
The intention to carry over the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill into the next Session does not signify any lessening in our commitment to reforming the planning system.
Copies of a short progress report covering the large number of workstreams being taken forward as part of this commitment are available in the Libraries of the House. The note will also be available on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website www.odpm.gov.uk.
Lord Dubs asked Her Majesty's Government:
Lord Rooker: In my view the provisions of the Fire Services Bill are compatible with the convention rights.
The Earl of Northesk asked Her Majesty's Government:
In respect of the intention of the Office of the e-Envoy to charge government departments for its services, whether they can explain the reported statement from the OeE that "the costs should be [invoiced to] where the savings are made". [HL2998]
The Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Lord Macdonald of Tradeston): The Knowledge Network project within the Office of the e-Envoy was set up with funding from the Capital Modernisation Fund (CMF) to develop the infrastructure and initial applications and business systems to support inter-departmental working. The CMF funding for the project has now expired.
The Knowledge Network is now a successful ongoing service to government departments, with 32 departments and agencies using the infrastructure. As the main development stage is complete, it is in accordance with general government policy that the costs should be met by those benefiting from the service, hence the intention to introduce charges on user departments. The Office of the e-Envoy (OeE) is discussing details with users at the moment but charges are not expected to exceed £150,000 per year even for the major departmental users.
The OeE is also responsible for delivering two other major infrastructure developments, the UKOnline portal and the Government Gateway. Both projects are still receiving funding from the CMF. No decisions have yet been taken about moving these services on to a charging basis.
What is the latest position as regards the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill.[HL3222]
Whether the provisions of the Fire Services Bill are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.[HL3226]
What are the projected costs to government departments of the Office of the e-Envoy charges for improvements to e-government services when the Capital Modernisation Fund (CMF) comes to an end in September; and[HL2997]
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page