| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Stern: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minster for giving way. Since his time is nearly up and he has not answered any of my questions, perhaps I may ask him if he intends to or whether he proposes to write to me about them.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I think it is important that the response in general covers the issues that have been raised. That is why I have dealt with the issues in the way that I have. I have made a careful note of the questions that I have been asked, and they deserve a fuller response than I could possibly make in 12 minutes of summarising. This is an important debate, and the issues that have been raised in it are wide ranging and go further than the individual case. I hope that the noble Baroness will accept that I will
put together a full response to the different questions and points. I could not have covered them all this evening.In conclusion, the future strategy will encompass specific suicide prevention strategy for juveniles. It is important that is understood. The noble Viscount, Lord Bridgeman, made the point about Paul Goggins's statement yesterday, and I want to make it clear that that strategy is most important. This has been a useful discussion and debate in your Lordships' House. It is sad that it has been occasioned by such a tragic case. I hope that lessons can be learned, certainly from the outcome of the inquest that is to start shortly. No doubt the Minister—because of the high profile that this case has achieved, the important representations that have been made to him, and this debate—will follow the outcome of that inquest very carefully indeed.
Finally, it is time for us simply to reflect on this and express our deepest sympathy to the family and all those involved—
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, before the Minister sits down, did he mention whether a large number of witnesses will be available to the coroner? Does this include those people who were responsible for sentencing? That seems to be outside the scope of the coroner. Perhaps he could look into it, rather than reply to me now. I will appreciate the reply, so that I can get in touch with the coroner.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not have the response to that question to hand. It is an important question, like the other questions raised. I will make sure that the noble Lord, and other noble Lords involved in this debate, get a response.
- House adjourned at twenty-two minutes past eight o'clock.
Written Statements
Thursday 1 April 2004
Cyprus
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean): I would like to inform the House of developments in relation to Cyprus.
Following the breakdown of settlement negotiations in The Hague in March 2003, the UN Secretary-General made a report to the Security Council. In this report Kofi Annan announced that his proposal for a comprehensive Cyprus settlement (the Annan plan) remained on the table. However, he added that he did not propose to take any further initiatives unless and until he was given solid reason to believe that the necessary political will existed for a successful outcome.
The Secretary-General went on to say that he believed it would be a great step backward if the plan were simply to wither away. He believed that a solution on the basis of the plan could be achieved only if there was an unequivocally stated preparedness on the part of the leaders of both sides, fully and determinedly backed at the highest level in both motherlands, to commit themselves: (a) to finalise the plan (without reopening its basic principles or essential trade-offs) by a specific date with United Nations assistance; and (b) to put it to separate simultaneous referendums as provided for in the plan on a date certain soon thereafter.
The United Kingdom shared this approach and continued to work with its EU and US partners in support of UN efforts to keep the plan on the table and to encourage the parties to demonstrate the necessary political will to re-engage.
The elections in north Cyprus on 14 December 2003 marked a turning point. The Turkish Cypriots voiced their resounding support for the pro-settlement, pro-EU parties and in doing so gave popular expression to a growing desire from the Turkish Cypriot community to work for an early settlement of the Cyprus problem in order to allow a reunited Cyprus to join the EU on 1 May 2004. Encouraged by the attitude of the Turkish Cypriots and aware of the potential positive impact a Cyprus settlement would have on its own EU aspirations, the AKP government in Ankara led by Prime Minister Erdogan signalled its own willingness to re-engage and work constructively for a settlement.
The parties (the Greek and Turkish Cypriots, Greece and Turkey) were therefore invited to New York by the Secretary-General on 4 February 2004 in order to resume negotiations towards a settlement on the basis of the Annan plan. On 13 February, following an initial round of discussions, the Secretary-General announced that the parties had
agreed to resume talks on the basis of the Annan plan and had committed themselves to a three-phase process leading to a finalised plan being submitted to simultaneous, separate referendums on 24 April.The 13 February agreement was a landmark achievement. The parties had committed themselves to a strict timetable and a negotiation process which led inexorably towards simultaneous referendums on a pre-determined date on the basis of a settlement plan which, absent agreement between the parties (including, in the final stage, Greece and Turkey) would be finalised by the Secretary-General himself.
Negotiations between the two sides resumed in Cyprus on 19 February. In parallel to the main political level negotiations between the leaders of the two communities, technical committees started to work through the whole range of laws and administrative texts and practical arrangements necessary to give effect to the new state of affairs.
During this phase of the negotiations, our High Commissioner in Nicosia informed the UN that the UK's earlier offer to the UN of giving up roughly half of the territory of the Sovereign Base areas in Cyprus remained valid, subject to some small changes in the map. The land to be ceded to the United Cyprus Republic would not in any way compromise the operational capabilities of the bases themselves. The UN confirmed that the UK's offer would be very valuable in taking forward the adjustments to the territory of the two new constituent states. The UK's offer has been incorporated in the UN's map for the new Cyprus.
On 24 March, the negotiations moved to Buergenstock, Switzerland, where the UN and the parties were joined by Greece and Turkey in a final push for a negotiated settlement agreed between the parties themselves. The UK attended in its capacity as a guarantor power in order to assist the efforts of the UN Secretary-General's good offices mission. The European Commissioner for Enlargement, Gunter Verheugen, also attended for the final days.
On 29 March the Secretary-General presented the parties with a revised plan. This revision was produced following extensive consultation and aimed to strike a balanced compromise, building on the earlier version of the Annan plan which had been presented to the parties in February 2003, and taking subsequent developments and both sides' views carefully into account. Following a further final round of meetings between the Secretary-General, the parties and Greece and Turkey, Kofi Annan called the parties together late on 31 March. Announcing that the time for negotiation and consultation was over, and that the time for decision and action had arrived, the Secretary-General presented the parties and the guarantor powers (Greece, Turkey and the United Kingdom) with his finalised plan—Annan IV—for a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem.
In his remarks, Kofi Annan said that the plan was inevitably a compromise. It did not satisfy everyone's demands. But he believed that it met the core interests, and addressed the key concerns, of people on both sides. He added that the choice was not between the plan and some other mythical solution. In reality, the choice was between the settlement on offer or no settlement at all. The Government share this view.
No one is under any illusion about what remains to be done. No one is saying that reunification will be easy. But the plan is balanced and fair, and offers all Cypriots the chance of a better future as citizens of a United Cyprus Republic within the European Union. The Government believe strongly that this is a chance which must not be squandered.
The final decision will now be taken by the Cypriots themselves in separate, simultaneous referendums to be held on 24 April.
Deepcut: Surrey Police Final Report
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Bach): My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Defence (Mr Adam Ingram) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
On 4 March 2004 the Chief Constable of Surrey Police published his final report following the completion of the investigation into the deaths of Privates Sean Benton, Cheryl James, Geoff Gray and James Collinson at Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut between 1995 and 2002. At the Chief Constable's request I placed copies of the report in the Libraries of both Houses on the same day.
In conducting background research for their report Surrey Police drew considerably on information provided by the Army. I recognise the interest of right honourable and honourable Members in these cases and am today arranging for a number of documents mentioned specifically in the report to be placed in the Library of the House shortly.
These documents have, where appropriate, been expurgated to remove security-sensitive material and references to third parties.
We continue to give the Chief Constable's recommendations careful consideration. I expect to make a further announcement after the Easter Recess.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page