24 May 2007 : Column 757

House of Lords

Thursday, 24 May 2007.

The House met at eleven o’clock: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.

Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Chester.

Royal Assent

The Lord Speaker (Baroness Hayman): My Lords, I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that the Queen has signified her Royal Assent to the following Act:

Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007.

Criminal Justice: Offender Management

11.06 am

Lord Northbourne asked Her Majesty’s Government:

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): My Lords, offender management has been implemented for offenders under probation supervision in the community. It has also been implemented for prisoners serving determinate custodial sentences of 12 months or more who are prolific or other priority offenders, or who have been assessed as presenting a high or very high risk of serious harm. Offender management is planned to be extended to a further group of prisoners later this year.

Lord Northbourne: My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that basic information about what has been achieved. During the debates on the Offender Management Bill we have heard of exciting progress and plans, but always in relation to end-to-end management of offenders. The noble Baroness would probably agree with me that the ultimate objective must be the lasting reform of offenders and my concern is that that will not be achieved without end-to-end supervision as well. It is hard to tread the stony path from drug addiction, for example, or alcohol addiction without the help of someone who cares, or appears to care, for your welfare.

Noble Lords: Question!

Lord Northbourne: My Lords, I should be grateful if the Minister would tell the House what the Government’s plans are for the support of prisoners.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I have read with great interest the contributions of the noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, in the debates, and I know he is concerned that the purpose of all this should be that we have reform of offenders and that recidivism rates drop substantially. I completely support him on that. We are seeking to develop a relationship with the offender manager that takes offenders through their sentences and beyond, to the point where the support and advice they get achieves that objective. As noble Lords will know, in the Offender Management Bill we are bringing in other organisations to enable us to work together in real partnership. I pay tribute to the many organisations that do sterling work in supporting those with drug or alcohol problems and to those who can offer training and work opportunities.

Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, in the rollout of offender management, are the Government giving specific attention to the recommendations of the Corston report on the needs of women offenders with regard to smaller, locally based units so that families can stay together and be less damaged and rehabilitation becomes more likely?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I pay tribute to my noble friend Lady Corston for the work she did on that report. I know my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor is very interested that we explore all the issues raised by that report, which I am sure would find great support in your Lordships’ House.

Baroness Linklater of Butterstone: My Lords, what importance do the Minister and her department attach to the role of the Prison Service in end-to-end management? What consultations or discussions has she had with the Prison Service in the run-up to the drafting of the Bill? I ask this because until the third day in Committee there was no mention of the Prison Service.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I did not have any consultations in the run-up to the Bill because of course the Ministry of Justice did not exist at that time. I intend to visit a prison next week. Before I became a Minister, as noble Lords may know, I was involved in a project to establish training and support for prisons in the private sector, so I have some understanding of the issues. The importance of the Prison Service should never be underestimated; it is crucial in offender management. The role of the prison governor in understanding and knowing the offenders in his care is important too. The relationship between the prison and the offender manager is of great importance.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, now that the Ministry of Justice has taken over control of offender management from the Home Office, how much has been allocated from the Home Office budget to be transferred to the Ministry of Justice?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I do not have the precise figures. I shall write to the noble Baroness with the details and put a copy in the Library.

Lord Lloyd of Berwick: My Lords, given the criticism of the Lord Chief Justice in his recent letter of 12 April, do the Government now regret the use of the phrase “seamless management of offenders through the courts” by the new Ministry of Justice? Is there not now a clear case for an inquiry, as called for by the Lord Chief Justice in his recent evidence to the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the House of Commons, before relationships between the Government and the judiciary deteriorate still further?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the Question is about offender management and the noble and learned Lord’s question extends beyond that. However, the importance of the Ministry of Justice should not be underestimated; I value the Lord Chief Justice very highly and am sure that we will be able to reach satisfactory conclusions in our deliberations with him. The critical nature of these questions is how to ensure that we tackle issues of reoffending and that those who enter the process of end-to-end offender management have the opportunities that will keep them out of prison and enable them to carry on with fulfilling lives.

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, will the Minister update the House on the status of the Libra IT project in so far as it relates to offender management?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I cannot update the noble Earl because I do not know enough about the project at this point in my career in the Ministry of Justice. I shall write to him and put a copy in the Library. I might have guessed that the noble Earl would ask me something about IT—we have had many discussions on it, and I know of his expertise in that area.

Baroness Trumpington: My Lords, does end-to-end offender management include education and the improvement of education in prisons for prisoners?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the noble Baroness rightly raises the need to make sure that those in prisons receive high-quality education. Noble Lords will know better than I the problems of illiteracy and levels of numeracy in prisons. It is very important that education in prisons is tackled. As one of the main purposes of our efforts to get offenders into work requires us to consider their educational attainment and achievements, it is very important to do so.

Baroness Stern: My Lords, the Minister of Justice gave those who are working on the Offender Management Bill some very helpful information last week, from which we learnt that 40 per cent of offender managers are not fully trained probation officers and that some offender managers will have caseloads of 100 people. Is the Minister satisfied that this is likely to provide us with a quality service?

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the issue of caseload is very important. My understanding is that it varies from between fewer than 20 to more than 80, and the noble Baroness has mentioned the highest figure. That depends on the amount of input that is required for the individual offender.

Burma: Karen

11.13 am

Baroness Cox asked Her Majesty’s Government:

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): My Lords, the United Kingdom has been in the forefront of international efforts to highlight human rights abuses, including the attacks on civilians in conflict areas. On 23 April, European Union Foreign Ministers issued a statement calling for an end to the military campaign. We intend to set out our concerns directly to the Burmese Foreign Minister at the Asia-Europe meeting of Foreign Ministers in Hamburg next week.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for that encouraging and sympathetic response. Is he aware that, in the past year alone, 27,000 civilians in Karen state and a further 59,000 in other states in eastern Burma have been displaced from their villages by SPDC military offensives and are now hiding in the jungle, living and dying in appalling conditions as internally displaced peoples? Will Her Majesty’s Government consider taking further initiatives to instigate proceedings to bring the SPDC regime to account for crimes against humanity?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, we will consider any new initiatives, including those that the noble Baroness has just identified, that would help us to promote reform and positive change and bring an end to human rights abuses. This is a continuing crisis for the civilians who were caught up in recent fighting between rival armed ethnic groups, which has added to the alarming number of displaced people already affected by the offensives of the Burmese army. The Government give £1.8 million to the Thailand Burma Border Consortium, which provides humanitarian aid to internally displaced people and refugees, and we are spending £8 million per annum in Burma on fighting HIV, TB and malaria. We need a comprehensive policy across these fronts.

Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, is right to keep bringing this issue before us. Are there not 7 million Karen people in Burma, and another 400,000 in Thailand, and have they not been subjected steadily to the most appalling atrocities, being rounded up, shot down and slaughtered in manners reminiscent of the Nazi era? Are not 40 per cent of them Christians? Are they not a people to whom we in Britain owe a considerable debt, since they supported us against our enemies during the Second World War? Will the Minister assure us that their plight and our efforts to carry on with the initiatives that he described are continually to the forefront in his department and in government policy? We need to maintain our reputation for looking after our friends in the world—a reputation that is unfortunately in tatters in other parts of the world at the moment.

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I do not accept the last element of what the noble Lord said, but I completely agree with the rest. This is an obligation on us, and we will continue to meet it. It is a matter that has engaged us as Ministers in making representations. We should not cease to take the opportunities that we have. We are talking about a terrible regime, although I add, without by any means trying to mitigate the terror that it inflicts, that inter-ethnic fighting is making the whole problem worse.

Lord Avebury: My Lords, I congratulate the Government on the measures that they have taken to persuade the Government of Burma to live up to their requirements, but is not the problem that ASEAN members have not joined in? At their recent meeting in Manila, the question of Burma was not even on the agenda. While I congratulate the Government of Thailand on playing host to the large number of refugees mentioned by the Minister, would it not bring home to ASEAN its responsibilities if UNHCR apportioned the costs of supporting these refugees to the neighbouring states and sent them a bill?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I am not sure that the United Nations has a mechanism for increasing the charges to particular groups of countries, but I am completely at one with the noble Lord about the responsibilities of ASEAN. That is one of the reasons why my right honourable friend Ian McCartney, I and others have made representations to those nations, bilaterally and to them as a group. I am glad to say that the European Union has been doing so, too, in relation to them as a group. It is without question a scar on ASEAN’s performance.

Lord Clarke of Hampstead: My Lords, the Minister referred in his initial Answer to a number of initiatives. Will he consider providing support and assistance, and funding if necessary, for an international independent inquiry into what is going on and the violation of human rights? I consider what is going on to be a form of genocide, which should be a matter for investigation by an international inquiry, too.

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I can confirm that discussions about what form of crime against humanity this is are proceeding in the international fora. My priority would be to ensure that Ibrahim Gambari, who represented the previous Secretary-General in Burma in November of last year, resumes his efforts now that he has been reappointed by Ban Ki-Moon. It may be that an inquiry should come along in due course, but I am eager to see the most senior people in the United Nations directly involved in trying to find a solution in Burma. It would be well worth our adding our weight to that effort.

Lord Alton of Liverpool: My Lords, is the Minister aware that Sunday will be the 17th anniversary of the 1990 elections in Burma, when the National League for Democracy won more than 80 per cent of the seats? It will also be the day, one year on, when the extension of the house arrest order on Aung San Suu Kyi will expire. Will he take this opportunity to support the statement made recently by the noble Baroness, Lady Thatcher, and other former heads of government, calling for her release? Will he also tell us why the European Union common position was not recently strengthened when this matter was discussed, including the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, about the plight of the Karen people?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I do not think that there is any question about the level of support in the European Union. I appreciate the efforts being made by the noble Baroness, Lady Thatcher. However, rather than speaking for her—she has never needed us to do that at any time in her history—perhaps I can say on behalf of the Government that I unreservedly condemn the detention of the democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. I sincerely hope that her house arrest will not be extended this weekend. That point will be made to the Burmese Government. She should be released, as should all other political prisoners. The Burmese Government will be in no doubt of our position as this unfortunate anniversary comes up.

Zimbabwe: UN Commission on Sustainable Development

11.21 am

Lord Blaker asked Her Majesty’s Government:

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): My Lords, the Minister of State for Climate Change and the Environment and I have already condemned publicly the decision to appoint Zimbabwe as the chair of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. The United Kingdom, with 20 other EU and like-minded states that are members of the commission, voted against Francis Nhema’s candidacy. On behalf of all EU member states, including the United Kingdom, the EU presidency then made a statement expressing deep concern that a representative from Zimbabwe should become chair. It will undoubtedly damage the commission’s work and credibility.

Lord Blaker: My Lords, noble Lords will be glad to hear what the Minister said. However, is not the farcical situation described in the Question the result of the fact that certain African countries are determined to vote for Mugabe on any motion, whatever the question may be? If it is suggested that the remedy for this situation is to be found in the mandate recently given to President Mbeki of South Africa by the SADC countries to facilitate dialogue between the two sides in Zimbabwe, should not the following two points be borne in mind? President Mbeki regards his appointment as meaning that he will choose who will represent each side in negotiations; and neither side will be allowed to report back to its own leaders what is happening in the negotiations. The MDC would also have to accept that President Mugabe was correctly elected as the president of Zimbabwe. Should not this situation be discussed by the G8 when it meets in a couple of weeks’ time, when the item of Africa will be on the agenda and African leaders will be attending?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, it is very likely that the G8 will look at these matters, and it is as yet a little early to draw any conclusions about how President Mbeki’s mission will be conducted. Others in SADC have a rather more robust view on what is needed than the view that has just been described. In general, it is worth noting that in the recent election, which we have deplored, there were groups, and not only of African states, that believed that nobody should interfere with the decisions of regional groupings on who should be elected, because it had not been done in the past. I differ from that view. Some people plainly cannot add to any realistic or credible discussion because their own record and that of their country is beyond the pale.

Lord Anderson of Swansea: My Lords, this is not the first time that the principle of Buggins’s turn adopted by the African countries has led to absurdities. One thinks of Libya going into the chair of the United Nations human rights organisation and the President of Sudan almost becoming president of the African Union. Can we not make clear to our friends in Africa that they are devaluing themselves and international organisations by this practice? But are we not in danger ourselves of being accused of hypocrisy if we allow the EU-Africa summit in December under the Portuguese presidency to issue an invitation to President Mugabe?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, on the last point, just for clarity, there is no change in our position: people who are on the list of those not allowed to travel to the EU remain on that list. On the more general question, that point is consistently made in diplomatic discussions with African nations and it has a real impact. President al-Bashir has quite rightly not been elected as chairman of the African Union. That resulted from all the work that was done in Africa by friends in Africa, by the European Union and by many in the United Nations. Such an unfortunate election should not be taken as the norm or as something that we would not resist in future.

Lord Avebury: My Lords, was not Francis Nhema, the Environment Minister appointed to the commission mentioned by the Minister, also a Minister at the time of Operation Murambatsvina, when 700,000 people were thrown out of their homes and lost their livelihoods? Has the noble Lord seen the report by the Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions which declares that this was a crime against humanity justiciable by the International Criminal Court? On the basis of its legal opinion and the report made by the UN envoy, Anna Tibaijuka, would it be possible for the International Criminal Court to issue indictments against this gentleman?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, let us start with a slightly more practical point: he is also on the banned list. That is one of the reasons why, in my view, he will be incapable of properly fulfilling the responsibilities of the post to which he has just been elected. Some people probably should be indicted, and he may well be one of them, but no Government can simply indict people whom individual NGOs suddenly decide should be indicted. The list of indictees would be very extensive and probably beyond the scope of any Government.

Lord Luce: My Lords, does the Minister agree that Mugabe has betrayed his own country and blamed all his problems on colonialism, which is long past? African leaders would best serve their own people on the continent by turning and following the inspired leadership of Mandela who, when President of the Republic of South Africa, always put the interests of his country first.

Lord Triesman: Absolutely, my Lords. If we had that kind of ethical standard, these problems would not arise in the way in which we have described them.

Baroness Park of Monmouth: My Lords, I have two questions. First, I see that Zimbabwe will also be on the executive of the African Development Bank. It is also the vice-chairman of COMESA. Will any G8 funds be used to support those enterprises, which might be at risk from being dealt with, I am sorry to say, by the Zimbabwean Government? Secondly, can we ensure that, now that the United Nations has appointed Zimbabwe to a post, the latter will let in UN inquirers and special representatives such as Anna Tibaijuka to report on the internal situation in that country, which so far Mugabe has refused to allow?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I do not think that there is any chance that Robert Mugabe will decide to let in further observers, nor do I think that any conditions imposed on him are likely to change his view on that. International funds go into multinational institutions where, generally speaking, they are used for policies that apply right across Africa. I hope that the poverty programmes run by the bank, which reach the poorest people on the continent, will not be impeded simply because Africans have not stopped Robert Mugabe and his cohort from occupying these positions.

Lord Hughes of Woodside: My Lords—

The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord Rooker): My Lords, I am sorry, but we have run into the 24th minute. We must allow time for the final Question.


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page