| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Barristers and Solicitors (Taxation)
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what research he has commissioned into the effect that the proposed removal of the cash basis income tax system for barristers and self-employed solicitors will have upon (i) the financial viability of the Bar and solicitors' profession, (ii) individuals in legal practice and (iii) the public's access to justice; and if he will publish it. [25763]
Dawn Primarolo
[holding answer 27 January 1998] The Inland Revenue issued a press release on 22 December 1997 inviting comments on the proposal to withdraw the cash basis practices available to professional businesses. The responses will enable the Government to identify those affected and allow them to explain the effect of the proposal. The responses received will then be considered as in any consultative exercise.
28 Jan 1998 : Column: 269
If anyone wishes to make representations and has not already done so, these should be sent not later than 14 February 1998 to: Crispin Taylor, Inland Revenue, Business Profits Division, Room 439, 22 Kingsway, London WC2B 6NR.
Mr. Caplin:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will ensure that pre-paid funerals are subject to regulation by the new Financial Services Authority.[24800]
Mr. Nigel Griffiths
[holding answer 21 January 1998]: The Government plan to ensure that consumers who purchased their funerals in advance are adequately protected. I am urgently considering how this can best be achieved.
International Criminal Court
Ms Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress of the Preparatory Committee of the United Nations General Assembly on the establishment of an International Criminal Court, indicating whether Her Majesty's Government will provide financial support to help create such an institution. [25525]
Mr. Tony Lloyd: The December 1997 session of the Preparatory Committee made good progress on negotiating a Statute for the International Criminal Court. However, many issues have yet to be resolved. At the next session in March and at the Diplomatic Conference in June-July we will work actively to advance the negotiations so that a Treaty can be signed at the end of the Conference. Through the EU we have contributed funds to assist Governments of Least Developed Countries to participate in the Conference.
South Africa
Mr. Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on British relations with South Africa. [25645]
Mr. Tony Lloyd: The relationship thrives on many levels. The UK is South Africa's largest trading partner; there are close political links across a wide range of issues; we have a major development programme in South Africa; and cultural and sporting ties abound and have expanded since the 1994 changes. Recent highlights included President Mandela's two visits to the UK last year, the Prince of Wales's visit to South Africa in November, and Deputy President Mbeki's visit to London for the first meeting of the UK/South Africa Bilateral Forum.
Scottish Executive
Mr. Swinney:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to his answer of 20 January 1998, Official Report, column 469, what representations he has received from other Government Departments concerning the format and aims of a non-statutory agreement between his Department and the
28 Jan 1998 : Column: 270
Scottish Executive; if he will list the number of representations from each Department; and if he will make a statement; [25588]
(3) if he will publish the most recent drafts of non-statutory agreements with the Scottish Executive; when he proposes to publish the final document; and if the agreement will operate on a trial basis; [25586]
(4) pursuant to his answer of 20 January 1998, Official Report, column 469, when discussions began in his Department concerning the draft non-statutory agreement with the Scottish Executive; on what dates discussions took place; and who was present at such meetings.[25585]
Mr. Doug Henderson
[holding answer 27 January 1998]: Discussions are being held between departments, both at official level and Ministerial level, on all matters relating to non-statutory agreements between the UK Government and the Scottish Executive. In most cases, these discussions are in their early stages in the light of the fact that such agreements cannot be finalised until the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Executive are established. Parliament will be kept informed of progress on these matters.
Dr. Stoate:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if there have been any recent exceptions to the arms embargo on Argentina. [26529]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
We have recently granted an exception to the embargo relating to the sale of spare parts for the Argentine icebreaker, the Almirante Irizar. This represents an exception but not a change to the embargo.
Dr. Stoate:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the ratification of the additional protocols to the Geneva Conventions. [26530]
Mr. Tony Lloyd:
I am pleased to be able to inform the House that the United Kingdom instruments of ratification of the two Additional Protocols of 1977 to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 for the Protection of War Victims are today being deposited with the Swiss authorities in Berne.
The necessary legislation, the Geneva Conventions (Amendment) Act 1995, received the Royal Assent on 19 July 1995.
A copy of the note accompanying the instrument of ratification has been placed in the Library of the House. The note contains the statements made by the United Kingdom on ratification of Additional Protocol I on International Conflicts. In most cases these reflect similar statements made by the United Kingdom on signing Protocol I in 1977.
28 Jan 1998 : Column: 271
I wish to draw the attention of the House in particular to the statement concerning nuclear weapons, which is in the following terms:
Statements to similar effect have been made by NATO partners and others when ratifying Protocol I. They reflect the basis upon which the Conference which drew up Additional Protocol I took place and statements made at the Conference by the United Kingdom delegation among others.
I would also draw the attention of the House to statement (m) on Articles 51 to 55 and statement (n) on Articles 56 and 85, paragraph 3c. These statements reserve our right to threaten reprisals if attacks were launched against our own civilians or civilian targets and remove the virtual immunity under the Protocol for attacks on dams, dykes and certain nuclear facilities such as nuclear power stations, even when they are a significant part of the enemy's war effort. Both reservations have been drafted with great care to show that these would be measures of last resort, to be decided upon only if all else had failed, and requiring high level authorisation. Our actions would still be subject to the classic rule of proportionality.
I would also draw the attention of the House to statement (d) concerned with Article 1, paragraph 4 and Article 96, paragraph 3, which extend the application of the protocol to armed conflicts
"in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination."
To guard against the possibility that terrorist organisations may seek to misuse these provisions the statement makes clear that the term "armed conflict" is understood as denoting something clearly beyond the commission of ordinary crimes including acts of terrorism, and that the United Kingdom will not be bound, in relation to any situation in which the United Kingdom itself is involved, unless it expressly recognises the adversary as genuinely an authority representing a people engaged in an armed conflict of the type referred to in these Articles.
In accordance with the powers conferred in Section 7 of the 1957 Geneva Convention Act, as amended by Section 4 (7) of the Geneva Conventions (Amendment) act 1995, the Government will certify in an Order in Council the terms of the statements made on ratification.
Article 90 of Additional Protocol I establishes an International Fact-finding Commission and provides that the High Contracting Parties may at the time of ratification or subsequently declare that they recognise, in relation to any other High Contracting Party accepting the same obligation, the competence of the Commission to inquire into allegations by such other party of facts alleged to be a grave breach or serious violation of the Conventions or the Protocol. The Government intend to make a declaration of acceptance of the competence of the Fact-finding Commission. It will be necessary first
28 Jan 1998 : Column: 272
to bring before the House legislation to confer upon the members of the Commission and their staff the necessary privileges and immunities.
(2) in what areas the non-statutory agreement between his Department and the Scottish Executive will give the lead role in policy formation to his Department; to what extent it will include mechanisms to harmonise policy between Scotland and his Department on devolved matters; and if he will make a statement; [25587]
"It continues to be the understanding of the United Kingdom that the rules introduced by the Protocol apply exclusively to conventional weapons without prejudice to any other rules of international law applicable to other types of weapons. In particular, the rules so introduced do not have any effect on, and do not regulate or prohibit the use of nuclear weapons."
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |