|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
12 Jun 2003 : Column 989Wcontinued
John Healey: In our 2000 White Paper"Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalisation Work for the Poor"the Government made a commitment to strengthen the voice of developing countries in the international system. We are actively pursuing this agenda in three broad ways both at the IMF and World Bank.
Firstly, strengthening developing country offices in the IMF and World Bank. Many of these offices suffer from a lack of capacity, combined with a heavy workload. That is why, earlier this year, we pushed for the provision of extra staff to the Sub-Saharan African offices. This was subsequently agreed at both the Fund and Bank. We also support the provision of more training opportunities, improved links between Washington-based delegations and their Capitals and the creation of a Fund that these offices can draw on to finance analysis.
Thirdly, increasing developing country representation and voting rights on the Executive Board. The UK believes that the issues of developing country representation on the Executive Boardparticularly for Africaand increasing the basic vote, both merit serious consideration.
David Taylor: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the need for greater representation for poor countries on (a) the World Bank and (b) the International Monetary Fund. 
12 Jun 2003 : Column 990W
pillar of our efforts to increase their effectiveness has been to encourage greater developing country ownership of policy reforms and decisions.
Experience suggests that when countries 'own' their policies, they are more likely to implement them. That is why both IMF and World Bank resources are increasingly being used in support of country-led strategies, such as the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers.
This ownership agenda also extends to the institutions themselves. In our 2000 White Paper"Eliminating World Poverty: Making Globalisation Work for the Poor"the Government made a commitment to strengthen the voice of developing countries in the international system. The need to address this problem was subsequently endorsed by all UN member states at the International Conference on Financing for Development in March 2002.
Since then the IMF and World Bank have been actively progressing this agenda, most recently at their spring meetings in April. The UK has strongly supported this work and will continue to push for early and substantive progress.
Mr. Horam: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which United Kingdom commitments arising from the World Summit on Sustainable Development (a) have been incorporated into the Department's existing delivery plan for Service Delivery Agreements and (b) will be incorporated in its delivery plan for Service Delivery Agreement in advance of the 2004 Spending Review. 
John Healey: The Chancellor and I welcome the outcome and commitments made at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) last year, and will work with other Government Departments and in the international community to meet them.
In relation to the 200306 Spending Review period, the Treasury has adopted a specific Service Delivery Agreement (SDA 10.1) to work with other Departments and with other EU partners to appraise the sustainable development implications of policy proposals. Although the Treasury's current Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets do not specifically refer to WSSD commitments, as they were agreed before the Summit, PSA 4 is relevant to WSSD commitments. It reads:
12 Jun 2003 : Column 991W
Mr. McLoughlin: To ask the Prime Minister how many (a) public and (b) judicial inquiries the Government have set up into events which took place (i) before and (ii) after May 1997; and how much they have so far cost. 
12 Jun 2003 : Column 992W
The Prime Minister: Since May 1997 two inquiries have been established under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act 1921: the Bloody Sunday Inquiry (1998) under Lord Saville and the Shipman Inquiry (2000) under Dame Janet Smith DBE. The latest available costs are £107.6 million and £11.75 million respectively.
There have been a number of inquiries of different forms established since May 1997 either under other statutory provisions or on an ad hoc, non-statutory basis, dealing with events both before and after 1997. Examples include:
The BSE Inquiry (1997), under Lord Phillips;
The Ladbroke Grove Inquiry (1999) under Lord Cullen;
The Royal Liverpool Children's Inquiry (1999) under Mr. Michael Redfern QC.
12 Jun 2003 : Column 993W
Bob Spink: To ask the Minister of State, Department for International Development what further action he will take to ensure that the common agricultural policy and international trade rules are reformed in order to promote trade for poor countries. 
Hilary Benn: As it stands, the EU common agricultural policy imposes high costs on developing countries and is unsustainable as EU enlargement becomes operational. We are committed to reaching agreement by June on the current proposals for reform of the common agricultural policy, as a first important step towards broader EU agriculture reforms in future.
Agreement on EU CAP reform and movement of the US position on export credits and food aid are key to ensuring a successful outcome in Cancun. DFID is working hardboth through officials' and high-level meetingsto ensure that the WTO agriculture negotiations don't stall and that current polarisation is overcome. Our objective is a set of trade rules which meet the commitments made in Doha to making this round a true "development" round, by taking adequate account of the special needs of developing countries.
Mr. Best: To ask the Minister of State, Department for International Development what proposals his Department has to encourage greater involvement of poor countries in the decision-making process of debt relief initiatives. 
Hilary Benn: The UK was influential in getting agreement, at the 1999 Annual Meetings of the World bank and IMF, to the consultation process on the design of the enhanced Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative being widened to include developing countries. In order to ensure developing country involvement in discussions about the delivery of debt relief, we and other donor countries are co-financing the HIPC Ministerial Network, as part of the HIPC Capacity Building Project. This network, which held its first meeting in Copenhagen in November 1999, brings together, once or twice a year, Finance Ministers and senior officials from all of the HIPC countries to discuss issues relating to the design and implementation of the HIPC Initiative. These meetings help to inform our own views on debt issues. The Commonwealth HIPC Forum also provides an important platform for Ministers from HIPC countries to discuss matters of mutual interest, and has stimulated wider debate within the Commonwealth, as well as within the International Financial Institutions themselves. The UK also contributed to the recent review of the HIPC Initiative by the Operations Evaluations Department (OED) of the World Bank, and funded two meetings between the evaluators and HIPC representatives, to allow HIPC countries to feed in their views. The OED report has now been published.
12 Jun 2003 : Column 994W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|