| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ms Buck: I do not believe that it is a question of semantics. As I said, airports want the powers to be clarified so that they can implement them.
A further issue relevant to Nottingham East Midlands airport is flight tracking, which was referred to by the hon. Member for Rutland and Melton and other hon. Members. If a plane has not come from Nottingham East Midlands, the airport sometimes cannot identify it because complainants often cannot provide sufficient information to allow it to do so. The Government are trying to determine what else can be done to address the problem, but it is a technically difficult matter. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Manchester, Blackley for offering to assist by trying to find a way to provide further information.
Aspects of the Bill relate to consumer protection and all hon. Members should welcome the provisions on the replenishment of the travellers fund. The 15th report of the Transport Committee of the Session 2003–04 said:
"A public protection scheme should not be forced to rely on deficit funding for so long. The Government must swiftly introduce legislation to provide the long overdue levy-making power, even if it rejects the case for wider reform of financial protection."
As my hon. Friend the Minister of State made clear earlier, we have not rejected that case, although we have not included provisions on it in the Bill.
I have, as intended, listened closely to the arguments advanced today as part of our decision making. The issue is not straightforward. The Transport Committee urges us to choose a mechanism that allows airlines in a sound financial position to derive an advantage from that fact. However, a flat £1 levy would not distinguish between the sound and not-so-sound airlines. Arguably, it could distort competition in favour of tour operators because package holiday makers would pay the same levy as a passenger on a no-frills flight to Paris, yet could be eligible for a refund on a long-haul flight, three weeks' accommodation and car hire.
We have heard arguments in favour of improving consumer information instead, and it has been pointed out that we do not compel travellers to take out medical insurance or hold an E111 form. On the other hand, a flat levy is easy to understand, which cannot be said of
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1110
the status quo, in which the boundaries between what is and what is not covered by ATOL are confusing. In short, the arguments are finely balanced and the Government will reflect on the views of the House. We will not have a referendum in which the numbers of representations in favour are compared with the number against. The decision will be based on political judgment.
The Bill will transfer the cost of the CAA's aviation health unit from the taxpayer to the aviation industry. That will be a much fairer arrangement because those who benefit from the service will pay for it. The Bill will sweep away unnecessary restrictions on public airport companies to allow them to develop their businesses. By abolishing appeals to the Secretary of State on route licence applications, we will speed up the take-up of new air services, thus benefiting the consumer.
The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington asked whether there would be a cost increase if there were additional recourse to judicial review. At present we believe that airlines appeal almost automatically to the Secretary of State, so we hope that by concentrating their minds on the prospect of success, the number of appeals will fall, thus bringing down costs overall.
The Bill is fair—fair to airports, fair to airlines, fair to those exposed to noise and pollution and fair to consumers. I commend it to the House.
Bill accordingly read a Second time.
CIVIL AVIATION BILL (PROGRAMME)
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 83A(6) (Programme motions),
Proceedings in Standing Committee
2. Proceedings in the Standing Committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Thursday 7th July 2005.
Consideration and Third Reading
4. Proceedings on consideration shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion one hour before the moment of interruption on the day on which those proceedings are commenced.
5. Proceedings on Third Reading shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the moment of interruption on that day.
6. Standing Order No. 83B (Programming committees) shall not apply to proceedings on consideration and Third Reading.
7. Any other proceedings on the Bill (including any proceedings on consideration of Lords Amendments or on any further messages from the Lords) may be programmed.—[Mr. Alan Campbell.]
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1111
CIVIL AVIATION BILL [WAYS AND MEANS]
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 52(1)(a) (Money resolutions and ways and means resolutions in connection with bills),
That, for the purposes of any Act resulting from the Civil Aviation Bill, it is expedient to authorise the making of provision requiring contributions to the Air Travel Trust to be made by persons applying for, or holding, licences by virtue of section 71 of the Civil Aviation Act 1982.—[Mr. Alan Campbell.]
DELEGATED LEGISLATION
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Michael Lord): With the permission of the House, I shall put together motions 5 to 9.
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 118(6) (Standing Committees on Delegated Legislation),
That the draft Unauthorised Encampments (Northern Ireland) Order 2005, which was laid before this House on 21st February, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.
That the draft Climate Change Levy (Combined Heat and Power Stations) Regulations 2005, which were laid before this House on 10th March, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.
That the draft Climate Change Levy (Fuel Use and Recycling Processes) Regulations 2005, which were laid before this House on 10th March, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.
That the draft Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 (Consequential Modifications) (England, Wales and Northern Ireland) Order 2005, which was laid before this House on 25th January, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.
That the draft Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 (Consequential Modifications) Order 2005, which was laid before this House on 25th January, in the last Session of Parliament, be approved.—[Mr. Alan Campbell.]
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1112
Zimbabwe
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Alan Campbell.]
9.14 pm
Kate Hoey (Vauxhall) (Lab): I am grateful for the opportunity to raise a serious issue tonight: the humanitarian crisis that faces Zimbabwe. I am especially grateful that the Speaker enabled the debate to happen so soon after I returned from Zimbabwe and even more grateful that we have a reasonable amount of time—although I appreciate that perhaps you thought that you would have an early night, Mr. Deputy Speaker—to consider the issue and allow one or two other hon. Members to intervene.
As I left Zimbabwe only 10 days ago, people begged me to take their message to the outside world. After the dreadful sights that I witnessed when travelling through Matabeleland, Midlands and Mashonaland, I have no doubt about my responsibility to get the message out. I was fortunate in that, with the help of some brave Zimbabweans, I was able to get some good film and video footage, which has been shown widely on international broadcast networks. That is especially important because, as we all know, there are no independent media in Zimbabwe. There is no longer an independent daily newspaper and, although The Zimbabwean, which is put together in London and printed in South Africa, gets around Zimbabwe, it does not reach nearly as wide an area as The Daily News.
I begin with the words of a young Zimbabwean, who sent me a message today before the debate. He said:
"When you speak on Monday, you speak knowing that our thoughts, hopes and prayers go with you. We want the world to know what is happening here."
As hon. Members will remember, I previously visited Zimbabwe in 2003, again undercover, when I saw the thousands of displaced farm workers who had been put off their farms after many white farmers had been displaced. I saw then that little farming was happening on those farms. Roads alongside them were full of dying crops and those that had not even been planted. However, since my previous visit, ordinary Zimbabweans' plight, which was dreadful then, has become much worse, and the regime's actions far more shocking. Unless resolute action is taken, I fear that the humanitarian crisis in Zimbabwe will move to a new and even more sinister phase.
For the past six weeks, Robert Mugabe's regime has been engaged in a brutal and systematic mission to destroy the homes and livelihoods of some of the poorest people in Africa. There is no shelter for many of the thousands who have been displaced. The original figure of 250,000 that somebody somewhere in the United Nations cited is wrong. Even in my short time there, I could see that the numbers of those displaced are far greater—750,000 to 1 million people. Most of them are without shelter at night in winter.
Bulawayo, Kwe Kwe, Gweru and Harare were among the places that I visited and witnessed the terrible scenes of the aftermath of Operation Drive Out Rubbish or Operation Murambatsvina. In Killarney camp on the outskirts of Bulawayo, I saw the police attacking people's homes. Many had lived there for 20 or 25 years. Grotesque scenes of burning houses were spread across the landscape, smoke rising from the burning thatch.
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1113
I watched as teams of police clubbed or bulldozed walls and brought corrugated iron roofs crashing to the ground.
Later in Harare, when I met Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, he described what was happening as Pol Pot in slow motion. He and others have since used that description internationally. They are strong words, but from what I saw, they are truthful. In the narrow streets of Makakoba, Bulawayo's oldest township, I saw truckloads of armed police in riot gear, simply standing around and forcing families to knock down their homes. Some families had built shelters at the back for the many extended members who had been displaced from the rural areas because of what had happened on the farms and come to urban areas. Those shelters were being forced down, and it was quite tragic to see people trying to rescue tiny bits of corrugated iron, brick and stone to take away and use somewhere else.
Killarney was the settlement on the outskirts of Bulawayo that I had particularly wanted to go back to, because I had visited it when I was there before, and attended church in one of the small huts there with the pastor. When we went back on that Sunday, it was the day when the people were being removed, and the church had already been demolished. What happened was deeply moving, because many of the churches of all denominations in Bulawayo had managed to scrape together enough fuel, which is in incredibly short supply there, to bring their own vehicles and to carry a few desperate families away to a place of safety. Shell-shocked families and elderly couples were gathering up the remains of their earthly possessions, usually just a few pots and a mattress. Many of them would not leave unless they could take those possessions with them, because they represented their only hope of having anything with which to start again.
I want to pay tribute to the many courageous people who drove me round and helped me to shoot the video footage that I brought out of the country, despite the huge numbers of security police, members of the Central Intelligence Organisation, who are everywhere now. There are far more than there were two years ago; Mugabe has spent millions of dollars on recruiting huge numbers of them. That video footage has now been shown around the world and it has helped to alert the international community to what the regime is doing. It was ironic that some of my guides had spent their youth fighting as freedom fighters in the bush. For them, the struggle continues to this day, and I salute them.
I also want to salute the very brave women, particularly in Bulawayo but also in Harare, who are members of WOZA—Women of Zimbabwe Arise—and who take to the streets repeatedly in peaceful protest. They are often arrested for defying the draconian laws on public association. I also pay tribute to the teams of individual Zimbabweans who go out gathering evidence of human rights abuse for the Solidarity Peace Trust. I want to draw to Members' attention the trust's first report, which has been sent round to some people today. If anyone else wants a copy, they can get one from me. It is the interim report of May-June 2005 on the Zimbabwean Government's urban cleansing and forced eviction campaign. The trust has the Roman Catholic
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1114
Archbishop of Bulawayo, Pius Ncube, as one of its key sponsors. The report presents a shocking tale of what has happened, including numbers, and I would commend it to every Member of the House.
I have to point out that people are dying in order to get the message out of Zimbabwe, and to try to raise any international outrage. I was privileged to have been able to be there, even if it was only for one short week. I knew that, if anything had happened, I was unlikely to be killed, but I was left with the impression of people risking their lives every minute of the day. Even ordinary people conducting their everyday lives need to be brave in Zimbabwe. The vendors' markets, once a lively feature of towns and cities across the country, have all gone. Most of the pitches were licensed by the local councils. Bulawayo council is in the control of the Movement for Democratic Change, and it used to collect rent from the stall-holders, who all had licences. The pitches were laid out with yellow lines to show their boundaries. Now the plots are deserted, with only mangled wire and scorch marks left behind.
Particularly shocking were the industrial suburbs of Harare, where there used to be hundreds of bustling workshops, with their valuable machinery. Many people who wanted to be able to look after their own livelihoods had created these small businesses and factories, perhaps fixing cars or doing some sewing, all using machinery. The Mugabe police simply came in and bulldozed them down, destroying thousands of pounds worth of machinery and leaving flattened concrete behind. Those buildings had been solidly built. Mugabe and his forces talk about these constructions being illegal, but they were proper homes. In many cases, people had lived in them all their lives, but now their contents have been destroyed, and those people's homes and lives ruined. I had also visited those parts of the outskirts of Harare the last time I was there, so I could see the difference. The area literally looks as though an earthquake has hit it; it is quite unbelievable when I remember the thriving suburb that it used to be.
The destruction and misappropriation of businesses continues in another form what started with the illegal seizure of commercial farms. As I pointed out earlier, most of the farm workers have been displaced to urban areas and are now being displaced again. Mugabe saw how easy it was to get away with displacing those farm workers and farmers and knows that there is no appetite to resist him. He has African leaders parroting his propaganda lies for him and the leaders of the industrial world by and large swallowing them and choking on what is sometimes, I believe, a misplaced post-colonial guilt.
I am still concerned about companies in this country that continue to do business with counterparts in Zimbabwe that are working hand in hand with the regime. Supermarkets—I simply mention Tesco but there are many—have not yet taken seriously their obligations to ensure that their vegetables and flowers are not being sourced from illegally seized farms or operations run by proxies for the regime. There is also evidence that banks based in this country and on the continent still co-operate in arranging lines of credit for the regime and its associates.
Last week, the European Union increased the numbers of people on the banned list, and finally banned Grace Mugabe, Robert Mugabe's wife, from being able
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1115
to come over here and shop at Harrods. I welcome that decision. Many people, however, have still not been put on the list. One of the people whom we must get on that banned list is Gono, the governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, who has been the driving force behind much of the getting rid of people and small businesses.
What is most shocking, however, and most upsetting, is the way in which Mugabe's refusal to co-operate with the World Food Programme and formally ask for assistance means that the WFP must bend its rules in order to put out an appeal to donors. It is time that we started setting our own rules. As a major donor Government, we need to demand very special terms before providing assistance to people trapped under a regime that is not only failing but taking positive action to deprive its people of basic human rights of shelter and food—a human right that the UN is meant to uphold. The world talks of finding new ways to tackle new problems, but this evil tragedy in Zimbabwe is happening so slowly, and Mugabe is such a cunning manipulator, that we must find completely new ways of dispensing aid. As Michael Holman recently wrote:
"The West's unconditional generosity has done—and is doing—more long-term damage to Zimbabwe than short term good".
Aid organisations must face up to the fact that in Zimbabwe they cannot be apolitical. The crisis with which they are dealing is not a natural disaster but a deliberately manufactured tool of oppression and political control. The normal rules do not apply, and they must speak out in protest against the ZANU-PF regime. Without question, the African Union must demand that the International Red Cross and the United Nations relief agencies are given unrestricted access to Zimbabwe to deal with the internal refugee and food crisis, as they would have in any other disaster situation. Those bodies must also demand, however, that the African Union tackles the political paralysis in Africa that has allowed Mugabe to run amok and set back his country's progress by 50 years. I hope that the UN envoy's team who have arrived today will be able to go around and see what is happening. I worry that they will only be taken where the Government want to take them. We hope, however, that they will be independent and go out and see what is happening.
I hope that the organisers of the Live8 concerts will urge the millions who flock to the concerts on 2 July to demand that the world leaders attending the G8 summit get their heads out of the sand and put Zimbabwe's plight right at the top of their agenda.
Most importantly and immediately, our Government will lose all credibility in tackling the problems of Africa if they are seen to demand high standards of African Governments and yet, because of whatever petty domestic reasons, statistics or figures, send back asylum seekers to the mercy of Mugabe's state agents. Our Government face a massive test of their commitment to Africa's future, rather than to the dapper but corrupt bigwigs who will tell the Prime Minister what he wants to hear, then go back and, like Mugabe, treat their people as dirt to be cleared away. Our loyalty must be to the people of Africa—the poorest people of Africa—and perhaps the most immediate test of that commitment involves the asylum seekers who are on hunger strike not many miles from here.
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1116
I was shocked today to receive a letter from someone telling me to look at something in the May edition of "News&Views", described as
referring to the immigration and nationality directorate.
What was the award? The FCO's global migration team collected it on behalf of the FCO. A member of the team is quoted as saying
"it's great to see the two departments working together so closely . . . but we're just a small part of a big network of FCO desks and posts".
—which is what the award was for—
"focus on the countries where the greatest numbers of asylum seekers originate, and where systematic HO/FCO co-operation is needed to reduce the number of applicants with no grounds for asylum . . . The plans have helped secure agreements with several countries including Afghanistan, China and Zimbabwe."
I am sure that the FCO is very proud to have received an award for sending back asylum seekers and doing a deal with Mugabe. I hope that the Minister will be able to explain exactly what deal, if any, has been done.
I want to refer to one or two asylum cases that have been mentioned in various newspapers. I think that the media have been particularly good in raising some of them. There is the case of Crispen Kulinji, who I know for a fact is an MDC activist. I know that he was tortured. I talked to him with Morgan Tsvangirai last week in Zimbabwe. The MDC has sent clear messages to our Government explaining the position and asking for him not to be deported, and he had been dealt with by our supposedly independent and fair immigration system. Nevertheless, he was to be sent back on Saturday night. That is why I told the Home Secretary today that I did not have much confidence in the independent appeal tribunal. People were not given the right legal advice in many cases. Often, once in the fast track, they had little chance.
Many Zimbabweans here who are genuine asylum seekers had to leave Zimbabwe without their passports. Crispen's passport was taken from him. He then went to South Africa. It should be remembered that some Zimbabweans do not feel particularly safe in South Africa. It is not always a safe country for Zimbabweans because of the way in which Zimbabwean Government agents work there. We have a close link with Zimbabwe, and a special responsibility for what is happening there. If Zimbabweans have a link with Britain, they will obtain passports by other means. Crispen obtained a Malawi passport. Although the Foreign Office knew that he was not from Malawi, it was intent on sending him back there. The Malawians immediately did what they had done with other asylum seekers. They said "This person is not Malawian. He must go straight back to Harare." The Foreign Office did not even have the decency to send him back to Harare; it let someone else do the dirty work by sending him to Malawi first.
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1117
The same thing is happening to a great many asylum seekers who are in the detention centres. More than 50 have been on hunger strike since last Wednesday. Many are becoming weaker, although they are taking water. Next weekend the G8 nations meet at Gleneagles to begin their conference. Does the Minister really want asylum seekers in our detention centres to be literally near to death as we discuss poverty in Africa? What message does that send to the world about the kind of country we are, and how we can possibly do what we are doing? Crispen is keen not to be the one who is always picked out, because they all work and speak together. It is clear that there are many asylum seekers who are at risk of being sent back.
I heard on the rumour mill today that the Home Office had decided that it must be careful because the G8 summit was coming up. It does not want to change policy and go back to the pre-November policy, when there was a moratorium. The situation was okay until November. Nobody was being sent back, but suddenly, the policy changed. However, immigration officials have apparently been told this evening that there is a freeze on sending anyone back, to avoid the possibility of the public's becoming aware of such incidents in the next few days. Yet once the G8 is over and everyone attending it has gone home, we will simply return to the policy of speeding up the process of sending people back. I appreciate that the Minister responding to the debate is from the Foreign Office and not the Home Office, but according to the Home Secretary today, everybody is working closely together on this issue. The Minister will therefore doubtless be able to say whether there is any truth in what I have said, and to explain how the situation will be handled.
The Home Secretary keeps saying that he has received no substantiated evidence of people who have been sent back then being tortured or ill-treated in any way. However, there is a lot of such evidence, all of which is being passed on. Unfortunately, the Home Office tends to lose some very important documents. Indeed, Home Office immigration officials have even gone to the Zimbabwean high commission—I should say the Zimbabwean embassy, as the country is no longer in the Commonwealth—to get information on such people. Their names are well known, therefore, when they are put back on the plane. Anyone travelling back to Harare from this country who has been in detention is immediately suspected as being anti-Mugabe. On all such occasions, the Central Intelligence Organisation meets them at the airport. Just last week, someone who was sent back was immediately questioned and his home was visited. The situation was handled very aggressively, and at the first opportunity he managed to get over the border into South Africa. Such is the fear of many of these people.
It beggars belief that the Home Office goes on about wanting evidence. How does it expect us to get it? Zimbabwe is in chaos, and many of these people have nowhere to return to because they come from demolished areas and their families have been displaced. I do not know what our offices in Harare are doing, but I cannot imagine that our ambassador—he was on holiday when I was there, but I did see his deputy—and his colleagues are looking for any evidence. It might be
27 Jun 2005 : Column 1118
possible to obtain such evidence in some countries, but given the chaos in Zimbabwe and the state machinery's control of absolutely everything, it is almost impossible to obtain the proof that the Home Secretary wants. However, I hope that he will listen and take account of the various types of evidence that we will provide.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |