|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice) of 27 October 2005, Official Report, column 522W, on nuclear missiles (security), if he will list the projects the United Kingdom supports under the Global Partnership; how much has been paid to each; and if he will make a statement on performance in improving material security. 
The Government have implemented a major portfolio of projects in Russia as part of the UK's contribution to the Global Partnership and details of all our projects are published in an annual report published every December. The 2005 report will be published on 21 December and copies placed in the Library of the House. Some £35 million was spent on UK Global Partnership nuclear projects in 200405 and forecast spend for 200506 is around £37 million. Many of the projects we support under the UK Global Partnership Programme contribute to the enhanced security of nuclear materials, including through the retraining of former weapons scientists and engineers and the associated creation of sustainable employment in the closed nuclear cities. Projects include work to ensure the safe and secure storage of around 20,000 Spent Nuclear Fuel Assemblies from nuclear submarines at Andreeva Bay, work to enhance the physical protection of civilian nuclear institutes and the training of guard commanders at key Russian nuclear establishments. We are working closely with other donor countries to co-ordinate work on improving material security at a number of sites across Russia, to determine priorities and ensure sustainable improvements are made from our grant-aid. We believe that our growing portfolio of nuclear security projects will substantially enhance the security of materials stored at facilities in Russia. Project specifications are agreed with Government
19 Dec 2005 : Column 2488W
experts in the UK's Office of Civil and Nuclear Security and implementation of projects closely monitored by private sector project managers.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to prevent pollution from old whaling stations from damaging the environment around (a) South Georgia, (b) the South Sandwich Islands and (c) the British Antarctic Territory. 
Mr. Douglas Alexander: Work has recently been completed on the clean-up of the former whaling station at Grytviken, which now presents no hazard to wildlife or to those who visit or work in this area of South Georgia. However, the South Georgia Government are aware that the derelict whaling stations at Stromness, Husvik and Leith Harbour present similar hazards to those previously present at Grytviken, largely in the form of asbestos, heavy fuel oil and collapsing buildings. There are no whaling stations in the South Sandwich Islands.
No funds are currently available to the South Georgia Government to carry out the clean-up of these other whaling stations, although it is hoped that it will be possible to undertake some of this work (mostly on the clean-up of heavy fuel oils) in the event of an increase in income from the licensing of fishing around South Georgia. Meanwhile, signs have been erected around the former whaling stations at Stromness, Husvik and Leith Harbour warning visitors not to approach within 200 metres of them due to the hazards presented by the asbestos and dangerous structures.
The British Antarctic Survey (BAS) undertook clean-up work at the site of a former UK base (and former Norwegian whaling station) at Deception Island, South Shetland Islands in 1992. This work included the removal of 500 drums of waste fuel and debris. A further 45m 3 of waste, including asbestos and other hazards, was removed by BAS in April 2004.
The site has now been designated as Historic Site and Monument (HSM) No. 71 under the Antarctic treaty, and forms part of the Deception Island Antarctic specially managed area. A conservation strategy for HSM 71 allows for the ongoing clean-up of debris resulting from the gradual deterioration of the buildings and other structures.
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much has been spent in each of the last eight years on removing pollutants from the whaling stations and other whaling industry sites around (a) South Georgia, (b) the South Sandwich Islands and (c) the British Antarctic Territory. 
Mr. Douglas Alexander:
Work was carried out in 2003 and 2004 to remove hazardous substances, mainly asbestos but also including heavy fuel oils, from the whaling station at Grytviken, South Georgia; and to make the whaling station safe for visitors and those who work at Grytviken and King Edward Point. The total cost of the project was £6.7 million. This was met from South Georgia Government funds. Around 3,000 cubic
19 Dec 2005 : Column 2489W
metres of asbestos were safely removed and disposed of by burial on site. The work was carried out to full UK standards.
The clean-up undertaken at Deception Island in 2004 was part of a wider clean-up of abandoned bases in the Antarctic Peninsula. The total cost of this work undertaken by the British Antarctic Survey during the 200304 austral summer at three sites, including Deception Island, was £434,000.
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list overseas missions of his Department which have closed since 1997; and on what date each (a) opened and (b) closed. 
Dr. Howells: The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)has closed 26 overseas missions since 1997. The following table provides further details. In most cases, the financial year in which the post had opened or closed has been given because we do not keep a record centrally of more detailed information, and in any event there is not a clear date on which a mission closes. Like any well-run organisation, the FCO continues to realign its resources flexibly in line with UK interests.
|Chiang Mai (Thailand)||1884||199899|
|Pusan (Korea Rep)||1970||19992000|
|Seville (Spain)||(37)pre 1852||200001|
|San Salvador (El Salvador)||1968||200304|
|Oporto (Portugal)||(37)pre 1852||200405|
|San Juan (USA)||(37)(5508560038)pre 1852||200506|
|Port Vila (Vanuatu)||1980||200506|
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is
19 Dec 2005 : Column 2490W
taking to protect the petrel populations around (a) South Georgia, (b) the South Sandwich Islands and (c) the British Antarctic Territory. 
As a party to the Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels, the UK supports the Agreement Secretariat in its efforts to protect petrels throughout their range, which includes South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands and the British Antarctic Territory.
This year Defra have contributed additional project funding of £35,000 to support activities agreed at the first Advisory Committee Meeting of the Agreement. One such activity is the creation of a database of population status and trends for breeding sites, which will include South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands and the British Antarctic Territories.
In addition the joint Foreign and Commonwealth Office/Department for International Development's Overseas Territories Environment Programme has allocated £100,000 to the South Georgia Giant Petrel and White-chinned Petrel conservation programme.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|