| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Written Answers
Tuesday, 14th January 1997.
Hong Kong: Transfer of Privy Council Judicial Committee Business to Court of Final Appeal
Lord Geddes asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What arrangements have been made for the transfer of outstanding business from the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of Final Appeal on 1st July 1997.
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey): The jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council will automatically lapse with Britain's administration of Hong Kong as from 1st July 1997.
The Judicial Committee will make every effort to ensure that outstanding Hong Kong business is dealt with before 1st July. It is nevertheless clear that there will come a point after which it will become unlikely for practical purposes that the Committee will be able to accept new business with a reasonable expectation of being able to dispose of it before the handover. That point is likely to be 1st March.
Hong Kong's Court of Final Appeal Ordinance provides that any appeal in respect of which the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council or the Hong Kong Court of Appeal has granted conditional, final or special leave to appeal to the Committee and the Appeal has not finally been disposed of on or before 30th June 1997, shall proceed in the Court of Final Appeal.
Hong Kong Ethnic Minorities: Consular Protection
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they have informed governments throughout the world that the ethnic minorities of Hong Kong will be entitled to the full diplomatic protection of the United Kingdom after the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: Her Majesty's Government extend consular protection to all British nationals overseas in line with international law. This position is well known to other governments. The ethnic minorities in Hong Kong will continue to hold British nationality after the transfer of sovereignty of Hong Kong and they will be accorded British consular protection.
The European Movement
Lord Stoddart of Swindon asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What grants have been paid from government sources to the European Movement since 1985 and by which department or departments.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: Until 1985 the Government made grants of £30,000 a year to the European Movement. This regular funding was phased out between 1985 and 1990. Further one-off grants were made in 1992 and 1994. The grants given since 1985 have therefore been:
- 1984-85: £30,000
- 1985-86: £20,000
- 1986-87: £15,000
- 1987-88: £10,000
- 1988-89: £5,000
- 1992: £30,000
- 1994: £10,000
European Court of Human Rights: Judicial Appointments
Lord Cocks of Hartcliffe asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they consider that there are shortcomings in the present system for appointing judges to the European Court of Human Rights, and what suggestions they have made to improve the system.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: The Government have put certain proposals to the other States Members of the Council of Europe on improvements to the procedure for appointing judges to the new Protocol 11 Court when it comes into existence in 1998-99. These would include an arrangement whereby the names of national candidates for the Court would be exchanged informally within the Committee of Ministers before they are passed to the Assembly. We hope to discuss these and other ideas further in the Council of Europe in the new year.
World Trade Organisation Ministerial Conference: Action Programme
Lord Judd asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Following the recent World Trade Organisation ministerial meeting, what new specific action (a) within the developing countries (especially the least developed countries), (b) within the industrialised countries, and (c) between the developing countries (especially the least developed) and the industrialised countries will now be taken to
- help reduce global poverty and assist sustainable development.
Baroness Chalker of Wallasey: The Government believe that barriers to trade are one of the greatest obstacles to world prosperity and that sustainable development for all countries can best be achieved by continuing the momentum for the general lowering of tariffs and freeing of trade that was achieved through the successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round in 1994. Our overall aim for the Ministerial Conference in Singapore was therefore to carry forward that liberalising agenda and to consolidate the role of the World Trade Organisation, which provides the secure trading environment for all trading nations and is particularly vital to more fragile developing country economies.
World Trade Ministers in Singapore agreed a substantial work programme to carry forward trade liberalisation in the WTO, including new work on trade facilitation, standards, government procurement and investment. The biggest immediate trade liberalising achievement of the conference was an agreement in principle between the EU, US and a number of other countries, including Japan, Canada, Korea and Indonesia, to phase out tariffs on a wide range of information technology products by the year 2000. The new work programme and this agreement offer benefits to developed and developing countries alike.
The Singapore Conference Declaration also commits WTO members to address the problem of marginalisation for Least Developed Countries and confirmed a comprehensive action plan which paves the way for consideration of better market access provisions and for more focused and co-ordinated trade related technical assistance. There will be a conference in Geneva in the first part of 1997, to be attended by all relevant international organisations, which will have the objective of fostering this more integrated approach to assistance.
Gulf War Veterans: Medical Notes
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Why sick Gulf War veterans who request copies of their medical notes in order to assist their general practitioners are required to pay a handling charge of £10 plus 10 pence for each single sided A4 sheet, and whether they consider this practice reasonable.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Earl Howe): No charge is made to general practitioners who request copies of Service medical notes to assist their treatment of ex-Service personnel. Under the Access to Health Records Act 1990, a charge of £10 to cover the cost of retrieval plus a photocopying charge per sheet may be made to individuals who themselves request their medical notes. The Ministry of Defence normally levies such charges, as does the National Health Service.
Gulf War: Provision of Vaccination Details
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the Statement on Gulf War illness repeated by the Earl Howe on 10th December (H.L. Deb., cols. 953-7), whether full details of the vaccines (including adjuvants) administered to members of HM Armed Forces who served in Operation Granby will now be made available to their general practitioners.
Earl Howe: As has been the practice throughout for veterans attending the Medical Assessment Programme, these details will be made available to general practitioners on request if the information is available on individual medical records. If this information is not recorded, general practitioners will be advised of the vaccinations which their patients are likely to have received.
Gulf War: Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Whether they will review their written reply of the 4th June 1996 (H.L. Deb., WA 120) to the Countess of Mar in the light of evidence that chemical weapons were deployed and used during the Gulf War.
Earl Howe: My department keeps this matter under continuous review, in close liaison with the US authorities. Neither our own research nor that of the American authorities has so far provided any corroborative evidence for the deployment or use of chemical warfare weapons during the conflict.
Fisheries Council, 19th and 20th December
Lord Willoughby de Broke asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What was the outcome of the Fisheries Council held in Brussels on 19th-20th December.
Lord Lucas: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food represented the United Kingdom at the meeting of the Fisheries Council in Brussels on 19th-20th December, together with my honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State at the Scottish Office and my noble friend the Under-Secretary of State at the Northern Ireland Office.
The Council agreed by qualified majority, with Belgium and Sweden voting against, the total allowable catches and quotas to apply in 1997 in Community waters. The agreement fulfilled the Government's objective of securing the best possible deal for British fishermen consistent with the scientific advice and the conservation of stocks for the future. In the final package the total UK quotas agreed for the stocks of most importance to our fishermen were
some 23,000 tonnes higher in cod equivalent terms than the quotas being discussed at the start of the negotiations. The increase is worth approximately £16 million to the industry and leaves our total quotas in cod equivalent terms for these stocks just one half of one per cent. below the 1996 level.My honourable friend the Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food invoked the Hague Preference on all the stocks where it was necessary to do so. Quota swaps were agreed immediately after the Council to mitigate the impact arising from use of Hague Preference by the Republic of Ireland, in particular on stocks of importance to the Northern Ireland industry.
The Council agreed unanimously to access and quota arrangements for 1997 with neighbouring non-member states. The United Kingdom has large cod and haddock quotas at North Norway and these were increased by 16 per cent. and 13 per cent. respectively. We have retained our quotas in Faroese, Greenland and Iceland waters at the same levels as in 1996. The Council also agreed unanimously to the allocation of the Community's 1997 quotas in the waters covered by the North-West Atlantic Fisheries Organisation, together with technical conservation and control measures applicable to those waters, and to the allocation of the Community's 1997 redfish quota in the waters covered by the North Atlantic Fisheries Commission, together with management measures for those waters.
The Council continued its discussion of objectives for the next series of Multi-Annual Guidance Programmes (MAGP IV). My honourable friend the Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food reiterated the need for the quota hopper problem to be resolved before he could contemplate any further reductions in the capacity or effort of the UK fleet. Other member states continued to have substantive concerns on various aspects of the proposals, though there was a broad consensus that the Presidency compromise tabled in November remained the most promising basis for progress. The Council concluded that further work should be pursued as a matter of urgency with a view to reaching decisions by 30th April 1997.
The Council agreed by qualified majority, with Denmark, Netherlands, Spain and Sweden voting against, a Presidency compromise on the introduction of satellite monitoring arrangements. These will apply from 30th June 1998 for particularly sensitive fisheries, for example industrial fisheries, and from 1st January 2000 for other vessels of over 24 metres overall length. All vessels which operate exclusively within 12 miles of the coast and those which never spend more than 24 hours at sea will be exempt. Where there is a reciprocal access agreement with third countries, satellite monitoring will only apply to Community vessels fishing in those third country waters if the third countries' vessels carry satellite monitoring equipment in Community waters. There was also agreement that concerns about skippers' liability in the event of genuine equipment failures will be addressed in the detailed implementing rules and that the Council and Commission will explore ways of reducing the regulatory burden on the fishing industry, with a
Commission report to be submitted by 31st March 1997. The compromise met all the UK's main negotiating objectives and will usefully reinforce existing control measures to ensure compliance with rules intended to conserve fish stocks.The Council welcomed the progress that had been made in removing many of the problems from the Commission's proposal for new technical conservation measures but noted that further detailed work was necessary before the proposal would be ready for agreement. So far as industrial fisheries are concerned, my honourable friend the Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food called for the introduction of a precautionary TAC for sandeels in the North Sea and he proposed that a new research programme into the effects of the sandeel fishery off the east coast of Scotland be used to monitor the effects of the fishery on sandeels and other fauna so that any necessary remedial action can be considered urgently.
The Commission introduced its report on the operation of the CFP over the last three years and issues to be addressed for the future. The Council welcomed the report as contributing to the debate leading up to the review of the CFP in 2002.
The Council agreed by qualified majority, with Denmark voting against, a 10,000 tonne increase in the 1996 autonomous tariff quota for cod imported for salting and drying.
My honourable friend the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland reminded the Council of the problems of the salmon market, including the extended period of low prices, the prospects for continuing weakness in the early months of 1997 and the loss of jobs now being experienced. He pressed the Commissioner to reconsider her earlier decision not to introduce a further set of minimum import prices for salmon. The Commissioner, however, said that she still saw no case for minimum import prices, on the basis that the continental market showed no sign of instability, that minimum import prices had proved effective earlier in 1996 and that she was unwilling to intervene while investigations were proceeding into the industry's complaints about dumping and unfair subsidies.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page