|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Boswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the occasions, and the individuals concerned since May 1997 on which British delegations to European Council meetings have been led by persons other than Members of either House. 
Mr. Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the Government of Burma concerning U Pa Pa Lay and U Lu Zaw and their continued detention; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Battle: U Pa Pa Lay and U Lu Zaw are among an estimated 1,500 political prisoners in Burma. Our Ambassador in Rangoon has made representations to the Burmese authorities on this subject. We take every opportunity, including in United Nations resolutions, to call for the immediate and unconditional release of all such prisoners. We also support the work of the ICRC in visiting prisoners in Burma.
Mr. Corbyn: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been made to the Government of China concerning the continued detention of Ngawang Choephal, a Tibetan; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Battle: We remain deeply concerned about the case of Ngawang Choephal, and raise his case regularly with the Chinese authorities. I raised the case with the then Chinese Vice-Foreign Minister, Wang Yingfan, in
9 Jan 2001 : Column: 509W
Beijing in November 1999 and urged that Choephal's mother, Sonam Deckyi, be allowed to visit him. A visit took place in August 2000. We remain concerned at reports that Choephal may be in poor health. During the most recent round of the UK/China human rights dialogue in October 2000, we made a specific request that his sentence be reviewed in the light of these reports. At that meeting, the Chinese stated Choephal was in good health. We will continue to press this case.
Mrs. Ann Cryer: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he will make a statement about progress made on the Government's commitment to nuclear disarmament, as agreed in the Non-Proliferation Treaty final document; 
(3) what progress has been made on honouring the commitment made under the Non-Proliferation Treaty for all the nuclear weapon states to engage in the process of disarmament as soon as appropriate; 
(4) what steps he has taken towards honouring the commitment to a diminishing role for nuclear weapons in security policies, as agreed in the Non-Proliferation Treaty final document. 
Mr. Vaz: The Government have made their commitment to all aspects of the Final Document agreed at the 2000 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference. We believe the United Kingdom is already some way ahead of most other states in fulfilling the undertakings it sets out.
We have reduced our own nuclear forces to the minimum necessary to provide for our security for the foreseeable future. These reductions have included the withdrawal from service of the last of our free-fall nuclear bombs, leaving Trident as our sole nuclear weapons system.
We have made clear, both nationally and in NATO, that our reliance on nuclear weapons in our security policies has been radically reduced since the end of the Cold War. We have pledged to include British nuclear weapons in multilateral negotiations when satisfied with progress towards the global elimination of nuclear weapons. And we have made clear our willingness to see a body established in the Geneva Conference on Disarmament to deal with nuclear disarmament.
Mr. Hain: UN Security Council resolution 1333 (2000), adopted on 19 December, imposed further measures against the Afghan faction known as the Taliban, who also call themselves the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, in response to their continued support for international terrorism and their failure to hand over
9 Jan 2001 : Column: 510W
Usama Bin Laden for trial in accordance with the demands of the Security Council in its resolution 1267 (1999).
The new measures will come into force on 19 January 2001. They are established for a 12 month period. At the end of this period, the Security Council will decide whether to extend them, having decided whether the Taliban have complied with the demands of the Council that they should:
cease the provision of sanctuary and training for international terrorists and their organisations; ensure that their territory is not used for terrorist installations and camps or for the preparation of acts of international terrorism; and co-operate with international efforts to bring indicted terrorists to justice;
act swiftly to close all camps where terrorists are trained within the territory under their control.
closure of Taliban (non-diplomatic) offices overseas;
closure of Ariana Afghan Airlines offices overseas;
a ban on the supply of the heroin precursor acetic anhydride to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan;
a ban on all international flights to or from Taliban-controlled Afghanistan (with exceptions for humanitarian flights);
a non-mandatory call to all States to restrict the movement through their territory of senior Taliban officials;
a non-mandatory call to States who have diplomatic relations with the Taliban to reduce the number and level of Taliban diplomatic staff at missions in their territory.
The resolution has been carefully designed to ensure that the new measures exert pressure on the Taliban, but do not have an adverse humanitarian impact on ordinary Afghans, who have suffered for too long already. We call on the Taliban to do everything in their power to ensure that international organisations and aid agencies can carry on their vital work in safety and without hindrance.
The freeze of Taliban funds and financial resources and the ban on international flights by aircraft owned, leased or operated by or on behalf of the Taliban, imposed by UN Security Council Resolution 1267 (1999), remain in force.
New Orders will be made under the United Nations Act (1946) to implement the new measures in the UK, the Crown Dependencies and the Overseas Territories. Where appropriate, certain of these measures may be implemented by administrative means.
Mr. Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list, in order of their inclusion in the draft Treaty of Nice, each proposed Article relating to change in the procedure for taking
9 Jan 2001 : Column: 511W
decisions under qualified majority voting or other requirement, indicating for each (a) the article and treaty to which it applies and (b) the nature of the proposed change. 
Mr. Vaz: At Nice, the Government agreed to extend qualified majority voting in a total of 31 articles of the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty on European Union. All these moves will benefit the UK. As promised, we retained the UK's veto over taxation, social security and the other key issues we identified at the start of the IGC.
Of the articles that moved to majority voting, 11 relate to conditions of appointment or procedural rules. The rest are primarily about the efficiency of economic management and the single market. Where needed, articles have been amended to carve out specific issues or to retain unanimity for key aspects of legislation.
9 Jan 2001 : Column: 512W
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|