|
Column Number: 3
Fourth Standing Committee on Delegated Legislation
Thursday 29 April 2004
[Miss Anne Begg in the Chair]
Draft Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organisation (Immunities and Privileges) Order 2004
9.55 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Bill Rammell): I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organisation (Immunities and Privileges) Order 2004.
The order was laid before the House on 19 April 2004, together with the explanatory memorandum that is now required for all affirmative procedure statutory instruments. The order will enable the Government to implement their obligations in the appendix to the agreement, signed in 1999, between the United Kingdom and the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organisation—the CTBTO—on the conduct of activities, including post-certification activities, relating to international monitoring facilities for the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. The UK ratified the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty—the CTBT—in 1998. The CTBT provides for the establishment of the CTBTO.
The appendix to the agreement confers legal capacity, privileges and immunities upon the Preparatory Commission, representatives of its members, and its officials and experts. Those privileges and immunities are comparable to those accorded to similar international organisations.
The agreement facilitates the activities of the provisional technical secretariat of the Preparatory Commission of the CTBTO in conducting, in the UK and other member states that are party to the treaty, an inventory of existing monitoring facilities; conducting site surveys; upgrading or establishing monitoring facilities; and certifying facilities to international monitoring system standards. It has the overall goal of facilitating the continued testing, the provisional operation when necessary, and the maintenance of the international monitoring system in pursuit of an effective comprehensive test ban treaty. That work has to be carried out in order to ensure that effective monitoring arrangements can be put in place.
The treaty is undoubtedly the cornerstone of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime. The Government wholeheartedly support it. We continue to urge all states that have not done so to ratify it unconditionally and without delay.
Column Number: 4
I am satisfied that the order is compatible with the rights contained in the European convention on human rights. I trust that it will have the Committee's full support.
9.58 am
Mr. Gary Streeter (South-West Devon) (Con): The Opposition support the comprehensive test ban treaty. We recognise that it does not come into force until it is ratified by all states. Will the Minister indicate when that is likely to happen?
We recognise the need to establish the Preparatory Commission and we are sympathetic to the need to grant immunities and privileges to those engaged in the important work that the Minister has described. We therefore support the order. We wish the commission well in its important work, and hope that the treaty will be in force as soon as possible. However, the Minister will understand that I would not be me if I did not ask him just a few questions.
I think that we all understand the reasons, but it would help if the Minister were to tell us why people working for the commission need diplomatic immunity. From what menace do they need protection? How many people is it likely to affect, and over what length of time? It would also be interesting to discover how many people in this country enjoy diplomatic immunity. I have no real feel for it—it might be several thousand; it might be only 12. I shall understand if the Minister cannot answer those questions, and I would accept a letter from him.
We wish the order well, and we are glad that the Government have brought it before the House.
9.59 am
Mr. Michael Moore (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): I rise briefly to echo the comments made by the Conservative spokesman, the hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter) and to confirm that the Liberal Democrats also support the comprehensive test ban treaty. It is important that the Preparatory Commission should have the ability to carry out its work.
The Minister has rightly urged the countries that have not done so already to ratify the agreement as quickly as possible. On that score, does the Minister anticipate ratification by any other countries soon or in the foreseeable future, or is there a serious logjam about which we should be concerned? I echo the question asked by the hon. Member for South-West Devon about when the Minister expects that the agreement between this country and the commission will come into force and, therefore, when it may be able to start its work.
To take a slightly more parochial perspective, my constituency is close to the Eskdale Muir monitoring station. The Ministry of Defence has recently put in a holding objection to wind farms. I do not ask the Minister to answer on that, but I shall be interested at some stage—the Minister may have to write to me—to understand the significance of that site and what impact it may have on the development of renewables
Column Number: 5
and the like in the area. If there is any connection with the test ban work, I shall obviously be very interested to know about it.
10.1 am
Mr. Rammell: I certainly welcome the cross-party support on this exceedingly important treaty. As I said, it is the cornerstone of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime.
I was asked when the treaty would come into force. Technically, it will enter into force 180 days after it has been ratified by 44 states. We do not expect, in view of the processes that need to be gone through, that that will happen within the near future. Nevertheless, we are lobbying to ensure that it is enacted as quickly as possible. Indeed, we are lobbying all non-state parties. We are currently working with the Caribbean states, and we expect some ratifications soon as a result of that process.
It is a matter of fact that we have a difference of view with the United States. That was highlighted when this issue was debated in the other place. The United States Government have a concern about the treaty monitoring arrangements. We do not share that concern and we have, as part of an EU lobbying exercise, urged the US to sign up to this important treaty. That process of lobbying will continue.
Column Number: 6
The hon. Member for South-West Devon asked me why the officials involved needed diplomatic immunity. I have to say that when I was preparing for the Committee this morning that was the very question that I asked officials. There is a readily understood explanation. Diplomatic immunity is important because if the monitoring arrangements are to be robust and independent, it is critical that no state party influences them.
As for the number of officials within the UK who have full diplomatic privileges and immunities, it is certainly not as few as 12. It is currently 2,305. In addition a further 1,930 officials in the UK serving in diplomatic missions and the Commonwealth secretariat are entitled, with their families, to more restricted privileges and immunities.
In response to the specific question asked by the hon. Member for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale (Mr. Moore), who leads for the Liberal Democrats, about the site in his constituency and wind farms, I am not aware of the detail of the matter, and I will ensure that we write to him.
I welcome the broad cross-party support for this important treaty, and I urge all members of the Committee to vote for it today.
Question put and agreed to.
Committee rose at four minutes past Ten o'clock.
The following Members attended the Committee:
Begg, Miss Anne (Chairman)
Breed, Mr.
Casale, Roger
Donohoe, Mr.
Eagle, Angela
Ennis, Jeff
Moore, Mr.
Murphy, Mr. Jim
Rammell, Mr.
Robertson, Hugh
Ruddock, Joan
Streeter, Mr.
Worthington, Tony
| 
