| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Triesman: My Lords, there is a lot of support in this country, and there has been growing support in the international community, but discussions are plainly still needed with China, the United States and Russia. It will not be easy to bring everyone on board by the time of the UN meeting in the autumn, but it is a worthwhile target to try to make sure that the process goes through another major landmark at that stage. That is our objective.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire: My Lords, the Prime Minister is fond of saying that Britain is a bridge between the EU and the United States. The EU is fully on board with regard to this initiative. What are the Government doing to persuade our closest ally that it is also in American interests to sign up to an arms trade treaty, given the extent to which arms now circulate to non-state actors throughout the world?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, a number of major nations—the United States is one—have considerable arms industries. There needs to be a lot more persuasion that there must be regulation of the way in which arms flows take place without those states feeling that their industries are liable to be destroyed in the process. That is a difficult discussion—there is no question about it—and so it is with other countries. We are pursuing it on a daily basis, making sure that we take every opportunity to discuss the possibilities of this treaty.
Lord Hannay of Chiswick: My Lords, given the possible difficulties of getting universal agreement to such a treaty, has the Foreign Office given any consideration to a treaty on a much narrower basis involving, say, the European Union and its main preferential trading partners, which would account for a proportion—perhaps the Minister can say how much—of the trade in question?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, I do not have figures on the proportion of the trade in question, but there have been suggestions that there should be—if I may coin a phrase—a coalition of the willing on the matter. However, at this stage we do not believe that it is impossible to persuade a very much wider group; a large number of nations have already agreed. I do not think that all that support is solid support; just saying it is different from doing it. We have work to do with those who have agreed, let alone with those who have not. We now have a core. The EU is a core; and there
14 Feb 2006 : Column 1073
is the Commonwealth, which is very diverse as it is made up of developed and developing countries. That is a basis for being optimistic.
Lord Elton: My Lords, will the Government use the opportunity of these negotiations to develop with other countries a strategy for bringing an end to the use of and trade in cluster weapons?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, it is the intention to try to get cluster weapons into international treaties, but they may not fit exactly into this treaty. Noble Lords will be aware that several paths are being followed in arms limitation talks, of which this is one, but the point is taken.
Lord Archer of Sandwell: My Lords, if the treaty is concluded, will my noble friend use his best endeavours to ensure that it is provided with institutional support to urge governments to ratify and to provide ongoing monitoring and inspections? Without ongoing institutional support, a treaty can so easily become a dead letter.
Lord Triesman: My Lords, I agree with my noble and learned friend that the treaty, if it is secured, must have the machinery behind it to deliver it. I made the point a moment ago that some of those who had already consented to the idea of a treaty might not be so firm in their resolve. At each stage, the thing has to be nailed down and the machinery put in place; otherwise I fear that we will look back on this as a wasted opportunity.
Lord Garden: My Lords, given the concerns about lack of enforcement of the Export Control Act, lack of regulation of brokering and lack of formal, end-use monitoring, what undertakings has the Defence Export Service Organisation, a sub-department of the Ministry of Defence, given in helping him with his aim of getting the arms trade treaty through?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, the key process on the regulatory side is to ensure that we have in this country the most robust system of export licensing possible and, indeed, to ensure that the end-user process is an integral part of it. That is a separate process, and we will be going through it in any event. If we are as continually successful as we aim to be in that process, the need for the arms trade treaty will complete the picture, rather than supplement it.
Lord Howarth of Newport: My Lords, given the distraction from investment in the most modern technologies caused by our excessive concentration on arms exports, given the cost of subsidising such exports, and given the risk of disruption to our most sensitive trading patterns, alongside the fact that the export of arms is not really a decent way for Britain to pay its way in the world, does my noble friend agree that there will be great benefits to our economy if the treaty can be successfully negotiated?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend. I should like to see a process in which the key
14 Feb 2006 : Column 1074
building blocks of this treaty were what guided us in the arms trade. There is good evidence that, where people turn their back on illicit arms trading or dangerous arms trading that tends to destabilise regions or whatever, they often produce alternatives in industrial production that are of even greater economic benefit.
The Earl of Sandwich: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the millennium review summit was disappointing in the respect that it set up a new peace-building commission that was designed for post-conflict reconstruction and development and not for conflict prevention and control of the arms trade?
Lord Triesman: My Lords, one part of the UN conference last September was the clear demand made by the secretary-general that huge effort should go into the prevention of conflict. Some of the new human rights institutions are seeking to restore states to some sort of viability and have the direct aim of trying to prevent conflict breaking out. The ethos of "prevention is better than cure" is fundamental to the potential success of ensuring that even when a state returns to peace it stays at peace—because that is not assured either.
Identity Cards
2.52 pm
Lord Glentoran asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they intend to include residents of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic in a compulsory identity card register and identity card scheme; and, if so, how in practice they will achieve this.
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Rooker): My Lords, the identity cards scheme and the register will apply within the United Kingdom, including Northern Ireland, to legal residents of all nationalities who are aged 16-plus. It is intended to become compulsory when Parliament so decides.
Lord Glentoran: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is the noble Lord aware that the Irish Minister McDowell has admitted that the introduction of ID cards in GB will have an impact on cross-border travel for all Irish citizens? In relation to the Acts of Irish citizenship of 1949 and 1956 and the 1998 agreement, does he agree with Minister McDowell?
Lord Rooker: My Lords, the introduction of the ID cards scheme has no impact whatever on the common travel area.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, the noble Lord said that the scheme was intended to be compulsory "when Parliament so decides". Should he not now say, "if Parliament so decides"?
Lord Rooker: When or if, my Lords—it is up to Parliament.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: My Lords, does the Minister not agree that the carrying of British identity
14 Feb 2006 : Column 1075
cards by nationalists and republicans in Northern Ireland will give rise to huge policing and enforcement problems? Is that not one among many arguments for affirming the resolution of this House to make ID cards, in conjunction with passports, truly voluntary?
Lord Rooker: My Lords, the initial part of that question was incredibly extravagant and simply not true. In answer to the noble Lord's general point, I must say that no one in Northern Ireland has to carry a British identity card. Under the Good Friday agreement, all citizens in Northern Ireland have a choice—they can have a British and an Irish passport. Following the introduction of ID cards, they can choose to have a British/UK ID card which can be used for travel; or a plain identity card which cannot be used for travel; or they can exercise their rights under the European Economic Community travel area as Irish citizens and have the necessary documentation for that as citizens of a member state. So the issue raised in the question cannot arise.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |