| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Alexander of Weedon: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving way. Since he trails his coat about the excellence of the Government's record on proportional representation, does he agree that the 1997 manifesto promised a referendum on the outcome of what became the Jenkins commission? If so, can he say why such a referendum has never been held?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I shall deal with that point because I think it is important. I finish
the point about where we have introduced forms of PR simply by adding that it was introduced for elections to the GLA in 2000.Perhaps I may cover the noble Lord's point. It remains the position that if, in the light of political developments and the review which we promised of the electoral system in our 2001 manifesto, there were recommendations to change the electoral system, we would obviously abide by the commitment we made in our 1997 manifesto that there would be a referendum on that issue.
Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, I am most grateful to the Minister for giving way. At this stage, can he say anything more about the review to which he referred and the possibility of recommendations being made? By whom would the recommendations be made? Do the Government envisage a further commission sitting on the issue, in supplement to the Jenkins commission? Does he envisage this being a review in which other political parties participate? Does he envisage that it would be an internal review only, conducted by the Government, or one conducted by an individual? What is the nature of the review? When is it to take place? What will its status be? Will he acknowledge that it would be wholly unsatisfactory, in view of the great work that was done by the Jenkins commission, to have something of less standing producing the definitive position on this issue?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his intervention. It is worth revisiting what we said in our most recent manifesto, in 2001. It referred to the major innovations which I have mentioned; innovations that we have already introduced to the electoral systems for the devolved administrations, the European Parliament and the London Assembly. It confirmed that we would review the experience of the new systems and the Jenkins report to assess whether changes might be made to the electoral system for the House of Commons.
No decisions have yet been made on the structure and timing of any review and a number of options are possible. We are considering when and how best to initiate any review so that it can be comprehensive and can look at practical experience gained. We have already had some very useful experience in the real life working of various PR systems in various elections. Further experience will be gained in this year's European parliamentary and Greater London Authority elections. In both cases, this will be only the second time that elections to those bodies will have been run under their respective proportional, though not STV, systems.
Lessons learnt from experience on the ground are most valuable, which is why the detailed reports produced after elections by the independent Electoral
Commission are so useful. Noble Lords may also be aware that another body, the Independent Commission on Proportional Representation, a team of electoral experts, has been carrying out a study of how PR has actually worked thus far in the UK.The ICPR was set up by the constitution unit of University College London. It is jointly chaired by David Butler and Peter Riddell, the political correspondent of the Times, and its vice-chair is Professor Robert Hazell of UCL's constitution unit. The ICPR membership includes a number of well known MPs and MEPs from all parties, together with distinguished academics and journalists. Its stated aim is to conduct research to ensure that the Government's review of the electoral system for general elections, to which I have referred, is based upon the best available evidence. The ICPR produced and published an interim report on the experience of PR in April last year and it will produce its final report in March 2004.
Any review that the Government might initiate will certainly wish to draw on the findings of the Jenkins report, the reports of the independent Electoral Commission on particular elections and our own views of the experiences of the devolved legislatures and also the findings of the ICPR report. We have listened very much to what has been said about methods of proportional representation. We have taken careful note of the arguments for particular systems—in particular, STV and the different permutations of PR generally. There are arguments for and against each possible voting system.
This debate has been most valuable because it has attempted—perhaps sketchily—to make the link between voting systems and public participation in politics. That is a rich and interesting vein, although perhaps we should consider more generally ways to engage the electorate further to foster confidence and strength in our parliamentary system.
There can be no doubt that the first-past-the-post system is simple and easy to understand, while STV can seem convoluted and complex. On the other hand, first past the post may tend to discourage those supporting minority parties from voting, while a PR system can or could ensure that all votes carry weight—although some systems of PR give greater weight and create greater equality than others.
In general, the Government welcome wide consideration of those issues. I put on record our preparedness to learn from the results of research and experience. Indeed, no one can seriously question our appetite for considering and undertaking wide-ranging constitutional reform when necessary. Debate such as this about different PR systems and the participation of the public generally in politics play an important part in that continued and continuing debate.
- House adjourned at one minute past seven o'clock.
Written Statements
Iran: Earthquake in Bam
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): On 26 December 2003, at 1.57 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time (5.27 a.m. local time) a powerful earthquake, of magnitude 6.7 on the Richter scale, struck Kerman Province in south-eastern Iran. The epicentre was near to the city of Bam. The earthquake hit the city while people were sleeping and the resultant human tragedy has been immense. The Government of Iran now estimate that between 30,000 and 32,000 people have lost their lives. Some 16,000 suffered injuries and 70,000 have been left homeless.
The Iranian Government have long experience of dealing with earthquakes and other natural disasters, but the sheer scale of this disaster meant that they welcomed international assistance. The situation was compounded by the fact that many of the city officials in Bam were themselves killed during the earthquake.
The first priority was search and rescue support for those still trapped in the rubble, and the provision of medical care for the injured. With Bam's only surviving hospital completely overwhelmed, the injured were flown to Kerman, 125 miles away, where they were stabilised before being flown on to Tehran and Isfahan. Providing shelter for those facing the freezing desert night was also critical. Water and electricity supplies took a while to be restored, so some local people were relying on open fires, in low winter temperatures. The Iranian authorities mobilised 20,000 volunteers for the relief effort and the Iranian Red Crescent treated approximately 30,000 casualties in the first four days, of which 10,000 were evacuated to receive tertiary care in seven other centres in Iran. The United Nations reports that the food and water supply is now adequate at this stage and that health needs are being addressed.
The United Kingdom played its part in responding quickly to the tragedy. In London, DfID opened its emergency crisis co-ordination room on the morning the earthquake happened, from where staff helped to co-ordinate efforts on the ground, liaise with other international relief organisations and worked with the Iranian Government and the British Embassy in Tehran to ensure that humanitarian assistance was delivered as quickly as possible. The Foreign Secretary spoke to the Iranian Foreign Minister, Kamal Kharrazi, on the afternoon of 26 December, to express his deep condolences at the loss of so many Iranian people in the earthquake and to offer the Iranian Government the services of specialised search and rescue teams to help in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake.
On 27 December, the day after the earthquake, 68 search and rescue specialists from the UK landed in Kerman on a DfID-organised charter flight from Stansted. The team, comprising UK fire service teams, specialists from British non-governmental organisations including the International Rescue Corps, Canis, Rapid and Bird, and four staff from DfID, took with them sniffer dogs and thermal-imaging equipment. They were among the first international teams to reach Bam. The search and rescue phase has now come to a close and the UK teams have returned home. The United Nations reports that the collective efforts of the Iranian and international search and rescue teams saved approximately 1,000 lives.
In addition to the immediate search and rescue effort, DfID immediately committed £150,000 towards the International Federation of the Red Cross/Red Crescent appeal for shelter, heating and water purification equipment and on 29 December organised an airlift of 450 winter tents and other shelter materials, from DfID's warehouse, for distribution by the Iranian Red Crescent. We also leased two Antonov 12 cargo aircraft and put them at the disposal of the Government of Iran for the first few days to assist in maintaining the flow of relief items from congested airports to the areas where they are most needed. Also, following an urgent appeal from the World Health Organisation, DfID allocated £59,000 for the immediate purchase of 20,000 doses of tetanus vaccine, to be donated to the Ministry of Health and the Iranian Red Crescent. To date, in total, we have contributed some £900,000, including the UK share (approximately £280,000) of the European Community commitment towards the international relief effort. DfID is maintaining a presence in the country to look at potential further help in the light of assessments currently under way.
The Government of Iran have asked the United Nations to develop and launch a Flash Appeal. It will address the relief, recovery and early rehabilitation needs of those affected by the disaster and cover a period of three months. The Flash Appeal is expected to be launched, in Tehran, on 8 January 2004.
I want to pay tribute to the professionalism and dedication of the teams from Britain and Iran, and from other nations, that immediately responded to the call for help. The preparedness of the British teams meant that the UK was able to react as soon as news of the earthquake began to reach us. I am also grateful for the excellent assistance provided by the British Embassy in Tehran in facilitating and supporting the teams during this period. Since the start of the crisis DfID has made available its situation reports on the DfID website. A copy of the latest report will also be placed in the Library of the House.
Helping the people of Bam has become a genuinely global effort, with assistance pouring in from all around the world: 1,600 international search and rescue, health and relief personnel drawn from 44 countries operated in the disaster area. Since the earthquake, the UN in Bam and Kerman has registered 1,400 flights carrying relief teams and
emergency supplies. At moments of great human need like this, the international community must do all that it can to help. It is notable that over 50 countries are doing so, including significant commitments from the Gulf Co-operation Council for reconstruction.Finally, I am sure that the House will wish to express its heartfelt condolences to the people of Bam and of Iran on the terrible tragedy that they have suffered. Our thoughts are with them.
Equitable Life: Penrose Inquiry
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media and Sport (Lord McIntosh of Haringey): Lord Penrose delivered the report of his inquiry into Equitable Life on 23 December. The Treasury and its legal advisers and a limited number of people at the FSA are now reviewing the contents of the report. Subject to these discussions, it is the Treasury's intention to publish the report in full as soon as possible. Further details will be announced in due course.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |