25 Jan 2007 : Column 1197
House of Lords
Thursday, 25 January 2007.
The House met at eleven o’clock: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Manchester.
Leave of Absence: The Lord Speaker
The Lord Speaker (Baroness Hayman): My Lords, I have received an invitation from the President of the French Senate to pay an official visit to the Senate in Paris on Thursday 1 February. Accordingly, I seek leave of absence from your Lordships’ House on that day.
People Trafficking
11.06 am
Lord Judd asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Why they have not yet signed the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the Prime Minister recently announced that the UK intends to sign the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, and the Home Secretary is liaising with colleagues across government on how to progress this issue as quickly as possible.
Lord Judd: My Lords, does my noble friend not agree that the delay is becoming inexplicable? On the Joint Committee on Human Rights, on which I serve, we listened to witnesses working in the front line with these unfortunate people, and the story was harrowing and moving. Too often, they are seen as just a troublesome extension of the immigration problem, as distinct from women in danger and in dire need of support and help. When will we send a clear message to all concerned in this country, and to all those in Europe and the world, that we stand absolutely firm and resolute in condemning this beastly trade and in supporting all those who are endeavouring to help these women in their predicament?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, my sentiments are entirely with my noble friend Lord Judd. I am sure he listened carefully to what I said, which was that it is our very firm intention to sign the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings for the very reasons my noble friend set out in his supplementary. We have always said that we are wholly sympathetic to the objectives behind the Council of Europe convention, which, as I am sure we all appreciate, will provide greater support for all victims of trafficking and continue our fight against organised immigration crime, something that is at the very top of our political agenda.
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1198
Baroness Anelay of St Johns: My Lords, as always, I welcome the Government’s commitment to sign up to the convention. Is the Minister aware that delay costs lives? Practical measures can be taken now to protect trafficked children. Is the Minister aware of the report by ECPAT, published last week, which points out that of the 80 children rescued by government agencies from trafficking, two-thirds have gone missing and are back in the hands of traffickers? What will the Government do to protect them now?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we continue to take firm action. The ECPAT report does not absolutely identify the 48 missing children—we are not fully apprised of all the circumstances set out in the report—but we continue to ensure that proper enforcement measures are taken. Certainly, with the measures that we have put in place in the past few years, this Government take the issue very seriously, which is why we support projects such as the Poppy project, through the Eaves housing project, and so on, providing all the opportunities that we can to ensure that proper standards of child protection are in place.
Baroness Turner of Camden: My Lords, is it not essential that when these unfortunate women manage to escape they are not sent back to their country of origin? The country of origin may well be the place where they were abducted by a criminal gang in the first place. Returning them to their country of origin may mean returning them to a family that does not want to accept them because they are regarded as dishonoured. Could we not adopt a more compassionate attitude in such cases?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we do that and that is why we have made the announcement that we intend to sign the Council of Europe convention, which will put that firmly in place. But, of course, it is important that we develop our policy further to ensure that the 30-day reflection period and the protection that is offered to victims are in place and are well supported.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno: My Lords, we on these Benches welcome the long-delayed promise to sign the convention, but when will the Government ratify it? So many conventions have been signed but not ratified.
Before Christmas, we were promised an action plan on trafficking that was supposed to be published last year. It was to come out in January, and we are now well into January. When will it be in our hands?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, we have made it clear that we will ratify the convention. An absolute date for signing up to it is still an open question. A number of states, including us, have yet to do that.
On the action plan, we launched a three-month national consultation exercise on proposals in January of last year. The proposals are being developed. The consultation period ended in the middle of last summer with many responses. We are obviously keen to ensure that they are properly fed into developing the plan so that the consultation document, which was welcomed, gives full effect to our policy intentions.
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1199
The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, the Children’s Society is reporting cases of trafficked children in the south-east of England being arrested during factory raids and prosecuted for illegal working. Are the Government aware of these specific instances? In the light of what the Minister said about the consultations over a trafficking action plan, what precise matters will be addressed by the Government at this moment?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I am not in a position to provide precise details. Operations such as Operation Pentameter do pick people up, particularly minors. We must ensure that they are adequately cared for through social services. It is a difficult exercise. I am happy to write to the right reverend Prelate and share more detailed information with him.
Lord Slynn of Hadley: My Lords, is it not clear, as was revealed in the recent debate in your Lordships’ House, that the extent of this trafficking is such that a mere commitment in words is not enough? The minimum step is to sign up to the European convention.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I have indicated that that is our policy intention. We continue to develop important policies to ensure that we have strategies in place to deal with the fall-out of doing so and to provide the proper protection that young people, in particular, deserve.
Baroness Goudie: My Lords, is it not outrageous that, the Prime Minister having said that he would sign the convention, we are now prevaricating? This convention must be not only signed but ratified, and we must have a timetable for ratification soon. While this is happening, women and children—girls and young boys—are going through terrible, horrendous lives and many are being killed.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I agree with the need for a timetable, which is being developed across government. It is essential that we get it spot on, because this is an important issue. I am sure that your Lordships’ House is fully in support of our overall approach.
Road Safety: Mobile Telephones
11.14 am
Viscount Tenby asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What is the number of successful prosecutions in relation to the use of hand-held telephones while driving.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the latest figures, for 2004, show that, for England and Wales, there were 789 prosecutions and 641 convictions for using hand-held mobile phones while driving. However, offences are dealt with by the offer of a fixed penalty. In 2004, some 74,000 tickets were paid.
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1200
Viscount Tenby: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer and for the rather flattering signal-ahead answer given by the Home Office two days ago. I hope I shall have such favoured treatment when I ask a Question in the weeks and months to come. The Answer revealed the figures for successful prosecutions, and another survey showed that some 500,000 calls are made on hand-held phones in a 24-hour period, so is he satisfied that the police are pursuing this matter with sufficient vigour, or perhaps the offence is difficult to prove? Does he agree that what is really required is a sea-change among the driving community, such as occurred with drink-driving, which nevertheless took many years to become socially unacceptable?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Viscount makes a very good point about drink-driving and the culture of drinking that prevailed at the time, which initially made it difficult for enforcement to bite. The offence has been in place for only two or three years and, as I revealed in the Answer, some 74,000 drivers have been ticketed, which indicates a high level of enforcement. I agree with him that this area will develop over time. The Government take the issue of driving while using a hand-held mobile phone extremely seriously.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, can the Minister say why he can give the statistics for the number of tickets issued for using a hand-held telephone while driving but not for the numbers of tickets issued and paid for the offence of cycling on footpaths? Why does he not collect one set of statistics, or why does he not give them when he is able to give them for the other offence?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not want to underestimate the nuisance value of cycling on footpaths, but the threat potentially posed by hand-held telephones when a motorist uses one while driving is rather different. It is clearly important that we collect data and statistics on that issue. The cycling question is rather more difficult.
Lord Watson of Richmond: My Lords, given the extraordinary disparity between the number of successful prosecutions and the number of recorded telephone calls made by people while mobile in a car, does the Minister not agree that the time has come to try to produce a culture change? That will require advertising, particularly television advertising.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the Department for Transport has embarked upon a campaign on this issue. I am sure the noble Lord will have noticed that an increase in the penalty is to be introduced on 27 February, and there is a substantial advertising campaign around that. We have also recently been blessed, I guess, with some fairly high-profile cases of people being convicted of driving while using a mobile telephone.
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1201
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, can the Minister say whether there has been a change in the number of deaths and injuries attributed to road traffic accidents caused by people using their mobile phones since the penalties were introduced?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not have precise statistics on that issue. I can say that accident figures continue to fall, and I would like to think that our efforts to tackle mobile phone use while driving are part of the explanation behind that. In the last year for which I have statistics, there was a further decline in accident numbers and, in particular, in serious injuries. I am more than happy to provide those statistics to the noble Countess in a letter.
Baroness McIntosh of Hudnall: My Lords, I want to follow on from the question asked by the noble Countess. Does my noble friend have an analysis of the statistics which shows what proportion of those people convicted of driving while using hand-held mobile telephones were involved in a road traffic accident as a result? Are the police proactively seeking to prosecute people who have not yet caused an accident, but who might do so if they continued their behaviour?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, the noble Baroness is seeking statistics which may not exist. She will know that I am new to this brief, but I shall check on the matter because that information might be extremely valuable. We are well on the way to achieving our casualty reduction targets for 2010. There has been a 40 per cent reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents compared with the average number for 1994 to 1998, and a 50 per cent reduction—this is an important statistic—in the number of children killed or seriously injured during that period. The Government are having a fair measure of success in meeting their casualty reduction targets.
Lord Mawhinney: My Lords, in how many accidents last year was the use of a hand-held telephone recorded as the cause of the accident?
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I do not have access to those data.
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, it is a complex issue and a complex question. I do not have the data. I am more than happy to have the research conducted and provide the noble Lord and others with that information.
Lord Colwyn: My Lords, about one hour ago, I was very nearly knocked off my bicycle by a car turning left at the bottom of Wimpole Street—I was on the road and not on the footpath. As the driver was turning left, he was blowing his horn and was on his mobile. If I were to take his registration number and report it to the police, would anything happen?
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1202
Lord Bassam of Brighton: My Lords, I would be extremely cross if nothing did happen, because it is exactly the sort of thing that the police should follow up.
Armed Forces: Expenditure
11.21 am
Earl Attlee asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Why, in light of Lord Drayson’s statement on 5 July 2006 (Official Report, col. 229) that defence expenditure as a percentage of gross domestic product had reduced, Lord Davies of Oldham stated on 17 January (Official Report , col. 649) that the Government had not reduced the percentage.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the totality of defence spending as a percentage of GDP, as published in the Pre-Budget Report national expenditure statistical analysis of 6 December 2006, has remained roughly constant since 1997 at 2.5 per cent.
Earl Attlee: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that rather surprising reply, but since the GDP cake has been growing by 2.5 per cent per year since 1992 and the defence slice of that cake has been growing by only about 1.5 per cent, was not your Lordships’ Defence Minister surely right?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I am glad that the noble Earl acknowledges that under a Labour Government there has been a real growth in defence expenditure during the past 10 years. The simple explanation for his misunderstanding of the position is as follows: the defence budget has been at the level that he stated, but I answered last time on defence expenditure, which includes military operations.
Lord Garden: My Lords, while I recognise the slight increase in real terms in the defence budget, the tasking, too, has increased significantly during this period. The National Audit Office recognised that in its report and the Prime Minister said in Plymouth that it would mean the need for long-term extra expenditure. Will the Minister confirm that the Treasury is working with the Ministry of Defence on redefining and costing the defence planning assumptions?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the first base is the Comprehensive Spending Review, which will culminate in the middle of this year. Defence expenditure and the defence budget for the next three years will be included in that. However, the Government of course take into account changes in priorities in the longer term. This is all part of the work that is done together by the Treasury and the Ministry of Defence.
25 Jan 2007 : Column 1203
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock: My Lords, was not the Minister being unduly modest in his reply? Has not GDP been rising rapidly? Is not the fact that defence expenditure has stayed at the same percentage of GDP therefore really quite remarkable?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we had a reduction in defence expenditure against GDP over the decade before we came to power. Since 1997, we have been spending on defence 2.5 per cent of GDP, which is almost exactly the same as the percentage rise in GDP.
Lord King of Bridgwater: My Lords, does the Minister recognise that, as the noble Lord, Lord Garden, said, it is also a question of commitments? I do not think that many of those serving in the forces will be impressed by the bandying around of statistics or the clever answers coming from the Treasury Bench, given that those forces are faced with shortages, increasing levels of commitment and an increasing abandonment of the harmony guidelines, which provide a decent interval between unaccompanied tours of duty. The Prime Minister’s comments in Plymouth, belated though they were, were at last a recognition of the serious shortfall in defence expenditure.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the issue is not that the Treasury produces these statistics; the noble Lord who asked the Question called for the statistics. This derived from a Question about defence last week. I am, therefore, obliged to put the record straight. However, I recognise what the noble Lord says: of course it is important that we sustain defence expenditure to meet the commitments of our troops. It is quite clear that the extra cost of military operations reflects the deployment of our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the noble Lord will recognise that that involves substantial increased expenditure.
Lord Tebbit: My Lords, I do not know whether the Minister feels that he has yet understood the questions. Surely he will agree that a Government who saw the end of the Cold War were able to reduce defence expenditure, and a Government who involved our Armed Forces in only one relatively minor overseas war were able to contain defence expenditure. Does he not realise that the Government of which he is a member will probably go down as the most warmongering since the end of the Second World War? That is why defence expenditure ought to be far higher than it is today.
Lord Davies of Oldham: But, my Lords, the noble Lord is asking his question in a different context. I was replying last week in a context in which it was contended that defence expenditure was being cut. I said that it was not, and it is not.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |