17 Apr 2007 : Column 111
House of Lords
Tuesday, 17 April 2007.
The House met at half-past two: the LORD SPEAKER on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Worcester.
Cluster Munitions
Lord Dubs asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What steps they are taking, either directly or with their international partners, to help the Governments of Serbia and Lebanon to locate and clear cluster bombs and cluster munitions on their respective territories.
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Amos): My Lords, the United Nations estimates that there are around 1 million unexploded cluster bomblets in southern Lebanon. The United Kingdom has provided £2.7 million to help with the clean-up. In Serbia, NATO, with UK support, is co-ordinating target data from the 1999 campaign to help to locate and clear unexploded cluster bomblets. The United Kingdom has also contributed £86,000 to the Serbian Mine Action Centre for equipment to assist with clearance work.
Lord Dubs: My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for a most encouraging Answer. I have two questions. First, is the NATO information now actually being made available to Serbia? When I was at a conference in Oslo recently people were complaining that they did not have that information. Secondly, will the Government use their influence with the Government of Israel to persuade them to provide information about bomb co-ordinates for the mine-clearers in the Lebanon?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I shall start with my noble friend’s first question. We have supported the efforts that NATO is making in co-ordinating target data. I shall check that those data have now been passed over. We have of course urged the Israelis to give the United Nations detailed maps and other help in locating cluster munitions and other unexploded ordnance in the Lebanon. We shall continue to press for that to happen.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, what proposals will the Government be offering to the expert-led review that was announced at the Geneva meeting in December?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, we have a number of officials who have been involved in that process. They will be involved in the follow-up meetings to the Geneva meeting. The particular advice that we shall give will depend on the nature of those meetings and the kind of information requested. After the meetings
17 Apr 2007 : Column 112
Lord Hannay of Chiswick: My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that these two bad cases show how wise the Government were to ban the use of dumb cluster weapons on any future occasion? What plans do the Government have to proceed with the commitment that they have now entered into to work for a worldwide convention banning these weapons?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for recognising that the Government have made some progress on these issues. On how we take discussions forward, there are two parallel processes. There is the process through the United Nations—because, of course, it is very important that this is done multilaterally so that all the countries with these weapons take these issues on board. But there is also a parallel process being spearheaded by the Norwegians, in which we are also involved, which seeks to put pressure on the UN process. It has been made clear—and the UN Secretary-General has agreed with this—that these are complementary processes that can reinforce each other.
Lord Garden: My Lords, in respect of Serbia, the United Kingdom should have detailed information about the cluster munitions that were expelled from the BL755 weapons used during the conflict over Kosovo in 1999. I was in that case surprised by the Written Answer provided by the noble Lord, Lord Drayson, on 10 January, in which he was unaware of “detailed information” on BL755 cluster munitions strikes. Does the Ministry of Defence have the information to provide to NATO to provide to Serbia, as the Minister has suggested?
Baroness Amos: My Lords, my understanding is that we have passed over information with respect to our own role in this process, but if in some way that is incorrect I shall be happy to write to the noble Lord to clarify that.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I endorse what the noble Lord on the Liberal Democrat Benches said. At a recent conference that I attended this issue arose and a recently retired American general assured everybody that the information had been passed to the Serbians some time ago. There is real confusion about this, not about whether the information went from the various armed forces to the authorities in NATO but whether it was passed from NATO to the Serbians. I should be most grateful if the noble Baroness would be kind enough to look at this further and put an answer in the Library.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I shall be happy to do that. I was not aware of the confusion until answering the Question at the Dispatch Box this afternoon. I shall clarify the position and I am very happy to put a letter in the Library.
17 Apr 2007 : Column 113
Lord Dubs: My Lords, I assure my noble friend that many of us involved in the campaign against cluster munitions are enormously grateful that the Government have banned dumb munitions. As has been said, we very much hope that this will become the subject of an international treaty before too long. The only other question remaining, which I am sure my noble friend does not want to answer now, is whether the smart bombs are smart enough.
Baroness Amos: My Lords, I received a very detailed briefing on these issues yesterday. My understanding is that the United Kingdom has its own definitions of what are called dumb bombs and what are called smart bombs. I do not think that the House would want to hear my explanation of the difference between those two things, but I assure my noble friend that we fully intend that anything we do falls within our international humanitarian obligations. It is very important that we carry our partners with us in this work.
Olympic Games 2012: VisitBritain
2.41 pm
Lord Lee of Trafford asked Her Majesty’s Government:
Whether VisitBritain has the appropriate resources to exploit fully the 2012 Olympics tourism opportunity.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the Government fully acknowledge the value and importance of tourism to the success of the 2012 Games and the economic legacy. VisitBritain’s activities in marketing and supporting the industry will form a major part of the forthcoming 2012 tourism strategy. The appropriate levels of funding for this work will be allocated in the context of the current Comprehensive Spending Review.
Lord Lee of Trafford: My Lords, I am half grateful to the Minister for that Answer, but given that we are spending approaching £9 billion on the Olympics, and it is calculated that tourism revenue should be boosted by about £2 billion, surely it makes sense to fund VisitBritain, our national tourist board, properly and adequately during these Olympic years and not reduce its grant, as has happened in recent years, with a further cut threatened in the coming spending round. I ask the Minister specifically when the Government will take a decision on the application for £20 million for marketing spend for VisitBritain, matched by the private sector, which it needs for its Olympic marketing activities, given that it is already having to enter into commitments and spend money for the Beijing handover in 2008?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, we recognise the £20 million put forward by the private sector and the importance of a government decision on support for that. In general terms our support for VisitBritain has not declined; it has kept pace with inflation. We support our tourism industry a great deal more than other European countries, far outspending the
17 Apr 2007 : Column 114
Lord Bridges: My Lords, will the Minister consider an alternative way of financing the Olympics? It seems to me that to expect departments to fund this wholly exceptional event through the ordinary year-by-year budgetary procedures is very difficult. There is something to be said for issuing special gilt-edged stock to be repaid at a precise date in the future, which would be raised from the public in the usual way like other government stock. That would be a more appropriate way of meeting these very exceptional expenditures.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord will recognise that after some trial and tribulation the Government now have effective costing figures on the Olympics and which sector should pay. The departments have their role to play, but it is a reasonably limited role and it is within their compass. He will also recognise that other contributors, such as London and the lottery, will also play a significant part in the funding of the Games. The Question is about a specific departmental responsibility in relation to the tourist industry.
Baroness Billingham: My Lords, reverting to the Question, is it not the case that this is not the full story about government funding? There is also considerable funding from the regional development agencies and from local authorities. That is an important factor. Because of my proximity to the noble Lord, Lord Tanlaw, while I am on my feet I suggest to the Minister that if we adopted the features of the lighter evenings Bill that would be an enormous boost to tourism, not only in 2012 but in every other year as well.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, is the House ever going to avoid the issue of lighter evenings coming into almost every Question? I will not be drawn into that at this stage. On the first point, my noble friend is absolutely right that although VisitBritain and the tourist agencies play their important role in promoting tourism in Britain, there are many other actors on the scene. Local authorities invest substantial amounts in their local tourist activities and attractions and, as my noble friend mentioned, so do the regional development agencies.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, the clear consensus from the 2012 tourism strategy consultation is that there is a huge amount of marketing work to do in the run-up to 2012. How does the Minister respond to those such as the Historic Houses Association, which said in its recent evidence to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee:
“At a time when Britain should be increasing its tourism profile in the run up to the Olympics, it is perverse that
17 Apr 2007 : Column 115
this year? What are the Minister and the DCMS planning to do about this?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, the noble Lord introduces other deep demands on the departmental budget that exist and which contribute to what we regard as the question of not just the Olympic Games, but the whole environment and the attractions of the UK for visitors over that period. I emphasise that decisions have not been taken regarding the final financing for tourism in the lead-up to the Olympic Games; that decision is being taken later this year. All that has happened with VisitBritain, as with every other sponsored organisation of government departments, is that it is being asked to look at increased efficiency and reducing costs. That is an entirely proper demand, and that will be taken into account when the final decisions are taken later this year on the future budget for VisitBritain.
Lord Soley: My Lords, this is wider than the issue of tourism, because this question is about the Olympic Games. Will the Minister take this opportunity to make it clear to some of the critics in the media and on the fringes of politics and elsewhere, who seem to think that Britain winning the Olympic Games was a great loss, that in fact this was a great success for Britain? If we had lost the Games, people would have been saying, “Fancy wasting all that money on losing the bid”. We won, and people ought to be proud of that. Those people in the media and politics who are not proud of it could perhaps go to Paris on the Channel Tunnel link and share the misery with the French, who lost the bid but would dearly love to have won it.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, it may be that because the Olympic Games are five years away that is too long an attention span for the average editor in the media, who concentrates on the short term. I make one optimistic prediction: when the baton is handed over from the Beijing Games to London at the end of the Games in China, it is then that the country—and even the more recondite members of the media—will begin to realise that London’s success was huge for this country.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno: My Lords, have the Government a determination that not only the London area—which we sometimes thinks finishes north of Watford—but the whole of the United Kingdom, including the four nations, will benefit from tourism in the year of the Olympics?
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I understood that that was the burden of the Question asked by the noble Lord’s noble friend. VisitBritain is not concerned solely with tourism to London, but with the whole of the United Kingdom. The noble Lord is absolutely right; the Games will be a complete success
17 Apr 2007 : Column 116
Israel and Palestine: Middle East Quartet
2.50 pm
Lord Blaker asked Her Majesty’s Government:
What further steps the Middle East quartet plans to take to secure peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, following the quartet’s meeting on 21 March, it agreed to meet in the region soon to review developments and to discuss the way ahead.
Lord Blaker: My Lords, is not the situation changing a bit, in that the Sunni Arabs are beginning to perceive that there is a growing threat from Iran, as, indeed, does Israel? They are beginning to perceive a common interest. Does it make sense for the quartet to continue to demand capitulation from the Palestinians on the three tough conditions that it has set even before negotiations begin and when the Israelis continue to build settlements?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, it is not a question of capitulation in any sense or form. The UK and the quartet have made it clear that they will engage with those who are committed to the quartet principles. It would be wrong to expect the Israeli state to have a relationship with a Government who did not recognise its entitlement to exist. We want to work with the Palestinian Government as soon as possible and as soon as they accept those principles. In the mean time, we are working constructively with individuals in that Government who are committed to the quartet principles; for example, we have held meetings with the Foreign Minister, the Interior Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and others.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire: My Lords, there must be mutual recognition of each others’ right to exist within a fair and equitable two-state solution, but the willingness to do that is lacking on both sides. Is the noble Baroness still convinced that the quartet principle is the central process for moving ahead with Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, given that the Saudi initiative now commands a good deal of support not only within the Arab world but within Israel and that that seems to be a more lively process than the quartet process, which is held back by the Bush Administration and is not moving far in any direction?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, the noble Lord is absolutely right to say that there must be balance. In relation to the previous question, I should also have stated that of course we must see an end to settlement building by Israel and an end to the illegal
17 Apr 2007 : Column 117
Lord Hylton: My Lords, I am sure that the whole House welcomes the fortnightly meetings between the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of the Palestinian Authority. Is anything being done to widen the scope and terms of reference of those meetings to deal with the more fundamental issues?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I regret that I cannot comment on the scope of those meetings, but I understand that they have had some very practical outcomes. For example, I understand that at the meeting earlier this week it was agreed that the Karni crossing should be opened much more frequently, thus allowing better trade for the Palestinians. I also believe that there was discussion about security.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, in order to establish a Palestinian state in the future, there will have to be a sustainable economy for the Palestinians. Can the noble Baroness tell us whether, in this awkward period when there is a degree of stand-off for the reason that she has described, the Government can take forward any of the work on helping to build that economy for the future of a Palestinian state?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Yes, my Lords, the UK is working very closely with its EU partners precisely to develop a mechanism to build the capacity of the Palestinian institutions. As my noble friend suggested, that work is crucial if we are going to create a viable Palestinian state. We are working on this closely with our EU partners because we are absolutely determined that the Palestinian state should be properly economically underpinned in order for it to be viable.
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, following the very good question of the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, what steps do the Government propose to take to ensure that the new Palestinian unity Government agree as soon as possible with the principles enunciated by the quartet?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, it is clear from all the statements that the Government have made that they are actively working to try to ensure that the new unity Government are aware of the need to adhere to the quartet principles. If the Government were to do this in a forthright manner, that might make it more difficult for the unity Government adhere to those principles. Therefore, we work behind the scenes with our international partners.
17 Apr 2007 : Column 118
Baroness Tonge: My Lords, is the Minister aware that, at a real estate exhibition at Alexandra Palace on 18 March, property was being offered for sale or rent in Har Homa settlement, which is being built on a forested mountain on Palestinian land between Jerusalem and Bethlehem? Can she assure us of what the Government have said many times, which is that settlements built on Palestinian land are illegal and against all international law? Can she also assure us that that land, with or without settlements, will be returned to the Palestinians in the future?
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: My Lords, I can categorically state that, in the view of this Government, settlements built on Palestinian land are illegal. The Government constantly make that position clear to the Israeli authorities at every level. However, it would be impossible for the Government to give the undertaking that that land could be returned to the Palestinians. Unfortunately, that is not within their remit.
Lord Dykes: My Lords, on withdrawing some of the Israeli checkpoints—
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |