| Home Page |
Column 1
Written Answers to Questions
Tuesday 18 April 1995
HOUSE OF COMMONS
EU Institutions (Visits)
Mr. Allen: To ask the Lord President of the Council what steps he is taking to encourage hon. Members to take up their annual entitlement to visit EU institutions; and if he will consider organising such visits.
Mr. Newton: Hon. Members were made aware of the administrative arrangements covering this facility in December 1991. Members elected since then have had the facility drawn to their attention. I do not have any plans to organise such visits.
Mr. Allen: To ask the Lord President of the Council if he will list the number of hon. Members who have used their entitlement to a visit to the EU institutions in each of the financial years since the scheme was instituted.
Mr. Newton: The information requested is as follows:
(i) 31 Members in the period 1 January 1992 to 31 March 1992. (ii) 88 Members in the year ended 31 March 1993.
(iii) 75 Members in the year ended 31 March 1994.
(iv) 68 Members in the year ended 31 March 1995.
Senior Salaries Review Body
Mr. Alfred Morris: To ask the Lord President of the Council, pursuant to his answer of 4 April, Official Report, columns 986-87 , on what date the letter to which he refers was sent to the right hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe; and whether his letter of 23 March to the Government Actuary Department indicated the Government's response to the SSRB's current recommendations other than their proposed increase in the death-in-service benefit.
Mr. Newton: The letter to the right hon. Member was sent on 4 April. The letter of 23 March indicated the Government's response to the two SSRB recommendations relating to benefit improvements. This was to allow the necessary considerations to be given to the Exchequer contribution level in the Actuary's valuation report.
LORD CHANCELLOR'S DEPARTMENT
Correspondence
Mr. Winnick: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department if it is the practice for an official in his Department to reply to letters from hon. Members. [18675]
Mr. John M. Taylor: It is the practice for either the Lord Chancellor or me to reply substantively to all correspondence from right hon. and hon. Members, save
Column 2
where the correspondence concerns a specific operational matter within the responsibilities of an agency, in which case the relevant chief executive will reply. On occasions an official may write direct in advance of a substantive ministerial reply being sent. Typically this would happen in the following cases:--where further information is required from right hon. or hon. Member to assist with the preparation of a substantive reply; or --if the correspondence is being transferred to another Government Department or an agency; or
--when it is anticipated that there will be a delay in a substantive reply.
Mr. Steen: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what considerations led to the interval between his receipt of the letter of 21 February from the hon. Member for the South Hams, regarding John Halsey, and his reply of 30 March, with particular reference to the content of the answer. [19400]
Mr. John M. Taylor: It is my normal practice to try to reply to all letters which I receive from hon. Members within one month, unless the letter raises a matter of particular urgency, in which case it is given priority. In this case the reply took a little longer than I would have liked, for which I apologise.
Immigration
Mr. Winnick: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what co-ordination has occurred between the Foreign Office and his Department over the appeal of Sukhwinder Kaur who was refused entry clearance in New Delhi by Imm ECRO 548/95/5; what is the normal practice in such cases where an appeal is lodged; how soon on average such appeals are heard by an adjudicator; and if he will make a statement. [18673]
Mr. John M. Taylor: It is not the practice of my Department to approach the Foreign and Commonwealth Office about such appeals. Ms Sukhwinder Kaur's appeal was lodged in New Delhi in the normal way. Once the entry clearance officer's explanatory statement of the reasons for refusal has been completed, it will be sent to the immigration appellate authorities in London together with the notice of appeal. Upon receipt of these documents, the appellate authorities will send copies of them to the representatives of both parties in this country.
At present, once the parties have indicated they are ready to proceed, the immigration appellate authorities are able to arrange a hearing, on average, within 17 weeks.
Court Dress
Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what assessment he has made of the usefulness of the wearing of wigs in court. [18713]
Mr. John M. Taylor: The question concerns a specific operational matter on which the chief executive of the Court Service is best placed to provide an answer and I have accordingly asked the chief executive to reply direct.
Letter from Michael Huebner to Mr. Gordon Prentice, dated 12 April 1995:
Parliamentary Question: The Usefulness of Wearing Wigs in Court--
The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, has asked me to reply to your question about the usefulness of wearing wigs in court.
Column 3
On 19 July 1994 a Practice Direction on court dress was issued by the Lord Chief Justice on behalf of the Lord Chancellor. The Direction arose because of the need to maintain consistency in the court dress worn by solicitors following the extensions to the rights of audience under the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. The Direction indicated that the current dress requirements for advocates appearing in the Supreme Court and the county courts continued to apply. This meant that while Queen's Counsel and junior counsel could wear a short wig in court, solicitors could not.The Lord Chancellor recognised the need for further consultation on court dress before arriving at a long-term decision. In August 1994 views were therefore sought from organisations and individuals closely concerned with the working of the courts, on whether solicitors should be allowed to wear wigs in court. Comments were also invited from members of the public. Because there was no consensus among respondents, the Lord Chancellor concluded that the case for change was not made out. A Practice Direction was issued by the Lord Chancellor on 11 April 1995 to re-affirm the position on court dress as stated in the Practice Direction of 19 July 1994.
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
Arms Exports
Mr. Wray: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what procedures his Department will be implementing to ensure that all future transfers of military, security and police equipment, including dual-use technologies, will comply with the European Parliament resolution passed on 19 January. [17780]
Mr. David Davis: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply given to the hon. Member for Glasgow, Pollok (Mr. Dunnachie) by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Technology on 5 April, Official Report, column 1191.
Parliamentary Questions
Mrs. Ann Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) how many times in each year since 1979 80 his Department has given a reply to a parliamentary question which has resulted in the information requested being placed in the Library and not printed in the Official Report ; [18445]
(2) how many parliamentary questions to his Department in each year since 1979 80 requesting a priority written answer or answer on a named day, were answered within three days; how many received a holding reply; and how many of those which received a holding reply then received a substantive answer within a further five, 10, 15, 20 days or longer; [18444]
(3) how many times in each year since 1979 80 his Department has written to a right hon. or hon. Member correcting an answer to a parliamentary question. [18446]
Mr. Baldry: The information requested is a matter of public record but it could be extracted in the form requested only at disproportionate cost.
Mrs. Ann Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) how many parliamentary questions to his Department were transferred for answer to the chief executive or other senior official of a non-departmental public body or agency for which he has responsibility in each year since 1979 80 or for each year that the body or agency has been in existence; [18447]
Column 4
(2) how many parliamentary questions to his Department that were transferred for answer to the chief executive or other senior official of a non-departmental public body or agency for which he has responsibility received an answer which was not printed in the Official Report in each year since 1979 80 or for each year that the body or agency has been in existence. [18448]Mr. Baldry: The Department has transferred no parliamentary questions to non-departmental public bodies since 1979 80. The number of written parliamentary questions referred to next steps agencies by this Department is as follows:
Session 1992 93: 7
Session 1993 94: 4
Session 1994 95: 6
Information for previous Sessions is not readily available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
It is normal practice to print answers from the heads of our agencies in the Official Report.
Mrs. Ann Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many parliamentary questions requesting an ordinary written answer were received by his Department in eachyear since 1979 80; and how many such questions received a substantive answer within 10, 15, 20 days or longer. [18443]
Mr. Baldry: The number of written parliamentary questions for ordinary answer received by the Department, excluding the Overseas Development Administration, are as follows:
Session 1991 92: 223
Session 1992 93: 1,461
Session 1993 94: 1,054
Current session to date--587
The figures for the Overseas Development Administration are as follows:
Session 1990 91: 256
Session 1991 92: 197
Session 1992 93: 685
Session 1993 94: 799
Current session to date--305
It is not possible to identify those questions that received an answer within a given time period without incurring disproportionate cost.
Refugee Status (Application)
Mr. Raynsford: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what arrangements are being made for applications from people residing in Iran for family reunion with relatives granted refugee status in Britain to be processed without requiring applicants to travel to another country to make the application. [18779]
Mr. Baldry: The embassy in Tehran cannot normally handle such applications because the number of UK-based staff there is limited. However the embassy does have discretion to consider applications in exceptionally compassionate circumstances.
Iraq
Mr. Worthington: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what information has been received from Mr. Rolf Ekeus of the Special UN
Column 5
Committee for the Destruction of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction on the amount of materials for biological weapons supplied to Iraq by western companies; and which were these companies. [18909]Mr. David Davis: The UN Special Commission makes information available in a regular series of reports to the Security Council. The last of these were published on 10 April and commented on iraq's past biological weapons programme. Copies will be placed in the Library of the House.
It is not our practice to comment in detail on information given to us by UNSCOM on companies which have trade with Iraq. Any information about potential offences will be investigated and, if substantiated, will be a matter for the courts.
Sudan
Mr. Worthington: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement about the ceasefire in Sudan brokered by President Carter and about the intended next steps. [18873]
Mr. David Davis: We welcome the announcement of a two month ceasefire in the conflict in southern Sudan to which the Government of Sudan, the Sudanese People's Liberation Army and the South Sudan Independence Movement have agreed. We hope that the ceasefire will give new impetus to the peace initiative sponsored by four east African states, which we fully support.
Mr. Worthington: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development has now referred the issue of peace in Sudan to the UN Security Council; and what proposals he has to increase pressure on all participants in the Sudanese civil war to find a peaceful solution. [18910]
Mr. David Davis: The peace initiative of the Intergovernmental Authority on Drought and Development is continuing and the issue has not been referred to the Security Council. We shall continue to urge all participants in the civil war in Sudan to find a peaceful solution and have decided to participate in the recently founded Friends of IGADD, which will consider ways to support this initiative.
Immigration
Mr. Winnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what co-ordination has occurred between the Lord Chancellor's Department and his own over the appeal of Sukhwinder Kaur who was refused entry clearance in New Delhi by Imm ECRO 548/94/5; and if he will make a statement. [18674]
Mr. Baldry: None. Mrs. Kaur's appeal has been received in New Delhi and the entry clearance officer's explanatory statement is now being prepared. This will be forwarded as soon as possible to the immigration appellate authority which falls under the aegis of the Lord Chancellor's Department.
Colonel Oliver North
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what meetings his
Column 6
officials had with Colonel Oliver North between 12 November and 19 November 1984; [18955](2) for what reasons Andrew Green of his Department met Colonel Oliver North on 24 July 1984 to discuss hostage rescue missions; [18954]
(3) for what reasons Mr. Derek Thomas of his Department met Colonel Oliver North in April 1984 in relation to anti-terrorist and hostage rescue activities in the middle east; [18962]
(4) for what reasons on 10 May 1984 Mr. Andrew Green of his Department and the British embassy in Washington met Colonel Oliver North to discuss Monzer El Kassar; [18953]
(5) why Mr. Andrew Green of his Department on 10 May 1984 discussed with Colonel North the role of the British Parliament in the hostage situation. [18961]
Mr. Douglas Hogg: In the mid-1980s members of the British embassy in Washington kept in close touch with the US Administration, including the National Security Council, on matters concerning hostages and on terrorism more generally. This was, and remains, a normal part of the embassy's work.
Yousef Haidar
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) what discussions he has had with United States officials about the pictures taken of President Bush in Damascus in the possession of Yousef Haidar; [18959]
(2) what discussions he has had with United States officials of a visit by Yousef Haidar to the United States. [18958]
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what meetings his officials had with Yousef Haidar in Beirut. [18960]
Mr. Douglas Hogg: We are aware of no such meetings.
Iran
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if it was with his authority that Monzer El Kassar was authorised in June 1984 to ship arms to Iran. [18952]
Vice-President Bush
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions he had with Untied States officials about the visits to Damascus in 1986 by Vice-President Bush. [18956]
Mr. Douglas Hogg: I have had no such discussions. Mr. Bush did not visit Damascus in 1986. British and US officials have regular discussions about the situation in the middle east.
Mr. Dalyell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussion he had with
Column 7
Lily Boustanny about Vice-President Bush's plans to visit Syria in 1988 to arrange a hostage release. [18957]Correspondence
Mr. Winnick: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if it is the practice for an official in his Department to reply to letters from hon. Members. [18672]
Mr. Baldry: All correspondence to Ministers from hon. Members receive substantive replies from Ministers with the exception of the correspondence unit of migration and visa department of the FCO and the head of Wilton Park, an agency, who have authority to reply to hon. Members directly.
The exception for the correspondence unit of migration and visa department was reaffirmed by the then Under-Secretary of State in his letter to hon. Members dated 10 October 1991. A copy of this letter was placed in the Library of the House.
Wilton Park
Mr. Mackinley: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what proportion of Wilton Park's activities is devoted to conferences organised for private sector customers; and what proportion is devoted to conferences for or on behalf of the new democracies of central and eastern Europe. [18677]
Mr. Goodlad: Responsibility for the subject of the question has been delegated to Wilton Park under its chief executive, Richard Langhorne. I have asked him to arrange for a reply to be given. Letter from R.T.B. Langhorne to Mr. Andrew Mackinlay dated 10 April 1995:
I have been asked to respond to your questions about Wilton Park.
Wilton Park does not itself organise conferences for private sector customers, though it does from time to time cooperate with other organisations, such as the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, where there is a joint interest in a particular topic. During the periods when Wiston House, which is the home of Wilton Park, is not being used for Wilton Park meetings, it can be used as a host venue for private sector customers for training courses and other functions. In the year 1994 95, the proportion of income was 62.4 per cent. from Wilton Park activities and 37.6 per cent. from commercial operations.
No Wilton Park conferences are directly organised "on behalf of" foreign governments, but Wilton Park has recently much increased its coverage of issues related to Eastern and Central Europe. In 1994 95, six conferences out of 32 were devoted to such issues and they are listed below. In addition there were Eastern European speakers and participation in 21 of the conferences during the same period. At the invitation of the Polish government, a special and outstandingly successful Wilton Park conference was held in Warsaw in September 1994.
412: Economic reform and privatisation in Central and Eastern Europe.
415: Europe's Balkan Wars
419: Nordic and Baltic Security
424: Russian Security Dilemmas
430: Civil society in Central and Eastern Europe
Warsaw Special: The EU and Central Europe: from Association to Membership
Column 8
Later on this year, we will be covering: candidates for membership of the EU; Russian foreign policy in post- communist Europe; Longer-term stability in the Balkans; and the future of Ukraine.If you need any further information, please let me know, and I will do my best to provide it.
| Next Section
| Home Page |