General Affairs and Foreign Affairs Councils (20-21 June)

David Lidington Excerpts

Friday 17th June 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will attend the Foreign Affairs Council on 20 June. I will attend the General Affairs Council on 21 June. Both meetings will be held in Luxembourg.

Foreign Affairs Council (Foreign Ministers)

Sudan

Ministers will focus on Sudan in the run-up to the secession of South Sudan on 9 July. They are likely to discuss the worrying violence in the Abyei and southern Kordofan regions of Sudan and the lack of progress on key issues under the comprehensive peace agreement. Ministers will also have the opportunity to welcome the EU’s comprehensive approach strategy for Sudan, setting out the EU’s approach to supporting the emergence of two viable, peaceful and prosperous states in North and South Sudan.

Western Balkans

We expect Ministers to discuss the ongoing political stalemate in Albania, compounded by the dispute over recent local election results. On a visit to Tirana on 9 June, I outlined the UK’s concerns at the continued impasse to the political leaders, and stressed the need to find consensus-based solutions to put Albania back on its reform path to the EU. The UK has also supported Baroness Ashton’s and Commissioner Fule’s recent joint statement (see link below) that called for a fair and transparent legal process, and for Albania’s leaders to live up to the European aspirations of the Albanian citizens. We are working for conclusions that stress similar concerns.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/122198.pdf

We expect Baroness Ashton to raise two information points: on Bosnia and Herzegovina on the appointment of a new EU Head of Delegation; and on Serbia/Kosovo she will update the FAC on developments following the arrest of Mladic, and on her visit to the region.

Belarus

Ministers are due to discuss the worsening political and human rights situation in Belarus. They will consider applying further targeted restrictive measures in order to put pressure on the regime to release all political prisoners and cease the continuing repression of human rights defenders. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary made a statement on the sentences passed against former presidential candidates in Belarus on 27 May:

“I utterly condemn the sentences passed against former presidential candidates, Mikolai Statkevich and Dmitry Uss, on 26 May. Whatever the official reason given for their conviction it is clear that their real “crime” was the exercise of their right to protest against the flawed elections of 19 December.

I equally condemn the sentencing on 20 May of former presidential candidates, Vladzimir Neklyayev and Vytaly Rymasheuski. This trial is the latest in a series of politically-motivated show trials which have seen the conviction of 43 people. The Belarusian authorities need to understand that there can be no normalisation of relations with the international community without respect for the most basic of human rights and fundamental freedoms.”

European Neighbourhood Policy

Ministers will consider conclusions on the European neighbourhood policy, on the basis of the recent communication from the European Commission and External Action Service. This precedes a likely discussion of the new policy by Heads of Government at the European Council on 23-24 June. The revised European neighbourhood policy forms the centrepiece of the EU’s response to the events of the last months in the southern neighbourhood. The communication, which we broadly support, was the subject of an explanatory memorandum submitted to Parliament on 3 June.

Southern Neighbourhood (Libya/Syria/Yemen)

Ministers will discuss progress on Libya since the contact group held in Abu Dhabi on 9 June, where participants agreed to increase pressure on Gaddafi’s regime. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the Member for North East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt), represented the UK at that meeting. Ministers may also assess the latest humanitarian situation and stabilisation plans.

My right hon. Friends the Foreign Secretary and Secretary of State for International Development travelled to Benghazi on 4 June to demonstrate their support for the national transitional council and discuss the council’s plans for a political road map for the future of Libya. Following the visit, the Foreign Secretary updated the House on the middle east and north Africa on 7 June (see link below).

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?id=609070182&view=PressR

On Syria, we expect Ministers to consider recent developments on the ground. We are considering proposing further names of individuals and entities to add to the EU sanctions list. We believe it is vital that the EU keeps up the pressure on Syria while the violence continues. As my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary said to the House on 7 June, Bashar al-Assad is losing legitimacy. He should either reform or step aside.

Ministers will also discuss the current situation in Yemen. If conclusions are agreed, we expect them to repeat the EU’s call for President Saleh to stand down. We continue to call on all sides to renew dialogue and pursue the Gulf Co-operation Council-brokered initiative as the only solution for smooth political transition in Yemen. On 6 June, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made a joint statement with his German, French, Spanish and Italian counterparts calling for transition to take place on the basis of the GCC initiative. The statement said:

“We take note of President Abdullah Ali Saleh’s departure from Yemen and are grateful to Saudi Arabia for receiving him on its territory for urgent medical assistance. After months of troubles and violence that have inflicted considerable suffering to the people of Yemeni and caused much destruction, we urge all Yemeni civilian and military leaders to respect the truce initiated by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

We call on the Yemeni people to find the way to reconciliation in a spirit of dialogue and national unity, in particular on the basis of the proposals presented in the framework of the Gulf Co-operation Council’s initiative, which we fully support, in order for the Yemeni people to be able to democratically choose its leader. We stand ready to fully support the Yemenis in this move.”

Middle East Peace Process (MEPP)

We are expecting the discussion to be conducted in an informal session over lunch, looking at the latest developments in the MEPP.

General Affairs Council

June European Council

The General Affairs Council will help prepare the June European Council, which takes place in Brussels on 23-24 June 2011. The agenda will cover migration, Croatian accession and economic policy. On the latter point there will be an update by the Commission about the national reform programmes, submitted by member states in April. In this context there may also be a discussion about growth-enhancing structural reforms, following the commitments made by member states at the March European Council. There may also be discussion on the eurozone crisis and the latest situation in the middle east and north Africa. The Council is expected to approve conclusions about the Danube strategy and the integration of Roma communities.

The EU’s overseas development assistance (ODA) targets may also be raised at the European Council. The Foreign Affairs Council adopted conclusions in May (see link below) which set out actual performances against EU aid targets (0.7% of EU gross national income by 2015).

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/122163.pdf

The conclusions of the last European Council in March, where the focus was on economic policy, Libya/north Africa and Japan, can be found at:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/120296.pdf

18-Month Programme of the Council

Ministers will discuss the 18-month programme of the Council. This sets out the combined programme of the Polish, Danish and Cypriot presidencies of the Council covering the period July 2011 to December 2012. We expect the programme to be published on the Council’s website in the next few days.

I will deposit copies of this note in the Libraries of both Houses when we receive it, and I will update Parliament on Foreign and General Affairs Councils after the meetings.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lidington Excerpts

Tuesday 14th June 2011 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

We have made direct representations at ministerial, ambassadorial and senior official level on a number of occasions, and of course we continue to condemn the imprisonment of Opposition politicians in Belarus, as well as the persecution and harassment of civil society leaders and human rights defenders there.

[Pamela Nash]

President Lukashenko’s Administration are responsible for a series of enterprises, the profits from which are kept within the presidential Administration, including the KGB. Owing to clear close financial links between state oppression and such enterprises, is it not time that the UK looked at prohibiting British trade and investment with those companies?

[Mr Lidington]

As the hon. Lady knows, together with our European Union partners we have agreed a set of sanctions targeted against leading members of the Belarusian regime. There is also a review of the possibility of additional economic sanctions. Not every EU country has expressed itself in favour of that course, and we must take account of the need to get the balance right between harming the regime and not trying to impoverish further a people already oppressed. However, I take seriously the point she makes.

[Tracey Crouch (Chatham and Aylesford) (Con)]

The Minister will be aware that, in light of its economic failures, Belarus has requested a further £5 billion bail-out from the IMF. What discussions has he had with the Treasury to ensure that Britain will not support a bail-out package unless it comes with a firm commitment from the Belarusian regime to recognise the basic rights and freedoms of its media and civilians?

[Mr Lidington]

My hon. Friend puts her point well. As she rightly says, the economy of Belarus is in a dire state, and the Belarusian Government’s economic policies, as well as their internally repressive policies, are making a bad situation even worse for the people of that country. We are considering—both internally in the United Kingdom and in concert with international partners—what our approach might be in the event of Belarus applying for further help from the IMF.

[Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton) (Lab)]

8. What recent assessment he has made of the political situation in Tunisia.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mark Lazarowicz (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab/Co-op)]

T3. The Secretary of State will be aware of the case of my constituent, David Petrie, who is one of a number of British citizens who, for more than 20 years, have been trying to secure equal pay under their European rights in Italy. I understand that the Minister for Europe will meet his Italian counterparts in a few days’ time. Will he take up this case again and try to bring the sorry saga to a conclusion?

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

Yes, I intend to visit Italy in the next week and this is certainly one of the items that will be on the agenda for discussion.

[Rory Stewart (Penrith and The Border) (Con)]

T7. Will the Foreign Secretary please confirm the UK’s policy on the use of Predator drones and, in particular, its legal and moral basis?

--- Later in debate ---

[Greg Hands (Chelsea and Fulham) (Con)]

Returning to the western Balkans, the Foreign Secretary will be aware of the large and growing Serbian expatriate community in London. What positive message can we send to them about the prospect of visa requirements being eased in future and about how and when Serbia could eventually join the European Union?

[Mr Lidington]

As my hon. Friend knows, British visa requirements are a matter for the Home Office, and Serbia’s wish for visa liberalisation will be considered by Home Office Ministers when they next review the visa waiver scheme. I think that the message to Serbia is that this country strongly supports its ambitions to join the European Union and wishes President Tadic every success in taking through the very demanding programme of reforms that will be needed for it to meet the conditions for entry.

[Several hon. Members]

rose—

BBC World Service

David Lidington Excerpts

Thursday 19th May 2011 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South (Richard Ottaway) for introducing the debate, and for doing so in a characteristically courteous and thoughtful fashion; and I pay tribute to all members of the Foreign Affairs Committee for a comprehensive report on what all Members, whether in government or not, agree is a matter of great public significance and of significance to how we advance the interests of the United Kingdom.

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has said frequently in opposition and in government that he sees the World Service as, to use the words of my hon. Friend, a key element of British soft power. My right hon. Friend has also underlined frequently the central importance of the World Service and the British Council in giving this country an unrivalled platform from which to project our culture and to share our values.

The Government and, in particular, my right hon. Friend will clearly want to reflect carefully on what has been said during this debate, but I make it clear that there cannot be any avoidance of difficult financial decisions and hard choices for the Foreign Office or for the World Service, as for any part of the public sector. I hope that when I have concluded my speech hon. Members will recognise that the Government are committed to finding ways—within the terms of the existing settlement announced in October last year, and in discussions about possible additional sources of World Service revenue—in which the current and potential resources available to the World Service can be used to the greatest possible advantage. My hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy), in particular, listed a number ways in which that might be possible.

[Rehman Chishti]

Can the Minister confirm that in 2010 the chief executive of the BBC World Service earned £215,000 and five of his colleagues earned more than £200,000? Does he agree that chief executives and other senior officials should have had their salaries frozen or taken a reduction instead of cutting front-line services?

[Mr Lidington]

My hon. Friend makes an important point. I am not somebody who usually harps on about high salaries for people who hold important positions of responsibility, but it is fair to acknowledge that the BBC World Service board is responsible for a significantly smaller operation with a smaller budget than the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and yet the World Service’s board is more numerous and significantly more expensive than the board that runs the FCO. I do not want to make too much of that, but my hon. Friend makes an emblematic point that I will come to later.

I am not trying to deny that hard choices are having to be made, but there is a need to say to the World Service, as to every other part of the public sector, that it needs to look rigorously at how to make finite budgets go further and try to reduce all unnecessary costs.

[Mel Stride (Central Devon) (Con)]

Does my right hon. Friend believe that the BBC World Service is doing enough to amortise the costs of news gathering and production among other services, including within the BBC family, before looking at a reduction in language services?

[Mr Lidington]

One of the challenges that the World Service management faces is to draw up what I hope will be very ambitious and detailed plans to deliver a reduction in administrative and other inessential costs that match commitments of the sort that Government Departments throughout Whitehall, including the FCO, are already having to make. The BBC World Service has announced that it is committed to a significant reduction. We have not seen details of that, nor are we entitled to do so. It is an independent organisation, quite properly so, although the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee are of course free to investigate further.

I hope that the World Service will choose to make those plans public and will look to take advantage of the opportunities that will arise from the new arrangements for the relationship between the World Service and the BBC as a whole to merge and share costs where possible. For example, arrangements to combine studios for the World Service and other parts of the BBC would seem to be a sensible way forward. Indeed, the BBC has indicated that it is considering that in the context of the new arrangements.

[Mike Gapes]

Is the Minister aware that the BBC World Service spends proportionately less on human resources, finance and IT than the FCO? Is he also aware that there has been a reduction of about 32% in the management costs of the World Service since 2009?

[Mr Lidington]

The hon. Gentleman, perhaps uncharacteristically, is choosing to overlook the fact that the FCO is responsible for well over 100 operations in different countries overseas and that in those circumstances the requirements of currency operations and IT add up to quite a considerable overhead. I welcome the public commitment of the World Service to a significant reduction in its administrative costs, and I am sure that the House looks forward to seeing how it proposes to deliver that.

[Mr David]

rose—

[Mr Lidington]

I will give way to the hon. Gentleman, and then I will make progress, because I want to be fair to the many hon. Members who want to take part in the next debate.

[Mr David]

I hear what the Minister says, and of course we all want to see efficiency savings and economies. However, it is important to bear in mind that the cost of producing a message or sending out a programme is lower in the BBC World Service than in any other international broadcaster.

[Mr Lidington]

It is certainly important to bear such things in mind, but many parts of the public sector in this country can point to how their best practice matches that in other parts of the world. Nevertheless, the financial state in which this country finds itself as a consequence of the inheritance bequeathed to us by the Government of whom the hon. Gentleman was a member is so grave that we have no alternative but to ask every part of our public services, no matter how well and efficiently they perform, to drive those efficiencies further.

My hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South, and indeed the report, criticised the Government’s decision to reduce the budget of the World Service by 16% and argued that it was disproportionate. To set the matter in context, as the House knows the Government inherited a massive fiscal deficit when they came to power. We made it clear from the start that it would be the Government’s overriding priority to take swift and effective action to reduce that deficit. Every member of the Government has always made it clear that rebalancing the nation’s finances will not be without pain and that every taxpayer-funded organisations will have to play its part, as will the private sector. Frankly, if as a country we fail to deal with the overriding challenge of our deficit, all our hopes, whether for prosperity, improved public services or enhanced international influence for the United Kingdom, will come to naught.

The World Service was asked to reduce its budget by 16%. The Foreign Affairs Committee has argued that that is disproportionate. I say candidly, but politely, to my hon. Friend that I disagree with that verdict. At the beginning of the previous comprehensive spending round in 2007-08, the World Service budget was 13% of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office budget. By the end of 2014-15, its budget will be 14.4% of the FCO budget. The proportion of its budget at the end of this Government’s tenure will therefore be slightly higher than it was before. To respond to the particular case put to me by my hon. Friend, in 2007-08 the World Service received £222 million, and in 2013-14 it will again receive £222 million. However, the FCO budget will fall from £1.7 billion in 2007-08 to £1.55 billion in 2013-14. It is those figures that lie behind the percentages that I quoted.

[Richard Ottaway]

Is the Minister including the costs of conflict prevention in his figures?

[Mr Lidington]

I will take advice on that point and come back to my hon. Friend either later in the debate or in writing.

It is also fair to point out that the FCO has been more severely affected by the impact of foreign exchange losses than has the World Service. From 2007 to 2011, the loss of the mechanism that protected the FCO against foreign exchange risk accounted for a 17% loss to the FCO core budget, but only a 2% loss to the BBC World Service core budget. That discrepancy is explained by the fact that a much greater proportion of the FCO’s diplomatic effort is located overseas than is the case with the BBC World Service.

The Foreign Affairs Committee has made its case, and I hope that I have provided figures that back up the evidence my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State gave and that support our contention that although the settlement is indeed tough, it is fair when set alongside what has happened to the core FCO budget over the past few years.

The World Service undoubtedly provides a valuable service, but that is true of many other public bodies. The police, the military and the education system have all had to make savings, and so have the British Council and UK Trade & Investment. Some of those organisations have suffered cuts considerably larger than 16%. I am happy to stand at the Dispatch Box and say that all those institutions are vital assets of the UK. We do not take pleasure in what we have had to do, but the measures that we have taken are essential for the future well-being of our country. Much as I dislike having to support cuts to the budget of the BBC World Service, we cannot in good conscience say that we support cuts in general but resist all of them in particular.

Members will have heard the announcement by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary on 11 May, in which he set out plans for the future of the Foreign Office’s diplomatic network. We will find £100 million a year in savings from our administration budgets, yet at the same time we are both widening and deepening our diplomatic network. We are opening more posts and strengthening existing ones in emerging economies of key importance to this country. The savings that we are having to find to finance that expansion are not easy, but they are essential if we are to develop within tough financial constraints.

When I go to British embassies overseas, I am left in no doubt about the seriousness of the choices that Ministers have to make. I regularly have meetings with our staff at our posts throughout Europe and the former Soviet Union, and at practically every meeting I meet staff who are worried about their jobs, some of whom have worked loyally for the FCO for a large number of years. The FCO is not immune from difficult decisions, and there is no pain-free way to make the choices necessary to provide a strong voice for Britain in the world. I do not think the World Service can be exempt from the need to make difficult choices.

The World Service originally approached the Foreign Secretary for authority to close 13 of its 31 language services—even more closures than were authorised by the Government of whom the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Mr David) was a member. When I heard him denounce the policies of the current Government, I worried about the selective amnesia that had come over him about his Government’s record on the World Service.

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary was not prepared to support those suggested closures, and after frank discussion with the World Service and the BBC Trust he reluctantly agreed to the closure of five services. That was after he had received clear assurances that the closures would not cause major damage to the World Service’s overall services and audience share. The World Service also assured us that it would make strenuous efforts to find efficiency savings and drive down non-editorial costs to protect its front line. It has said that it will find savings of up to a third in finance, human resources, business development, strategy, marketing and other administrative operations.

I hope that the World Service will match that commitment with detailed plans, and that it will match the greater transparency of financial arrangements that the Government have undertaken to provide. The BBC is not obliged to do that under the current arrangements, but it would add to public confidence in the organisation, including the World Service, if it endorsed greater transparency so that taxpayers and licence fee payers could see where their money was being spent.

There are other changes in how World Service output is delivered, such as the closure of radio transmissions in Mandarin or the cessation of the Hindi shortwave service. Ministers have no power to veto such decisions. Some access to the World Service in those languages will remain, whether online or through FM or television, but those choices fall squarely within the responsibility of the World Service—the Government were not consulted in detail on those changes and we had no locus to intervene. The BBC believes that those decisions were soundly based, and we have seen its justification for those changes.

As a number of hon. Members mentioned, given recent events in the middle east and north Africa, the FCO chose to reprioritise in order to bolster our effort there. It is entirely sensible for the World Service to do likewise. However, even before the Arab spring, the decision to curtail Arabic broadcasting was somewhat surprising.

On potential sources of additional money for the World Service, first, there is the prospect of commercial income. We agreed with the World Service that it would increase its sources of commercial income, with an initial target of £3 million. It is important for it to adopt an entrepreneurial approach to developing that source of income.

Secondly, on funding from the Department for International Development, my hon. Friend the Member for Croydon South quite fairly pointed out that there are two genuine hurdles to be surmounted, the first of which is meeting the OECD kitemark for measures that count as official development assistance. The OECD requires that any activity that qualifies as ODA must have the

“promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective”.

However, even if activity qualifies under OECD rules as ODA, it does not necessarily meet the second, stricter test, which is embodied in the International Development Act 2002. The Act gives the Secretary of State statutory authority to spend money when that allows for the relief of poverty—that is the prime measure. As my hon. Friend mentioned, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development is looking at a new relationship with the World Service trust. In addition, the Government are approaching the OECD with a view to getting its agreement to classify a proportion of World Service spending as subject to ODA rules.

It is worth noting that the settlement included money to be used as the contribution of the World Service to the overall BBC pension deficit. The BBC says that its original estimate of that deficit has been revised down by about one third. We do not yet know the detailed figures for the World Service, but if, pro rata, it no longer needs a third of the money it has allocated for pensions—that would amount to about £4 million a year—it could choose to restore the five cut services and the Hindi service, or to restore the cuts to the Arabic, Hindi and Mandarin services that it previously announced.

Those choices are for the BBC. In a recent article in Ariel, the World Service controller of languages said that even if funding were reinstated, it would not necessarily restart services that it had stopped, but would instead look at new investment. Global shortwave audiences are falling dramatically—20 million listeners were lost from 2009-10 alone.

My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for North East Fife (Sir Menzies Campbell) and my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham (Martin Horwood) asked about the place of the World Service in the proposed new arrangements with the BBC, which will take effect from 2014-15. As I have already said, these provide opportunities for things such as the combination of news rooms and studios, and for different arms of the BBC to share costs, which might help World Service funds to go further. But it is also true that the BBC, through its new chairman and director-general, has made it clear that it places a high value on the World Service and sees it continuing as a key element of BBC output. The new governance arrangements will be guaranteed by an amendment to the BBC agreement between the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport and the BBC. We are discussing with the BBC Trust a formal exchange of letters to confirm this. The BBC Trust is also considering an international trustee to represent the interests of the World Service.

Even after the cuts, the World Service will still receive funding from the British taxpayer of £733 million over the next three years. The settlement that we came to with the World Service was challenging, and we take seriously the points that have been made by the Select Committee and in the Chamber today and will reflect further on them. We will work with the World Service to find ways in which it can continue to fulfil its mission as an independent broadcasting voice that is at the same time a key element in the promotion of British culture and values.

[Richard Ottaway]

Time does not permit me to acknowledge in detail the speeches that have been made today. It has been a great debate, but the Minister must have felt a bit lonely. We have heard seven speeches today, six of which supported the thrust of the motion and the desperate need for a review of the service, and his own which was more defensive of the Government’s position. The Minister is a good friend of mine, in both the personal and political senses, but he has not quite got the point that everyone has made today.

We all recognise the economic pressures on the Government—indeed, everyone who spoke is a member of a party that supports the need to address the desperate financial situation the country is in. However, it is a question of priorities. When the facts change, so must the policies. The circumstances in Libya have meant that more resources have been diverted to that country. The international tensions of worldwide terrorism have meant that more money has been put into the security services. The extra need for diplomacy around the world was behind the statement last week about extra funding for diplomacy. What colleagues are saying today is that, with the changing world we live in and the desperate need for more soft power—

[Mr Lidington]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Richard Ottaway]

I am afraid you would never forgive me if I gave way, Mr Deputy Speaker.

There is a desperate need to address the changing world and to take soft power more seriously. I appreciate the fact that my right hon. Friend has agreed to a review. I hope that it will be a constructive review and that this is not brushed under the table saying, “That’s the House of Commons dealt with.” The House is serious about this and I hope the Foreign Office will be as well.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House notes the Sixth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee, The Implications of Cuts to the BBC World Service, HC 849; endorses the Committee’s support for the World Service’s invaluable work in providing a widely respected and trusted news service in combination with high-quality journalism to many countries; considers that the unfolding events in North Africa and the Middle East demonstrate the continuing importance of the soft power wielded through the World Service; believes that the value of the World Service far outweighs its relatively small cost; and invites the Government to review its decision to cut spending on the World Service by 16 per cent.

Pre-Foreign Affairs Council and General Affairs Council (23-24 May 2011)

David Lidington Excerpts

Thursday 19th May 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will attend the Foreign Affairs Council (Foreign Ministers) on 23 May. My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence, the Minister with responsibility for international security strategy, the hon. Member for Aldershot (Mr Howarth) will attend the Foreign Affairs Council (Defence) on 23 May. I will attend the General Affairs Council on 23 May. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development will attend the Foreign Affairs Council (Development) on 24 May.

Foreign Affairs Council (Foreign Ministers)

Libya

Ministers are expected to discuss developments in Libya since the contact group meeting in Rome of 5 May, where participants agreed to increase pressure on Gaddafi’s regime. Ministers are likely to agree conclusions referring to the recent announcements by the International Criminal Court (ICC)—see more below. And they may assess the humanitarian situation and discuss the possibility of setting up an EU office in Benghazi.

On 12 May, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil, chair of the Libyan national transitional council (NTC), visited the UK and met the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for International Development. The Foreign Secretary updated Parliament in a written ministerial statement on 13 May.

On 16 May, the Foreign Secretary welcomed the announcement by the ICC that Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo will apply for arrest warrants for Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam al Gaddafi and Abdullah Senussi.

The Foreign Secretary said:

“I welcome this announcement. The human rights situation in Western Libya and the behaviour of the Qadhafi regime remains of grave concern and the UK was at the forefront of efforts in the UN to adopt resolution 1970 which referred the situation in Libya to the ICC. The request for these warrants is a reminder to all in Qadhafi’s regime that crimes will not go unpunished and the reach of international justice will be long.”



“Those responsible for attacks on civilians must he held to account. The international community must fully support the ICC in thoroughly investigating all allegations. I call on all UN Member States, whether parties to the Rome Statute or not, to offer their full co-operation.”

Syria

We expect the Council to agree conclusions on Syria condemning the violence and ongoing repression of peaceful protesters and for release of detainees. It could also call for the UN/ICRC to be granted immediate humanitarian access to several towns in Syria; and to urge the Syrian Government to choose the path of reform and warn the Syrian leadership that the EU will work to agree sanctions unless the violence stops and detainees are released.

On 13 May, the FCO’s political director, Sir Geoffrey Adams, called in the Syrian ambassador Dr Sami Khiyami to the Foreign Office to express the UK’s strong concerns about the ongoing situation in Syria.

Sir Geoffrey emphasised the UK’s profound concern about the Syrian Government’s violent repression of their own citizens, and called on the Syrian authorities to respect universal human rights, including freedom of expression. Sir Geoffrey also expressed concern about the continued denial of access of international media into Syria.

The political director called on the Syrian Government to allow UN and other humanitarian organisations immediate and unhindered access to besieged Syrian cities, particularly the city of Deraa.

Sir Geoffrey said that unless the Syrian Government stopped the killing of protesters and released political prisoners, the UK along with its EU partners would take further measures to hold the regime to account. These measures would include further sanctions targeted at the highest levels of the regime, including travel bans and asset freezing.

Yemen

This will be a further opportunity for the EU to demonstrate support for the Gulf Co-operation Council’s (GCC’s) initiative to resolve the current political deadlock to agree the transitional process. Further deterioration in Yemen’s economic and humanitarian situation, and a rise in violence between protesters and security forces, underpins the urgent need for a political settlement. The Government have remained in close contact with EU, US and Gulf counterparts on finding a peaceful solution. We expect there to be Council conclusions.

My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the hon. Member for North East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) discussed recent events when he met UN special envoy to Yemen Jamal Benomar in London on 12 May.

Speaking after the meeting my hon. Friend said:

“Mr Benomar’s insights into recent developments in Yemen reinforced my deep concern about what is happening. I condemn the actions taken by the security forces that have reportedly caused the death of several protestors and injured many more in Taiz, Sana’a, and cities across Yemen. Mr Benomar and I agreed that all parties should exercise the utmost restraint and take all steps necessary to defuse this situation.

I urge the Yemeni authorities to demonstrate their commitment to an orderly and peaceful transition by respecting the right of peaceful protest and free speech. The rising violence we have witnessed risks undermining the efforts to secure the agreement brokered by the Gulf Co-operation Council. All parties need to come together urgently to confirm their commitment to this.”

Iraq

Baroness Ashton may raise the incident at Camp Ashraf in Iraq on 8 April, in which 34 people died and some 70 were injured. The UK has supported calls for an independent inquiry.

On 8 April, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the hon. Member for North East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt), made the following statement:

“The UK Government has been disturbed to read reports that a number of civilian residents have been killed and many more wounded at Camp Ashraf yesterday. I absolutely deplore any loss of life and my sincere condolences go out to the families of those involved.

The Iraqi Government has provided us with assurances on several occasions that it will treat individual residents of camp Ashraf in a humane manner, act in accordance with Iraqi law, the Iraqi Constitution and its international obligations. We urge the Iraqi Government to uphold this commitment.

Our Ambassador in Baghdad has been expressing our concerns to the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the highest levels. We call on the Iraqi Government to cease violent operations in Camp Ashraf immediately and to ensure that the residents have full access to medical care. It is important that the Government of Iraq takes immediate steps to calm the situation and ensure that the human rights of the residents are respected. We are aware of a request by UNAMI to send a humanitarian monitoring mission to camp Ashraf as soon as possible. We fully support this request and therefore urge the Iraqi Government to quickly grant permission. We call on all sides to engage in a constructive dialogue that can lead to a lasting resolution to the situation.”

Middle East Peace Process (MEPP)

Ministers are likely to discuss recent developments in the MEPP, including the implications of the Fatah-Hamas reconciliation. There may also be conclusions. We will make clear our hope that the announcement of reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas will lead to the formation of a Government who reject violence and pursue a negotiated peace, and that we will judge a future Palestinian Government by their actions and their readiness to work for peace.

On 15 May, the Foreign Secretary called on all parties to exercise restraint after violence broke out on Israel’s borders as Palestinians marked Nakba day.

The Foreign Secretary said:

“I am deeply concerned by the violence on Israel’s borders today and saddened by the loss of life. I call on all parties to exercise restraint and ensure that civilian life is protected. These developments make clearer than ever that a lasting and comprehensive resolution to the conflicts in the region is urgently needed and will only be achieved through negotiation”.

Southern Caucasus

We expect Ministers to discuss recent developments in the south Caucasus, and in particular to focus on the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Bosnia and Herzegovina

We expect Ministers to discuss the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) following Baroness Ashton’s visit there on 13 May. The Government are deeply concerned that a BiH state-level Government has not been formed over seven months after elections; that divisive nationalist rhetoric continues; and that there have been recent serious challenges to state-level institutions and to the Dayton agreement. We will urge the Council to remain fully engaged on this issue and to react as necessary to developments on the ground.

Sudan

Ministers are expected to be briefed on the key elements of the EU’s comprehensive approach to Sudan, with a view to a possible substantive discussion and adoption of conclusions at the FAC in June. Given the lack of progress on key issues under the comprehensive peace agreement, and the ongoing violence in Darfur. the meeting on 23 May will be an important opportunity for Ministers to stress the importance of a continued focus on Sudan, both in the run-up to and following the secession of South Sudan on 9 July.

External Action Service (EAS)

This should be an opportunity to set out our view on the priorities for EAS action, and to underline that the EAS should limit its representation of the member states to agreed areas. It will also be an opportunity to voice our opposition to the proposed budget increase for the EAS of 5.8% (€27 million) in 2012 and press the EAS to produce a convincing plan for the savings that will lead to budget neutrality.

Iran

There should be an agreement, without discussion, to the designation of over 100 entities in order to strengthen EU sanctions and increase the pressure on Iran’s nuclear programme. In addition, Baroness Ashton may brief Ministers on the reply she recently received from the Iranian chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili. A spokesperson for Baroness Ashton commented to the press that the reply “does not seem to justify” organising another meeting between the E3+3 (UK, France, Germany, US, Russia and China) and Iran at this time.

EU Human Rights

Baroness Ashton will brief Ministers on her preliminary views on an EU overall strategy for human rights, followed by an exchange of views. The final strategy is due to be announced in June 2011.

Foreign Affairs Council (Defence)

The current agenda includes three main items: an informal discussion of military operations; a formal discussion of military capabilities; and the European Defence Agency (EDA) Steering Board.

Informal working session on operations

Ministers will be joined by the NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen for an informal discussion of military operations. The session is likely to focus on a potential extension to EU Training Mission Somalia. We do not expect the discussion to result in a decision; this is likely to be deferred to the June FAC. The session will also update progress on Operation Atalanta, Althea, and Eufor Libya.

Formal working session on military capabilities

There will be conclusions on pooling and sharing military capabilities and a broader dialogue on the Weimar initiative. Ministers are likely to discuss the High Representative’s interim report (yet to be released) on the progress of the Weimar initiative and implementation of provisions in the Lisbon treaty. We will support the principle of increased pooling and sharing among European and NATO partners but resist any calls for the creation of additional institutions or processes.

EDA Steering Board

The agenda for this meeting is currently being finalised. It will build from the session on capabilities, taking stock on key capability development projects and initiatives, including pooling and sharing and the European Air Transport Fleet (EATF) programme. We are broadly supportive of the EDA’s work in these areas.

General Affairs Council

Croatia

The Commissioner for Enlargement, Stefan Fule, will brief Ministers on Croatia’s progress on its accession negotiations and the approaching closure of negotiations. He is likely to focus on progress within Chapter 23 (Judiciary and Fundamental Rights). This chapter was created to strengthen the accession process after the last EU enlargement. The Government will continue to monitor Croatia’s progress and ensure that this chapter is closed on the basis of a thorough technical assessment against the benchmarks, including establishing the necessary track records to ensure that reforms are sustainable. Beyond this, the Government will ensure that closure of negotiations as a whole takes place on the basis of rigorous conditionality.

Charter of Fundamental Rights

The presidency is seeking agreement to conclusions in response to the Commission’s annual report on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The Council conclusions set out the actions taken by the Council to ensure compliance with the charter, including the work of the fundamental rights working group to produce guidelines to help other formations of the Council identify and resolve fundamental rights issues. The Council conclusions may also describe the actions the Council has taken or announced under each of the six chapters of the charter.

Roma

Ministers will have an initial discussion of proposed European Council conclusions on the Commission’s communication of 5 April entitled “An EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020”. The Commission’s communication can be found at the following link:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri= CELEX:52011DC0173:EN:NOT.

The conclusions are likely to call on member states to develop national strategies or policy approaches to improve the social and economic integration of Roma communities, specifically through access to education, employment, health care and housing. The UK already has a strong record on the integration of Roma, Gypsy and Traveller communities. We will argue for the eventual conclusions not to be overly prescriptive to allow us the flexibility to continue with these approaches. There will be a more substantive discussion at the 19 May Employment and Social Affairs Council, which will feed into the 24 June European Council, where we expect the adoption of formal conclusions.

Foreign Affairs Council (Development)

Sudan

We expect the Development Commissioner, Andris Piebalgs, to debrief Development Ministers on his visit to Khartoum and Juba and to update them on the EU’s plans for joint programming in South Sudan. Additionally, a possible Council decision is expected on the use of €200 million of de-committed funds from European Development Fund (EDF) to support development efforts in South Sudan.

Accountability Report on EU Development Policy

Ministers will discuss the findings of the Commission’s accountability report on EU development policy. The report assesses progress against the EU’s financing for development commitments and covers official development assistance (ODA), innovative finance, domestic resource mobilisation, aid for trade, climate finance, co-operation with the private sector, and aid effectiveness. The discussion is likely to focus on how to achieve the EU aid commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income on aid by 2015. Ministers will adopt a report on EU ODA performance in 2010, to be considered by the June European Council. This report is a welcome means of holding other member states to account. We will continue to press others to fulfil their aid commitments.

Water

The Hungarian presidency is expected to deliver proposals on the role of water in EU development policy, for which Council conclusions are due to go through Environmental Council in June. The Government agree that water for growth and development as well as water supply and sanitation for human development need greater policy priority within the EU. We will therefore support proposals to update and renew the EU policy on water in EU development co-operation. This should support the efforts to redefine and revitalise the EU water initiative, set up in 2002 as part of the World Summit on Sustainable Development to mobilise and co-ordinate EU resources to achieve the water-related millennium development goals. We believe that water should be central in preparations for Rio+20 and that the EU should play a leading role in the preparatory processes and conferences. We will continue to insist on these points in negotiations with EU partners.

Cote d’Ivoire

This is an opportunity to emphasise the need for firm international support for stabilisation, reconciliation, and justice under President Ouattara’s new Government. Close co-ordination of international community efforts, appropriately resourced and structured UN involvement; active and effective UN agencies; and a UN and EU sanctions regime that supports the goals of political, economic and social progress will be important.

I will deposit copies of this note in the Libraries of both Houses. And I will update Parliament on Foreign and General Affairs Councils after the meetings.

Council of Europe: 121st Annual Ministerial Meeting: Istanbul, 10-11 May 2011

David Lidington Excerpts

Monday 16th May 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

I represented the United Kingdom at the 121st annual ministerial meeting of the Council of Europe in Istanbul on 10 and 11 May 2011.

The Turkish and Ukrainian chairmanships issued a declaration covering a statement in their joint names. This statement reaffirmed the Council of Europe’s role in protecting and promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law across the whole European continent and beyond; respect for and recognition of the political commitments and legally binding instruments to which all 47 member states are committed; and the urgent need to continue the current process of reform of the organisation.

I reaffirmed the United Kingdom’s commitment to the Council of Europe and its aims. I paid tribute to the reform work done so far under Secretary-General Jagland but noted that much more needed to be done. I gave notice that the forthcoming United Kingdom chairmanship would continue to support Mr Jagland’s reform programme while seeking to advance a programme of work under the theme of promoting and protecting human rights. A key priority of our chairmanship would be to drive forward the ongoing process of reform of the European Court of Human Rights, building on the agreements reached at the high-level conferences at Interlaken in February 2010 and at Izmir in April 2011.

At the end of the meeting, Turkey handed over the rotating six-month chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers to Ukraine. The United Kingdom will succeed Ukraine as Chair of the Committee of Ministers on 7 November 2011 and hand over the Chairmanship to Albania on 14 May 2012. Each country will have its own set of chairmanship priorities, but the Ukrainians, the Albanians and we have agreed in addition that our three successive chairmanships from May 2011 to November 2012 will include certain shared priorities. These cover reform of the organisation; reform of the European Court of Human Rights; and raising the efficiency of Council of Europe work on local and regional democracy.

While in Istanbul, I also held separate talks with a number of key Council of Europe and bilateral colleagues. These included the Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, Mr Thorbjom Jagland; the Commissioner for Human Rights, Mr Thomas Hammarberg; the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Mr Alexander Grushko; the Foreign Minister of the Republic of Turkey, Mr Ahmet Davutoglu; the Minister for EU Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, Mr Egemen Bagis; and the Foreign Minister of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr Sven Alkalaj.

I am placing a copy of the joint Turkish/Ukrainian statement, and of the UK statement, in the Library of the House. The latter document has already been published on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website (www.fco.gov.uk).

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lidington Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd May 2011 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

I am in regular contact with my European counterparts about the work of the External Action Service, and with the EU High Representative, Baroness Ashton.

[Stephen Gilbert]

The Minister will be aware of the growing number of countries in Africa and the Pacific that do not have representation from either the UK or other European Union member states. Does he agree that the European External Action Service could provide representation to European nationals in those countries?

[Mr Lidington]

My hon. Friend talks about the EEAS’s role in consular representation. Of course, under the treaties, that competence is given explicitly to member states rather than to European institutions, but it is quite right that the EEAS should, in line with the treaties, support the work of EU member states, especially by signposting EU nationals who are unrepresented to embassies or high commissions of another member state where they can obtain representation.

[Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)]

During the ratification of the Lisbon treaty, the right hon. Gentleman was opposed to the European External Action Service. Does he agree that recent experience in north Africa and elsewhere in the world demonstrates the need for positive co-operation with our European partners?

[Mr Lidington]

Neither I nor my party has ever quibbled with the idea that there should be effective European co-operation between member states. The test of whether the External Action Service is effective will be, in large measure, whether the High Representative and her staff can work effectively with member states’ Foreign Ministers, because only when member states reach a genuine common position does the High Representative have a mandate to act.

[Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) (Con)]

7. What recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Government's actions with respect to Libya; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

We have excellent co-operation with Turkey on a wide range of issues, as was reaffirmed in the strategic partnership signed last July by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and Prime Minister Erdogan.

[David Rutley]

Given Turkey’s important role in helping the United Kingdom foster stronger relations with Arab nations at this time of instability, what steps is my right hon. Friend taking to engage Turkey further both in providing increased humanitarian aid in Libya to those who need it and in helping to enforce the arms embargo against the Gaddafi regime?

[Mr Lidington]

Turkey has already been active on both counts. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is in frequent contact with Foreign Minister Davutoglu about how to strengthen our co-operation both in supplying effective humanitarian aid to people in need inside Libya and in planning for the reconstruction of that country in the future.

[Mr Andrew Love (Edmonton) (Lab/Co-op)]

Britain is Turkey’s best friend in the European Union, yet relations between the EU and Turkey continue to be bedevilled by the issue of Cyprus. What efforts is the right hon. Gentleman making to persuade both Cyprus and Turkey that a better relationship between the two of them will help the reunification of the island and Turkey’s membership of the EU?

[Mr Lidington]

The urgent need for progress towards a settlement in Cyprus is on the agenda at every conversation that either I or my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary have with both our Turkish and Cypriot counterparts. I am sure that that will continue to be the case, and I hope that once the forthcoming Cypriot and then the Turkish elections are over, all parties concerned will redouble their efforts to reach the solution that all communities in Cyprus need to see.

[Mr Speaker]

Graham Evans is not here, so I call Fiona Bruce.

--- Later in debate ---

[Julian Smith (Skipton and Ripon) (Con)]

T4. British business continues to be bogged down by regulation and directives from Brussels. What plans does the Minister for Europe have to work with ministerial colleagues to challenge that over the coming months?

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

My hon. Friend is right in his analysis. Securing less costly, less burdensome regulation on European businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, is a priority in our engagement with our European counterparts for every Minister in this Government, from the Prime Minister downwards. I am delighted to be able to assure my hon. Friend that the Prime Minister’s initiative in that respect is gaining increasing support from other Heads of Government across the European Union.

[Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)]

T3. Described as the single greatest advertisement for Britain, the value of the BBC World Service cannot be underestimated, especially given that Syrian demonstrators hold up placards with “Thank you BBC” on them. Will the Minister therefore consider making the appropriate representations to stop the disproportionate reduction in the BBC World Service output before it is too late?

--- Later in debate ---

[Eric Ollerenshaw (Lancaster and Fleetwood) (Con)]

T9. Two weeks ago, Bosnia’s Serb Parliament agreed to a referendum questioning the legitimacy of the Bosnia and Herzegovina state court, which deals with war crimes. Does the Minister agree that that potentially undermines the Dayton peace accord and could set off the worst crisis in the 16 years since the war finished? What is he doing with our allies to ensure the peace and stability that has been achieved so far will not now be squandered?

[Mr Lidington]

My hon. Friend is right that that is a potential challenge to the Dayton accord and it is not something that the British Government regard as acceptable. We are emphasising to our European partners and other members of the international community that we all need to work to strengthen the statehood of Bosnia and the integration of its communities within a single country, and we should be prepared, if needs be, to invoke the Bonn powers to make it clear that what the Republika Srpska is now proposing is simply not acceptable.

[Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab)]

In his response to the Chairman of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs about the Arab League’s response in Syria and Bahrain, the Foreign Secretary stressed the importance of consistency in our response to the Arab spring. How is it adequate simply to urge dialogue on both sides in Bahrain, given the Bahraini Government’s outrageous and continuing human rights abuses?

Zimbabwe

David Lidington Excerpts

Wednesday 27th April 2011 Westminster Hall

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

I thank the hon. Member for Vauxhall (Kate Hoey) for initiating the debate and for giving the House the opportunity to express views upon Zimbabwe this morning, and I also thank all those who have taken part: the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Stephen Twigg), my hon. Friends the Members for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport (Oliver Colvile), for Tiverton and Honiton (Neil Parish) and for Cheltenham (Martin Horwood), and the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). All their contributions spoke from a mixture of heart and head. What came through to me was the profound commitment, and love—I do not think that too strong a word—on the part of those Members for Zimbabwe and its people, coupled with an appreciation of the complexity and difficulty of the challenges that the country faces, and of the efforts by successive United Kingdom Governments to do what is best to try to make it possible for the people of Zimbabwe to decide upon the destiny of their own country. I thank the hon. Lady also for her kind words about the Minister for Africa, my hon. Friend the Member for North West Norfolk (Mr Bellingham), and about our ambassador to Zimbabwe and the head of the DFID team in that country.

In discussing Zimbabwe, it is right to focus on not only the deep-rooted and abiding problems that afflict the country, but, as the hon. Lady did in her opening speech, on the progress that has been made in the face of difficult odds, since the formation of the inclusive Government in 2008. There has been a marked economic recovery, illustrated by a robust 8% growth rate in 2010, although it is also fair to remind ourselves, as has been said, that some sectors, most notably agriculture, are failing to perform at anything like their full potential because of the disastrous economic policies pursued by Zimbabwean leaders.

Reports of human rights abuses since the formation of the inclusive Government have fallen well below the peak, but there has been a worrying trend in the early months of this year of a reverse in those promising signals. There has been greater freedom for the print media, and the constitutional review process, despite its frailties, has helped to open up democratic space. The important point to note is that those achievements, both economic and political, are a tribute to the courage, dedication and persistence of reformers of all stripes in Zimbabwe. I pay tribute to all the reformist politicians, civil society groups, free trade unionists, churches and others in Zimbabwe who express their hopes for and work their utmost towards a better future for their country. Those people and organisations are not the creatures of any foreign power; they are the authentic expressions and voices of the people of Zimbabwe.

However, those efforts by many in Zimbabwe risk being undermined by a few who wish to sacrifice their own country’s prosperity and political development in order to hang on to power and the opportunity for plunder. Resisting those efforts and reinforcing Zimbabwe’s progress with a process for free, fair and credible elections will demand still greater courage and commitment from reformers in Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe’s neighbours in the region and those members of the wider international community in Africa and elsewhere, including the United Kingdom, that support Zimbabwe’s transition to full democratic freedom.

Rightly, much of this debate has focused on the great concerns about the increase in reports of politically motivated violence since the new year. The Government share that concern. The high-profile arrests and threatened arrests of senior members of the inclusive Government in March and April signalled a stepping up of the partisan politicisation of the legal process. My hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham was right to pay tribute to the courage and endurance of leading democratic politicians in Zimbabwe in the face of such treatment. We remain equally concerned by ongoing reports of rising intimidation targeting civil society groups and political activists.

Several hon. Members asked about the Government’s view of the regional approach to the political challenges facing Zimbabwe. South Africa and the Southern African Development Community more generally act as the facilitators and guarantors of the global political agreement and play the lead role in brokering an agreement on a road map to free and fair elections. As my hon. Friend the Member for Cheltenham pointed out, it is somewhat ironic that the global political agreement should have been fully implemented by now, yet Zimbabweans and SADC are trying to agree on a path to the next round of elections before the GPA has been implemented anywhere near fully.

President Zuma of South Africa has shown in the creation of the elections road map that he is prepared to demonstrate strong and active leadership in the region. We hope that that critical document will address the many individual points raised by hon. Members during this debate, including the quality of the electoral register, the reform of the electoral commission, access to media and provision for the presence of international observers at the elections. The United Kingdom is certainly ready to support international observers in any way possible, yet it remains the case that we can send observers only in response to an invitation from the Government of Zimbabwe.

On the points made about this country’s programme of bilateral aid, following the bilateral aid review, our programme of aid to Zimbabwe has been increased further to £80 million for 2011-12, the largest amount yet. That is crucial. Our aid provides vital support, in particular for primary education and basic health treatment inside Zimbabwe. For example, last year we provided essential medicines to 1,300 primary care clinics and rural hospitals. The nature of that aid and the fact that it is distributed via the United Nations and non-governmental organisations rather than through the Zimbabwean Government means that I am cautious, to put it lightly, about calls for greater conditionality in the provision of aid, although I guarantee to the hon. Member for Vauxhall and my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport that I will report to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development on the points they made about conditionality.

[Kate Hoey]

I thank the Minister. I think we are all conscious of the issues involved in aid. Our point is that it is not necessarily the Department for International Development but the agencies themselves—the big charities working in countries such as Zimbabwe—that need to be much more aware. They try so hard not to be political that they end up being political in how they operate on the ground.

[Mr Lidington]

The hon. Lady has made her point well. I will ensure that my right hon. Friend is made fully aware of the case that she makes.

The EU targeted measures on Zimbabwe remain in force. This Government remain committed to them, and the European Union has made clear its commitment to the continuation of those measures. We remain willing to revisit them within the year, but only if further concrete developments take place on the ground. We will not be shifted by coerced signatures on a partisan petition. On behalf of the Government, I make it clear again that we need to lay to rest the delusional nonsense that the EU targeted measures, which apply to 163 individuals and 31 entities in Zimbabwe, are somehow responsible for the widespread deprivation and suffering endured by the people of Zimbabwe. The right way to help with the economic plight of the people in Zimbabwe is for Zimbabwe’s leaders to pursue the kinds of economic policy and give the commitments to good governance that will attract investment and add to Zimbabwe’s trade relationships with the region and the rest of the world.

In view of the time, I will write to my hon. Friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport about the Kimberley diamond process and Marange, and I will copy the letter to other Members who have taken part in this debate. As my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for Africa has made clear on numerous occasions, we continue to take a firm line within the EU, which acts on our behalf in the Kimberley process, insisting that Zimbabwe should comply fully with the rules laid down in the process before diamond exports are permitted.

China has an important role in the growth and development of Africa, and considerable progress has been made in areas such as infrastructure as a result of Chinese financing. Like China, we see trade as vital to helping African economies to grow and escape poverty, but one lesson of the developing world is that as countries grow and develop, they require not just physical infrastructure but skills, improved health services and, critically, better governance, better public institutions and a clear commitment to the rule of law rather than arbitrary government. We believe that it is vital that donors, including China, be open about their investments and make clear what they are spending and what results they achieve. That enables people to hold Governments to account and ensure that donors co-ordinate their work effectively.

Interestingly, some of China’s recent experience, for example in Zambia or Libya, might give pause for thought to those who have assumed that China can maintain an economic relationship with African nations without regard to issues of governance and the rule of law. Where those prove lacking, investment and the safety of expatriate workers can sometimes turn out to be at considerable risk.

I express once again my gratitude to all those who have taken part in this debate. The Government remain determined to pursue the course on which we are set, and we hope to see Zimbabwe reach a more prosperous and democratic future.

Yemen

David Lidington Excerpts

Friday 1st April 2011 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

I congratulate the right hon. Member for Leicester East (Keith Vaz) on securing this debate. Anyone who heard him speak will know of the importance of the issues he has brought before the House, most obviously to the prosperity and well-being of the people of Yemen, but also, as he rightly said, to the security of the United Kingdom and the wider global community. Anyone who listened to the right hon. Gentleman’s speech will also have been left in no doubt about the depth of his knowledge of Yemen and his deep and abiding affection for the country and its people.

The UK has a long-standing relationship with Yemen, and in recent years we have, under successive Governments, sought to work with the Government of Yemen and the international community to bring about greater stability, prosperity and democracy in Yemen. The current situation in the country is a cause of deep concern, and I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to this debate.

The right hon. Gentleman mentioned at the start of his speech the advice the Government are giving to British nationals currently living in Yemen, and it will be of assistance to the House if I make it clear again today that we changed our travel advice again earlier this week, and we are now advising British nationals that they should leave Yemen now, while commercial carriers are still flying. Because of the violence and political turbulence in Yemen and the dangerous security situation, the ability of the British Government to provide consular assistance is very limited. If British citizens do not leave, it is highly unlikely that the British Government would be able to evacuate them or to provide consular assistance if the situation worsens further. We are therefore strongly advising British nationals to plan on that basis.

Recent protests have brought into sharp focus the economic, political and social challenges that have faced Yemen for some time. The Yemeni protestors have raised their voices in a peaceful manner to demand a more open political system, and their bravery has been apparent to everybody. It is clear to us that the time has come for political change in Yemen. As the right hon. Gentleman said, the Yemeni people have made it clear that they want greater political participation, greater respect for human rights, and peace and prosperity. The United Kingdom Government support those aspirations.

President Ali Abdullah Saleh has led Yemen for more than 30 years and has steered his country through substantial change during that time, not least the unification of the two Yemeni republics. He has confirmed that he will not seek to run again as President of the Republic of Yemen, although the protestors are calling for a more immediate exit from power. I wish to make it clear to the House that it is not for the United Kingdom to determine how Yemen should be governed or who should be its President. The exact terms of the transition have to be worked out in Yemen, but we believe that it should be carried out on the basis of a credible and inclusive dialogue, that it should be peaceful and orderly, and that it needs to command the support of all sides in that country. The fundamental values of democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law should be upheld, and we stand ready to do what we can to support dialogue and transition, whether bilaterally or with our partners in the international Friends of Yemen group.

In response to the right hon. Gentleman’s final comments, I would say that the Foreign Secretary, Baroness Ashton on behalf of the European Union, and their counterparts in the United States are in close touch with the neighbouring countries of the Gulf on how best to offer assistance to the Government of Yemen. Sometimes we make clear in public what we are doing, but sometimes these contacts are made in private, for reasons that he will appreciate. Our judgment is that private messages are best at the moment and that a public mission would risk moving the focus from the responsibility of both the Government and opposition in Yemen to talk to each other, to whether an international mission with a high public profile would or would not succeed. Although I take the right hon. Gentleman’s proposal seriously and will ensure that the Foreign Secretary is made aware of it, we think that providing detailed and frequent support in private to those who have the responsibility to ensure transformation is the right way forward.

The violence that we have seen in recent weeks is shocking and unacceptable. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has made it clear on a number of occasions that we need to help find a way to reduce tension and avoid confrontation. All that violence does is undermine trust further, and that trust is essential if there is to be a successful negotiation and a period of political transition. As President Saleh has acknowledged, the Government of Yemen have a responsibility to protect protestors and uphold the rule of law, and that needs to be done with full regard to Yemen’s international human rights obligations.

As the right hon. Gentleman rightly said, violence and the political crisis in Yemen take place against a background of a serious social and economic situation in that country. Yemen has a large and fast-growing population, huge unemployment, significant rates of child malnutrition, and rapidly declining oil and fresh water resources. As he said, more than 40% of Yemenis live on less than $2 a day, and the inflation in world food commodity prices is hitting even wealthy Yemenis hard. That is happening to such an extent that major international non-governmental organisations are seriously concerned about the potential for a significant humanitarian disaster in Yemen in the coming months. Government revenues there are decreasing and Government expenditure is increasing. The economy is in serious decline and the current political instability threatens to make an already fragile situation much worse.

Yemen and its prosperity matter to us all, because any worsening of the instability, terrorist activity and poverty will have a detrimental effect on security within Yemen, in the region and globally. Therefore, the Government’s strategy is to support Yemeni action to create a more secure, stable and economically sustainable Yemen. A number of different policy themes interact in that regard. Yes, we are helping the Yemeni Government to provide basic services for their people, such as health care and education. We have been supporting work to develop economic opportunities in that country to create jobs and generate income, most obviously through the Department for International Development’s programmes. We have supported work to build the capacity of the Yemeni Government to tackle the threat from terrorism and, within a strict framework, we have provided training to select parts of the Yemeni security forces.

Our strategy acknowledges that developing the capacity of a state cannot be just a short-term goal. It can take months or years and requires a long-term and serious commitment by both partners and donors. In addition to the assistance we provide in that area, the United Kingdom, through DFID, supports the very poorest in Yemen through the social fund for development. We are one of the biggest bilateral aid donors to Yemen and our development partnership arrangement sets out our development commitment through to 2017. Between 2008 and 2011 alone, DFID will have provided £105 million to support development in Yemen.

The right hon. Gentleman spoke about the Friends of Yemen group. I am happy to pay tribute to the previous Government’s initiative in establishing that group and of course the current Government have sought to follow that through. Like the right hon. Gentleman, we were disappointed when, at the request of the Yemeni Government, the planned meeting in Riyadh in Saudi Arabia was postponed. We very much hope that it can be rescheduled as soon as possible, but the timetable for that would very much depend on what happens politically in Yemen.

[Keith Vaz]

The Minister has set out the position very clearly as far as aid is concerned, but the emphasis now is on the critical nature of what is happening at the moment. Given that there is the Friends of Yemen group and that there is a structure, does he not feel that an emergency meeting with the emphasis less on development aid and more on protecting and helping the country to stay stable would be helpful? The critical point now is not how much aid we can give Yemen in future but how we can save people now.

[Mr Lidington]

I take seriously the right hon. Gentleman’s point, but as I said earlier, the meeting was postponed at the request of the Yemenis themselves. It is clearly important that they engage in such a meeting with friends and neighbours. We have not forgotten about Yemen because the friends group is not meeting: we are talking to the Saudis and other neighbours in the Gulf Co-operation Council about the best way forward to try to bring about reconciliation and political transformation in Yemen and about the way in which the regional and international community can help Yemen with development and enhancing its political stability once that period of political transition is over. That work is continuing whether or not there is a formal meeting of the Friends of Yemen group.

[Keith Vaz]

The Minister knows how important these matters are, and the problem is that the situation is different to that in Libya, where the successor Government will be the Libyan people in one form or another. The successor Government to President Saleh, unless we intervene now, will be al-Qaeda, and once it is in there will be no shifting it. I would like the emphasis that has been put on Libya to be put on Yemen, and I would like that to happen as soon as possible. These bilateral discussions are great, and they will always continue as part of Foreign and Commonwealth Office life, but there is urgency now.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lidington]

I certainly take seriously the right hon. Gentleman’s point about the threat from al-Qaeda, especially as al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and other al-Qaeda affiliates have operated in Yemen for some time. AQAP in particular has significant operational capacity there. The Yemeni Government, under President Saleh, are of course publicly committed to combating AQAP, and we regard it as important that those involved in any new arrangements for government in Yemen after President Saleh has left office should be equally committed to the fight against international terrorism; we will do our utmost to work with the Government of Yemen to ensure that that happens.

The right hon. Gentleman mentioned aviation security. I can tell him that the technical officials in the Department for Transport who are responsible for the project are working hard to implement it as quickly as possible, but we are not talking about equipment that we can just take to Yemen, and plug in and play; there are basic operating procedures, and staff training and management issues, that have to be tackled by the Yemeni authorities, not the United Kingdom. We can move only as fast as they will allow on clearance of equipment, undertaking training and putting in place the operating procedures. However, we have not forgotten the issue.

The United Kingdom regards the political crisis and the long-standing economic—

Foreign Affairs Council and General Affairs Council

David Lidington Excerpts

Thursday 24th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

The Foreign Affairs Council and General Affairs Council were held on 21 March in Brussels. I represented the UK.

Foreign Affairs Council (FAC)

The FAC was chaired by Baroness Ashton. A provisional report of the meeting, and all conclusions adopted, can be found at:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/120084.pdf

The agenda items covered were as follows:

Japan

Ministers reviewed the EU’s response to the crisis in Japan. Commissioners Georgieva (International Co- operation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response) and Piebalgs (Development) briefed Ministers on the public health situation and the requirement for humanitarian assistance. A key focus for current EU efforts would probably be temporary housing. (See also record of GAC discussion.)

Libya

Ministers agreed conclusions (see link above) which:

Called on Gaddafi to relinquish power immediately;

Expressed satisfaction with the adoption of UNSCR 1973;

Agreed further restrictive measures against the Libyan regime and agreed to work up further measures on the basis of UNSCR 1973;

Committed to support action provided under UNSCR 1973—noting that the EU would continue to provide humanitarian assistance to those affected;

Called for the High Representative to develop planning for assistance for humanitarian assistance in close co-ordination with the UN and NATO.

During discussions, I set out how military action under UNSCR 1973 had helped avoid a catastrophe in Benghazi. This action had been broad-based; a coming together of western and regional actors.



Libya was also discussed in the GAC in the context of the text of European Council conclusions which will be presented to the European Council on 24-25 March—see below.

Developments in the Southern Neighbourhood

Ministers agreed conclusions on both Bahrain and Yemen (see link above) expressing concern with the situation in both countries. In both cases, the Council urged all concerned—including the respective Governments—to engage in constructive dialogue. They expressed concern about reports of the arrest of opposition figures in Bahrain. And stressed the need for the authorities in Yemen to ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

On EU assistance to the region, I stressed the need for conditionality, or, what others termed “mutual accountability”: a lot of money had been spent to limited effect in terms of economic development or political reform. The European neighbourhood policy (ENP) needed ambitious re-shaping to focus on supporting states pursuing reforms.

Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH)

Ministers agreed conclusions (see link) that endorsed the external action service’s (EAS) proposals for a reconfigured EU presence in BiH. The conclusions raised concerns about the political situation in BiH and called on BiH leaders to form Governments which can address the reform agenda. The conclusions outlined the Council’s continued support for the Office of the High Representative (OHR), EUFOR (EU military mission) and EUPM (EU police mission). They also outlined the package of instruments, including restrictive measures, which would be available to the new EU representative and looked forward to further discussions on the reconfiguration of the international presence.

The Sahel

Council conclusions on a strategy for security and development in the Sahel were adopted (see link). The strategy’s primary focus will be on Mali, Mauritania and Niger, but it also builds on complementary activity in the Maghreb. Proposals made by the High Representative and Commission on the basis of this strategy will be considered by Brussels working groups before implementation. Action would be directed to development, good governance, and internal conflict resolution; security and rule of law; and countering violent extremism.

Somalia

Conclusions were agreed (see link above) which:

Confirmed the EU’s continuing support for the Djibouti peace process;

Stressed the need for the transitional federal institutions (TFIs) to help advance the peace process;

Expressed regret over the Somali transitional federal Parliament’s decision to extend its mandate;

Agreed that any future EU support to the TFIs, including stipends for parliamentarians, should be based on progress on reform;

Reaffirmed support for the AMISOM peacekeeping mission.

I supported the conclusions, stressing the importance of maintaining pressure on the TFIs, supporting AMISOM and greater EAS engagement in Puntland.

Iran

Council conclusions were adopted (see above link) without discussion on Iran/human rights. These gave agreement to introduce targeted sanctions against human rights violators while at the same time making it clear that the EU remains ready to discuss human rights issues with Iran. Work will now proceed in Brussels to draw up the sanctions legal act and list of individuals to be targeted.

Côte d’Ivoire

Under AOB, France raised recent developments in Côte d’Ivoire. There was broad agreement that the EU needed to continue to apply its targeted measures against Mr. Gbagbo and those that sustain his illegitimate regime. On the 18 March, the Foreign Secretary issued a statement:

“I utterly condemn the indiscriminate killing of more than 25 people in Abobo yesterday by forces loyal to former President Gbagbo. The launching of mortars into a market place and bus station is abhorrent and the UN should conduct a full investigation.

I call on all parties in Côte d’Ivoire to cease violence, to seek a peaceful resolution to the ongoing crisis and for President Ouattara to take his rightful position in line with the will of the Ivorian people”.

General Affairs Council (GAC)

The GAC was chaired by the presidency, Hungarian Foreign Minister Martonyi. A provisional report of the meeting can be found at:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/genff/120082.pdf

Preparation for the March European Council

Ministers examined draft Council conclusions for the European Council to be held on 24-25 March. The European Council will discuss:

Economic policy: adoption of a comprehensive package of measures to strengthen EU economic governance and ensure the stability of the euro area.

Developments in Libya and elsewhere in the EU’s southern neighbourhood: follow-up to UNSCR 1973 and latest developments as regards Libya; implementation of measures agreed by the European Council on 4 February.

Crisis in Japan: assessment of the humanitarian aid effort, the situation in the energy sector and the broader economic implications.

Economic policy

On economic policy, I emphasised the need to focus on economic growth, building on the Commission’s annual growth survey. The European Council conclusions needed to have language promoting smarter regulation, reducing the regulatory burden on businesses and SMEs in particular, and improving the internal market for services. The EU also had to reflect on the importance of trade for future EU growth, delivering this through a conclusion to the Doha round this year and taking forward negotiations on free trade agreements (FTAs) with India, Canada and Singapore.

Libya and the Southern Neighbourhood

Following on from the earlier discussion in the FAC, Ministers focused on the detail of proposed short-term measures, including raising the ceiling of the European Investment Bank (EIB) operations in the region by EUR 1 billion. A number of member states emphasised the conditions that would need to accompany any such rise.

I also made a more general call for a set of ambitious European Council conclusions, reflecting our offer of a new partnership and a deeper coalition with the region in return for greater reform. To that end, we needed to better reflect the commitment set at the European Council of 11 March—which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister set out for the House on 14 March.

Japan

Ministers briefly took stock of the EU’s response following discussions in the FAC. They noted that Energy Ministers were meeting separately in Brussels on the same day to discuss the nuclear crisis.

On the proposed European Council conclusions language, I stressed that while we wanted to ensure the highest safety standards in nuclear plants, we should remember that there was already much legislation in place and very capable national authorities were taking action. We should not do anything that undermined the clear responsibility which rested with member states in this area.

Foreign Affairs Council and General Affairs Council

David Lidington Excerpts

Thursday 17th March 2011 Written Statements

[The Minister for Europe (Mr David Lidington)]

The Foreign Affairs Council and General Affairs Council will meet in Brussels on 21 March. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary will attend the Foreign Affairs Council. I will attend the General Affairs Council.

Foreign Affairs Council (FAC)

Japan

Japan is not currently on the agenda for the FAC, and the constantly evolving situation makes it difficult to predict the nature of a possible discussion. But we would expect Ministers to review the EU’s response to the devastating earthquake and tsunami, and to take stock of the latest developments on the nuclear issue. The EU’s response so far has been summarised in the press release below.

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=MEMO/11/166&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN& guiLanguage=en

EU Southern Neighbourhood

On Libya, Ministers will want to take stock following the extraordinary European Council of 11 March, at which EU leaders called on Gaddafi to “relinquish power immediately” as his regime had lost all legitimacy and was no longer an interlocutor for the EU. As my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister stressed to Parliament in his statement of 14 March, Official Report, columns 25-27 (see link below), HMG’s position is that Europe must seize this opportunity to support ordinary people in north Africa and across the middle east in their aspirations for a more open and democratic form of government. The EU now needs to follow through on its declaration of 11 March with a real and credible offer to these countries, based around the massive economic opportunities which lie in greater trade and co-operation with Europe. Discussion of Libya and other specific country issues will depend on events in the next few days.

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=PressS&id=564995382

Sahel

The Sahel is one of the poorest regions of the world. It faces a number of challenges to its security and development simultaneously, including terrorism and frequent food shortages. At the FAC, Ministers are expected to review proposals for an EU strategy to deal with the Sahel’s security and development needs in a coherent way. The proposals are particularly important given recent instability in the region.

Somalia

Ministers should be asked to agree conclusions on Somalia, the first since July 2009. Discussion is expected to focus on handling of the planned end of the transitional period in August 2011 and on tackling piracy. We want to see a clear statement that there can be no extension of the Transitional Federal Institutions beyond August without reform to make them more representative and legitimate in the eyes of the Somali people. We will look to emphasise the importance of tackling the causes of piracy on land and continue to push for the European External Action Service to play a leading role in co-ordinating donor activity in those regions most affected by piracy, including in Puntland.

Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH)

We expect conclusions to be adopted on BiH on proposals to reinforce the EU’s presence there. We are supportive of the package in which there was broad agreement at the February FAC. The conclusions should also address the political situation in BiH, where a Government is yet to be formed nearly six months after elections.

Belarus

Ministers are due to discuss the political and human rights situation in Belarus. We hope the discussion will focus on what further measures the EU can take to apply political pressure on the regime to release all political prisoners and cease the ongoing repression of human rights defenders.

Serbia/Kosovo

Baroness Ashton will update Ministers on the EU-facilitated dialogue between Pristina and Belgrade. Following appointment of the new Kosovo Government on 22 February, the first meeting of the dialogue took place in Brussels on 8-9 March. We expect EU member states to give Baroness Ashton strong support for her efforts on the dialogue as a way of building co-operation between Kosovo and Serbia and of helping both countries make progress towards the EU.

Iran human rights

We seek conclusions which pave the way towards EU targeted measures on Iran, including a travel ban and asset freeze on human rights offenders; and which develop the EU’s human rights dialogue with Iranian civil society.

Middle East Peace Process

Baroness Ashton will report on the 2 March Quartet envoys’ meeting and provide an update on work being done in preparation for the April meeting of Quartet principals. The UK will continue to make clear that the peace process must not become a casualty of uncertainty in the region, that it is too important to fail or falter, and that we must strive for a breakthrough this year. The UK has set out views on this with France and Germany in our explanation of vote on the draft UNSCR on settlement; see link below:

http://ukun.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=555290382

We also expect Baroness Ashton to update on progress in implementing her proposal for EU support to Gaza.

General Affairs Council (GAC)

European Councils

Ministers will review follow-up to the extraordinary European Council of 11 March, which discussed the EU’s response to the current crisis in Libya and the southern neighbourhood. The declaration made by the Council on 11 March can be found at:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/119780.pdf

In addition to the Prime Minister’s statement of 14 March (see earlier link), an FCO report of the European Council can be found at:

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&id=564968482

Ministers will also discuss preparation for the spring European Council on 24 March. The current draft agenda includes:

the southern neighbourhood and EU action to promote stability in the region (see comments on FAC);

legislative proposals for economic governance in the Eurozone;

European Council decision amending article 136 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union and intergovernmental arrangements setting up the European Stability Mechanism. These were agreed at the December European Council, see link:

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/118578.pdf