Author: admin

  • Toby Perkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    Toby Perkins – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Toby Perkins on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department plans to refuse the applications to use neonicotinoid pesticides on British fields this year.

    George Eustice

    The Government has received two applications for emergency authorisation of neonicotinoid seed treatments for use on oilseed rape during 2016. These applications are currently being assessed according to the normal rules, which allow for limited and controlled use of a pesticide on an exceptional basis in emergency situations to control a danger which cannot be contained by any other reasonable means.

    The decision on whether or not to grant the authorisations will be made on the basis of an examination, by the UK Expert Committee on Pesticides, the Health and Safety Executive and Defra’s Chief Scientific Adviser, of the technical and scientific information submitted by the applicant.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what recent discussions the Government has had with the government of Israel on political prisoners.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    The UK has not specifically raised the issue of political prisoners. Our Embassy in Tel Aviv have raised concerns around detention, including Israel’s extensive use of administrative detention. Administrative detention should, according to international law, be used only when security makes it absolutely necessary rather than as routine practice, and as a preventative rather than a punitive measure. On 24 February, our Embassy in Tel Aviv raised the issue of administrative detention with the Israeli authorities.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 28 April 2016 to Question 35490, if he will raise the issue of the demolition of the villages of Susiya and Umm al-Hiran with the Israeli government.

    Mr Tobias Ellwood

    Our Embassy in Tel Aviv raised our concerns about Susiya with the Israeli authorities on 21 January. More broadly, we regularly voice our opposition to the increase in demolitions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories with the Israeli Government, most recently on 21 April. In regards to demolitions of Bedouin villages in green-line Israel such as Umm al-Hiran, we believe a solution must respect the equality of all Israel’s citizens.

  • Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Roger Godsiff – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Roger Godsiff on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, when the Government will announce the decision on the resettlement of the Chagos Islanders.

    James Duddridge

    No date has yet been set for a decision. The Government is still considering its policy in this area and will announce developments to Parliament and the public in due course.

  • Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Andrew Rosindell – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Andrew Rosindell on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what provisions are in place to ensure that the jurisdiction of Investor State Dispute Settlement tribunal hearings remains restricted to its current mandate under the terms of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

    Anna Soubry

    Investment protection provisions in trade and investment treaties such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) aim to protect international investors from discriminatory or unfair treatment by a state. Their investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provisions allow international investors to bring claims if they think the obligations set out in the treaty have been breached by the host state. As such, Governments cannot initiate claims against investors. Under the European Commission’s proposals for TTIP, in line with normal investment treaty practice, UK investors would be able to bring ISDS claims against the US Government.

    The jurisdiction of any ISDS tribunal established in TTIP will be set out in the investment protection and ISDS provisions of the agreement. The aim of the European Commission’s proposals for investment protection provisions in TTIP is to clearly define the scope for ISDS claims and tribunal jurisdiction, including protecting the right of governments to regulate lawfully in the public interest. If an ISDS tribunal did exceed its jurisdiction in making an award, typically those elements of the resulting award would not be enforceable.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, with reference to Freedom in the World 2016, published by Freedom House in January 2016, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the finding that Tibet is the second least free country in the world.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    The Government regards the Tibet Autonomous Region as part of the People’s Republic of China. We do have concerns about rights and freedoms in Tibet. We urge the Chinese authorities to respect freedom of religion, expression and association in Tibet in line with China’s constitution and the international frameworks to which it is a party.

  • Fabian Hamilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Fabian Hamilton – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Fabian Hamilton on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what representations he has made to the government of Bangladesh on the increase in and alleged official toleration of extra-judicial killings in that country; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    Allegations of extra-judicial killings in Bangladesh are deeply concerning. We follow progress closely and raise concerns where there are credible allegations. We take human rights in Bangladesh seriously, naming it as one of 30 Human Rights Priority Countries in this year’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office Human Rights and Democracy report. In my speech during a House of Commons debate on the future of Bangladesh in June 2015 I reiterated our call for the Bangladesh Government to hold the perpetrators to account through impartial, transparent investigations.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, on what occasions ministers of his Department raised the issue of Tibet during visits to China since May 2015.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    In addition to our UK-China Human Rights Dialogues, we continue to make our views on Tibet known to the Chinese authorities through various channels. In June 2015 and November 2015 I set out to Parliament our concerns about rights and freedoms in the Tibetan Autonomous Region. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy also covers these issues.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the outcome of the last round of the UK-China human rights dialogue; and if he will make a statement.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    The 22nd round of the UK-China Human Rights Dialogue was held in Beijing on 21-22 April 2015. It provided for detailed, expert engagement on a wide range of human rights concerns, resulting in a frank exchange of views. Our current assessment of the human rights situation in China can be seen in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy.

  • Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Tom Brake – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tom Brake on 2016-05-04.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential consequences for native Tibetans of the planned railway expansion from China into Tibet.

    Mr Hugo Swire

    The Foreign and Commonwealth Office has not made an assessment of the expansion of China’s railway network in the Tibet Autonomous Region of China. We collect information about developments in Tibet from a wide range of reports, such as those made by the Chinese authorities and by Non-Governmental Organisations.