Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-11-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made about the health and wellbeing of, and the prison conditions being experienced by, former President of the Maldives Mohammed Nasheed.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for East Devon (Mr Swire), has spoken directly with the Maldives Foreign Minister on a number of occasions regarding former President Nasheed and in August wrote to her expressing our concern about Mr Nasheed’s return to prison. On 10 November Mr Swire met for a second time Mrs Laila Ali, wife of former President Nasheed as well as Amal Clooney and Ben Emmerson QC from Mr Nasheed’s legal team. The meeting was an opportunity to discuss the situation in the Maldives as well as Mr Nasheed’s case, his health and wellbeing.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-12-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the recommendations by Save the Children in its report Nowhere safe for Yemen’s children: The deadly impact of explosive weapons in Yemen, particularly regarding the enhanced protection of children, their families and communities, and the steps that should be taken by the UK to press all parties to the conflict to agree an immediate ceasefire and stop the use of explosive weapons.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are very concerned by reports of any civilian casualties as a result of the ongoing fighting in Yemen. A political solution is the best way to bring long-term stability to Yemen and protect Yemen’s children, their families and communities. The UK is actively supporting the UN’s efforts to achieve a lasting ceasefire and a return to the political transition in Yemen.

We have regularly raised our concerns with the Saudi Arabian authorities and received assurances that they are complying with International Humanitarian Law (IHL). We continue to engage with Saudi Arabia on those assurances and have offered advice and training to demonstrate best practice and to help ensure continued compliance with IHL.

We are also concerned by reports of alleged IHL violations by Houthi-Saleh and pro-government forces, including attacks on civilians in Aden and Taiz; intimidation of UN ships attempting to dock at Aden; the use of schools and hospitals for military purposes; the use of child soldiers; and the targeting of aid workers and restrictions on humanitarian access. We have also raised our concerns with the Houthis on the importance of compliance with IHL and international human rights law.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what recent representations they have received about the interpretation and implementation of the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in relation to the actions by ISIS against Christians and other minorities in Syria and Iraq; what response they are making to such representations; and what specific actions they intend to take to establish an international consensus on these matters.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The British Government has received a number of recent representations on these issues from Parliament and members of the public and is responding in writing.

We condemn in the strongest possible terms the atrocities committed by Daesh against all civilians, including Christians, Mandeans, Yazidis, and other minorities, as well as the majority Muslim population who continue to bear the brunt of Daesh’s brutality. The UK has led efforts within the UN to tackle and condemn Daesh and on the protection of civilians more widely. For example, we co-sponsored the UN Human Rights Council Resolution mandating the UN to investigate and report on Daesh abuses.

It is a long-standing Government policy that any judgements on whether genocide has occurred are a matter for the international judicial system rather than governments or other non-judicial bodies.

Ultimately, the only way to protect Christians, Yazidis and other minorities in the region from Daesh is by defeating this terrible organisation, which in turn requires, amongst other things, ending the conflict in Syria. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), set out the UK’s comprehensive strategy for defeating Daesh and finding a political settlement to the Syria conflict in his response to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 26 November 2015.

The joint Office of the United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect (the Office) are engaged with these issues and publish much of their activity online, including statements in relation to the situation of Christians and other minorities in Syria and Iraq. Our officials maintain regular contact with officials from the Office to discuss issues related to the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities. The Government provides funding for the Office, including for their work with religious leaders and faith based organisations in the Middle East and North Africa region, aimed at the prevention of incitement to violence that could lead to atrocity crimes.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-20.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government why no safe haven has been established for Yazidis and Assyrian Christians, Mandaeans, and Shabaks; when they last raised the failure to make such provision with their international partners; and what assistance they have given to those minorities to better provide for their self-defence.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The British Government agrees that there is an urgent need to protect civilians in Syria and Iraq. However, for safe zones to be effective they must be truly safe. That would require an international mandate and a significant commitment of boots on the ground. Turkey has promoted the idea of safe havens along the border in northern Syria. However, all such previous proposals have foundered on the question of who will provide the defensive air cover, given the presence of a very sophisticated Syrian air defence system, and now the presence of Russian air-to-air offensive capability in the area. The priority remains an end to the violence and full, unhindered access for humanitarian agencies, so civilians can escape the fighting and aid can get through to save lives in the worst affected areas. Britain continues to lead the way in helping those suffering from the humanitarian crisis. The best way of safeguarding minority rights in the region is by defeating Daesh and establishing peace and stability in the region. The UK has been at the forefront of these efforts. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), set out the Government’s comprehensive strategy for dealing with Daesh and the conflict in Syria in his response to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 26 November 2015.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-01.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 27 January (HL5039), whether they are now able to say whether a stated aim of the recently approved application by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 was, and remains, to better understand why miscarriages occur in some pregnancies; and if not, whether the description of that research that will be made public will disclose the specific assay the researchers concerned had proposed using to determine whether embryos subjected to gene editing might be either able or unable to implant in a womb.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) publishes on its website the inspection report relating to a licence renewal application and the minutes of the Licence Committee’s decision. It does not publish other information associated with a licence application.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 (as amended) permits the genetic modification of embryos in research, subject to an HFEA licence. As the regulator, the HFEA’s responsibility is to apply the test in the legislation, namely that the research is necessary or desirable for any of the purposes specified in the Act and that the use of embryos is necessary. The Licence Committee has added a condition to the licence that no research using genome editing may take place until it has received approval from an NHS Research Ethics Committee.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-22.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any projects funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are within one hundred miles of Kyo-hwa-so camps, Kwan-li-so camps, Ku-ryu-jang centres, Jip-kyul-so prisons or Ro-dong-dan-ryeon-dae centres; and what steps they are taking through the British Embassy in Pyongyang to access prisoners in those camps.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are not aware of any Foreign and Commonwealth Office funded projects that take place within one hundred miles of Kyo-hwa-so camps, Kwan-li-so camps, Ku-ryu-jang centres, Jip-kyul-so prisons or Ro-dong-dan-ryeon-dae centres. Together with other EU member states resident in Pyongyang, our Embassy has requested access to these camps on numerous occasions, and will continue to do so. However, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea continues to refuse access by independent observers.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the level of engagement by the Disasters Emergency Committee, and other international donors, with representatives of Nepal’s civil society and charities such as Childreach Nepal.

Baroness Verma

The role of national Nepali civil society after the earthquake has been key to the emergency response, and will be important into the recovery and reconstruction phases. International humanitarian organisations who acted as part of the earthquake response, such as the UK Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC) members, have partnered with Nepal civil society organisations to deliver assistance to those most in need. These partnerships have combined international funding flows with local knowledge and expertise.

Over the course of the humanitarian response UK government representatives in Nepal have met regularly with DEC members and other international donors in order to share situation analysis and learning, as well as jointly advocate on collective issues. The UK has supported over 20 trusted partners as part of its own Nepal earthquake response, including the UN, INGOs and the Red Cross. All have worked in partnership with Nepali civil society organisations on the ground. We have conducted three rounds of field-based monitoring, meet regularly with our partners, and receive frequent reporting, which has enabled us to assess with confidence the effectiveness of our direct partners and their Nepali civil society partners.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-21.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by the Earl of Courtown on 22 February (HL5963), and with regard to Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request 0986-15, why there is a discrepancy between the Minister’s quoted figure of £270,046.61 being spent on projects in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with a human rights focus and a quoted figure in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Freedom of Information response of £9,499 being spent; and what differentiates the FCO projects with a human rights rationale” and a human rights “element”.”

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The figure of £270,046.61 relates to projects which are not exclusively focused on promoting human rights, but which significantly contribute to our human rights objectives in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. These include humanitarian projects aimed at improving the lives of the most vulnerable people in North Korean society, and English language projects which make North Korean participants aware of other ideas and cultures. The figure of £9,499 relates to projects solely focused on promoting human rights.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-25.

To ask the Leader of the House whether time will be made in the Parliamentary timetable for a full debate on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s Human Rights and Democracy Report 2015.

Baroness Stowell of Beeston

My Noble Friend the Government Chief Whip does not expect to be able to facilitate a full debate on the report before the end of this session, but from the start of the new session, the usual mechanisms – which include balloted debates, Thursday debates, and questions for short debate – will be available to secure a debate on the Report.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-05-04.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the campaign by the Syriac Military Council and its militia in recapturing territory, including Assyrian villages, from ISIS.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We welcome all successes against Daesh. Ultimately, the best way of safeguarding minorities such as the Assyrians and the majority population is by defeating Daesh and establishing a lasting peace in both Syria and Iraq.

The Syriac Military Council has been a component part of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG)-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) since the SDF’s formation in late 2015. The SDF receives support from the Global Coalition in its efforts to combat Daesh in Northern Syria.