Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-13.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government why no mention of human rights is made in the new UK aid strategy; whether they intend to address that omission; and if so, how.

Baroness Verma

The UK Aid Strategy was published alongside the Government’s Strategic Defence and Security Review which sets out the Government’s approach to human rights. The UK will continue to promote universal human rights as an integral part of building prosperity and stability around the world. We will work with our partners to strengthen the promotion and protection of human rights and hold to account those responsible for violations and abuses. This is part of our work to promote the golden thread of democracy, rule of law, free media and open, accountable institutions.

The UK Aid Strategy has at its heart the Global Goals for Sustainable Development, which represent a commitment to achieve substantive, measurable improvements on economic, social and political human rights. It commits to leading the world in implementing the Leave No One Behind Promise agreed by the Prime Minister and other world leaders in September 2015. The ‘leave no one behind’ principle is an expression of the human rights agenda, which the UK played a key role in securing in negotiations. It also commits us to working towards ending violence against girls and women, including ending FGM and child, early and forced marriage, and tackling sexual violence in conflict. It commits to prioritising work that targets the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, the most excluded, those caught in crises, and those most at risk of violence and discrimination.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-26.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 17 March (HL7118) and 25 April (HL7391), what assessment they have made of (1) the specific steps during the evolution of the peer-review process by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) over the last 10 years that allow specific members of the HFEA Licence Committee to overrule recommendations by the HFEA’s appointed peer reviewers; and (2) the relative impact on the licensing of proposed research over the last 10 years of (a) scrutiny by a team of inspectors, (b) scrutiny by an external, independent peer reviewer and (c) scrutiny by the HFEA’s Licence Committee; how participants in each of those levels of scrutiny have been (i) briefed regarding the impact of their recommendations and (ii) remunerated for their efforts; and how many research licence applications have ultimately been rejected following scrutiny over the last 10 years.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that its Licence Committee acts under delegated power from the Authority to make decisions on licences based on information put before it, which includes recommendations from peer reviewers. Given that they are the decision makers appointed by the HFEA in accordance with its statute, they are able to accept or reject information as appropriate. This therefore includes rejecting or accepting recommendations of peer reviewers. The Committee’s effectiveness is reviewed on an annual basis.

The Licence Committee is made up of authority members who are remunerated on an annual basis. The remuneration figures are publicly available in the HFEA’s annual reports. Peer reviewers receive a fee of £189.67 per review.

Inspectors receive a yearly salary and are not remunerated per inspection, unless they are external inspectors who are used occasionally.

The information regarding research licenses is only held in a readily accessible format from 2011 onwards and before this date can only be provided at disproportionate cost. Since March 2011 there have been no research applications rejected by the Licence Committee. The HFEA works closely with licence applicants to develop their applications and resolve any issues prior to being submitted to the Licence Committee.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-05-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 10 May (HL7949), what factors are thought to be responsible for differences in the number of serious adverse incidents of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) between each of the three years from 2010 to 2012 compared to 2013 and 2014; and whether the reference to professional standards applies only to clinicians or also to the activities of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in attempting to mitigate the risks of OHSS.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that whilst certain factors may increase the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), there is no agreed method to predict the amount of severe OHSS that will occur. Therefore, the Authority cannot infer what factors, if any, would cause year to year variation in the number of incidents reported.

Professional clinical standards are set by the appropriate Royal Colleges and issued to guide clinicians and health professionals directly, not the HFEA.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-06-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of North Korea on reports of widespread rape committed by its military; and whether the UK defence attaché to North Korea will raise this issue with their counterpart.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are aware of the disturbing reports of sexual violence within the Korean People’s Army. We consistently raise our concerns about the appalling human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) directly with the regime. In June, our Ambassador to North Korea made clear the UK’s position on human rights in a speech in Pyongyang attended by DPRK senior officials. We regularly raise North Korean human rights issues in multilateral fora such as the UN Security Council and the Human Rights Council, and will continue to do so.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-07-08.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what information they have about (1) land confiscation, (2) military activity, (3) health, (4) education, (5) drug use and its consequences, (6) local drug supply and drug use, (7) the killing of civilians, (8) arbitrary taxation, and (9) the displacement of villagers and forced recruitment, in Burma’s Karen state; and whether they plan to discuss those issues with the new government of Burma.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The British Government follows events in Burma’s Karen State closely, including those listed in the noble Lord’s question. Staff from our Embassy in Rangoon visit regularly. Many of these issues are connected to the legacy of conflict. We play a key role in international efforts to resolve the conflict across Burma. As part of these efforts, we have supported both the previous and current Governments of Burma, as well as the Ethnic Armed Groups that are party to the conflict (including the Karen), to find a negotiated political settlement. In addition, the Department for International Development (DFID) has a major development programme in Burma, of which Karen State is a beneficiary, including on health and education. For example, DFID works with several non-government organisations to fund programmes for the prevention and treatment of malaria which is prevalent in Karen State, and to establish community based schools and centres for early childhood development. The UK discusses conflict-related issues with the Government of Burma on a regular basis.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-06.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the remarks by Lord Prior of Brampton on 22 October 2015 (HL Deb, col GC37), what progress has been made in establishing across the country a network of NHS practitioners interested in Lyme disease.

Lord Prior of Brampton

We will be considering options for improving professional engagement on Lyme disease in light of the reviews on the diagnosis, treatment and transmission of Lyme disease, commissioned by the Department to inform future decision making. Public Health England continues to work with local authorities and primary care providers to raise awareness.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-14.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the report by Siegfried Hecker, published on 12 September, concluding that North Korea will have enough material for about 20 nuclear bombs by the end of this year, that it has expanded uranium enrichment facilities, and that it has stockpiled plutonium.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We have made clear our deep concern at and condemnation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) nuclear programme. We take into account all sources of information when assessing it. As the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my Hon. Friend the Member for Reading West (Alok Sharma) made clear in his remarks to the UN Security Council on 23 September, that the United Kingdom condemns the recent nuclear test conducted by the DPRK, which is a direct violation of binding Security Council Resolutions. The DPRK must comply with its obligations under all relevant UN Security Council Resolutions, including abandoning all nuclear weapons and nuclear programmes in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of reports that the government of China has recently breached the United Nations Refugee Convention by refouling 30 North Koreans without giving them an opportunity to claim asylum nor to meet representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are aware of reports of thirty North Koreans being sent back to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) after a period of detention in China.

Despite claims by the DPRK authorities that forcibly repatriated refugees are well treated and reintegrated into DPRK society, reports suggest that they are often mistreated by the authorities.

We will raise the issue of non-refoulement at the next UK-China Human rights Dialogue, scheduled to take place this month.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-17.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether any approach has been made to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority regarding the possibility of performing spindle-chromosome complex transfer in the UK; and if so, when any such approaches were made and by whom.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has advised that no such approach has been made to the Authority.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will raise with Prime Minister Modi, during his visit to the United Kingdom, the role of India in brokering talks between the government and opposition parties in the Maldives.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We continue to have serious concerns about the situation in the Maldives. My Rt Hon. Friend the Member for East Devon ( Mr Swire) raised publically and privately with Maldives Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon. The Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron) raised the issue with Prime Minister Modi during his visit. In a joint press statement released by the UK and India on 12 November the two Prime Ministers emphasised the importance of a stable and inclusive democracy in the Maldives, including an independent judiciary.