Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-11-30.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the government of Saudi Arabia about those currently facing execution in Saudi Arabia.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Government opposes the death penalty in all circumstances and in every country, including Saudi Arabia. The death penalty undermines human dignity and there is no evidence that it works as a deterrent. We continue to remind the Saudi authorities of our views on the death penalty at every suitable opportunity.

We continue to strongly believe that we are most effective when we discuss human rights privately in some countries. This is the approach we are following in light of claims that Saudi Arabia intends to execute over 50 people convicted of terrorism offences, which the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), raised at a senior level on 4 December.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-12-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what recent discussions they have had with East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust regarding the use of Do Not Resuscitate orders for patients with disabilities.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Department expects National Health Service trusts and NHS foundation trusts to have in place local policies on resuscitation that are based on expert professional guidance. We have commended, as a basis for local policies, professional guidance, Decisions Relating to Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (2014), published jointly by the British Medical Association, the Resuscitation Council (UK) and the Royal College of Nursing. The guidance is clear that any resuscitation decision must be tailored to the individual circumstances of the patient and must not be made on the basis of blanket assumptions. A copy of the guidance is attached.

Where a person lacks capacity to make decisions about their care or treatment, the Mental Capacity Act makes clear that doctors must act in the best interests of patients. Doctors must take account as far as possible of the known wishes of the person and consult with relatives and colleagues as appropriate to help inform their decision.

Departmental officials have recently contacted the Trust about recent media coverage concerning an incident when Down’s syndrome was listed as a reason to issue a Do Not Resuscitate order. The Trust confirms it accepts that it failed to consult with the family and has apologised unreservedly for this isolated incident by a junior doctor.

In regards to any disciplinary action taken against the doctor this would be an operational issue for the Foundation Trust. We have written to Ms Nikki Cole, Chair of East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust informing her of the Noble Lord’s enquiry. She will reply shortly and a copy of the letter will be placed in the Library.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-18.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority is taking, if any, following the reports that one 41-year old man has fathered up to 800 children by providing his gametes to women seeking to become pregnant.

Lord Prior of Brampton

According to media reports, this particular case concerns private arrangements made between individual women seeking sperm for home insemination and the man providing the sperm. There is no third party involved. Such private arrangements between a man and a woman are not regulated. We understand that there is also no evidence to support the claim of up to 800 children having been born.

It is important that women seeking sperm donation treatment fully understand the benefits of using clinics licensed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-01-25.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 22 January (HL4827), what are the contents of those statements by the United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect, and where those statements are published.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

Statements made by the Office of the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide and the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect are published on the UN website.

The statements cover a range of issues including incitement to violence in Syria on religious grounds; urging against rhetoric that escalates the risk of violence against religious communities; expressing concern about the on-going threat to the safety of minority groups in Syria; expressing outrage at speeches and media articles that dehumanise Alawites and Christians; expressing alarm at reports of the abduction of 1,500 Yazidi, Christian and Shabak women and girls; expressing concern at the situation of religious and other minorities, noting that members of the Christian community were fleeing the northern city of Mosul following the Daesh-led invasion; urging leaders in the wider region to refrain from using or condoning any language that may escalate sectarian tension; calling on all actors to condemn hate speech that could constitute incitement to violence against communities based on their religious affiliation.

The complete statements are attached to this response, and the link to the website is provided below for your ease of reference: http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/statements.shtml

“

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-10.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 8 February (HL5360) and the Written Answer by the Minister of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Hugo Swire, on 29 January (HC23512), whether the UK will act on the information that officials from a number of state institutions and ministries of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea are responsible for possible crimes against humanity in North Korea, and ensure that there is no impunity for those accused of serious human rights violations.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

As stated in the previous responses, we remain deeply concerned about the human rights situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The UN Commission of Inquiry report highlighted the horrific human rights violations perpetrated by the regime, including details of officials from state institutions and ministries.

The Government supports the principle that there must be no impunity for those accused of human rights violations and that crimes against humanity are appropriately investigated.

We will continue to work with members of the international community through multilateral fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN Human Rights Council, to ensure the regime is held to account for its appalling human rights record.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-29.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of North Koreans who work in Russia as labourers or who have entered Russia to escape North Korean human rights violations; and of the potential contravention of Russia’s international obligations and violation of human rights should North Koreans be repatriated from Russia to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We estimate that there are approximately 20,000 – 35,000 workers from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the Russian Federation. We do not hold detailed information on the number of DPRK refugees currently in the Russian Federation.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-03-11.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 7 March (HL6225) and 8 March (HL6323), and the letter from the Chief Executive of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to both Lord Alton of Liverpool and the Department of Health on 7 March, whether there are any principled reasons why copies of the patient information and consent forms submitted to the HFEA by the person responsible in order to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9 have not yet been made publicly available; if so, what those reasons are; and if not, when they will place those documents in the Library of the House.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it is has no objections to these documents being placed in the Library. While licence applications and associated documents are not routinely placed in the public domain, inspection reports relating to licence renewal applications and the minutes of the licensing Committee’s decision, which contain lay summaries, are published on the HFEA’s website.

Licence applications may contain third party personal information. On this occasion, a copy of the research licence application and associated documents is attached with third party personal information redacted.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-12.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether North Korean citizens are given disproportionately harsh punishments for listening to foreign radio broadcasts than for other comparable offences.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea releases no reliable information about prosecution of offences, so it is hard to make a judgement on the proportionality of punishments imposed for listening to foreign radio broadcasts.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-04-27.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government when they anticipate being in a position to reply to the representations made to Lord Bates and to Lord Keen of Elie about Syrian Christian families seeking asylum after the beheading of family members.

Lord Keen of Elie

I understand the Noble Lord is referring to correspondence dated 25 April from a member of the public on behalf of people they believe are at risk in Syria.

I can confirm that a response was sent on 9 May.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the human rights of Christian pastors in Sudan are protected, in the light of the arrests and continuing detention of Telahoon Nogosi Kassa Rata and Hassan Abduraheem Kodi Taour.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

Freedom of religion or belief in Sudan continues to be an area of deep concern. We have consistently called on the Government of Sudan to ensure all legislation is consistent with the Interim Constitution of 2005; within which religious freedom is enshrined. We regularly attend court cases in Sudan on freedom of religion or belief and through our project work we also seek to support lawyers who take on cases addressing important human rights issues.

Our Ambassador in Khartoum raised the specific cases of Mr Talahon and Reverend Hassan with the Minister of Guidance and Religious Endowments and the Sudanese Director of Church Affairs in February. We also raised this issue with the Sudanese Director of Human Rights during the UK-Sudan bilateral talks in March, and again with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in April. Furthermore, we continue to raise concerns about the scope of the National Security Act (2010) and the powers it gives the National Intelligence and Security Service. Most recently, we highlighted this issue in our statement at Sudan’s Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council on 4 May. We will remain active on these issues.