Tag: Lord Alton of Liverpool

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-09-05.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of North Korea’s launch of three ballistic missiles on 5 September.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) ballistic missile launches of 5 September are a clear violation of multiple UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs). The DPRK’s repeated provocations in 2016 are a threat to regional stability and international security. The UN Security Council statement of 6 September, which the UK fully supports, clearly demonstrates that the international community is united and will not tolerate this destabilising behaviour. We urge the DPRK to abide by UNSCRs and return to credible and authentic discussions on its nuclear and ballistic missile programme.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-10-03.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the government of Sudan about the arrest and continuing detention of Reverend Hasan Kodi Taour, Reverend Kuwa Shamal Kori, Abdelmonim Abdelmawla and Petr Jasek.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

We are aware that the four men in question remain in detention. Officials from our Embassy in Khartoum were present in court to observe the most recent hearing on 26 September, and are in close contact with the lawyers representing the defendants. We regularly raise our concerns over this case with the government of Sudan, most recently during the visit of the UK Special Representative for Sudan and South Sudan to Khartoum in September. We will continue to monitor this case closely.

More widely, freedom of religion or belief remains a consistent theme in our ongoing human rights dialogue with the government of Sudan. We consistently call on them to ensure all legislation is consistent with the commitment to their citizens in the Interim Constitution of 2005, within which religious freedom is enshrined.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government how they ensure that funds spent by the British Embassy in Pyongyang or funds dispersed by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office for North Korea activities are not diverted by the government of North Korea for use in its nuclear programme or human rights abuses.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) projects in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) are usually delivered through international Non-Governmental Organisations who operate in-country and are aimed at assisting some of the most vulnerable groups in North Korean society. Before selecting an implementing partner relevant due diligence checks are carried out which include, but are not limited to, obtaining assurances about: training provided to staff in relation to reporting bribery and corruption; how those concerns are shared with donors; and what policies, principles and procedures the organisation has in place to regulate its own conduct.

In line with standard FCO project requirements detailed budgets are required for all projects and these are carefully checked to ensure both in-country and other costs are reasonable. Project implementers are required to provide financial reports and originals or copies of all invoices and receipts, as well as a Project Completion Report containing a detailed breakdown of all expenditure during the project period. The final payment on any project is only released after submission of a satisfactory Project Completion Report.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-10-27.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 22 October (HL Deb, GC53–4), what response they have received from the government of Bangladesh following the representations they have made about the murder of secularists and upholding rights of freedom of belief set out in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Government has been unequivocal in its condemnation of the murder of four secular bloggers in Bangladesh this year, and in calling for the Government of Bangladesh to protect those who face threats to their lives because of the views they have expressed. The Bangladesh authorities continue their investigations to find the perpetrators and a number of arrests have been made. The UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt, visited Bangladesh from 31 August to 9 September. We look forward to his report at the UN Human Rights Council in March 2016 and we will encourage the government to consider all its recommendations carefully.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-11-17.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anelay of St Johns on 4 November (HL2885), what assessment they have made, if any, of the reach and impact of radio and television in North Korea.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) does not produce viewing or listening figures for domestic media. However, in 2012 the consultancy organisation, InterMedia, produced a report on the media environment in the DPRK based on a survey of North Korean refugees. The report, with some caveats from the authors, found that 74 per cent of those sampled were able to access television while resident in the DPRK, 42 per cent radio and 38 per cent a cassette player with a radio. The survey also found that 38 per cent of those surveyed considered domestic television to be their most important source of information while living in the DPRK, 21 per cent South Korean radio and 4 per cent domestic radio.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2015-12-07.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings by Save the Children (1) that Yemen is the country (a) with the highest number of people in humanitarian need, and (b) with the highest number of casualties owing to explosive weapons; and (2) that at least three children are killed each day in Yemen.

Baroness Anelay of St Johns

The humanitarian situation in Yemen is now one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world, with more than 80 per cent of the population in need of humanitarian assistance. The UN declared Yemen a Level three crisis on 1 July, a category reserved for the most serious and complex crises (others are Syria, Iraq & South Sudan). Humanitarian needs remain significant across all sectors. According to the UN, 7.6 million are facing severe food shortages and 2.1 million people are malnourished, including 320,000 children who are severely malnourished. 2.3 million Yemenis are internally displaced. The UK is the 4th largest donor to the humanitarian crisis in Yemen (providing £75 million, including funding to the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Save the Children, and the Cooperative for Assistance and Relief Everywhere (CARE) to provide specific support to children on protection, malnutrition, health, water and sanitation).

In compliance with International Humanitarian Law (IHL), no weapon should be used indiscriminately, disproportionately, or to deliberately target civilians and civilian objects. We therefore continue to urge all parties to the conflict to act in compliance with IHL and to conduct open and transparent investigations into all incidents where it is alleged that IHL has been breached.

We remain extremely concerned by civilian casualties as a result of the conflict. A political solution is the best way to bring long-term stability to Yemen and we are supporting the UN’s efforts through diplomatic channels to achieve a ceasefire and return to an inclusive political process, including through the Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Mr Cameron), the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my right hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Mr Hammond), our ambassadors, and the UK Special Envoy to Yemen, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Sir Alan Duncan).

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what work is being undertaken by the United Nations Special Advisor on the Prevention of Genocide in relation to the situation of Christians and other minorities in Syria and Iraq.

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 what assessment they have made of whether any North Korean banks or businesses have direct or indirect access to the UK’s financial system, and whether any UK banks provide financial services to (1) North Korean individuals or entities, or (2) any third-party banks or entities that have engaged with North Korean individuals or entities engaged in sanctionable conduct.

Lord O’Neill of Gatley

In 2006 the United Nations imposed restrictions on a range of goods from entering or leaving North Korea and imposed a travel ban and asset freeze against those persons designated as persons who engage in or provide support for North Korea’s nuclear-related, other weapons of mass destruction related and ballistic missile-related programmes. These restrictions were implemented in the EU in 2007, and have subsequently been expanded by the EU.

The EU regulation prohibits financial institutions establishing new correspondent banking relationships with North Korean financial institutions if there are reasonable grounds to believe that this could contribute to North Korea’s nuclear-related, other weapons of mass destructions related or ballistic missile-related programmes.

HM Treasury is responsible for implementing these financial sanctions in the UK. Failing to comply with financial sanctions is a criminal offence and HM Treasury works closely with law enforcement to ensure breaches of sanctions are dealt with appropriately.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-04.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Prior of Brampton on 27 January (HL5039), what specific recommendations the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has made in order to resolve any conflict between the demands of research and the best interests of patients, in particular regarding (1) a demand for sufficient numbers of human embryos at the single-celled zygote stage in order successfully to perform genome editing by means of CRISPR-Cas9, and (2) the usual practice of transferring embryos to the uterus after assessing their potential to develop further after either two to three days or five to six days.

Lord Prior of Brampton

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority has advised that it requires, through its Code of Practice, that embryo donors will be recruited in a manner compliant with standard licence conditions. These conditions prevent conflict between the demands of research and the best interests of patients.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 11 February (HL5773, HL5959 and HL5960), why they have not placed in the Library of the House a full copy of the original licence application submitted to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9; why they have not placed in the Library of the House copies of the patient information and consent forms submitted to the HFEA by the person responsible in order to perform such work; how the conditions stipulated under paragraph 13 of Section G in Direction 0008 version 4 as published by HFEA on 29 October 2015 (http://www.hfea.gov.uk/docs/ General_Directions_0008. pdf) regarding Information to be submitted to the HFEA as part of the licensing process” were satisfied in the case of the decision; and why they will not place in the Library of the House a full copy of the responses to peer reviewers by the person responsible.”

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 Licence Committee considering the application to which the noble Lord refers was satisfied that the requirements of General Directions 0008 were met, with the exception of evidence of ethics approval, which must be submitted to the HFEA before any licensed research can begin.

The HFEA has advised that licence conditions R18-R27 and T97 address any potential conflict between the use of embryos in research and the use of embryos in the provision of treatment services. The person responsible did not give a reason on the application form for requesting that reference to surplus embryos should be removed from the research project title, nor are they required to do so. The removal of ‘surplus’ from the title does not reflect a change in the way embryos will be donated to the research.