Tag: Lord Laird

  • Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-11-09.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Faulks on 5 November (HL2965) concerning public inquiries that they have instigated into the death of a single individual since 1988, which of the individuals specified have not had a full coroner’s inquest.

    Lord Faulks

    A coroner’s inquest was not completed into the deaths of the following individuals:

    Victoria Climbié, Robert Hamill, Dr David Kelly, Alexander Litvinenko, Baha Mousa, Zahid Mubarek, Rosemary Nelson and Azelle Rodney.

    The only occasion when an inquest has been adjourned under section 17A of the Coroners Act 1988 because a non-statutory inquiry was to be held was following the death of Dr David Kelly. The Lord Chancellor established an inquiry to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death on 18 July 2003, the day that Dr Kelly’s body was found.

  • Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-11-26.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they treat universities that receive public funding as private or public institutions.

    Baroness Neville-Rolfe

    In general, universities that receive public grant funding from the Higher Education Funding Council for England are private institutions.

    However there are instances where the law does consider them to be public authorities. For example, they are listed in Schedule 1 to the Freedom of Information Act 2000 as public authorities for the purposes of that Act. However, for the purposes of the Human Rights Act 1998, they are considered to be ‘hybrid’ public authorities, which means that that Act only applies to their public functions, and not their private ones.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-01-12.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Dunlop on 27 November 2015 (HL3723), whether parity of esteem is their policy for all citizens of the UK, and if not, why not.

    Lord Dunlop

    As I have made clear in previous answers on this subject the UK Government is committed to affording due respect and parity of esteem to all the people in Northern Ireland as underpinned by the 1998 Belfast Agreement, and in accordance with the obligations on the Government to promote equality and prevent discrimination across the United Kingdom.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-01-21.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what redress is available to those who do not feel that they have obtained parity of esteem as promised in the Belfast Agreement 1998.

    Lord Dunlop

    I have nothing further to add to my earlier responses on parity of esteem.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-03.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government what meetings under the Belfast Agreement 1998 can be attended by members of the public.

    Lord Dunlop

    Meetings between the UK Government, Irish Government and Northern Ireland political parties, such as those which took place that led to the Fresh Start Agreement, are held in accordance with the three-stranded approach established by the Belfast Agreement. Such political talks are held in private but are attended by representative politicians.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-02-24.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Dunlop on 28 January (HL5591) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they have not answered the question, and whether the Belfast Agreement applies to members of the British Security Forces.

    Lord Dunlop

    My previous replies to the Noble Lord on questions about the application of the Belfast Agreement to specific groups explain that the Agreement, with its three-stranded approach, paved the way for power sharing in Northern Ireland and provides the basis for devolved government there. The three-stranded approach is:

    • Strand 1 concerns the status and system of government of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom. This provides for the creation of a democratically elected Northern Ireland Assembly.
    • Strand 2 concerns the relationship between Northern Ireland and Ireland. This provides for the creation of a North /South Ministerial Council.
    • Strand 3 concerns the relationship between the Ireland and the United Kingdom. This provides for the creation of a British-Irish Council and the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-05-18.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether parity of esteem as established in the Belfast Agreement 1998 applies to (1) people temporarily residing in Northern Ireland, and if so for how long such people have to live there for parity of esteem to apply; and (2) people who live outside Northern Ireland but work in the province.

    Lord Dunlop

    This Government understands the concept of parity of esteem, as set out in the 1998 Belfast Agreement, as placing a general obligation on the UK Government to treat people of different traditions in Northern Ireland fairly and with equal respect. In the Agreement it is clearly expressed and defined in relation to people living in Northern Ireland.

    As a general obligation there is no definition of particular circumstances in which it does or does not apply.

    As I have set out in previous replies to the Noble Lord, this Government is firm in its commitment to the protection of people against any form of discrimination, and the promotion of opportunity for all, across the whole of our United Kingdom.

    In respect of the Noble Lord’s question about those who might march wearing army uniforms but who are not members of an army, the concept of parity of esteem clearly does not absolve people from upholding the law. This Government has made clear many times that we will never accept any form of equivalence between members of the security forces and those who engage in terrorism or other forms of paramilitary activity.

  • Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-10-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government in what way the Northern Ireland Parades Commission is accountable to them and to the courts.

    Lord Dunlop

    The Parades Commission operates independently of Government in line with the provisions contained in the Public Processions (NI) Act 1998.

    The Commission is accountable to the courts for its operational decisions.

    The Commission is accountable to the Northern Ireland Office for the management of its resources.

  • Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Ministry of Justice

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-11-10.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government on how many occasions a non-statutory public inquiry has been instigated into the death of a single individual under section 17A of the Coroners Act 1988 at a time when that individual had not been the subject of a full coroner’s inquest; who were those individuals; why they were referred for a public inquiry in each case; and on which dates they were referred.

    Lord Faulks

    A coroner’s inquest was not completed into the deaths of the following individuals:

    Victoria Climbié, Robert Hamill, Dr David Kelly, Alexander Litvinenko, Baha Mousa, Zahid Mubarek, Rosemary Nelson and Azelle Rodney.

    The only occasion when an inquest has been adjourned under section 17A of the Coroners Act 1988 because a non-statutory inquiry was to be held was following the death of Dr David Kelly. The Lord Chancellor established an inquiry to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death on 18 July 2003, the day that Dr Kelly’s body was found.

  • Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    Lord Laird – 2015 Parliamentary Question to the Northern Ireland Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-12-01.

    To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Dunlop on 25 November (HL3646), on what dates over the last 24 months the government of the Republic of Ireland attended in any capacity meetings held under section 1 of the 1998 Belfast Agreement; where the meetings were held; and what was discussed.

    Lord Dunlop

    The Government has held regular meetings with the Irish Government over the last two years. The Irish Government has not been in any negotiations or been involved in discussions about Strand one issues under the Belfast Agreement. As the Government set out in its Northern Ireland manifesto at the election, we are committed to upholding the well-established three-stranded approach.