Tag: Lord Laird

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they believe that some parts of the UK require different human rights legislation to others; and if so, why and what are the different rights.

Lord Faulks

The government is committed to protecting human rights across the United Kingdom, continuing the UK’s proud tradition of respect for human rights. There is, of course, already some variation in the legal framework for human rights across the UK, as the devolved administrations have competence to legislate in respect of human rights in the policy areas which are devolved to them.

The government was elected with a mandate to reform the UK’s human rights framework. We will consider the implications of a Bill of Rights on devolution as we develop our proposals. We will, of course, fully engage with the devolved administrations.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-11-24.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will consider amending electoral law to provide for and require the amounts and details of parliamentary candidates’ election expenses to be published online, and whether this could be implemented voluntarily in the meantime.

Lord Bridges of Headley

Electoral legislation sets out the process for publicising the details and amounts of candidates’ election expenses; election expenses are made available for two years after they are submitted.

Current electoral law does not expressly require candidates’ election expenses to be published online, but nor is this expressly excluded.

The Law Commission has raised the matter of online publication of this information in their review of electoral law. This review is on-going and we are awaiting the recommendations of the Law Commission before consideration is given to further legislation in respect of this matter.

The Government is therefore not persuaded of the need to change legislation at this time.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2015-12-17.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the Northern Ireland Parades Commission can have its files and information accessed under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Lord Gardiner of Kimble

The Parades Commission for Northern Ireland is a specified public body under Part VII of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and subject to the provisions of the Act.

The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Laird on 2016-01-19.

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether parity of esteem is applicable to terrorists who operated in Northern Ireland and resided in the Republic of Ireland.

Lord Dunlop

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

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government on what occasions the government of the Republic of Ireland reported on its implementation of the Belfast Agreement 1998 in the areas of human rights, equality and parity of esteem in the Republic; what were the dates of those occasions; where any such meetings took place; who attended those meetings; and what conclusions were reached.

Lord Dunlop

The UK and Irish Governments meet regularly at ministerial and official level to discuss issues of mutual interest and concern. These include matters relating to the implementation of the Agreements which underpin the political settlement in Northern Ireland.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Dunlop on 23 February (HL5589 and HL5590) concerning the Belfast Agreement 1998, why they have not answered the question, and whether the Agreement applies to all residents of the UK and Republic of Ireland.

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.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the application of parity of esteem applies to those in jail in Northern Ireland but who have a residence elsewhere.

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.

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

To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the rules and procedures of the Northern Ireland Parades Commission were most recently reviewed, and when the next review will be.

Lord Dunlop

The Public Processions (NI) Act 1998 requires the Parades Commission to keep the procedural rules and guidelines it issues under that Act under review and empowers it to, from time to time, revise the whole or any part of the procedural rules and guidelines and issue the revised versions.

The rules and guidelines are reviewed on an annual basis; the timing of such reviews is a matter for the Parades Commission.

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.

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.