DOCSLIB.ORG

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 6 Nov 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 6 Nov 1 NOU-17-1993 16=26 UK MISSION _ 212 745 9332 P. 01/16 House of Commons Hansard Debates for 1 6 Nov 1 ... -V JW ftl Ittu pag? 2 of $ the introduction of a new class IB employers' national insurance contribution, so that treatment of contributions on payments and benefits to employees included in a pay-as-you-eam settlement agreement can be aligned with the tax treatment. Regulations to give effect to all those changes will be laid before both Houses in due course. Mr. Mackinlay: I concentrated on that reply with considerable vigour. May I ask the Minister what he will do about employers—such as P and O Stena, and Cable and Wireless-who have the practice of paying their employees offshore, thereby avoiding paying national insurance contributions? That practice is not only unfair but unpatriotic, Should it not be stopped, immediately, by legislation? What does he say? Mr. Timms: I am aware of the concerns expressed by hon. Friend, which we are closely examining. Iraq 3,30 pm The Prime Minister (Mr. Tony Blair): Madam Speaker, with your permission, I shall make a statement on the situation in Iraq. As the House will know, on Saturday I had authorised substantial military action as part of a joint US-UK strike against targets in Iraq. British Tornado fighter bombers were about to take to the air, and 1 had already spoken to the detachment commander to thank the detachment for its bravery and professionalism, when we received word that the Iraqis were telling the United Nations Secretary-General that they had backed down. I should like to explain to the House why we were ready to take such action, why we decided to stay our hand, and why we remain ready to strike if the Iraqis do not fully comply with their obligations. Let me first.put the events in context. Security Council resolution 687 of April 1991, containing the ceasefire terms for the Gulf war, obliged Iraq to accept the destruction of all its weapons of mass destruction and not to develop such weapons in the future. The United Nations Special Commission was established to oversee those processes, with the International Atomic Energy Agency. A further resolution required immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access to any places and records in Iraq that inspectors wished to inspect ; The seven years since then have been a constant struggle between Iraq and the weapons inspectors, who have been backed by the full authority of the UN. The inspectors themselves have been harassed and threatened. Iraq has deceived and concealed and lied at every turn. A deliberate mechanism to hide existing weapons and to develop new ones has been in place, involving organisations close to Saddam Hussein, particularly his Special Republican Guard. Despite all the obstruction, UN S COM and the IAEA have been remarkably successful in uncovering and destroying massive amounts of weaponry, particularly following the defection of Saddam Hussein's son-in-law, Hussein Kamel, in. 1995. He was murdered on his return to Iraq the following year. UNSCOM has destroyed, for example, more than 38,000 chemical weapon munitions, 690 tonnes of chemical weapon agents and 3,000 tonnes of precursor chemicals. Furthermore, 48 Scud missiles have been destroyed, as has a biological weapons factory designed to produce up to 50,000 litres of anthrax, botulism toxin and other agents. Without the weapons inspectors, that deadly arsenal would have been available to Saddam Hussein to use against his. neighbours. Who can say with any confidence that he would not already have used it? Huge question marks remain, for example, over 610 tonnes of unaccounted-for precursor chemicals for the nerve gas VX; over imports of growth media capable of producing huge amounts of anthrax; and over missile warheads, particularly those designed for chemical and biological weapons, Iraq has http://www.parliamentme-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cml99798/cinhansrd/cm98n I/17/98.htm 17/11 '98 TUB 16:23 [TX/RX NO 5737] i]001 NOU-17-1998 16=29 UK MISSION 212 745 9332 P.02/16 House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Nov 1... Page 3 of 5 denied weaponising VX, but analysis of missile warhead fragments in a US laboratory showed traces of VX. Further tests were carried out in French and Swiss laboratories. A multinational group of experts concluded in late October that the original US tests were accurate, that the French laboratory UNCLASSIFIED LtJJLW II FAX LEADER United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations New York PO Box 5238 New York, NY 10150-5238 Telephone: (212) 745-9200 Facsimile: (212) 745-9316 Date: . From: Fax No: . Subject: Pages (including leader): ./.9,, Further Instructions/Details Please do not write below this line Sent at: Signature: 17/11 '98 TUB 16:23 [TX/RX NO 5737] @]002 NOU-17-193B 16=29 UK MISSION 212 745 9332 P.03/16 1 House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Nov 1... Page 4 of 5 comprehensive revieWj we and the Americans decided that if Saddam Hussein did not return to full compliance very quickly, we were ready to mount an air attack to reduce substantially Iraq's threat to its neighbours, in particular by degrading its weapons of mass destruction capability, and its ability to develop, control and deliver such weapons. We did not want a lengthy military build-up of the kind that there had been in February, or endless rhetorical warnings, but we did make it clear that if Iraq did not return to full compliance very quickly indeed, it would face a substantial military strike. A private warning was delivered directly to the Iraqi permanent representative at the UN on Thursday 12 November, giving no details about timing) but leaving no doubt about the scale of what was intended. Saturday afternoon, London time, was set for the start of the attack. I gave final authorisation that morning for the use of force. I did so with regret, and with a deep sense of responsibility. I saw no credible alternative. The UK's weight in the planned strike would have been substantial, including nearly 20 per cent, of the tactical bomber effort. Just over two hours before the attack was due to start, we received word that the Iraqis had told the United Nations Secretary-General that they were responding positively to a final letter of appeal which he had sent to them the previous night. We decided that the attack should be put on hold for 24 hours to give us a chance to study the details of the Iraqi response. The first Iraqi letter appeared to agree to resume co-operation with UNSCOM and the IAEA. It was described as unconditional by Iraqi spokesmen, but the full text of the letter, and in particular nine assurances that the Iraqis were seeking about the comprehensive review—they were listed in an annex-left that unclear. We and the Americans spelled out that that was unacceptable, and that there could be no question of any conditions. During the course of Saturday night and Sunday morning, the Iraqis offered a stream of further written and oral clarifications, making it clear that their compliance was unconditional, that the nine points were merely a wish-list, not conditions, that their decisions of August and October to withdraw co-operation had been formally rescinded, and that the weapons inspectors would be allowed to resume the full range of their activities in accordance with UN resolutions, without let or hindrance. I have placed the text of the Iraqi letters in the Library of the House. The clarifications, taken together, mean that Saddam Hussein has completely withdrawn his positions of August and October. No concessions of any kind were offered to him in exchange. There was no negotiation of any kind. Nor could there have been. Nor will there be in future. We do not take Iraqi words at face value. Long experience has taught us to do the opposite. However, we had asked for unconditional resumption of co-operation, and, in the face of the credible threat of force—in this case very imminent force—Iraq offered that resumption. In those circumstances, we and the Americans have suspended further military action while we bolt down every detail of what the Iraqis have said, and while we 16 Nov 199S : Column 610 test the words in practice. The Security Council decided last night that UNSCOM and IAEA inspectors should resume their work in Iraq immediately. They will be in Iraq tomorrow, and they must be afforded full co-operation in every respect. As ever, we do not rely on the good faith of Saddam Hussein. He has none. We know, however, that under threat of force, we can make him move. We will be watching with extreme care and a high degree of scepticism. Our forces remain in place and on high alert. We and the Americans remain ready, willing and able to go back to the use offeree at any time. There will be no further warnings. The inspectors will now carry out their work. http://www.parliament.me-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cml99798/cmhaiisrd/cm981116/d^text/SIl/17/98.htm 17/11 '98 TUB 16:23 [TX/RX NO 5737] @]003 NOU-17-199B 16:30 UK MISSION 212 745 9332 P.04/16 House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Nov 1... Page 5 of 5 There are in my view two substantial and fundamental differences between the Iraqi climbdown this time and the climbdown in February. First, there is now a very clear diplomatic basis for action without further need for long discussion in the Security Council or elsewhere.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On
    OPENING PANDORA’S BOX David Cameron’s Referendum Gamble on EU Membership Credit: The Economist. By Christina Hull Yale University Department of Political Science Adviser: Jolyon Howorth April 21, 2014 Abstract This essay examines the driving factors behind UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to call a referendum if the Conservative Party is re-elected in 2015. It addresses the persistence of Euroskepticism in the United Kingdom and the tendency of Euroskeptics to generate intra-party conflict that often has dire consequences for Prime Ministers. Through an analysis of the relative impact of political strategy, the power of the media, and British public opinion, the essay argues that addressing party management and electoral concerns has been the primary influence on David Cameron’s decision and contends that Cameron has unwittingly unleashed a Pandora’s box that could pave the way for a British exit from the European Union. Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank the Bates Summer Research Fellowship, without which I would not have had the opportunity to complete my research in London. To Professor Peter Swenson and the members of The Senior Colloquium, Gabe Botelho, Josh Kalla, Gabe Levine, Mary Shi, and Joel Sircus, who provided excellent advice and criticism. To Professor David Cameron, without whom I never would have discovered my interest in European politics. To David Fayngor, who flew halfway across the world to keep me company during my summer research. To my mom for her unwavering support and my dad for his careful proofreading. And finally, to my adviser Professor Jolyon Howorth, who worked with me on this project for over a year and a half.
    [Show full text]
  • THE 422 Mps WHO BACKED the MOTION Conservative 1. Bim
    THE 422 MPs WHO BACKED THE MOTION Conservative 1. Bim Afolami 2. Peter Aldous 3. Edward Argar 4. Victoria Atkins 5. Harriett Baldwin 6. Steve Barclay 7. Henry Bellingham 8. Guto Bebb 9. Richard Benyon 10. Paul Beresford 11. Peter Bottomley 12. Andrew Bowie 13. Karen Bradley 14. Steve Brine 15. James Brokenshire 16. Robert Buckland 17. Alex Burghart 18. Alistair Burt 19. Alun Cairns 20. James Cartlidge 21. Alex Chalk 22. Jo Churchill 23. Greg Clark 24. Colin Clark 25. Ken Clarke 26. James Cleverly 27. Thérèse Coffey 28. Alberto Costa 29. Glyn Davies 30. Jonathan Djanogly 31. Leo Docherty 32. Oliver Dowden 33. David Duguid 34. Alan Duncan 35. Philip Dunne 36. Michael Ellis 37. Tobias Ellwood 38. Mark Field 39. Vicky Ford 40. Kevin Foster 41. Lucy Frazer 42. George Freeman 43. Mike Freer 44. Mark Garnier 45. David Gauke 46. Nick Gibb 47. John Glen 48. Robert Goodwill 49. Michael Gove 50. Luke Graham 51. Richard Graham 52. Bill Grant 53. Helen Grant 54. Damian Green 55. Justine Greening 56. Dominic Grieve 57. Sam Gyimah 58. Kirstene Hair 59. Luke Hall 60. Philip Hammond 61. Stephen Hammond 62. Matt Hancock 63. Richard Harrington 64. Simon Hart 65. Oliver Heald 66. Peter Heaton-Jones 67. Damian Hinds 68. Simon Hoare 69. George Hollingbery 70. Kevin Hollinrake 71. Nigel Huddleston 72. Jeremy Hunt 73. Nick Hurd 74. Alister Jack (Teller) 75. Margot James 76. Sajid Javid 77. Robert Jenrick 78. Jo Johnson 79. Andrew Jones 80. Gillian Keegan 81. Seema Kennedy 82. Stephen Kerr 83. Mark Lancaster 84.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (9MB)
    A University of Sussex PhD thesis Available online via Sussex Research Online: http://sro.sussex.ac.uk/ This thesis is protected by copyright which belongs to the author. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Please visit Sussex Research Online for more information and further details 2018 Behavioural Models for Identifying Authenticity in the Twitter Feeds of UK Members of Parliament A CONTENT ANALYSIS OF UK MPS’ TWEETS BETWEEN 2011 AND 2012; A LONGITUDINAL STUDY MARK MARGARETTEN Mark Stuart Margaretten Submitted for the degree of Doctor of PhilosoPhy at the University of Sussex June 2018 1 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ 1 DECLARATION .................................................................................................................................. 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 5 FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................... 6 TABLES ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Future Oral Questions As of Tue 29 Oct 2019
    Published: Tuesday 29 October 2019 Questions for oral answer on a future day (Future Day Orals) Questions for oral answer on a future day as of Tuesday 29 October 2019. T Indicates a topical question. Members are selected by ballot to ask a Topical Question. [R] Indicates that a relevant interest has been declared. Questions for Answer on Wednesday 30 October Oral Questions to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland 1 Sir Henry Bellingham (North West Norfolk): What steps his Department is taking to support armed forces veterans in Northern Ireland. (900143) 2 Maria Caulfield (Lewes): What plans the Government has to make a further decision on the salaries paid to Members of the Northern Ireland Assembly. (900144) 3 Alex Cunningham (Stockton North): What recent assessment he has made of the effect on peace in Northern Ireland of the UK leaving the EU. (900145) 4 Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland): What steps the Government has taken to ensure that customs regulations are the same in Northern Ireland as in the rest of the UK. (900146) 5 Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham): What assessment he has made of the benefits to Northern Ireland of being part of the UK. (900147) 6 Marion Fellows (Motherwell and Wishaw): What economic assessment he has made of the potential effect of the Government’s proposed Withdrawal Agreement on Northern Ireland. (900148) 7 Steve McCabe (Birmingham, Selly Oak): If he will bring forward legislative proposals to maintain welfare mitigation payments in Northern Ireland after March 2020. (900149) 8 Frank Field (Birkenhead): If he will bring forward legislative proposals to maintain welfare mitigation payments in Northern Ireland after March 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Staffordshire County Council
    Appendices Appendix 1: Lichfield City centre Future High Streets Fund boundary Appendix 2: Lichfield City Centre Development Strategy Appendix 3: Lichfield District’s functional economic geography Appendix 4: Lichfield District’s tourism performance Appendix 5: Partners letter of support - Michael Fabricant MP for the Constituency of Lichfield - Staffordshire County Council - Stoke-On-Trent and Staffordshire Local Enterprise Partnership - Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership - Greater Birmingham Chamber of Commerce - Lichfield and Tamworth Chamber of Commerce - Lichfield City Centre Development Partnership - Lichfield Business Improvement District - Three Spires Shopping Centre - Lichfield Cathedral - South Staffordshire College Appendix 1: Lichfield City centre Future High Streets Fund boundary Appendix 2: Lichfield City Centre Development Strategy Lichfield City Centre Development Strategy & Action Plan 2016 – 2020 February 2016 About this strategy This strategy was commissioned and funded by members of the Lichfield City Centre Development Partnership who all fed into its development, including: Key organisations and groups across the city also fed into the development of the strategy. These include: Coach operators, including Johnsons Coach & Lichfield Festival Bus Travel, Bullock Coaches and Shaw Lichfield Garrick Coaches Lichfield Rail Promotion Group Drayton Manor Theme Park Premier Inn Erasmus Darwin House The National Memorial Arboretum George Hotel Samuel Johnson Birthplace Museum Holiday Inn Express South Staffs College The Lichfield Arts, Culture & Heritage St John’ Hospital Partnership. St John’s House Lichfield Arts St Mary’s in the Market Square Lichfield Civic Society Swinfen Hall Hotel Lichfield District Tourism Association Wedge Gallery About the authors The Tourism Company was commissioned by Lichfield City Centre Development Partnership (LCDCP) in 2015 to prepare the strategy Lichfield City Centre.
    [Show full text]
  • Cut Both Ways
    CUTCUT BOTHBOTH WAYSWAYS Lichfield & Hatherton Canals Restoration Trust Issue No. 100 Summer 2019 ay Wha eeth rf L tr Lichfield td S Heart of the Coventry Canal . TEL:01543 414808 MOBILE:0782 4848444 FAX:01543 414770 www.streethaywharf.co.uk 7-DAY CALL OUT SERVICE GEN SETS FITTED DIESEL AND SOLID FUEL STOVES FITTED BOTTOM BLACKING REPAINTING AND SIGNWRITING NEW BOATS FULL & PART FIT-OUT SUPPLIED ALL MECHANICAL / ELECTRICAL WORK FULL CHANDLERY STRETCHING AND REBOTTOMING GAS SAFE. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ALL STEEL WORK AND TANKS Support the boat yard on the “Lichfield Ring” Boat Transport, England, Europe Cranage Arranged Site Surveys Complete Service for DIY Repairs Boat Hire Boat Fitting Diesel Pump Out Mooring Boat Sales Laundry Trent & Mersey Canal V.A.T No. 133609427 Chairman’s Column We are celebrating two huge achievements in this edition of Cut Both Ways: Our 100th Edition thay Whar Being awarded The Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service: a genuine honour which ee f L reflects that we have the most amazingly dedicated volunteers one could ever imagine r t having and they tackle the very diverse activities which make LHCRT one of the t d foremost and most successful Canal Restoration groups in the country. S . Our editorial team had the great idea to select articles from the previous 99 editions, and you will see their selection in the following pages. Overall they exemplify how, over the Trust’s 31 years existence it has consistently faced and overcome challenges, gone from strength to strength and acquired and transformed derelict land into beautiful havens for people, for wildlife and eventually for boaters and thus also economic advantages through tourism.
    [Show full text]
  • View Future Day Orals PDF File 0.11 MB
    Published: Friday 19 March 2021 Questions for oral answer on a future day (Future Day Orals) Questions for oral answer on a future day as of Friday 19 March 2021. The order of these questions may be varied in the published call lists. [R] Indicates that a relevant interest has been declared. Questions for Answer on Monday 22 March Oral Questions to the Secretary of State for the Home Department Felicity Buchan (Kensington): What steps her Department is taking to reduce crime. (913694) Claire Hanna (Belfast South): What recent discussions her Department has had with the Northern Ireland Executive on asylum accommodation in Northern Ireland. (913695) Allan Dorans (Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock): What plans she has to review the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. (913696) Simon Fell (Barrow and Furness): What steps her Department is taking to support victims of modern slavery. (913697) Mr Richard Holden (North West Durham): What steps her Department is taking to speed up the deportation of (a) serious foreign national offenders, (b) failed asylum seekers, (c) people who commit serious breaches of their visa conditions and (d) illegal migrants. (913698) Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Washington and Sunderland West): What steps her Department is taking to protect people from fraud during the covid-19 outbreak. (913699) Kate Hollern (Blackburn): What steps her Department is taking to increase the number of (a) police community support officers and (b) police officers. (913700) Geraint Davies (Swansea West): What steps she is taking to help ensure that the streets are safe for women walking home at night. (913701) Ian Levy (Blyth Valley): What steps her Department is taking to reduce crime.
    [Show full text]
  • Lichfield, Phase One and Phase 2A
    Phase One and Phase 2a Lichfield Land and property map book www.hs2.org.uk Derbyshire Dales Co Derbyshire Derby South Const Dales Co Derby Boro Const Const North Boro Const Stone Co Burton Const Co Const South Derbyshire Co Const Lichfield Co Const Stone Co Const Stafford Co Const North West Leicestershire Co Const Cannock Chase Co Const Tamworth Co Const South Staffordshire Co Const North Walsall Warwickshire North Co Const Wolverhampton Boro Const North East Bosworth Boro Const Aldridge-Brownhills Co Const Boro Const HS2 Ltd accept no responsibility for any circumstances, which arise from LEEDS ! the reproduction of this map after alteration, amendment Legend High Speed Two or abbreviation or if it issued in part or issued incomplete in any way. MANCHESTER Limits of Land Subject to Safeguarding Direction Safeguarded Area: Surface ! Phase One & Phase 2a Scale at A3: 1:125,000 © Crown copyright and database rights 2021 OS 100049190 Extended Homeowner Protection Zone 1 Safeguarded Area: Sub-surface Westminster Constituencies: I Derived from (...cite the scale of the BGS data used...) scale BGS Digital Data Extended Homeowner Protection Zone 2 under licence 2011/111 BP British Geological Survey. © NERC. Constituency Boundary Safeguarding and Property Scheme 0 4 Contains Environment Agency information © Environment Agency and database right. Extended Homeowner Protection Zone 3 Zone Maps BIRMINGHAM ! Registered in England. Registration number 06791686. © Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of Land Registry Rural Support Zone (RSZ) Registered office: 2 Snowhill, Queensway, Birmingham B4 6GA. Kilometers under delegated authority from the Controller of HMSO. Homeowner payment (HOP) zone 1 Lichfield Co Const This material was last updated on [date] and may not be copied, distributed, sold Michael Fabricant or published without the formal permission of Land Registry and Ordnance Survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Paul Scully MP Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Labour Markets Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET
    Paul Scully MP Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Labour Markets Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy 1 Victoria Street London SW1H 0ET 2 February 2021 Dear Minister, Re: Support for the weddings industry. We are writing to you as a cross-party group of MPs concerned at the situation facing the weddings industry. A few weeks ago, the UK Weddings Taskforce presented a stark picture to us, with many of their businesses on the brink of collapse. This is despite pent-up demand and record bookings for the year ahead, worth £25 billion. There are 60,000 businesses and 400,000 workers relying on this sector and it is worth an average of £14.7 billion to the UK economy each year. Yet it requires urgent attention and bridging support to stay solvent, fulfil upcoming bookings, maintain jobs, and boost the economy when restrictions are lifted. The industry has been able to postpone the majority of its 2020 revenue, but without confidence about when weddings can restart, at a reasonable capacity, cancellations are increasing and the ability of wedding businesses to survive is diminishing by the day. First, the sector needs more information about the year ahead, including whether, after Easter, venues will be allowed more than 50 guests. Confidence is the most important factor in calculating spend, preventing cancellations and securing new bookings. Government engagement would not cost the Treasury and would help both consumers and the sector. Second, the sector needs an urgent cash injection to keep it going until reopening. The Weddings Taskforce has identified that cash grants of up to £10,000 would support up to 38,000 wedding businesses to survive until 1st April, and grants of between £10,000 and £40,000 would support a further 22,000 businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • EUROPEAN UNION (WITHDRAWAL) (No
    1 House of Commons Wednesday 3 April 2019 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE New Amendments handed in are marked thus EUROPEAN UNION (WITHDRAWAL) (No. 5) BILL FULL LIST OF ADDED NAMES (SUPERSEDES 6.15 VERSION) Mr William Wragg Sir Graham Brady Kate Hoey Nigel Dodds Mr Iain Duncan Smith Tom Pursglove Ross Thomson Steve Double Anne-Marie Trevelyan Crispin Blunt James Duddridge Robert Courts Michael Tomlinson Mr Nigel Evans Mr Charles Walker Mark Pritchard Stephen McPartland Mr Marcus Fysh Sir William Cash Royston Smith Mr Mark Harper Sir Robert Syms Sir Christopher Chope Craig Mackinlay Julia Lopez Will Quince Scott Mann Andrew Lewer Mr John Whittingdale Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg Boris Johnson Gavin Robinson Paul Girvan 19 Clause 1,page1, line 4, at end insert “provided and only if the conditions in subsection (1A) have been met— (1A) The conditions are that— (a) the Prime Minister has made a statement setting out the additional payments to the European Union that would be required should the motion tabled under subsection (2) be agreed without amendment; and (b) the House of Commons has passed a motion of the form “That this House agrees the additional payments to the European Union required under the proposed extension.” 2 Committee of the whole House: 3 April 2019 European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 5) Bill, continued Will Quince Mr Richard Bacon Michael Tomlinson Royston Smith Stephen McPartland David T. C. Davies Mr Iain Duncan Smith Anne-Marie Trevelyan Grant Shapps Mrs Anne Main Julia Lopez Eddie Hughes Mr Mark Harper Esther McVey Tracey Crouch
    [Show full text]
  • The Ocean Conservation Register
    The Ocean Conservation Register The Ocean Conservation Register “Growing the voice of the ocean in Westminster” www.sas.org.uk 1 The Ocean Conservation Register Published by Surfers Against Sewage June 2018 Surfers Against Sewage, Wheal Kitty Workshops, St. Agnes, Cornwall, TR5 0RD www.sas.org.uk Tel: 01872 553001 Email: [email protected] Registered Charity in England & Wales No. 1145877 (All information correct as of 25th May 2018) This report is supported by: The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation supports Surfers Against Sewage with an initiative to increase understanding of and influence on politicians’ views on marine conservation issues through the development of The Protect Our Waves All-Party Parliamentary Group. The Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation is an international charitable foundation with cultural, educational, social and scientific interests, based in Lisbon with offices in London and Paris. The purpose of the UK Branch in London is to bring about long-term improvements in wellbeing, particularly for the most vulnerable, by creating connections across boundaries (national borders, communities, disciplines and sectors) which deliver social, cultural and environmental value. www.sas.org.uk 2 The Ocean Conservation Register Foreword As a marine scientist and conservationist, this pollution has resulted in UK Parliament showing ambition documentation of the marine interests of MPs offers and leadership in reducing single use plastics, as one an important insight into the level of engagement of conservation challenge that everyone wants to solve. UK Parliament on ocean issues. A healthy functioning ocean is critical to our health and wellbeing, but there are UK Parliament is in a strong position to implement ocean immense and growing pressures from climate change, conservation policies and actions, informed by good overexploitation, pollution and habitat degradation and loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Visit for Members from Southern Indian Legislative Assemblies: Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh
    1109INDIA/REPORT17 Study Visit for Members from Southern Indian Legislative Assemblies: Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Telangana and Andhra Pradesh UK Parliament 31 October – 3 November 2017 Draft Report Contents Project Aim & Objectives ....................................................................................................4 Participants & Key Stakeholders ............................................................................................4 Key Issues .......................................................................................................................4 Results of the Project .........................................................................................................6 Next Steps .......................................................................................................................6 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................6 Annex A - Full Delegate List .................................................................................................7 Annex B - Full Programme ...................................................................................................9 Annex C - Speaker Biographies ............................................................................................ 12 About the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association UK ............................................................ 15 2 Summary Delivered in partnership the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO)
    [Show full text]