DOCSLIB.ORG

Letter 13 October 2016 to Rt Hon Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

International Development Committee House of Commons, London, SW1 A OAA • Tel: 020 7219 1223 Email: [email protected] Website: www.parliament.uk/indcom From Stephen Twigg MP, Chair Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Foreign and Commonwealth Office 13 October 2016 Follow-up to emergency debate on Syria and Aleppo Dear Boris, Further to the debate on Tuesday on 'Aleppo and Syria' I am writing to seek detailed answers to questions I raised. These questions arise from the International Development Committee's work. I am copying in Priti Patel and Amber Rudd as some of my questions relate to DFID and Home Office responsibilities. You may be aware the Committee published a Report on the Syrian refugee crisis in January of this year. 1 We recommended the Government should resettle 3,000 unaccompanied children from Europe in addition to the commitment to resettle 20,000 refugees from the region (para 63). It should also carry out resettlement quickly (para 65). In May 2016 in response to the amendments put forward by Lord Dubs to the Immigration Bill the Government announced that "Unaccompanied asylum-seeking children will be resettled from Greece, Italy and France" .2 The Immigration Act 2016 contained commitments that: 1. The Secretary of State must, as soon as possible after the passing of this Act, make arrangements to relocate to the United Kingdom and support a specified number of unaccompanied refugee children from other countries in Europe. 2. The number of children to be resettled under subsection (1) shall be determined by the Government in consultation with local authorities. 3. The relocation of children under subsection (1) shall be in addition to the resettlement of children under the Vulnerable Persons Relocation Scheme. It would be very helpful if you could provide a detailed reply to the following questions raised during the debate to help inform the consideration of how the Committee might follow-up on its inquiry on the Syrian refugee crisis. 1. What progress has been made on the Government's pledge to take 20,000 vulnerable people for resettlement in the UK? 2. How many vulnerable children have been resettled from Europe under the provisions of the Immigration Act 2016? 1 http ://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/international-development­ com:rnitteelinq uiries/parliament-2015/inquiry-na.me/ 2 https://www.gov.uk/goyernment/newslunaccompanied-a ylum-seeking-children-to-be-re. ettled-from-europe 3. Can you confirm that there are no delays to resettling refugees due to Central Government not providing travel costs? 3 4. What is the UK government doing to encourage banks to swiftly process payments for NGOs working in Syria who are fully compliant with anti-terrorism legislation? 5. What discussions are the UK having with Turkey over allowing NGOs to set up and operate effectively in the south of the country? In addition, it would be helpful if you could clarify your comments during the debate in response to the issue raised by Hillary Benn relating to "the French proposal that, in the case of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council should voluntarily undertake to give up their veto". You replied: "We are in constant touch with our French colleagues about this proposal. As I said earlier, I am personally very attracted to the idea of holding these people to account before the International Criminal Court, so that is certainly something that I would like to pursue.". Members of the International Development Committee attended the World Humanitarian Summit in May this year and we have published a Report on the summit's aims and priorities for reform of the global humanitarian system. At the Summit, the UK unequivocally committed "not to vote against credible draft resolutions before the UN Security Council on timely and decisive action to end the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, or to prevent such crimes" .4 It would be helpful if you could confirm that your comments do not represent a softening of this important commitment. I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible . Yours sincerely, Stephen Twigg MP Chair of the Committee Copied to: Rt Hon Priti Patel MP, Secretary of State for International Development Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP, Home Secretary 3 HC Deb 11 October 2016, col 189 4 http://www.agendaforlmmanity.org/commitrnent/3074 .
Recommended publications
  • Windrush, Shame and Scandal: Race, Class, Gender, and Immigration in a British Context

    Windrush, Shame and Scandal: Race, Class, Gender, and Immigration in a British Context

    Windrush, Shame and Scandal: Race, Class, Gender, and Immigration in a British Context “I have learnt silence from the talkative, toleration from the intolerant, and kindness from the unkind; yet strange, I am ungrateful to these teachers”.i This paper explores the issues of race, class and gender at the epicenter of British immigration policy, with particular reference to the lived experiences and reality of the Caribbean “Windrush generation” an estimated 500,000 – 700,000 people in the UK, who arrived from the Caribbean between 1948 and 1971 and their descendants.ii This entails exploring the socio-historical context of the migration of the ”Windrush” Caribbean people to Britain and the experiences of themselves and their descendants in British society. Of necessity, we also review the history of immigration patterns control in the UK. This is a critical exercise in view of the current “Windrush crisis” occasioned by the discriminatory implementation and abuse of Immigration law to deport and disadvantage many of the Windrush generation and their descendants.iii In our review parallel streams or race, class and gender are seen to turbulently converge in the everyday lived experiences of Black people in Britain, giving rise to fractures and fault lines in the fabric and landscape of British society. It is crucial that we begin our review and place this crisis in a socio-legal historical context to ensure analytical veracity. In this regard, it is important to consider that the internecine European tribal conflict, known as “World War
  • Ministerial Code

    Ministerial Code

    Published on The Institute for Government (https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk) Home > Ministerial code Ministerial code [1] What is the ministerial code? [2] [1] The ministerial code [3] is the set of rules and principles which outline the standards of conduct for government ministers [4]. There are separate codes for ministers for the UK government and devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The codes all include the ‘overarching duty’ of ministers to comply with the law and to abide by the Seven [2] Principles of Public Life [3], a set of ethical standards which apply to all holders of public office. The Northern Ireland Code also sets out rules and procedures specified in the Belfast Agreement, the 1998 Act, the St Andrews Agreement and the Northern Ireland (St Andrews Agreement) Act 2006. Who does the ministerial code apply to? [5] Ministerial codes apply to all government ministers. Sections of the UK, Scottish and Welsh codes also apply to special advisers [6] (who are also subject to separate codes), unpaid advisers (in the Welsh Code), Parliamentary Liaison Officers (in the Scottish Code) and parliamentary private secretaries [7] (in the UK Code). What does the ministerial code cover? [8] All of the ministerial codes cover similar ground in terms of the functioning of government and the impartiality of the civil service, accountability to parliament, use of government resources, propriety and ethics, and the separation between private and public interests. The codes also set out how each government should function, including the role of collective responsibility [9], or collegiality, and how decisions are made.
  • ANDREW MARR SHOW 9TH JUNE 2019 ESTHER MCVEY AM: Do You

    ANDREW MARR SHOW 9TH JUNE 2019 ESTHER MCVEY AM: Do You

    1 ESTHER MCVEY ANDREW MARR SHOW 9TH JUNE 2019 ESTHER MCVEY AM: Do you think, Esther McVey, that it makes a difference that you have a very different background – you didn’t go to Eton and all the rest of it – how would it feel different to have a woman of your background leading the Conservative Party? EM: Well, our party is a broad church. It always has been. It’s about meritocracy. And for me, our party’s also about social mobility. It’s about anybody can come from anywhere and achieve the highest post in the land, so long as they are prepared to work hard enough, so long as they can get a good team together and so long as you’ve got a vision that reaches out to the country. And that’s why I’m travelling the country all the time as part of a pub road show with blue collar Conservatives to really hear what people want us to do. Once we’ve delivered Brexit, what do they want after that? And they want money in schools, they want money going to police and they also, which I’ve announced today, is the public sector pay guarantee, because people want to know that they’re going to have a fair crack of the whip too. AM: But we’re not there yet. We’re not out of the EU yet. And your position on that is essentially that there’s not going to be another negotiation, they’re not really going to renegotiate, so we have to be prepared to leave at the end of October with no deal, if necessary.
  • Reducing Reoffending: the “What Works” Debate

    Reducing Reoffending: the “What Works” Debate

    REDUCING REOFFENDING: THE “WHAT WORKS” DEBATE RESEARCH PAPER 12/71 22 November 2012 The remanding and sentencing of people alleged to have been involved in the riots in England in August 2011 caused the prison population to rise again, before falling back to pre-riot levels. It now stands at around 86,300 (below the record high of 88,179 on 2 December 2011). That surge in the prison population made the debate about prison and whether it “works” all the more urgent. Evidently, while they are in prison, offenders cannot commit further offences in the community, but what happens when they are released? Are they less likely to reoffend? Does prison help offenders to “go straight”? If not, what might? Is prison, in fact, an expensive way of making bad people worse? This paper examines the evidence for the effectiveness of prison and programmes in the community aimed at reducing reoffending and some of the claims and counter-claims for whether “prison works”. Gabrielle Garton Grimwood Gavin Berman Recent Research Papers 12/61 Growth and Infrastructure Bill [Bill 75 of 2012-13] 25.10.12 12/62 HGV Road User Levy Bill [Bill 77 of 2012-13] 29.10.12 12/63 Antarctic Bill [Bill 14 of 2012-13] 30.10.12 12/64 European Union (Croatian Accession and Irish Protocol) Bill [Bill 76 of 01.11.12 2012-13] 12/65 Trusts (Capital and Income) Bill [Bill 81 of 2012-13] 02.11.12 12/66 Scrap Metal Dealers Bill: Committee Stage Report 06.11.12 12/67 Economic Indicators, November 2012 06.11.12 12/68 Unemployment by Constituency, November 2012 14.11.12 12/69 US Elections 2012 16.11.12 12/70 Small Charitable Donations Bill: Committee Stage Report 20.11.12 Research Paper 12/71 Contributing Authors: Gabrielle Garton Grimwood, Home Affairs Section Gavin Berman, Social and General Statistics Section The authors are grateful to Professor Shadd Maruna (director of the Institute of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Queen’s University, Belfast) for his help with this paper.
  • JP Brexit Newsletter

    JP Brexit Newsletter

    Brexit Newsletter - vol.82 Deloitte UK 20th November 2018 Overview Theresa May May 2 Brexit Contact us: /Hiromasa Hidaka May 11 14 JSG UK Brexit Leader Tax Director Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 6589 Email: [email protected] 300 EU EU ------------------------------------------- /Masashi Niwa 100 Consulting Partner Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 5630 Email: [email protected] EU ------------------------------------------- /Yukihiro Otani Banking and Capital Markets Partner EU Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 2024 Email: [email protected] /Yusuke Miura Banking and Capital Markets Senior Manager Tel: +44 (0)20 7303 2829 EU Email: [email protected] ------------------------------------------- EU /Koji Ishikawa EU JSG Partner Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 2067 Email: [email protected] / Megumu Tanaka EU EU JSG Senior Manager Tel: +44 (0)20 7303 8447 Email: [email protected] / Yuichi Kubota JSG Senior Manager Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 9850 Email: [email protected] JSG Manager Tel: +44 (0)20 7007 9778 Email: [email protected] 1998 Good Friday SBA EU EU EU 7 EU 2020 Brexit EU Brexit EU Michael Barnier Brussels EU27 27 EU 2022 12 6 EU Dominic Raab EU Esther McVey Jacob Rees-Mogg 1922 Theresa May Michael Gove Liam Fox May EU Donald Tusk EU 11 25 Brexit EU Angela Merkel Emmanuel Macron IMF EU GDP 6 2018 7 9 EU 1997 Deloitte LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC303675 and its registered office at 1 New Street Square, London, EC4A 3BZ, United Kingdom. Deloitte LLP is the United Kingdom affiliate of Deloitte NWE LLP, a member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee entities.
  • Reflections on the Supreme Court Ruling

    Reflections on the Supreme Court Ruling

    Reflections on the Supreme Court Ruling By Professor Alex de Ruyter, Director, Centre for Brexit Studies Today’s landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the UK has sent yet more shock waves through the British political landscape. The decision is particularly notable in its verdict in that the prorogation by the UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, having been found to be unlawful, should be “remedied” by the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow. In so doing, the Court noted the supreme principle of Parliamentary sovereignty in the UK, and of the essential function that Parliament exerted on the UK Government in terms of “scrutiny” and “accountability”. Bercow has since stated the Parliament must reconvene as soon as possible, and that it will sit at 11.30am tomorrow to reconvene. But here I want to consider the practical implications, and in particular, what this will mean for Johnson’s tenure as Prime Minster, and indeed of the trajectory of Brexit itself. As yet the PM has not responded, and reports suggest that he will “take his time” in doing so. Despite his public posturing, I suspect the verdict will still have come as a shock to him, and a “rude interruption” to his schedule in New York at the UN General Assembly. On the issue of Johnson’s tenure as PM, despite growing calls for him to “reconsider his position” as PM he cannot simply be forced to resign – in reinforcing the principle of Parliamentary sovereignty the Court has made it possible for Parliament to reconvene earlier. However, Johnson would still be PM, and he could only be removed from office via a successful motion of No Confidence in his government.
  • Andrew Marr Show Priti Patel Am

    Andrew Marr Show Priti Patel Am

    1 PRITI PATEL ANDREW MARR SHOW PRITI PATEL AM: We just heard from Nick Clegg saying there that there should be a vote on the floor of the House of Commons about the terms of the Brexit vote and making the strong point that parliament is supposed to be sovereign in this country. PP: Well, good morning, Andrew. I think the Prime Minister couldn’t be clearer when it comes to parliament and the discussions and the debate that will be forthcoming in the House of Commons. AM: She’s not going to allow a vote. PP: Already what we have seen, we’re seeing debates and questions in the House of Commons nearly every single day right now. But also there’ll be a very full discussion when we have the great Repeal Bill, which of course will be about repealing the European Communities Act from 1972, and that will go through, rightfully, the parliamentary process and give plenty of parliamentarians enough time and the right kind of time to discuss the actual repeal of that Bill. AM: People like Nick Clegg would say that the great Repeal Bill comes to late in the process, that we need before, before Article 50 is triggered, a proper discussion on the floor of the House of Commons about what kind of relationship we want with the EU after we leave it. PP: Well, I think, Andrew, on that point in particular we’re having that debate right now. You know, we’ve had statements and debates in the House of Commons, I think twice this week alone.
  • The Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministers

    The Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministers

    By Hazel Armstrong , Chris Rhodes The Ministerial Code and the 12 August 2021 Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests Summary 1 The 2019 Ministerial Code 2 The Register of Ministerial Interests 3 Proposals for reform of the Code 4 Investigating breaches of the Code 5 History of the Ministerial Code commonslibrary.parliament.uk Number CBP 03750 The Ministerial Code and the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Interests Image Credits Chamber-049 by UK Parliament image. Licensed under CC BY 2.0 / image cropped. Disclaimer The Commons Library does not intend the information in our research publications and briefings to address the specific circumstances of any particular individual. We have published it to support the work of MPs. You should not rely upon it as legal or professional advice, or as a substitute for it. We do not accept any liability whatsoever for any errors, omissions or misstatements contained herein. You should consult a suitably qualified professional if you require specific advice or information. Read our briefing ‘Legal help: where to go and how to pay’ for further information about sources of legal advice and help. This information is provided subject to the conditions of the Open Parliament Licence. Feedback Every effort is made to ensure that the information contained in these publicly available briefings is correct at the time of publication. Readers should be aware however that briefings are not necessarily updated to reflect subsequent changes. If you have any comments on our briefings please email [email protected]. Please note that authors are not always able to engage in discussions with members of the public who express opinions about the content of our research, although we will carefully consider and correct any factual errors.
  • Contents Theresa May - the Prime Minister

    Contents Theresa May - the Prime Minister

    Contents Theresa May - The Prime Minister .......................................................................................................... 5 Nancy Astor - The first female Member of Parliament to take her seat ................................................ 6 Anne Jenkin - Co-founder Women 2 Win ............................................................................................... 7 Margaret Thatcher – Britain’s first woman Prime Minister .................................................................... 8 Penny Mordaunt – First woman Minister of State for the Armed Forces at the Ministry of Defence ... 9 Lucy Baldwin - Midwifery and safer birth campaigner ......................................................................... 10 Hazel Byford – Conservative Women’s Organisation Chairman 1990 - 1993....................................... 11 Emmeline Pankhurst – Leader of the British Suffragette Movement .................................................. 12 Andrea Leadsom – Leader of House of Commons ................................................................................ 13 Florence Horsbrugh - First woman to move the Address in reply to the King's Speech ...................... 14 Helen Whately – Deputy Chairman of the Conservative Party ............................................................. 15 Gillian Shephard – Chairman of the Association of Conservative Peers ............................................... 16 Dorothy Brant – Suffragette who brought women into Conservative Associations ...........................
  • Work and Pensions Committee House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA Tel 020 7219 8976 Email Workpencom@Parliament.Uk

    Work and Pensions Committee House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA Tel 020 7219 8976 Email [email protected]

    Work and Pensions Committee House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA Tel 020 7219 8976 Email [email protected] From the Chair 8 August 2019 Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP Prime Minister 10 Downing Street London SW1A 2AA Dear Prime Minister, The Work and Pensions Committee recently took evidence on the role of the welfare system in the case of an economic recession.1 The Bank of England’s recent GDP projections show a 30% risk of negative GDP growth in 2020.2 The Governor of the Bank of England has also been quoted as saying that a no-deal Brexit would be an “instantaneous shock” to the UK economy. Might you please answer the following questions on the Government’s preparations for a potential future recession or economic shock? The way that legacy benefits, such as tax credits, would operate as an ‘automatic stabiliser’ in the case of a recession is relatively well-understood. The Chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility observed, however, that it is unclear if Universal Credit would operate in the same way, partly because of the conditionality regime.3 1. Has the Government undertaken any recent modelling of the effect of a recession or economic shock on welfare spending in general, or Universal Credit spending in particular? If so, please would you share the assumptions and results with the Committee? 2. Has the Government undertaken any analysis or planning of how Universal Credit would operate in a recession? a. Would the Government make changes to the conditionality regime in response to a material change in economic conditions? The OBR told us that recessions could vary in character, with different effects on price inflation, average earnings and employment rates.4 Universal Credit was designed so that the work allowance and taper rate could be varied in response to different economic conditions.
  • The Failures of Asylum Decision-Making in the UK

    The Failures of Asylum Decision-Making in the UK

    LESSONS NOT LEARNED The failures of asylum decision-making in the UK September 2019 Lessons not Learned: The failures of asylum decision-making in the UK “The aim is to create here in Britain a really hostile environment for illegal migration.” Theresa May, Home Secretary, May 2012.1 “I don’t like the phrase hostile... I think it is a phrase that is unhelpful and it doesn’t represent our values as a country.” Sajid Javid, Home Secretary, April 2018.2 “I am delighted that Wendy [Williams] will be overseeing the lessons learned review, which is vital to ensuring this never happens again to any group of people… The contribution that the Windrush generation have made to this country is invaluable and I am committed to putting things right.” Sajid Javid, Home Secretary, June 2018.3 “[T]he way in which immigration policies and legislation were being enacted… lost sight of the individual in a very practical way… These failings contributed to creating the appalling problems for the Windrush generation, and if they persist, they threaten to continue to do so, and potentially other groups.” Wendy Williams, Windrush Lessons Learned Review (Draft seen by Freedom from Torture) INTRODUCTION The United Kingdom asylum determination system is both inhumane and inefficient. People who have suffered horrific events, often face further suffering once they come to the UK. Poor Home Office decision-making on asylum claims is endemic, with almost two in five asylum refusals corrected on appeal.4 A wide range of credible organisations have Freedom from Torture has seen a draft version researched and analysed the problems of the independent Windrush Lessons Learned with Home Office decision-making in the Review.
  • EU Referendum 2016 V7

    EU Referendum 2016 V7

    EU Referendum 2016 Three Scenarios for the Government An insights and analysis briefing from The Whitehouse Consultancy Issues-led communications 020 7463 0690 [email protected] whitehouseconsulting.co.uk The EU Referendum The EU referendum has generated an unparalleled level of political If we vote to leave, a new Prime Minister will likely emerge from among debate in the UK, the result of which is still too close to call. Although the 'Leave' campaigners. What is questionable is whether Mr Cameron we cannot make any certain predictions, this document draws upon will stay in position to deal with the immediate questions posed by Whitehouse’s political expertise and media analysis to suggest what Brexit: such as the timetable for withdrawal, or how trading and may happen to the Government’s composition in the event of: diplomatic relations will proceed. Will he remain at Number 10, perhaps • A strong vote to remain (by 8% or more); until a party conference in the autumn, or will there be more than one new beginning? • A weak vote in favour of remaining (by up to 8%); or • A vote to leave. “The result could create If the UK chooses to remain by a wide margin, the subsequent reshue will aord an opportunity to repair the Conservative Party after a a new political reality.” bruising campaign period. This result will prompt a flurry of It is clear that the referendum result could create a new political reality on parliamentary activity, renewing the Prime Minister’s mandate until he 24 June. Businesses must be prepared to engage if they are to mitigate the stands down closer to 2020 and enable a continuation of the impacts and take advantage of the opportunities presented.