---

Human Rights

I am delighted to be here before you today, Mr. Key, and I wish you and all the staff of the House a merry Christmas. Let me start by drawing attention to the report that the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs published in July and the Government response that was published in September. I intend to set out the scope of our report, which is very wide-ranging, as you know, Mr. Key, and to discuss the Government response, which is welcome in relation to some areas. In other areas, however, the Government have said explicitly that they do not accept the Committee's recommendations and conclusions, and I shall inevitably focus most of my remarks on areas where there is continuing disagreement. I thank the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its officials for its consistent co-operation with our Committee on all our reports, but particularly these detailed and complex human rights annual reports. We seem to debate this subject every year. That is within the gift of the Select Committee on Liaison, but in recent years, we have had several debates on human rights matters following our Committee's report. In last year's debate, I discussed the changes that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had proposed to its annual human rights report to make it ““more tightly focused””. Our Committee expressed its hope that that would not be a means of hiding more controversial policies on human rights. However, I am pleased to say that the changes have been welcome and have produced an improved report that is more concise and covers a full calendar year. The Government have implemented our recommendation that work on human rights should be integrated into their strategic priorities. The 2007 report described the interaction of human rights concerns with the FCO's four strategic policy goals, and we welcome that. This year's report welcomes the Government's decision to split the ministerial responsibilities for human rights and trade within the FCO. We had been asking for that to happen for two years because one Minister was covering both areas for a time, and we were concerned that that sent the wrong signals to some countries. Although we were happy with the performance of that particular Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield (Mr. McCartney), we nevertheless felt strongly that there should be a separation, within the FCO, between the Minister with responsibility for trade, who was also in the Department of Trade and Industry—now the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform—and the Minister with responsibility for human rights. The separation of those posts, in the June 2007 reshuffle, was welcome, as there should now be no potential perception of a conflict of interests. That is important, and we hope that the separation will remain. We have considered a number of overall themes and individual countries. On overall themes, our report criticised the lack of prominence in the FCO's 2007 report on women's rights and children, as well as the inadequate work on the promotion of democracy. In their reply, the Government have agreed"““to better explain how these issues have been factored into the Government's overall strategy””." I hope that that will be the case, and that the Minister will commit to giving greater prominence to women, children and the promotion of democracy in the Department's next report. As in previous years, we have looked closely at what has been happening with the United Nations system. The move, a few years ago, from having a Commission on Human Rights to having a Human Rights Council unfortunately has not led to a particularly improved performance within the UN system. That is disappointing and this issue has been controversial. We have noted that the UK has voted against seven of the 10 resolutions in this year's FCO annual human rights report, and has abstained on the other three. That is because the way in which the UN system looks at human rights issues is not balanced, and has failed to address human rights abuses in significant regions and countries in the world. In my view, it has focused overly on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, but has not concentrated on or referred to human rights abuses in other regions and countries. That is damaging to the UN's reputation and credibility. If we have a universal declaration on human rights—we are celebrating its 60th anniversary this year—the Human Rights Council should be universal in its approach to human rights issues, but it clearly is not doing that at the moment. Will the Minister update us as to how the Government intend to press for a more balanced approach on these matters within the UN system? The Committee has looked at terrorism for several years, both in this report and in specific reports on other issues. Examples include our report ““Foreign Policy Aspects of the War Against Terrorism”” and reports on the situation in the middle east, Iran and other areas. This report also discusses issues of terrorism and measures to prevent terrorism. We feel strongly that the Government should act to ensure that no flights"““that enter UK airspace or land at UK airports””" are part of what has become known as the ““rendition circuit””. Unfortunately, the Government rejected that recommendation in their response. We have also expressed concerns about the US Government trying former British residents at Guantanamo Bay under the Military Commissions Act of 2006. We recommended that the UK Government should press for the return of Binyam Mohamed and Shaker Aamer from Guantanamo Bay to this country. We understand, from the FCO's response, that the Government are doing so for Mr. Mohamed, but they seem to have given up in the case of Mr. Aamer. What further representations have the Government made about Mr. Mohamed, particularly in light of the US authorities' decision to drop charges against him following the resignation of the original prosecutor on what he said were ethical grounds? Clearly, there will be a change in US policy on Guantanamo Bay with the change of Administration. President-elect Obama is reported to have made statements about closing Guantanamo within two years. I am interested to know from the Minister how the British Government see their role in facilitating its closure and how other countries in Europe and around the world can assist in that process? As the Committee pointed out in our 2007 report, following our visit to Guantanamo Bay in September 2006, it is all very well to call for the closure of Guantanamo, but there are several hundred people there, some of whom are very dangerous and will need to be dealt with in a different way through a legal process, rather than simply being released into wider global society.