---

Cluster Munitions (Prohibitions) Bill [HL]

I thank noble Lords. I understand very well why the noble Lords, Lord Hannay and Lord Howell, raised this issue. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Hannay, for the realism that he showed in his earlier response and my noble friend Lord Dubs for reminding us of the example that the progress that we made on landmines set us on these matters. Our ability to continue operations alongside coalition partners who will not be states parties to the convention was raised by a number of colleagues in our Second Reading debate. It occurs to me, as it did then, that the MoD would hardly be likely to have agreed with the points made in the Bill were their points not taken care of in the Bill. It occurs to me very forcibly that the MoD's position takes into account many of the points and concerns that noble Lords have raised. Interoperability is about the UK, and similarly placed states, being able to continue operating effectively with and alongside coalition partners in all potential situations. It will enable us to play our full and necessary part in coalition operations. That vital security requirement was recognised by countries negotiating the Convention on Cluster Munitions and was expressly provided for by Article 21 of the convention. Clause 9 implements this vital provision, providing the necessary defence for conduct that takes place in the course of military co-operation and operations with non-states parties. This defence is necessary to ensure that our service men and women are properly protected from prosecution as they work and fight alongside coalition partners who are not yet ready to join the convention. It is right that this protection is comprehensive and covers all appropriate circumstances, including the most exacting combat situations. While permitting co-operation with non-states parties, Article 21 of the convention also sets clear boundaries on what should be permitted. These restrictions are also reflected in Clause 9. Notably, as I was glad to state at Second Reading, nothing in the Bill will permit UK nationals to develop, otherwise acquire, stockpile, transfer or use cluster munitions. In addition, I made it clear that no UK national will be permitted to request the use of cluster munitions when the choice of munitions to be deployed is within their exclusive control. Article 21 also obliges states parties to encourage non-states parties to ratify or accede to the Convention on Cluster Munitions, to notify Governments of non-states parties of their obligations under the convention—a point of concern raised by many noble Lords—and to use their best efforts to discourage non-states parties from using cluster munitions. Those obligations are not covered in the Bill, as they do not require legislation to be implemented, but I am happy once again to assure your Lordships that the Government will actively fulfil these obligations. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, raised the issue of "operation" and "co-operation". They are terms taken from the convention and they are defined in the clause. Operation means active, in-the-theatre activities and co-operation is wider military activity that may be in support of the operation. I hope that that clarifies that point. As I said at Second Reading, the Government’s aim is a global convention and we are actively working towards that goal. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, also raised the point about inducements in joint operations. That is not what is intended, but we could be involved in logistical planning that involved cluster munitions. That is necessary as a part of high-level strategic co-operation. The noble Lord raised another point about UK personnel. They will be permitted to call for fire support that may involve the use of cluster munitions by non-state parties, except that they must not expressly request their use where the choice of munitions is within their exclusive control. That is essential to protect the lives of our service personnel, particularly during intense combat where rapid life-and-death decisions may need to be made. I can give some reassurance to my noble and learned friend Lord Boyd that prohibition on the UK's use of cluster munitions will be reflected through operational policy documents that will outline how UK Armed Forces will operate with coalition partners. Restrictions on the use of weapons and national caveats imposed during coalition operations are, as I am sure many noble Lords are aware, a normal part of a coalition-building process. Those directives will include the national, operationally specific rules of engagement, profiles and national caveats, which will ensure that any action is within the parameters of UK law. Furthermore, a Chief of the Defence Staff directive is issued to all individual embedded personnel explaining the UK's legal position on all the relevant matters. I would like to clarify another point that was raised. UK commanders and staff officers engaged in military operations should continue to operate in accordance with current practice except that they must not expressly request or direct the use of cluster munitions to achieve a task where the choice of munitions is within the UK’s exclusive control. On whether we asked the US to remove its stockpiles, since the UK adopted the Convention on Cluster Munitions in May 2008, there have been ongoing discussions with the US with regard to their cluster munitions stockpiles and the necessity of having stockpiles on UK territory. I hope that I have covered those points. As I said, the aim is to achieve ratification of this global convention. We must be able to work alongside coalition partners effectively. That was accepted in the decisions that were made in Dublin and elsewhere. Therefore, I hope that noble Lords will agree that the clause can stand part of the Bill.