What actions he is taking to help Nigerians establish democracy in their country. [40490]

We are pressing the Nigerian regime to respect human rights and restore a credible and democratically elected civilian Government. We have measures in place against the regime and, with our European Union and Commonwealth partners, we are keeping the situation under close review. At the same time, we are supporting activities that promote human rights and democracy in Nigeria and strengthen its civil society.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that it is the Government's policy to promote democracy in Nigeria and other countries in the region, including Sierra Leone? Will he confirm that it is no part of the Government's policy to countenance any breach of the United Nations arms embargo?

Our policy in Nigeria, and more widely in the region, is to promote democracy. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister pointed out yesterday that the United Kingdom and the United Nations were trying to help the democratic regime of Sierra Leone against an illegal military coup. He also stated, quite clearly, that no one should breach a UN embargo.

"I recall during the Commonwealth meeting in Edinburgh, Mr Tony Lloyd remarking that while the British Government would continue to give diplomatic and other support to my Government, it could not provide it with lethal materials or weapons. As far as I was concerned the matter was closed".

Is it the Minister's assessment that the arms supplied to the Nigerian-led military observers group of the Economic Community of West African States—ECOMOG—which was working to restore democracy in Sierra Leone at the specific urging of section 18 of Security Council resolution 1132, could possibly also have been supplied in breach of that resolution?

The hon. Gentleman is right to ask that question. There is a real question about whether arms that go from anywhere into Sierra Leone are in breach of UN embargoes. I assure the House that the British Government, who were at the forefront of the UN move to establish an arms embargo in the first place, will also be at the forefront in ensuring that the legal position is rectified to allow the Government of Sierra Leone to conduct their business properly.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the essential ingredients of democracy is the rule of law? My constituent, Mr. Mark Davey, a welder in the oil industry, was murdered in Nigeria last month while he slept in a so-called secure compound. Since then, the Foreign Office has received no response from the Nigerian Government to requests for a copy of the police report and for the matter to be investigated by police at the highest level. Does my hon. Friend agree with me, and with my constituent's family, that that is unacceptable? Will he press the Nigerian Government at the highest level? Will he also try to enlist the support of the oil companies that employ people in Nigeria, as there are issues concerning the safety of British citizens working in the industry, as well as an obvious need to bring the murderers to justice?

The whole House will join my hon. Friend in commiserating with the family of Mr. Mark Davey. The high commissioner has not yet received any response, or a copy of the police report on Mr. Davey's murder. He has been asked to arrange a visit to the Nigerian Foreign Affairs Ministry to press for news on progress in the case. I shall certainly ensure that we continue to press the matter from both London and the high commission until we reach an acceptable conclusion.

On 1 April, the Minister met representatives of non-governmental organisations to discuss democracy and human rights in Nigeria and Sierra Leone. On 19 March, he met the Foreign Secretary's special representative, Mr. John Flynn. Was Sandline International mentioned at either of those meetings?

The best thing that I can say is that while many allegations have appeared recently, the hon. Gentleman should reflect on what I have already told the House today. I say again that no Minister had prior knowledge of or gave prior approval to any breach of the arms embargo. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is to establish an inquiry that will examine every aspect of the case. Unlike the previous Government in the case of Matrix Churchill, there will be no cover-up by this Government.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the harrowing case of Elizabeth Siah-Vandi, the 14-year-old daughter of a constituent of mine who is in hiding following the beheading of her uncle by the despotic regime of Johnny Paul Koroma in Sierra Leone? Does he agree that the removal of that regime has been welcomed by human rights campaigners? What steps does he propose to ensure that Elizabeth is reunited with her family?

I cannot comment on the specifics of an individual case, except to promise my hon. Friend that I shall look into it. I make the point solidly: the British Government worked hard for the restoration of democratic government in Sierra Leone because of the outrages committed by the junta. That is different from the arms-to-Iraq scandal, when the previous Government supplied arms to a regime engaged in torture and repression of its own people. That is the difference.

What discussions officials from his Department have had with representatives of the Karen people in south-east Asia. [40491]

In the course of their normal diplomatic business, officials in Rangoon, Bangkok and London have met Karens. Most recently, in March, our ambassador at Bangkok and officials from London visited camps sheltering Karen and other refugees on the Thai-Burma border.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Will he ensure that the United Kingdom uses its presidency of the European Union to press for sanctions against the Burmese regime while it continues to repress pro-democracy groups and the Karenni people?

The hon. Lady knows that the United Kingdom has in its presidency reconfirmed the common EU position on Burma, which expresses our strong condemnation of the Burmese regime's violation of human rights. I assure her that we will continue to work hard to help the humanitarian position of refugees, particularly the Karen refugees. She will be pleased to know that during the last financial year the United Kingdom devoted more than £250,000 to that purpose.

Will the Minister's Department, on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, issue a reassuring statement to the Karen people of Myanmar, and to the peoples of all the states neighbouring India, about the grave potential consequences of the detonation of three nuclear devices in a test programme by the Indians yesterday and the risk of an arms race and nuclear proliferation in the region?

I am sure that all hon. Members condemn the nuclear explosions detonated by the Indian Government yesterday. They will add to regional instability and are a source of concern for others in the region. We urge the Indian Government to sign up to the non-proliferation and test ban treaties. We also urge restraint on Pakistan so that it is not persuaded into an arms race that would be even worse for the stability of the region.

What plans he has to visit Cyprus to discuss a settlement between the communities; and if he will make a statement. [40492]

What support the Government are giving to efforts to recommence the United Nations-sponsored negotiations in Cyprus. [40505]

We fully support the current UN efforts to achieve the resumption of negotiations on a comprehensive political settlement in Cyprus. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary met the UN Secretary-General on 3 April to reiterate that message.

I thank the Minister for that answer. Following the recent visit to the island by Mr. Holbrooke, I urge the Minister not to allow any retreat from the proposals for a federal solution and I ask him to continue to urge the Americans to keep up their pressure on the Turkish Government.

We shall certainly continue to work with all our allies toward the objectives set out by the hon. Gentleman. We strongly support a bi-zonal, bi-communal solution to the problems of Cyprus as that is the only way to make progress. Whatever contribution we, the United States and the United Nations can make toward that objective will clearly be welcome.

May I add my voice and those of my Cypriot constituents to those expressing concern at Mr. Denktash's decision to impose conditions that effectively block further negotiations toward a settlement? Will my hon. Friend reassure the House that the Government are taking every action, both in Cyprus and in Athens and Ankara, to ensure that the parties are brought to the negotiating table as soon as possible?

Like all other disputes of this sort, the Cyprus problem lends itself only to negotiation and to a resolution via the diplomatic process. There is no other way in which there can be a just and lasting settlement to the problems of Cyprus. Such a settlement is in the interest not only of Greek Cypriots, but of Turkish Cypriots. We shall continue to remind Mr. Denktash of his responsibility to the peace process and to his own people.

May I use this opportunity to congratulate David Madden, the high commissioner in Cyprus, and his staff on the work they have done to support the bi-communal activities of the Cypriot people? May I also seek an assurance from the Minister that we will make every effort to bring the two communities together and exert pressure on Mr. Denktash? The real solution to the Cyprus problem, when one accepts that both communities want a solution, is that pressure needs to be exercised through Ankara. Until the British and American Governments are prepared to tackle that issue front-on, the situation in Cyprus will continue not to be solvable.

I did not hear a question in that, but I am sure that the Minister will respond to the hon. Gentleman's comments.

I shall do my best to help the House by finding a question. I shall then set up my own question and answer it.

I understand that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is to visit Turkey in the near future. Will the Minister comment on whether he will urge the Government of Turkey to press Mr. Denktash and his regime to take a far more positive approach to a just solution for Cyprus in line with the United Nations resolutions?

I find it surprising that Conservative Members can find nothing else to do but laugh when we are dealing with such difficult and sensitive issues, especially given the suffering endured by the people of Cyprus over the past 20 years or more.

Part of the increasing tension is undoubtedly due to the purchase of £600 million-worth of anti-aircraft missiles by the Cypriot Government. In our presidency of the EU, what pressure does the Minister think we can bring to bear to ensure that that additional military hardware does not further exacerbate the situation in Cyprus?

I realise, from the serious nature of the hon. Gentleman's question, why he has risen to the status of vice-chairman of the Conservative party. He is taking the issues seriously and he is right to say that the introduction of the S-300 missiles later this year will add to the tension. We have said that that is unwelcome and it is not in the interests of the people of Cyprus. We will urge caution and negotiation, as I have already said and will continue to say. The hon. Gentleman is right to ask for that restraint and continued negotiation.

If he will make a statement on the talks held in London on 4 May on the middle east peace process. [40493]

If he will make a statement on the middle east peace process. [40495]

The UK was pleased to host the peace process meetings held in London last week. I met the US Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright, on the eve of those talks, and my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I repeatedly met Madeleine Albright and the two parties to the talks over the two days of meetings.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the major problems is the resistance and inflexibility of Mr. Netanyahu and the Israeli Government regarding the peace talks that have been proposed? Will he continue to work with the US Government to encourage Mr. Netanyahu and the Israeli Government to accept those proposals?

We will maintain very close contacts with the United States and I, in particular, will maintain close contact with Madeleine Albright. I pay tribute to her strong, firm leadership of the talks last week.

Will the Foreign Secretary join me in congratulating The Times on publishing on Saturday probably the most balanced and detailed analysis of the problems in the peace process? Will he confirm that there are genuine difficulties relating, for example, to giving up the early warning systems on the Sumerian heights, to the flight path into Tel Aviv airport and to the aquifers that supply Jerusalem, but that genuine progress was made in narrowing the gap between the parties in the discussions held in London? Does he share my optimism that all those problems can be resolved with good will on both sides?

I must confess that that article in The Times did not catch my eye on Saturday. Of course there are genuine problems, and nobody should take lightly Israel's important concerns about security, but those issues are much more likely to be resolved in the context of progress in the peace process.

I do not share the optimism that has been voiced. Does my right hon. Friend agree that all the evidence seems to show that Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Denktash have one feature in common: neither has any intention of reaching a peace settlement?

My hon. Friend expresses a point of view. It is important for both Europe and the United States that we continue to take at their word the Government of Israel when they say that they wish to restore the peace process. After all, Mr. Netanyahu was elected on a commitment not to end the peace process but to achieve peace with security. There will be no security without peace and no peace unless we manage to get the peace process back on track.

As the right hon. Gentleman knows, the Israeli Government cite security concerns as their reason for refusing to withdraw from territory on the west bank. What action have the United Kingdom Government taken to reinforce the ability of the Palestinians to deal with terrorist activity emanating from their territory in association, liaison and co-operation with the Government of the state of Israel?

I am delighted to tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman that Europe and Britain have been at the forefront of working with the Palestine National Authority to enhance its capacity to deal with security. That is why when I was in Gaza we announced a permanent joint security committee, which is being supported by a British expert who has real expertise in security and intelligence matters. We are providing practical and real help to enable the Palestine National Authority to get on top of the security problem. I regret that the Government of Israel declined our invitation to join that committee. I hope that they will reconsider their decision in the future.

What plans he has to visit the Lisbon Expo; and if he will make a statement. [40494]

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary very much hopes to visit Expo 98 in Lisbon and the United Kingdom pavilion. The Expo offers us an important opportunity to highlight British achievements in ocean technology, research and management. The United Kingdom pavilion will project an innovative and creative Britain in a lively and entertaining way. I am pleased to announce that I shall visit the United Kingdom pavilion on Thursday this week, ahead of the opening of Expo 98.

I thank my hon. Friend for his reply. Will he ensure that, at the Lisbon Expo, the British Council encourages as many Portuguese students as possible to study at universities in this country? Is he aware that a new university is to open this year in my constituency, and we would very much welcome them?

The British Council will play an important role in the Expo and in Britain's display there. The British Council is an extremely important asset to Britain, not just in Portugal but in other parts of the world, as it sells British higher education, the English language and British culture in the roundest possible sense. I am sure that the university in Peterborough will be a tremendous success.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that Portugal is our oldest ally and a good friend—a relationship that will no doubt be reinforced by the excellent British contribution at the Lisbon Expo? That relationship subsisted during the Salazar regime. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that demonstrates that friendship between nations is best exemplified by trade and relationships between peoples rather than by some cant about an ethical foreign policy?

I welcome the hon. Gentleman's opening comments. There is no doubt that Portugal and the United Kingdom are long-standing allies—indeed, Portugal is our longest-standing ally in Europe. Relationships depend upon much more than trade. In the case of Portugal, we have a range of shared democratic values that are crucial to the relationship between our two countries.

What consultations he has held with (a) Israel, (b) the Palestine National Authority and (c) Arab states concerning securing peace in the middle east. [40496]

The Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister met both the Israeli Prime Minister and President Arafat last week in London.

Does my hon. Friend welcome Israel's commitment to implementing United Nations Security Council resolution 425, which calls for Israel's withdrawal from the occupied areas of Lebanon? Does he agree that, in order to make that meaningful, both Syria and Lebanon must ensure that the civilians on Israel's northern borders do not suffer further attacks?

The Israeli Government have offered to accept conditionally United Nations Security Council resolution 425, which is unconditional in demanding Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon. My hon. Friend's point is that we must have progress on the Syrian-Lebanese track, and it is important that we have a comprehensive peace settlement covering the whole region. That is why she is right to stress the need to build security in south Lebanon through a comprehensive agreement with both Syria and Lebanon.

Does the Minister accept that one of the problems of bringing about peace in the middle east is the fact that not one responsible Arab leader trusts the Prime Minister of Israel, Mr. Netanyahu? Would not Mr. Netanyahu contribute towards the peace if he stopped building those odious settlements on Palestinian land, thus depriving Palestinians of their land and the ability to make a living and to live in peace?

We have condemned the building of settlements and any action that pre-empts the final status negotiations. The hon. Gentleman probably does his cause no good by using such strong and intemperate language. We do not choose our negotiating partners, but we must ensure that those negotiations are a success. We are looking for progress on the middle east peace process. That is in the interests of Palestinian, Israeli, Syrian and Lebanese alike, and we shall continue to work towards that just objective.

Does the Minister agree that, as the Prime Minister said, although the talks last week produced no breakthrough, they did not break down? Does he further agree that neither in Oslo nor later in Hebron in 1997 were any percentages detailed for territorial redeployment? That was to be implemented by Israel; it was not to be an issue for discussion with the Palestinians.

As the hon. Gentleman knows intimately, the value of continuing discussion is that it can often lead to a successful outcome in negotiations. We are seeing that in Northern Ireland, and I hope that we shall also see it in the middle east. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister helped to keep those talks going. If we can take the talks on to Washington successfully, that will be in the interests of everyone in the region.

If he will make a statement on United Kingdom relations with Burma. [40497]

We are deeply concerned about the political, economic and human rights situation in Burma. We are exerting pressure on the Burmese to engage in substantive dialogue with political leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi. We have used our EU presidency to renew EU measures against Burma. We also drafted the tough resolution on Burma for the United Nations Commission on Human Rights agreed in April. We continue to provide humanitarian assistance to Burmese refugees.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Has he seen recent reports that the economic sanctions against Burma are beginning to bite? Will he ensure that Japan and other Association of South East Asian countries implement them to make sure that the international community does not open any dialogue with the Burmese junta until the junta has opened negotiations with the democratic forces in that country?

My hon. Friend is right to say that the only way towards progress for Burma is through a political solution that recognises democratic rights and human rights. We are encouraged by the fact that some members of ASEAN are engaging much more constructively and openly in their discussions on Burma. We see that as progress. The way in which they are using their influence on the regime in Rangoon could be a positive source for the future. We shall continue to work for a democratic Burma because, again, through the restoration of democracy and human rights, we have the best chance of moving Burma forward and making progress.

What representations he has received on his recently published annual report on human rights. [40498]

The report has been generally welcomed by non-governmental organisations and others. I have received no formal representations.

On behalf of the parliamentary human rights group, may I say that we welcome the publication of the report? It is an important innovation in British foreign policy and we hope that it will stimulate discussion of such important issues in Parliament and elsewhere. Will my hon. Friend expand on the section of the report that discusses the setting up of a permanent international criminal court? Will he confirm that people such as Saddam Hussein, who are guilty of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, will never escape justice?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments on the human rights report; her welcome very much mirrors that of others. The Government are determined to make progress on the international criminal court at the Rome conference in June. We strongly believe that the crime of genocide and the other crimes against humanity committed by Saddam Hussein cannot escape that international process. We would support a proper judicial process to bring Saddam Hussein to book to show that the world is united in condemnation of the horrors that he has inflicted on his people.

Does the Minister agree that the human rights situation in Nigeria should have been highlighted in the report? General Abacha, the leading member of the junta, licensed five political parties to contest the coming presidential election and, lo and behold, he is the only candidate of all five political parties. Surely that is a case of democracy and human rights being denied throughout Nigeria, which should be condemned.

The hon. Gentleman should be in no doubt that the Government are in the forefront of those criticising Nigeria for its continued abuse of the rights of its own people, arbitrary detentions, repression of basic freedoms and erosion of democracy. There is no doubt that the EU got it right when it said that the transition programme to democracy was now fundamentally flawed.

Does my hon. Friend accept that one of the basic human rights is the right to life, health and basic subsistence, and that millions of people throughout the world, particularly children, are deprived of that basic right because of the burden of international debt? Does he further accept that millions of people throughout Britain, particularly in the Churches, support the Jubilee 2000 demand for debt forgiveness to mark the millennium?

I well understand my hon. Friend's point. We recognise the strength of feeling in Britain which that campaign demonstrates. The United Kingdom believes that, globally, individuals have the right to development. For example, negotiations on the right to development at the Commission on Human Rights were enhanced by the United Kingdom's presidency of the EU. We strongly believe that we can make progress internationally and that Britain is playing a moral role at home.

Britain is still training military personnel from Indonesia and sending arms to that country, which is not famous for respecting human rights. When will the Government start practising what they preach?

The overnment certainly do practise what they preach, in remarkable and stark contrast to the previous Government. The same export licence criteria apply to the Indonesian Government as to any other country. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary announced a change to the former United Kingdom military training and assistance scheme when he introduced ASSIST, which places an emphasis on human rights training and respect for civilian and democratic government. That is the direction in which this Government are going; that is not the direction in which the previous Government sought to go.

All hon. Members support the concept of human rights. Surely one of the major challenges facing us is the need to support those who work in difficult circumstances in many parts of the world to achieve basic human rights. Will the Minister, therefore, tell us whether he has any information about the fate of the president of the Turkish human rights association who, I understand, was shot six times today in his office and whose condition is critical?

I cannot help the hon. Lady with the specific details because I do not know them. The House and the world will view that development with alarm and concern. It is incumbent on the Turkish authorities to discover who committed the crime and to ensure that they are brought to justice.

May I thank my hon. Friend for the publication of the first human rights report in the 19 years that I have been a Member of Parliament, which is a welcome change in respect of the Foreign Office? The Foreign Affairs Select Committee has investigated human rights, and everyone who gave evidence welcomed the fact that we should have an annual report and be able to discuss with the Foreign Office how we could improve this country's ethical foreign and human rights policy.

A primary purpose of the report is to bring new openness to the way in which the Government conduct their affairs in respect of human rights. It is a matter of recorded fact that Conservative Members have made no pressure for that sort of openness and a matter of practical fact that, for the most part, they have never engaged in debate on human rights. My hon. Friend represents the body of opinion that wants proper and credible debate on the issue, and wants to make sure that the British Government can hold their head up in the world, as the present Government can on those issues.

If he will make a statement on the United Kingdom's relations with the Government of Israel. [40500]

We enjoy excellent relations with Israel.

Can the Minister assure the House that the traditionally excellent relationship between the United Kingdom and the state of Israel has been repaired following the disastrous consequences of the Foreign Secretary's visit to Israel recently?

During the lifetime of the Government, we have enjoyed an excellent relationship with the state of Israel and we shall continue to do so.

I regret to admonish my hon. Friend, but I hope that he will reconsider his remarks to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton), who asked about settlements and the Israeli Government's position. The hon. Gentleman represented the view of the House of Commons. Will my hon. Friend reconsider his words about intransigence? Most hon. Members believe as the hon. Gentleman believes.

There is no difference between my position, that of my hon. Friend and, indeed, that of the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton). There is no question about the Government's policy: we have said constantly that we oppose the building of settlements and that we will take no steps that would pre-empt the final status negotiations. I said to the hon. Gentleman that we do not have the right to choose the parties with whom we negotiate. We have to negotiate with them, whatever we may think of them in personal terms. We have to make the best of the process and of the negotiations, because, as my hon. Friend knows, the only way in which to make progress is through a satisfactory solution. That will come through negotiation and diplomatic activity.

If he will make a statement on progress in respect of subsidiarity within the European Union. [40502]

Since Maastricht, subsidiarity has been important in ensuring that the Community acts only where results can be achieved better by action at European level. The subsidiarity protocol of the Amsterdam treaty, for the first time, sets out in the treaty the procedures that should be used in applying the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality to European Union legislation.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware from his close reading of the text that the subsidiarity protocol of the Amsterdam treaty requires the maintenance, in full, of the acquis communautaire and the institutional balance? Given that he has accepted that pitiful state of affairs, does he expect a single European Union power to be repatriated to the United Kingdom in the lifetime of this Parliament, or has he thrown in the towel and once again let down the people of Britain?

I am aware that those words are in the protocol. They are in the protocol because they are the words that the Conservative Government accepted at Maastricht. For once, the hon. Gentleman is unfair to the previous Administration. As a result of the negotiations at Maastricht, 12 different regulations were dropped and fewer regulations have been introduced in every year since then. It would have been nice if the Conservative party when in government had applied subsidiarity in practice. It is this Government who are now implementing subsidiarity, not just between us and Brussels, but between London, Whitehall and Scotland, London and Wales, and London and the rest of Britain.

On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

I do not take points of order during questions. If the hon. Gentleman wants an Adjournment debate, he should know how to deal with that.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Amsterdam treaty specifically enshrines the principle of subsidiarity for the first time, and forces on the European Commission a duty to consult widely and to justify action at a European as opposed to a national level? We need such progress in Europe, rather than the incessant criticism that we get from the Conservative party, which makes none of those points and constantly attempts to obscure the truth.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The protocol makes it clear that for Community legislation now to be proposed, it must be shown that matters can be achieved better at Community level than at national level. It must also be shown that such legislation will produce clear benefits that could not be secured at national level. That is now written into the treaty for the first time. It is something that the Conservative Government did not achieve at Maastricht, and it is a clear advance for the principle of subsidiarity.

Will the Foreign Secretary reconsider his answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (Mr. Bercow) about whether the preservation of the acquis was in the Maastricht treaty as opposed to the Amsterdam treaty? Does he accept that his answer to my hon. Friend was entirely incorrect? I fear that that is another example of the right hon. Gentleman not reading the material that is put before him.

I am happy to tell the right hon. and learned Gentleman that what I said was entirely consistent with what I was told two hours ago. Conservative Members complain that we are not briefed, and then they complain when we are briefed. Those are, indeed, the words that were accepted by the previous Government at Maastricht, so it is a bit rich for the right hon. and learned Gentleman to complain to us now.

If he will make a statement on the situation in Kosovo. [40504]

The situation in Kosovo continues to be a matter of deepening concern. Fatalities in Kosovo are now an almost daily occurrence, and the authorities in Belgrade must accept major responsibility for the failure to start a political process, which is vital if we are to stop the violence.

Given my right hon. Friend's extremely worrying reply, will he assure the House that he will use his presidency to do all he can to implement the decision to send a mediator to Kosovo? Does he agree that it would be wrong for Europe to sit back and wait for the Americans to take the lead? We would be making exactly the same mistake as we made in Bosnia, with knobs on.

There can be no question of Europe sitting back and allowing America to take the lead. I hope that Richard Holbrooke's current mission in Belgrade is a success. On the question of a facilitator, I have recently written to President Milosevic urging him to accept the role for Felipe Gonzalez. We shall continue to press on him Mr. Gonzalez's role as special representative of the European Union and of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. In the meantime, although Belgrade refuses to accept outside facilitation, it is important for us to maintain the pressure, which is why we agreed to the ban on new investment within the Federal Republic.

Is the Foreign Secretary now able to tell us more than he was able to tell the House on 30 April in response to questions by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Folkestone and Hythe (Mr. Howard), first, about the extent and effectiveness of the monitors who were deployed by the European monitoring mission within Kosovo and secondly, whether any further action has been considered or taken to strengthen the UN forces that are stationed on the Kosovo-Macedonia border? Can he reassure the House that he is receiving and reading comprehensive and up-to-date briefings from his officials on this situation, so that he can take timely and well-informed decisions on matters which, after all, affect the lives of many people?

The hon. Gentleman asks about the European Union monitors. Five such monitors are currently attached to the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. As much as possible, they have given continuous provision within Kosovo, and their monitoring reports have been well received by the international community and have kept us up to date. Yes, I should like to see more monitors there, but to achieve that, we should have to get an agreement from Belgrade, and at present, such agreement has not been forthcoming. The provision of UNPREDEP, the UN preventive deployment force, on the Macedonian border is a clear commitment, and we have repeatedly confirmed to the contact group that there will be an extension of the mandate. Quite what the balance of forces will be—whether it will be a UN or a NATO force—remains under negotiation. However, for the first time, we shall be holding a partnership for peace exercise in Macedonia this autumn in which British troops will participate.

If he will make a statement on the Prime Minister's recent visit to Israel and the progress of the subsequent talks. [40506]

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister had a successful visit to Israel on 19 to 21 April. As a result of his meetings with regional leaders, the United Kingdom was able to facilitate the talks on the peace process, which were held in London on 3 to 5 May.

Notwithstanding the virtue or otherwise of regularly winning the Eurovision song contest or the short-term difficulties that currently face the peace process, will my hon. Friend take this opportunity to pay tribute to the state of Israel on its 50th anniversary for its economic and social progress, and for the fact that it remains the only democracy in the middle east?

I am happy to pay tribute to the successes of the state of Israel to which my hon. Friend refers. The best birthday present for the people and the state of Israel would be a comprehensive and lasting peace for the region. I hope that all political leaders in Israel and in the region share that common goal and will work towards that objective.

As it took a visit by the Prime Minister to the middle east and Israel to clear up the mess that was left behind after the Foreign Secretary's visit, does the Foreign Office have any plans for the Prime Minister to follow the Foreign Secretary on his forthcoming visit to Turkey as well?

As the hon. Gentleman says, the visit by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister was extremely successful. It succeeded in bringing the parties together in London, and I should have thought that the hon. Gentleman would be satisfied with that result. Instead of smirking, it is about time that he invested something in the peace process, which is a great deal more important.

If he will make a statement on the means by which his Department assists UK manufacturing industry's exports. [40510]

On 25 March I, together with colleagues from the Department of Trade and Industry, launched a new package of measures that is based on the recommendations of the export forum to help exporters. We have also launched the ambassadors for British business scheme and a programme of short-term attachments of business people to our overseas posts. Those projects are helping to make the Foreign Office more businesslike and to focus on the needs of our customers. The new schemes are in addition to the wide range of assistance that is provided to British companies by our global network of 217 commercial posts in 140 markets.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that comprehensive reply. Will he please continue to use the full resources of his Department to assist the British aerospace industry abroad?

I am happy to give that commitment to my hon. Friend. He has been a true champion of the industry during his years in the House of Commons, and his constituents know the valuable role that he has played in that respect. That is why his majority has increased at every successive election.

The Minister will be aware that General Motors was thinking of withdrawing its investment from Vauxhall in Luton. Is he aware that Vauxhall cited as one of the reasons the high value of the pound?

The hon. Gentleman establishes his question on a false assumption and hypothesis, so I will not answer it. Vauxhall is still with us. We look forward to it staying with us because it is an important inward investor in Britain and has a good reputation.

Will my hon. Friend ensure not just that resources are moved around in our efforts to increase British exports, including British manufacturing exports, but that there is a real percentage increase in the resources that are devoted to that important task? Does he agree that if British Airways flew throughout the world using not only Boeing jets powered by Rolls-Royce engines, but the airbus, which has a larger percentage of British-manufactured components, we should have a good ambassador for British products?

The export forum report recommended that we should concentrate our additional resources for export promotion on a number of priority markets. We aim to do that, and to ensure we have a more driven commercial response to the needs of those particular markets and the companies that operate in them, so my hon. Friend can be assured that additional resources, as and when they become available, will be used in that way. He is right, of course, to talk about the successes of the British aerospace industry. Rolls-Royce and the airbus are fine examples of British technology and British engineering.

What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Defence on the attachment of Ministry of Defence staff to embassies. [40511]

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has not discussed that matter directly with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence, but our two Departments remain in close contact on all aspects of such attachments.

In the past few weeks, hon. Members will have seen the importance of steady, sensible military advice to the Foreign Office. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is important that more officials from the Foreign Office do attachments to departments in the Ministry of Defence, and that more service men and women in the MOD go to the Foreign Office? Does he agree that that is one of the most important ways in which to encourage the vital understanding that should exist between those two Departments and that, although there are some moves to that end, there should be many more?

There is no doubt about the valuable role that service attaches play throughout the world. The co-ordination between the two Departments responsible—the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence—is close because they both recognise that that is important. In the context of the hon. Gentleman's original, perhaps less charitable, point, I thought that he might have taken the opportunity to congratulate the defence adviser who was based in Accra, but attached non-residentially to Sierra Leone, who was decorated for his valiant service at the time of the evacuation of British people and others whom Britain helped. That would have been a fitting tribute to that important role and perhaps more fitting to the tone of the later question.

If he will make a statement on UK relations with Algeria. [40514]

The UK maintains a broad-based dialogue with Algeria, at both political and senior official levels. We remain deeply concerned about the continuing violence there and believe that dialogue offers the best chance of contributing to an improvement in the situation. As we hold the presidency of the European Union, we co-ordinate our position on Algeria with our partners, who share our commitment to dialogue. As part of that process, earlier this year, I led an EU mission to Algeria.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that the price of victory and the power struggle in Algeria is being paid for with the bodies of innocent women and children?

I am sure that every hon. Member shares the view, expressed by my hon. Friend, that every loss of life is one too many. Algeria has suffered great human loss in the past few months and years, and we need to ensure that it is brought to an end. If the United Kingdom and the European Union can contribute to the political dialogue to achieve that objective, we shall do so.

What assessment he has made of the progress of the Turkish economy in recent years and its attractiveness to UK investors and exporters. [40516]

In recent years, Turkey has become a key market for British companies. In 1997, two-way trade between the United Kingdom and Turkey reached a new record of £2.8 billion. British exports to Turkey alone amounted to £1.76 billion, which was an increase of 13 per cent. on 1996. However, there is still potential to increase bilateral trade further. To that end, on 25 June, my noble Friend the Minister for Trade, Lord Clinton-Davis, will launch a target market campaign to promote the opportunities that the Turkish market offers.

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer. Is he aware that the Turkish CBI and—during its recent visit—the Anglo-Turkish Business Council have confirmed that the investment climate for British firms in Turkey is increasingly attractive? Does he also agree that trade and investment are but one part of an important bilateral relationship, and that the value of that relationship is such that it makes the Luxembourg decision look ever more disappointing?

We seek a full and rounded relationship with Turkey, involving both trade and a political dialogue. As part of building that relationship, we have made it clear that we should like Turkey to be engaged in the European process and involved in future discussions on European Union enlargement.