Vol. 593 No. 2
8 Mr. Gilmore asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has agreed funding in the context of the Estimates for implementation of the recommendations of the task force on Irish emigrants; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30077/04]
The Minister is delighted the funds available to emigrant services will once again rise substantially next year. The Estimates for Public Services include an overall allocation of €8.267 million to support our emigrants in 2005. This is a doubling of the 2004 Estimates figure. Even allowing for the additional funding which was made available to emigrant services in late 2004, this figure of €8.267 million represents an overall increase of 63%.
The task force on policy regarding emigrants, which was established by the then Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Cowen, produced an excellent report. It provides all those involved with emigrant services with a key framework that covers the full range of issues associated with our emigrants. It makes clear that these issues can best be addressed by a collective effort involving governmental and non-governmental agencies. We are making positive progress.
We have increased substantially funding to the voluntary organisations that assist our emigrants. The significant rise in funding has been warmly welcomed by emigrant representative bodies such as the Irish Episcopal Commission for Emigrants and the Federation of Irish Societies, whose director described the increase as "an incredible boost for the Irish community in Britain". The funding will in large part go to groups providing front line services to our emigrant communities in Britain, and especially the most vulnerable Irish people there. There will also be significant increases for emigrant groups providing similar services in the United States and Australia.
This significant increase reflects in the clearest possible way the strength of the Government's firm and sustained commitment to our emigrant communities. Our commitment is both immediate and long term, and the substantial allocation for 2005 will be built on progressively in the coming years. Our commitment is also reflected in the establishment of a new dedicated unit, the Irish abroad unit, which has been warmly welcomed at home and abroad by everybody who has the interests of our emigrants at heart.
Will the Minister of State say what proportion this €8.267 million is of the money asked for by the task force to which he referred? We should remember that the task force dealt with Irish emigrants in Britain who are living at the margins. When people do their retrospective stints here, they do not refer to the fact that 55,000 people left Ireland in 1955 and almost 60,000 left in 1959. There was no year in the 1950s when less than 45,000 emigrated which amounts to more than a quarter of a million people. As the task force reported, these people would like to come home. They cannot come home to the speculator's paradise that is Ireland because they will not be able to get shelter. They need assistance. They have often been exploited by some of their own in substandard accommodation. When the task force reported and made 23 recommendations it put a figure on what it needed for 2004-05. Why did the Minister of State not give what was sought? What proportion is his €8.267 million of that which the task force sought to implement the recommendations it presented to Government?
The task force produced a fine report. As with any report and group of recommendations of this kind, the Government has to make its own assessment of priorities. That is the duty of Government.
I see.
Our major priority is Britain and to help the most vulnerable Irish there. We also need to build up the outreach capacity of the front line organisations wisely and progressively. The substantial increases we have achieved are exactly what is required. They will make a huge qualitative and quantitative difference and the positive reaction of those agencies on the ground to the increases is especially welcomed and appreciated. The task force included wide ranging conclusions, covering the full range of emigrant needs. Its recommendations were far reaching and varied and their implementation will be, by necessity, on a phased basis over several years. That is as anybody with a reasonable understanding of the position would expect. Our long term goal is to ensure that if a person emigrates from Ireland he or she does so voluntarily and is fully prepared for the challenges and will prosper in his or her new country of residence and be able to maintain links to home. Our immediate priority is to ensure that the agencies that provide front line services to assist our vulnerable and elderly emigrants are funded and helped in every possible way. Action is under way on more than two-thirds of the recommendations in the report. I shall give a few examples.
I remind the Minister of State that his limit of one minute has concluded.
I apologise. Please keep me in order.
The argument rejects phasing. Without delaying the House, I suggest the reason and ask the Minister of State to comment. The 1950s represent a crisis point on emigration. These are the people the task force identified as being particularly at risk in Britain. Some 55,000 people left Ireland in 1955 and 59,000 two years later. Each year during the 1950s approximately 50,000 people left, all of whom are at a particular age now. The whole focus of the task force report was to be able to address the needs of a huge bulge in emigrants who emigrated during that decade but who are in distress of a different kind and are elderly. There is some case to be made for phasing a future policy but there is no case to be made for refusing to put the expenditure in place for those who already need it.
Will the Minister of State accept that this is another broken promise and a betrayal of that 1950s generation? The task force recommended a figure of €34 million.
Yes, and it got €8 million.
The amount allocated falls far short of the recommended figure. Does the Minister of State recognise these people have contributed hugely to this country? Their absence means we have a demographic bounce, so to speak, in terms of health care because they are being treated in Britain. A great deal of money has been saved because they are living in Britain and yet the Minister of State is so parsimonious and stingy with the money. He has neglected and betrayed these people and is turning his back on them and it is disgraceful.
I am absolutely shocked. It is typical of the Opposition to suggest that if money is thrown at every problem it will solve itself.
That is the Government's policy.
The position is simple. We have doubled the Estimates since last year.
The Minister of State should read the report and implement it.
Since we returned to Government in 1997 we have increased the budget for our emigrants by 850%. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, when Minister for Social and Family Affairs, introduced pro rata pensions for all those who emigrated in the 1950s and they are now getting €72 million per annum from the Exchequer to assist them. If one adds that to the €8 million, it brings the figure to €80 million, which is nearly two and a half times the €34 million sought. We must ultimately examine the applications, agencies, capacity and the ability to deliver to our people. We must also provide capital commensurate with that policy.
9 Mr. Timmins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if Development Cooperation Ireland will continue to be able to operate effectively if it is relocated; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30044/04]
In the Government's decision on decentralisation announced by the Minister for Finance on 4 December 2003, it was provided that the development co-operation directorate of the Department of Foreign Affairs would be relocated to Limerick. My Department has been working closely with the Department of Finance and the Office of Public Works on the implementation of that decision. In accordance with the recommendations of the Flynn committee, my Department prepared a decentralisation implementation plan and submitted it to the committee for consideration. The Flynn committee submitted a further report to the Cabinet on progress to date on decentralisation, including the sequencing aspect. The contents of the report are being studied. My Department will continue its planning to ensure implementation of Government policy on decentralisation and will take every measure necessary to ensure that the development programme will continue to operate effectively in the new location.
Given that the Minister of State said his Department is working closely with the Department of Finance and the OPW on the decentralisation programme, will he confirm that only ten of the 124 staff of Development Cooperation Ireland have applied for or agreed to decentralisation?
The Deputy's figures are incorrect.
What are the correct ones?
I can confirm that 144 people have volunteered from the wider Civil Service. There are 124 positions——
How many of the 124 agreed to decentralisation?
If the Deputy bears with me, I can provide him with all the relevant figures.
Perhaps the Minister of State would answer when I am finished my contribution.
I apologise.
Is the Minister of State aware of a report on this matter that is to be published in the international journal of the Royal Irish Academy? In her annual review of the aid programme, which is to constitute the report, Professor Helen O'Neill states that the plan to decentralise will damage the integrity of Ireland's foreign policy and fossilise its development work. She also states that the decentralisation of key staff will make Development Cooperation Ireland remote from the policy-generating activity of the Department and that staff will waste considerable time travelling to and from Dublin.
Will the Minister reconsider the decision made to decentralise in view of the findings of the annual review of the aid programme? On 2 August 2004, The Irish Times outlined Helen O’Neill’s view that severe damage will be done to DCI and that: “any move is likely to lead to ‘a haemorrhage’ of middle and senior-ranking staff that could irreparably damage the linkage between DCI and those working overseas”.
Given that I have been in this job for only one month, I have not read the report by the professor that the Deputy quoted.
If The Irish Times referred to it, the Minister of State must surely be aware of it.
The report that I have read, which is the most interesting one on this subject, is by our own advisory board, an independent body that advises the Department on its work. It has also expressed reservations on the decentralisation plan. My Department and officials are working very hard to ensure that there are no risks associated with the move.
There are 124 positions available for people who wish to move to Limerick. As the Deputy knows, Development Cooperation Ireland is moving to Limerick in its entirety. I only received the Flynn report at 12.30 p.m. today and have not had time to peruse it fully. My Department will be in the first wave of officials and Departments that will move under the decentralisation programme. The plan is that Development Cooperation Ireland will move to Limerick in the first quarter of 2007. It is a serious issue.
That was not my question. It concerned how many of the 124 staff agreed to be moved under decentralisation.
I will now answer directly the Deputy's specific question on the figures. The overall position is that 124 positions are available in Limerick. From the entire civil and public service we have had 144 applicants for the 124 positions.
How many of the current staff have indicated their willingness to move?
That is what I am talking about. Thirty-one people from the Department of Foreign Affairs itself have expressed interest in moving to Limerick. For reasons concerning staff relations, their identities are confidential. The Civil Service Commission obviously keeps the expressions of interest and applications to itself. However, we will find out who the 31 people are in the next few days. I am not in a position to enlighten the Deputy further on their ranks. The 31 people will know exactly the position they hold in the foreign affairs structure in the next few days. When the information becomes available, I hope we will be able to use it effectively to expedite the move to Limerick.
The Minister of State has not even answered my question on how many of the 124 staff of DCI have indicated their willingness to transfer to Limerick. He should give a straight answer to a straight question. Is the number I seek not closer to ten than 31?
One of the other issues to which the Deputy referred was that of remoteness, as raised by the advisory board. Development Cooperation Ireland, despite its having a separate name, is a fully integrated part of the Department of Foreign Affairs.
I know that.
There are 31 officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs willing to move. We do not distinguish between staff at Development Cooperation Ireland and those of the Department generally.
The Minister of State does not want to answer.
The organisation is a fully integrated part of the Department of Foreign Affairs and there is a strong link for obvious reasons. It is not just a question of overseas aid——
It will not be integrated for very long.
——but also of diplomacy. The reason I cannot identify precisely the 31 members of staff and their sections in the Department of Foreign Affairs is because we will only discover this information in the next few days.
Paul Cullen of The Irish Times seems to know more about it than the Minister of State.
When that information becomes available, I will communicate directly with the Deputy on the matter.
I have a supplementary question on Development Cooperation Ireland. The Minister's Department confirmed yesterday that the VAT refund on the Band Aid DVD and CD would be funded through the current aid budget of Development Cooperation Ireland rather than through additional funding. How can the Minister of State justify robbing Peter to pay Paul? Is it not ridiculous and does it not show that the Government is downgrading Development Cooperation Ireland?
I need some guidance from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle on this matter. The Deputy's supplementary question is the subject of another parliamentary question.
It widens the scope of the question.
I do not know if I am in order to answer.
The Minister of State certainly is.
I call Question No. 10.
He should feel free.
The Chair has called Question No. 10.
The net point is that there is no robbing of Peter to pay Paul.
I have called Question No. 10.
This money is to be paid from the increased funding that we have achieved in the Estimates.
The Chair has called Question No. 10.
It will not affect any existing commitment made under the programme——
The Minister of State should be at the races.
The Chair has called Question No. 10.
I cannot believe the Deputy suggests that we would not do this.
The Chair has called Question No. 10.
It is ridiculous.
10 Mr. McGinley asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the serious impact of new security measures being adopted by the United States concerning travellers to and from that country; the repercussions of these measures for thousands of young Irish persons at present residing in the United States; if he has discussed these difficulties with the United States authorities; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30145/04]
Since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, there has been a progressive tightening of US immigration controls and procedures. New procedures known as US-VISIT have been introduced for entry to the United States. These procedures, which include the taking of fingerprint scans and digital photographs, are intended to enhance the verification of the identity of visitors to the United States and to ensure the integrity of the US immigration system. Similar procedures are being put in place at points of exit from the United States.
These procedures, which take up relatively little time, are most unlikely to impact on visitors to the US from Ireland. However, as the new procedures serve to better assess compliance with the terms of entry of a visitor to the US, they undoubtedly exert further pressure on the undocumented Irish living there.
The House can be assured that the circumstances of undocumented Irish people in the United States is raised on an ongoing basis in our bilateral contacts with US political leaders, including when the Taoiseach and the former Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Brian Cowen, met President Bush earlier this year. Various proposals on emigration reform were made by President Bush and members of Congress. These initiatives reflect an awareness of the importance of addressing the situation of the undocumented in a constructive and sympathetic way.
Proposals for reform will have to be considered in detail by the US Congress in the new year. The information and advice the voluntary organisations in the US make available to our community there is of particular relevance at this complex time of change. This year's funding to these organisations from the Department of Foreign Affairs reached €500,000, which represented an increase of 70.5% on last year. We are pleased to have secured a substantial increase in funding for emigrant services in the current Estimates. This will enable us to ensure that these groups receive a further significant increase next year.
Given our contacts with figures in the US Administration and Legislature, the House can be assured that we will support measures that would help to alleviate the situation of undocumented Irish people in the United States.
Is the Minister of State aware of the havoc being caused on both sides of the Atlantic by the introduction of this drastic draconian legislation since 11 September 2001? Deputy Higgins referred to the people who emigrated in the 1950s. I refer to the latest cohort of people to leave in the 1990s. Does the Minister agree that, at a conservative estimate, 50,000 young Irish men and women, our kith and kin, have not been regularised for various reasons? Is he aware that the new regulations cause Irish people to be detained for weeks and months? A constituent of mine who was in the United States on holiday arrived home a few weeks ago after being detained for five weeks and deported. I received a letter from a girl from Arranmore Island who made a cry from the heart. She is in the United States since 2000 and wanted to come home to marry, but she knows if she comes home that she will not be allowed back into the United States.
Does the Minister of State agree that because of the Government's understanding with the United States authorities, he should be able to obtain some concessions from them? What is the position on the legislation promised in January by the US President to provide these people with temporary visas? Does the Minister agree that if we treated US citizens in this country as our citizens are being treated in the United States, we would probably have the marines coming to Shannon and remaining there?
This is a serious matter and I do not think the Government is giving it the priority it deserves. These are our people and they depend on us to do something for them. They left this country because they had to. They are in the United States and they are prisoners in the country of their adoption. The girl from Arranmore said she feels trapped. I want to know what is being done in this regard. When will the temporary visas be introduced so that these people can make a life for themselves in the United States? These people are not a burden on the country. They contribute to the United States because they were not given opportunities in this country. There are approximately 40 million Irish-Americans in the United States, a country with which we have a special relationship. If what is happening in the United States happened in China, we would be outraged. Members of this House and the emigrants want answers.
This is the second occasion today I have answered this question. The figures we have pertaining to undocumented Irish emigrants are very much in touch with the situation. The US Administration reckons there are approximately 3,000 undocumented Irish people in the country.
The number is 25,000 to 50,000.
No, that is not the figure. The Irish organisations estimate that the figure is in the region of 9,000 to 10,000. I am in touch with the situation because I know people in the same situation to which Deputy McGinley referred. The Taoiseach has taken up the matter with President Bush and the then Minister, Deputy Cowen, did so heretofore. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has had discussions with officials in the American Embassy. I met the ambassador on three occasions about the situation.
Nothing happened. People are in prison and being deported after all the meetings. We want action and results.
Our missions dealt with three cases in recent months. People were held for between two and six weeks in three instances.
That is scandalous.
It is a serious situation. In regard to the new regulations, we find they are not having a major impact on anyone travelling to and from the United States. They do not impede their mobility. It takes approximately one minute to get through the checks and this will not affect people travelling from Ireland or people from the United States visiting this country.
We have run over time. I call Question No. 11.
The undocumented Irish in the United States are a priority for the Government. The new President will take up office on 30 January.
Legislation was promised last January to provide people with temporary visas.
Will the relevant Minister deal with Question No. 11?
We will continue to exert the maximum pressure through our ambassador and diplomatic team on the President and his new Administration, including members of Congress, to make progress on the matter as quickly as possible.
11 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will make a statement on the political and security situation in Kosovo. [30023/04]
Elections for a new Kosovo assembly were held on 23 October. They were monitored by a Council of Europe observation mission, which included four Irish observers. The elections were organised by the Kosovo authorities and there is widespread agreement that they were conducted in a free and fair manner in line with international standards. Following the tragic violence in Kosovo in March, it was important that the elections and the election campaign took place in a peaceful atmosphere. It is regrettable, however, that almost all the Kosovo Serb community decided not to participate in the elections on the grounds that their security has not been fully assured.
The political parties in Kosovo are engaged in discussions on the formation of a coalition government and an announcement is expected soon. It is essential that when a new government is formed, it should demonstrate clearly its commitment to working with the representatives of minority communities in Kosovo with the objective of building a peaceful and stable multi-ethnic society. Kosovo has been under UN administration, in accordance with Security Council Resolution 1244, since the end of the conflict in 1999. The EU fully supports the UN mission in Kosovo which is working with the provisional institutions of self-government to implement European standards in the rule of law, human rights and the protection of minorities in advance of consideration of the constitutional status of Kosovo. The EU has stressed the importance of the early formation of a government following the elections which will continue to work towards the review of progress on the implementation of standards which will be carried out in mid-2005. If the outcome of the review is positive, it will be followed by a process of negotiation to agree the status issue. These negotiations will inevitably be complex and difficult with implications for the western Balkans region.
The European Union remains firmly committed to a multi-ethnic, democratic Kosovo in which the rights of all communities are fully protected. The ethnically motivated violence in March this year was undoubtedly a major setback for Kosovo. Some 19 people were killed and widespread damage was caused to property owned by members of the Kosovo Serb community. Work is under way on the reconstruction of property and it is essential that its early completion remains a priority for the new government.
The security situation has stabilised since March, although it remains tense. There are 213 Irish troops serving with KFOR, the UN-mandated peacekeeping force in Kosovo. I underline the deep appreciation of the Government for the key role being played by members of the Defence Forces in ensuring security and stability in Kosovo.
During Ireland's EU Presidency, the European Council and the General Affairs and External Relations Council paid close attention to developments in Kosovo. The situation will remain high on the agenda of the Council in the months to come. The EU will continue to work closely with the UN mission in Kosovo, and especially with Mr. Soren Jessen-Petersen, the special representative of the UN Secretary General, in preparation for the crucial review of the implementation of standards next year. The EU will also remain in close contact with the US and the wider international community to ensure the eventual process to address the question of Kosovo's final status will also contribute to the stability of the western Balkans region.
Will the review undertake an examination of law and order, security and human rights issues? Will the Minister of State inform the House of his views on the possible appointment of Ramush Haradinaj as prime minister in Kosovo? This man is believed to be under investigation by the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. How can his elevation to the post of Prime Minister tally with the so-called progress being made in recent times?
Following the election, the largest party in the new Kosovo assembly will be the Democratic League of Kosovo, the LDK, which is led by the current President Ibraham Rugova. The LDK received 45% of the vote, winning 47 seats. The Democratic Party of Kosovo, the PDK, to which the current Prime Minister Bajram Rexhepi belongs, received 29% of the vote and won 30 seats. The largest of the smaller parties, the Alliance for the Future of Kosovo, the AAK, won eight seats.
Discussions have been taking place between the political parties in Kosovo on the formation of a coalition government. A framework agreement for a coalition government was reportedly reached last week. It is expected that a new government will be announced in the very near future. There have been widespread media reports that President Rugova will remain as president and that his party will enter coalition with the smaller AAK. It has been reported that the leader of the AAK, Mr. Ramush Haradinaj, will be appointed prime minister, but no official announcement has yet been made. Mr. Haradinaj is a former commander of the Kosovo Liberation Army, the KLA. He has not been indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, but representatives of the tribunal asked to interview him recently in relation to the killing of Kosovo Serbs in the late 1990s. He agreed to the interview which took place in Kosovo on 11 and 12 November. The Government fully supports the work of the tribunal and expects the fullest possible co-operation with the tribunal from all persons and administrations.
The European Union and the international community will work with whatever government is formed as a result of the democratic elections in October last if it is committed to a truly multi-ethnic Kosovo where the rights of all communities are fully protected. The year ahead will be crucial for all of the people of Kosovo. It is essential that the Kosovo Serb community has the confidence that it can participate in a meaningful way in decision making and that its security is assured.
Does the Government support Kosovan independence?
The Government fully supports the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1244 which was adopted in 1999 following the end of the conflict in Kosovo. In accordance with Resolution 1244, Kosovo remains under UN administration pending resolution of the final status issue. The international community has given its full support to the UN mission in pursuing the "standards before status" policy. This involves working with the provisional institutions of self-government to implement, broadly, European standards in Kosovo in areas such as human rights and the protection of minorities in order to create conditions in which the final status issue can be resolved.
I wanted a "yes" or "no" answer.
Does the Government support Mr. Haradinaj's elevation to prime minister while he is still under investigation by the International Criminal Tribunal?
The Government is fully committed to a democratic process in Kosovo and we respect the right of the people who were elected to parliament to have discussions and form a government. With the European Union and the UN, we fully support a conclusion that will give consensual progress and ultimately full democracy, taking into account the multi-ethnic rights of every community and every individual in Kosovo.
12 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on breaches of the Geneva Convention which may have arisen during the recent assault on Falluja; if he has expressed concern in this regard to representatives of the occupying forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30073/04]
22 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on whether the assault of Falluja by the US forces will assist in progress towards democracy in Iraq; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30265/04]
42 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to recent statements from Amnesty International expressing deep concern that the rules of war protecting civilians and combatants have been violated in the current fighting in Falluja; if he has expressed concern to British or US authorities that international law is being contravened during this attack; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30097/04]
105 Mr. Gogarty asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has protested to the US Government regarding the killings in Falluja of unarmed injured insurgents by US soldiers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [30269/04]
I propose to take QuestionsNos. 12, 22, 42 and 105 together.
I refer the Deputies to my answer to Priority Question No. 4, answered today which was as follows. I am sure all Members of the House share our concern about large-scale military operations being launched in a built-up area. The decision to launch the operation to regain control of Falluja was taken by the Iraqi Government, which made clear its view that regaining control of such areas is a vital pre-requisite to holding elections and restoring stability to that country. Although most of the population is said to have left the city before the operation began, it seems clear from the scale of the fighting and from initial reports, that there will have been civilian casualties.
While it is evident that the insurgent forces show no regard for international law, it is essential that the forces of the Iraqi Interim Government and those of the multinational force, assisting the interim government under a mandate from the UN Security Council, should operate according to the highest international standards.
I want to ask about a specific matter which goes beyond the content of Question No. 4, which I asked earlier. When and to whom did the Government express concern after the assault on Falluja? When did it contact the British Government? Did it contact the United States Government? Did it contact Acting Premier Alawi? To whom did it address its concern? When was it expressed? In what form was it in terms of compliance with the Geneva Convention?
The Government at all times——
That is not the question.
The Government at all times raises these issues at every opportunity. The United States authorities are very well aware of the Government's view.
That is not the question. The question is whether there has been a specific post-Falluja contact on behalf of the Government regarding breaches of the Geneva Convention with the British, US or interim government in Iraq.
There have been several contacts and communications between our officials and the officials of the American administration pertaining to this situation. We have been assured at all times that the highest possible international standards have been executed and that consultation has taken place to ensure the protection not alone of civilians who are there but also of people who come in to assist, such as the Red Cross and others and their agents.
The Minister did not answer the question. He mentioned in reply to a previous question that the then Minister, Deputy Cowen, had met President Bush. I want to know whether representations have been made at ministerial level in respect of the attack at Falluja.
The Minister mentioned that the insurgents had little respect for international law. Does the Minister believe the soldier we saw on a videotape which was broadcast around the world who shot an unarmed person in a building had respect for international law or for the Geneva Convention? Will he condemn that outrageous act here in this House?
All of these issues were raised at the recent European Council meeting where Dr. Alawi met heads of state and ministers for foreign affairs. The event that appeared on television was horrendous and tremendously sad. We have been assured that this matter is being fully investigated, that the soldier has been removed from the situation——
That is not the issue. The issue is the breach of the Convention, and the Minister knows it.
Does the Minister condemn it?
That matter is being investigated. We await the outcome of that investigation. We await reports from the EU and the UN. We are confident such reports will be made available, and when they are we will make them available to Deputies.
The Minister cannot bring himself to condemn it.
Written answers follow Adjournment Debate.
