HL Deb 13 November 1996 vol 575 cc935-7

3.2 p.m.

Lord Dubs asked Her Majesty's Government:

How many landmines have been cleared in the Falklands since the end of hostilities there; what has been the cost of this operation; and what is the estimate of the number of landmines still to be cleared and the area of land affected.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Earl Howe)

My Lords, about 4,300 landmines have been cleared since the end of hostilities in the Falklands. We believe that there are still around 26,000 landmines in nearly 120 separate minefields, covering some 20 square kilometres of ground. It is not possible to determine how much mine clearing activities have cost since the end of hostilities as these records are not held centrally. There is currently an eight-strong team in the Falklands spending half their time on minefield inspections, repairing fences around them and disposing of landmines. The cost of personnel for this team is £176,000 per year.

Lord Dubs

My Lords, is it not a matter of concern that, 14 years after the end of the Falklands War, such large proportions of the Falkland Islands are still too dangerous for people to walk on? Further, is that not something to which the Government could attach rather more urgency, so that the people of the Falklands could have the scourge of landmines removed from their islands as quickly as possible?

Earl Howe

My Lords, as I am sure the noble Lord is aware, there are many quite major difficulties associated with mine clearance. But, principally because of the difficulties involved in detecting the mines, many of which are plastic, and the dangers to the personnel involved, a decision was made to cease the clearance operations in 1984 and to mark the minefields clearly instead.

The Government and the Falkland islanders welcomed the offer first made in December 1993 by the Argentines to pay a third party to demine the Falklands. We are looking forward to discussing the next steps with the Argentines and with the United States, who have agreed to manage the project should a practical way forward be agreed. We hope that it can.

Lord Taylor of Gryfe

My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that Edinburgh University is conducting a research project on a mechanical device to clear landmines more rapidly and with less danger to the operators? That experiment is being carried out with some success and has been financed by charitable funds. Would it not be appropriate for the Government to finance that project?

Earl Howe

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, for drawing that project to my attention; I was not aware of it. Nevertheless, on the broad subject of research, we continue to treat such research into the means of detecting non-metallic mines as a matter of considerable priority. The MoD is exchanging information with the United States and our European Union partners on a number of promising new technologies in the field. We are also working with humanitarian mine clearance agencies to seek to identify military technology which could be applied to humanitarian mine clearance tasks.

Baroness Strange

My Lords, is my noble friend the Minister aware that I personally exploded one of the mines near Port Stanley? Is he further aware that the mines have been scattered about a very large area, quite uncharted by the Argentinians, and that, therefore, to try to clear them up would be an extremely dangerous and hazardous job?

Earl Howe

My Lords, I am most concerned to hear that my noble friend was involved in the explosion of a mine on the Falklands. However, she makes a valid point. Even if one could clear a certain area which is demarcated, one could never be absolutely sure that the area was completely clear and safe for people to walk on. That is a consideration which we should bear in mind.

Lord Judd

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the Question tabled by my noble friend highlights the immense humanitarian implications of the use of anti-personnel mines in warfare? Have the Government been able to study the interesting statements by leading US military personnel who question the need for the use of such mines? Will the Government now undertake a fundamental review of whether we ourselves should ever contemplate the use of anti-personnel mines? In the meantime, are the Government prepared to issue an order refusing the military the powers to use them?

Earl Howe

My Lords, as I am sure the noble Lord will agree, the key objective is to reduce the danger to civilians. I do not believe that a unilateral renunciation by the UK would achieve that aim. We have to balance the humanitarian concerns that we all share with a continuing military requirement. If we can convince the major producers, exporters and users of anti-personnel mines to ban these weapons, then the United Kingdom would be willing to join that consensus. We will also ban them if suitable alternatives can be found.

However, the safety of our troops must remain paramount. We have said that we are keeping some stocks of anti-personnel mines, and we reserve the right to authorise their use in exceptional circumstances where Ministers are absolutely satisfied that there is no alternative to ensure the protection of our troops.

Earl Lloyd-George of Dwyfor

My Lords, can the noble Earl say whether the Argentinian authorities have given full co-operation in tracing the remaining minefields? If they have not done so, are they not in breach of the Geneva Convention under which all minefields require to be recorded in detail and kept note of? Indeed, that was certainly the case during the last war?

Earl Howe

My Lords, the noble Earl makes an important point. I believe that the Argentines have been as helpful as they can be. However, the problem has been a distinct lack of detailed records. We know the approximate area of the minefields and they have been fenced off, but we have very little precise knowledge of where the mines were laid.