HL Deb 19 November 2001 vol 628 c111WA
Lord Alton of Liverpool

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the statement by Lord Grocott on 25 October (HL Deb, col. 1120), whether and in what circumstances a ban on the use of United Kingdom overseas aid in programmes involving enforced non-voluntary abortion and compulsory sterilisation could adversely affect work to combat HIV in developing countries. [HL1182]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Amos)

UK development assistance is not used to support programmes involving enforced non-voluntary abortion or compulsory sterilisation.

Lord Alton of Liverpool

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the statement by Lord Grocott on 25 October (HL Deb, col. 1120), which organisations currently in receipt of United Kingdom overseas aid implement HIV prevention programmes that involve enforced non-voluntary abortion and compulsory sterilisation. [HL1183]

Baroness Amos

UK development assistance is not used to support programmes involving non-voluntary abortion or compulsory sterilisation.

Lord Alton of Liverpool

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the statement by Lord Grocott on 25 October (HL Deb, col. 1121), on what basis he stated that this year the United States Government had increased their funding of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) from 25 million dollars to 39 million dollars; how much of this is used in China; and, in the light of his remark that this funding is not that different in crucial respects from United Kingdom funding for the UNFPA, how much of the funding is used in coercive population programmes. [HL1184]

Baroness Amos

The United States' contribution to UNFPA's core resources in 2001 totalled US 21.5 million dollars, after a deduction of US 3.5 million dollars, equivalent to UNFPA's annual programme budget for China. The contribution is also subject to a tax deduction. The US Senate is currently considering authorising a contribution of US 40 million dollars to UNFPA for 2002.

The US Administration's view is that UNFPA's programme is not connected to abuse or coercion and that UNFPA does not and has not condoned coercion in China. We agree with that view.