[internetguru]

(Original post by toronto353)
If you can link me to fresh evidence, then I will tackle it. I need links to evidence and I will happily raise this issue.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17511816 Here our state media's research.

[toronto353]

(Original post by internetguru)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17511816 Here our state media's research.

Ok any further research? I shall compile a list and take it to the MUN. I will also credit you for bringing this to the MUN's attention.

[internetguru]

(Original post by toronto353)
Ok any further research? I shall compile a list and take it to the MUN. I will also credit you for bringing this to the MUN's attention.

Not exactly top secret research this is common knowledge our government and the public have had for a long time. Is this some sort of sarcasm or something I don't understand you are talking/acting as if you didn't know this.

[toronto353]

(Original post by internetguru)
Not exactly top secret research this is common knowledge our government and the public have had for a long time. Is this some sort of sarcasm or something I don't understand you are talking/acting as if you didn't know this.

No I'm serious. Once you can show me hard evidence, then I will raise it. I need sources to be able to use in the MUN.

[internetguru]

(Original post by toronto353)
No I'm serious. Once you can show me hard evidence, then I will raise it. I need sources to be able to use in the MUN.

I don't have an internet source but India and Pakistan themselves admit to having them. Israel is widely believed to have them but itself neither confirms nor denies it. If you want link evidence just use wikipedia.

[toronto353]

(Original post by internetguru)
I don't have an internet source but India and Pakistan themselves admit to having them. Israel is widely believed to have them but itself neither confirms nor denies it. If you want link evidence just use wikipedia.

I'll look at wikipedia and its bibliography tomorrow and compile some sources. I'll then PM you a copy of what I will post in the MUN forum so that you can add any alterations. Great work.

[toronto353]

Responses section updated.

[Rakas21]

On the nuke issue i would add that Saudi Arabia has previously (pretty much) admitted to having nukes.

I would personally prefer the UK to reduce its stockpile to 50 (could still take out all of Russia).

[toronto353]

Responses updated.

[eff01]

Mr Speaker, following the reckless shambles of the chancellor's out of touch budget, I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary the following questions:
a) What will be the new ID budget following its FCO merger?
B) How many jobs will go at the DfID as a result of this merger?

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, following the reckless shambles of the chancellor's out of touch budget, I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary the following questions:
a) What will be the new ID budget following its FCO merger?
B) How many jobs will go at the DfID as a result of this merger?

Mr Speaker,
I thank the Honourable Gentleman for his questions and welcome him as the new Shadow SOS for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. With regards to his first question, the current budgets of the two departments stand pre-budget, according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as follows:

FCO - £1.9 billion
DfID - £8.4 billion

My Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has noted that the FCO could comfortably survive on £1.2 billion so the FCO will save £0.7 billion. This leaves us with £2.8 billion to find elsewhere. By closing DfID offices and moving them into the FCO, I believe that we could save a vast amount of money here - I shall consider the exact figures in conjunction with my Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor and provide a more in depth answer. I aim to also review certain aid budgets such as that to India. I can assure the Honourable Gentleman, that redundancies shall be low indeed and I don't currently expect to make as many workers redundant as the Chancellor has estimated.

We will attempt to avoid cutting the aid budget as much as possible as try to cut the peripheries such as buildings and their associated budgets.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker,
I thank the Honourable Gentleman for his questions and welcome him as the new Shadow SOS for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. With regards to his first question, the current budgets of the two departments stand pre-budget, according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as follows:

FCO - £1.9 billion
DfID - £8.4 billion

My Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has noted that the FCO could comfortably survive on £1.2 billion so the FCO will save £0.7 billion. This leaves us with £2.8 billion to find elsewhere. By closing DfID offices and moving them into the FCO, I believe that we could save a vast amount of money here - I shall consider the exact figures in conjunction with my Right Honourable Friend the Chancellor and provide a more in depth answer. I aim to also review certain aid budgets such as that to India. I can assure the Honourable Gentleman, that redundancies shall be low indeed and I don't currently expect to make as many workers redundant as the Chancellor has estimated.

We will attempt to avoid cutting the aid budget as much as possible as try to cut the peripheries such as buildings and their associated budgets.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Foreign Secretary for his response. In short the Foreign Secretary does not know what the ID budget will be and also is clueless to the exact number of jobs that will go as a result of this ID FCO merger.

Mr Speaker, we have a chancellor who in his budget has closed down DfID without knowing how many jobs will go and what the new budget for ID will be. We have the foreign secretary here, going against the chancellor by stating that job loses as a result of this merger will be less than the chancellor's plucked out of thin air approximate of somewhere between 500-750 job loses. Mr Speaker, Who do we believe.

Mr Speaker, the chancellor is saying one thing, the Foreign Secretary is saying something else. This budget along with being reckless is a complete shambles!

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, I thank the Foreign Secretary for his response. In short the Foreign Secretary does not know what the ID budget will be and also is clueless to the exact number of jobs that will go as a result of this ID FCO merger.

Mr Speaker, we have a chancellor who in his budget has closed down DfID without knowing how many jobs will go and what the new budget for ID will be. We have the foreign secretary here, going against the chancellor by stating that job loses as a result of this merger will be less than the chancellor's plucked out of thin air approximate of somewhere between 500-750 job loses. Mr Speaker, Who do we believe.

Mr Speaker, the chancellor is saying one thing, the Foreign Secretary is saying something else. This budget along with being reckless is a complete shambles!

Mr Speaker, I believe that the Honourable gentleman's interpretation perhaps takes to the extremes what I said. The Chancellor has given an estimate of job losses - I have said that I will consider those job losses, but I want to try to minimise them. The budget for DfID will stand £5.6billion with the £2.8billion cut mainly coming from buildings being shut and the costs associated with those buildings obviously no longer occurring. While the Chancellor has set a budget, it is up to Secretaries of State to make the final and specific cuts and I want to cut the budget with few job losses. I'm surprised that the Honourable gentleman is complaining about me trying to reduce redundancies.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, I believe that the Honourable gentleman's interpretation perhaps takes to the extremes what I said. The Chancellor has given an estimate of job losses - I have said that I will consider those job losses, but I want to try to minimise them. The budget for DfID will stand £5.6billion with the £2.8billion cut mainly coming from buildings being shut and the costs associated with those buildings obviously no longer occurring. While the Chancellor has set a budget, it is up to Secretaries of State to make the final and specific cuts and I want to cut the budget with few job losses. I'm surprised that the Honourable gentleman is complaining about me trying to reduce redundancies.

Mr Speaker, after days of avoiding the question, the government has succumbed to the opposition's pressure and has spoken. the Foreign Secretary is cutting £2.8billion from the ID budget which will include direct cuts to countries that are recipient of UK aid!

Mr Speaker, the Foreign Secretary states that he plans on reviewing certain aid budgets including that of India. I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary what other country's aid budget does he plan to review and when will the house know the details of this review.

Mr Speaker, I am deeply worried, in a budget where the chancellor has stated that he plans on cutting somewhere between 500-750 jobs from the DfID, we have a Foreign Secretary here saying that he plans to cut less than that. Mr Speaker, the public watching this will be deeply worried. The chancellor is saying one thing, the Foreign Secretary is saying something else. Mr Speaker, I ask the Foreign Secretary once again, what is the exact number of job losses following the closure of the DfID. If the Foreign Secretary is clueless, I ask him to state to this house a date of when he will know for definite the job loss totals. Mr Speaker,this is a serious matter, thousands of jobs are in jeopardy following the chancellor's budget, it is alarming that the government does not know what the exact total is. The public demand an answer.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, after days of avoiding the question, the government has succumbed to the opposition's pressure and has spoken. the Foreign Secretary is cutting £2.8billion from the ID budget which will include direct cuts to countries that are recipient of UK aid!

Mr Speaker, the Foreign Secretary states that he plans on reviewing certain aid budgets including that of India. I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary what other country's aid budget does he plan to review and when will the house know the details of this review.

Mr Speaker, I am deeply worried, in a budget where the chancellor has stated that he plans on cutting somewhere between 500-750 jobs from the DfID, we have a Foreign Secretary here saying that he plans to cut less than that. Mr Speaker, the public watching this will be deeply worried. The chancellor is saying one thing, the Foreign Secretary is saying something else. Mr Speaker, I ask the Foreign Secretary once again, what is the exact number of job losses following the closure of the DfID. If the Foreign Secretary is clueless, I ask him to state to this house a date of when he will know for definite the job loss totals. Mr Speaker,this is a serious matter, thousands of jobs are in jeopardy following the chancellor's budget, it is alarming that the government does not know what the exact total. The public demand an answer.

Mr Speaker, the cuts have always been clear and been in the budget. The cuts will be around the periphery as much as possible and I am determined to ensure that countries which are recipients of our aid and desperately need our money will not see their aid cut at all.

Mr Speaker, the main country will be India. Once we know full savings from closing buildings, then I will know full details of the final amount that I need to cut. I intend this cut to be as small as possible.

Mr Speaker, once again, I'm confused. I'd have thought that the Honourable gentleman would have been pleased that I am attempting to reduce job losses yet he seems to be positively upset by this. We are united. The Chancellor provides the budget and can suggest cuts. I administer those cuts and decide the cuts to the department. Once the merger of the departments has been completed (which will start once a merger Bill has been passed), then I shall set a date for making a full statement to the House reviewing the cuts to my department and the budget. I have started work already on the cuts to the budget.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, the cuts have always been clear and been in the budget. The cuts will be around the periphery as much as possible and I am determined to ensure that countries which are recipients of our aid and desperately need our money will not see their aid cut at all.

Mr Speaker, the main country will be India. Once we know full savings from closing buildings, then I will know full details of the final amount that I need to cut. I intend this cut to be as small as possible.

Mr Speaker, once again, I'm confused. I'd have thought that the Honourable gentleman would have been pleased that I am attempting to reduce job losses yet he seems to be positively upset by this. We are united. The Chancellor provides the budget and can suggest cuts. I administer those cuts and decide the cuts to the department. Once the merger of the departments has been completed (which will start once a merger Bill has been passed), then I shall set a date for making a full statement to the House reviewing the cuts to my department and the budget. I have started work already on the cuts to the budget.

Mr Speaker, I am astonished that the Foreign Secretary is confused. The chancellor in his budget has made 3000 people unemployed. At the DfID the chancellor has stated in his budget that around 500-750 people will be made unemployed. 3 days after the budget, we have the Foreign Secretary here stating to the house that he plans to go against the chancellor's original estimate and make less people unemployed. Who is right? The Chancellor can't give an exact figure for how many people will be made unemployed and the Foreign Secretary, from what I can tell from his responses, doesn't know. At this time of uncertainty, with thousands of jobs in jeopardy, Mr Speaker, the Chancellor and Foreign Secretary's responses will not reassure anyone.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, I am astonished that the Foreign Secretary is confused. The chancellor in his budget has made 3000 people unemployed. At the DfID the chancellor has stated in his budget that around 500-750 people will be made unemployed. 3 days after the budget, we have the Foreign Secretary here stating to the house that he plans to go against the chancellor's original estimate and make less people unemployed. Who is right? The Chancellor can't give an exact figure for how many people will be made unemployed and the Foreign Secretary, from what I can tell from his responses, doesn't know. At this time of uncertainty, with thousands of jobs in jeopardy, Mr Speaker, the Chancellor and Foreign Secretary's responses will not reassure anyone.

Mr Speaker, I shall explain the processes again - the Chancellor gives each department their budget. The Secretary of State then sets out exactly how that budget will be spent. The Chancellor can make suggestions as he has done, but the Secretary of State does not have to take them. I give assurances now that I will try to save as many jobs as I can. Let me be clear that the 750 jobs is the upper limit of the job losses, but I hope that it will be far lower than that. As the departments haven't yet been merged, it's difficult for me to comment in depth. Once the merger is complete, then I will be in a position to give precise figures. Trying to paint the Chancellor and I as disagreeing or giving contradictory answers will not wash. We are in agreement over the budget and he has given suggestions as to how we could cut the budget. I am trying to do it without too many job cuts.

[eff01]

(Original post by toronto353)
Mr Speaker, I shall explain the processes again - the Chancellor gives each department their budget. The Secretary of State then sets out exactly how that budget will be spent. The Chancellor can make suggestions as he has done, but the Secretary of State does not have to take them. I give assurances now that I will try to save as many jobs as I can. Let me be clear that the 750 jobs is the upper limit of the job losses, but I hope that it will be far lower than that. As the departments haven't yet been merged, it's difficult for me to comment in depth. Once the merger is complete, then I will be in a position to give precise figures. Trying to paint the Chancellor and I as disagreeing or giving contradictory answers will not wash. We are in agreement over the budget and he has given suggestions as to how we could cut the budget. I am trying to do it without too many job cuts.

Mr Speaker, this response by the Foreign Secretary will not reassure the public or indeed workers at the DfID, who face losing their jobs as a result of the chancellor's reckless actions. Mr Speaker, I look forward to viewing the Rt Honourable Gentleman's proposals and I can only hope that the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary are 'singing from the same hymn sheet' then.

[toronto353]

(Original post by eff01)
Mr Speaker, this response by the Foreign Secretary will not reassure the public or indeed workers at the DfID, who face losing their jobs as a result of the chancellor's reckless actions. Mr Speaker, I look forward to viewing the Rt Honourable Gentleman's proposals and I can only hope that the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary are 'singing from the same hymn sheet' then.

Mr Speaker, I can assure you that once my budget work is complete for the merged department, I shall release it for scrutiny.

[eff01]

Urgent question to the Foreign Secretary, regarding the rejection of Georgia's European Union bid

Mr Speaker, with permission I would like to ask the Foreign Secretary the following questions.
A) Before voting in favour of Georgia's accession into the EU at the MUN, did he have any discussions regarding the matter with the government?
B) After supporting Georgia's accession into to the EU, why did he vote against it at the MHoC?

These Mr Speaker, are two pivotal questions that the Foreign Secretary needs to answer.