(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Callanan (Con)
My Lords, for nearly three years now, we have been steadfast and united in our unwavering support for the brave people of Ukraine. Their extraordinary determination, unparalleled courage and steadfast bravery in the face of unimaginable horror, terror and brutality have inspired nations across the globe. It is impossible not to feel profound sorrow for the pain, loss and suffering inflicted on the Ukrainian people by Putin’s illegal and barbaric war. This unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation is not just an attack on Ukraine but an assault on the principles of sovereignty and human rights that underpin global peace and security.
I am delighted to say that, from the very beginning of this crisis, we in the UK have stood shoulder to shoulder with President Zelensky and the Ukrainian people in their valiant fight for freedom. We recognised early on the grave threats posed by Russian hostility, which began with the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and continued with ongoing incursions in Ukraine’s eastern territories. The previous Government took decisive and swift action, providing vital military equipment, financial aid and humanitarian support—and I am delighted to see that the current Government have continued that policy. We established bespoke pathways to safety for Ukrainians seeking refuge in the United Kingdom, and I am proud to note the extraordinary response of the British people. Across the country, households opened their doors and their hearts, welcoming those fleeing violence and oppression. This collective effort has been a testament to the strength of our shared humanity and values.
Through the leadership of Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, Rishi Sunak, Ben Wallace and others, the UK spearheaded diplomatic efforts to galvanise international support for Ukraine and helped to isolate Russia on the global stage. Those efforts included imposing one of the most comprehensive sanctions regimes ever implemented, targeting not only the Russian state but its ruling elites, businesses and entities complicit in supporting the Russian war machine. The commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity was unshakeable. Over three years, we provided £12.8 billion-worth of support, including an unprecedented £7.8 billion in military assistance. This support encompassed advanced weaponry, vital training and intelligence-sharing to enable Ukraine to defend itself against Russian aggression. Equally crucial was our promise to provide at least £3 billion annually in military aid for as long as is required—a pledge that I hope that the Government will be able to continue with, without hesitation.
As we reflect on these achievements, it is imperative that we remain steadfast in our support for Ukraine and its people. The road ahead will not be easy, given Trump’s election, and the sacrifices that will be required are considerable. However, the cost of inaction—of failing to defend freedom and democracy—would be immeasurably greater. I want therefore to pose the following questions to the Minister.
Can the Government provide an update on the current levels of military and humanitarian aid being delivered to Ukraine and how they see this support continuing in future? What steps are being taken to ensure that sanctions against Russia remain robust, effective and tightly enforced, including measures to address any potential evasion? How are the Government working with international partners to ensure that Ukraine continues to receive the long-term economic and political support that it needs to rebuild and secure its future? What plans are in place to enhance the UK’s refugee resettlement schemes for Ukrainians, and how can we further support host families who have welcomed those fleeing this terrible conflict? Finally, in the context of ongoing geopolitical instability, how do the Government intend to strengthen and deepen the UK-Ukraine partnership to promote shared values and mutual security in the years ahead?
We owe it to the people of Ukraine, and to the principles of freedom and justice that unite us, to stand resolute and united in their hour of need.
Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)
My Lords, I am very happy to align myself and these Benches with everything that the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, has said. If we think back over this three-year period in British politics, we see that consensus has been hard to reach—but this is an area where there has been no division between any of the Benches within the two Houses of our Parliament. Indeed, in respect of the position of the previous Administration and this one, this agreement brings together both government-to-government relations, or the nine pillars within the agreement, and people-to-people relations, which, as the noble Lord said, are becoming ever deeper.
I also agree with the noble Lord’s observations on the coming period, when there will be an area of uncertainty, especially since the new President was elected in the United States, in the context of our main ally being the United States. But I am happy that UK policy is set by the UK and that the consensus in Parliament is therefore rock solid.
A 100-year agreement is unique. I looked at what Ukraine was like in 1925—and when you search for that, Ukrainisation comes up as the top element. There were attempts to ensure that the identity, language, culture and literature of Ukraine were protected. That was diminished under later Soviet rule—but to my mind that suggests that, whether it is with Stalin or Putin, there is an identity for an independent and autonomous people in Ukraine who wish to ensure that their own destiny is in their hands. The UK will be a stalwart ally over this Government and their successor Governments. While this is unique for being a 100-year agreement, we support it.
We support in particular the areas where we would use what are to some extent our best global assets, on renewable technology, the National Health Service, education and culture. The partnership with Ukraine within those pillars is to be welcomed. Can the Minister say, when it comes particularly to energy, renewables and green steel, whether the Government will be open to ensuring that all parts of the UK, especially our devolved Administrations, are deeply involved in this 100-year agreement? I live in Scotland, and the people of Scotland have opened their hearts and homes to those who have fled Putin’s illegal war—but we also have strategic advantage, especially when it comes to renewable energy and technology.
Economic and technical support will be incredibly important. As we debated just last week, one consequence of the illegal war on Ukraine is that 40% of the Ukrainian economy is now dedicated to defending itself. Technical support and partnership with the UK for economic reconstruction will be to the advantage of both countries. The Minister will have been briefed on assets, because we debated them fairly recently. She will be aware that these Benches are making the case that assets should be seized and used for the immediate and medium-term reconstruction of Ukraine, as well as for Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. If she could outline a bit more the timetable of when Ukraine will, we hope, be able to use some of the assets that we approved in legislation last week, that would be helpful.
I end with an appeal and an observation. The appeal is that one of the elements that I have found very important in Ukraine’s defence is the Verkhovna Rada—the Ukrainian Parliament. I had the privilege of visiting it before the war on three occasions and met many MPs and staff. It was telling that one of the first military objectives of the Russian assault on Ukraine was, within the first 48 hours, to seize the Verkhovna Rada, to cease its functioning, to ensure that MPs could not carry out their constitutional role in representing the people and to stop all legislation. It has carried on and shown incredible resilience. As a Parliament, it is a model around the world for being able to carry on its legislative and representative functions in incredibly difficult circumstances.
I hope the long-term relationship will be not just Government to Government but Parliament to Parliament. I know Mr Speaker and the Lord Speaker have extremely close relations with their counterparts in Kyiv, but I hope the Minister might be able to say that in those areas that the Government fund, whether the Westminster Foundation for Democracy or other technical assistance, we can support the Verkhovna Rada in carrying out its functions and the critical role it will play to ensure that any reconstruction is open, transparent and representative.
I close by repeating the words of my honourable friend Calum Miller. He said to the Foreign Secretary:
“We must stand with Ukraine for the long haul. The Ukrainian people must be in charge of their own destiny. If the UK’s new pledge is to be real, it must address the uncertainty generated by President Trump. The Prime Minister’s 100-year commitment must outlast the President’s desire for a quick deal in his first 100 days”.—[Official Report, Commons, 20/1/25; col. 738.]
I am certain that the Government’s intent is one we can support wholeheartedly. I would be grateful if the Minister would outline certain areas where we can use this as not just a statement of intent but a practical relationship that can help Ukraine be both resilient in war and successful in peace.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)
My Lords, I am incredibly grateful for the words of the noble Lords, Lord Callanan and Lord Purvis of Tweed. As they both said, it is so important that we commit ourselves to maintaining the unity that we have held so clearly for the three years that Ukraine has been experiencing the illegal invasion.
It is right that I pay tribute to the work of the previous Conservative Government—the Prime Ministers, Foreign Secretaries and Secretaries of State for Defence who worked so hard to support Ukraine during their time in office. I am grateful that the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, made that point. I am happy to agree with him and I thank him for the support that his party is providing in opposition to this Government. I also echo his comment about the people of the United Kingdom who, as he said, have been welcoming and, in many cases, hosting families from Ukraine in their homes. The support in our communities up and down the country remains as firm as it has ever been. I am happy to assure him that we will keep the commitment to £3 billion a year for as long as it takes to support Ukraine in its defence.
The noble Lord asked for an update on spending on military and humanitarian work. As I think I have said before, there is £7.8 billion of total support, including £3 billion for 2024-25. We have a commitment to provide £3 billion per year until 2030-31, and for as long as it takes, and for the UK to contribute £2.26 billion to the $50 billion of extraordinary revenue acceleration loans for Ukraine agreed by G7 leaders in June. The Government have laid legislation to facilitate disbursement. On humanitarian aid, the UK is providing at least £120 million in humanitarian assistance through to the end of financial year 2024-25, bringing our total contribution to Ukraine and the region to £477 million since the start of the full-scale invasion. Another £15 million delivered through UNHCR and UNICEF will support those most in need this winter.
The noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, asked about those from Ukraine living here and their status. Obviously, this is a matter for the Home Office, but we are all glad that their status has been renewed and that their ability to stay here is now secure for the time being. I am sometimes asked what this will mean in the longer term. I am very mindful of the words of President Zelensky, when he said that he wanted people to be able to go home. We do not want to compound Ukraine’s problems by keeping people here when they can be at home in Ukraine, contributing to the rebuilding of their community and their country.
I was very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, for highlighting pillar 9 of the agreement on the people-to-people work. This is so important for morale in Ukraine and it will be vital as we move forward in the years and decades to come. He also raised the very important point—Speaker Hoyle will be glad that he did—about Parliament-to-Parliament work and rebuilding democratic structures and institutions. Speaker diplomacy is underpriced when we consider this work, and I know there will be much to be done and said, and links to be forged. It is wonderful to have his support in that. He is right too to remind us of history and to look back at 1925: that is an interesting thing to do. Let us just hope that the partnership we are agreeing between our countries today means that, in 100 years’ time, we can look back and see what was agreed in 2025 as a turning point for Ukraine, having endured so much.
The noble Lord also raised questions about climate and energy. This is vital and is covered in pillar 5 of the agreement. He is absolutely right—and I am as passionate as he is about this—that we must enable our regions and nations fully to take part in this work. It is vital that we do that.
The noble Lord also asked about assets. As he will know, we put into law an agreement enabling us to use the profits from seized Russian assets, but he will also understand that we have to proceed carefully. We are very actively discussing all this and want to make sure that we can do everything we can in this regard. Those discussions are very much live within government, I can promise him that.
To conclude, I thank both Front-Bench speakers once again for their continued support for Ukraine.
Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Con)
My Lords, to date, the UK has given £7.8 billion-worth of military assistance to Ukraine and that has been paid for from the Treasury reserve. Under this agreement, we commit to give a further £3 billion per year until 2030. Can the Minister say whether that will continue to be paid for from the Treasury reserve, or will it, as some fear, be transferred to the defence budget, because without the appropriate baselining that would effectively negate any increase in the defence budget to 2.5%?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord, Lord Lancaster, for his steadfast support and championing of the need to have sufficient resources for the MoD; I have seen him do this on many occasions. Of course, this will be subject to discussion between the Treasury and the MoD, and my understanding is that it will be allowed for within the MoD budget. We will make sure at every stage that our troops have everything that they need. We are committed to the 2.5%, and we are committed to providing the £3 billion per year to Ukraine.
The Lord Bishop of Manchester
My Lords, I hope the thin attendance tonight does not mean that we in the United Kingdom are losing interest in Ukraine, especially when I think of the huge number that gathered in Westminster Hall when President Zelensky came and spoke to us, and when many of us went across and sat in the Gallery in the other place when he spoke on a Zoom-type link in the early days of the conflict.
It is my privilege, as the Bishop of Manchester, to regularly attend social functions at the Ukrainian Cultural Centre, which is only about a mile away from my home. We have had a strong Ukrainian community in Manchester since the Second World War, if not before. That has been greatly increased in recent times, by those who have come as refugees. I share the comments that others have already made about hoping that many of those people will want to go back and rebuild their countries.
We are talking about friendship and a 100-year friendship at that, but a partnership has to be built on more than just defence spending or mutual hatred of a common enemy; it needs to be about building connections at every level. I am pleased to hear what was said about parliamentary connections, but I am thinking in terms of the church connections that I build with my friends in the Ukrainian Catholic Church. What other civil society connections can we strengthen and grow if this friendship or partnership really is to last and be of benefit not only to the people of Ukraine but to this country as well?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
First, I think the lack of attendance this evening is probably something to do with a couple of late nights of voting. It is not lack of support at all; it is a lack of disagreement between our parties. If we disagreed, this place would be full, and the fact that we agree so strongly means that noble Lords feel confident in all Front Benches being here and saying things with which they would agree.
I am so glad that the issue of people-to-people links is featuring so much in this discussion. It is true that this cannot only be Government to Government or Parliament to Parliament; it needs to encompass the whole of civil society. We are speaking to the British Council, the Premier League and many other organisations so that there is a real depth to that partnership, under pillar 9 in the agreement, which is something we feel passionately about. I know that Members from across the House will want to bring their contacts, expertise and experience to contribute to making pillar 9 as deep and meaningful as we can.
Baroness Helic (Con)
My Lords, I welcome the Government’s clarity on the moral and strategic necessity of supporting Ukraine, and the House’s full support—from those who are here—for the future of Ukraine, and what both we and the Government have done previously. But the West’s longstanding appeasement of Russia, from Moldova to Georgia to Crimea, emboldened Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. A pre-emptive and timely response would have been far less costly in lives and resources than addressing the aftermath. However, we are where we are. We now risk repeating the same mistakes in the western Balkans. Sadly, today’s Serbia mirrors Russia’s 2014 trajectory, engaging in large-scale rearmament and actively backing secessionists in Bosnia and Kosovo. With that in mind, can the Minister say what concrete steps the Government have taken in the western Balkans not to have the Ukraine scenario repeated there? Can she clarify the Government’s position on rejoining Operation Althea?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for reminding us of the wider context—it is very important—as well as reminding us of the not-too-distant history of this conflict. I can assure her that my honourable friend, Minister Stephen Doughty, is in regular contact with our friends and allies in the Balkans, and he is working very hard to prevent the situation that she warns us of. It is right that we do not take our eye off the situation which she discusses.
Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Con)
With your Lordships’ indulgence, I will ask one more question since we have lots of time. I want to pick up on a point that the Minister made in her initial response about the status of refugees in the United Kingdom. I declare an interest in that my wife, Caroline Dinenage, the MP for Gosport, and I have hosted a Ukrainian family for the last two and a half years. They are very happy here and are pleased that there is clarity that, with their initial visa due to end shortly, they will be allowed to apply for a further 18-month extension, which, of course, takes them to four and a half years—some six months shy of the five years required to apply for indefinite leave to remain. Notwithstanding the Minister’s comments about not wishing to hold them here, the brutal reality is that they have made their home here and they wish to stay. They do not wish to go back to Ukraine because they simply do not have anything to go back to. While I realise the Minister cannot commit as to their status, will she perhaps take this opportunity to say that the one thing the Government will not be doing is forcing people to go back to Ukraine?
Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)
First, I acknowledge that the noble Lord and Caroline have done so much to support a family from Ukraine. Although many families are doing this, it is still an exceptional act of generosity and welcome. It is truly something we should acknowledge and thank him and Caroline for. I respect that he has taken this opportunity to raise this issue and highlight the feelings and thoughts of some people who are here from Ukraine who may feel as he describes. Clearly, this would be a matter for the Home Office at the point at which their status comes up for renewal again. I would not want to prejudge what the Home Office might decide, but he has made the case very strongly and clearly, and I am sure that that will be heard by colleagues at the Home Office.