Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian
peace.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. One of the most violent cycles of Israeli-Palestinian conflict in history, the largest since 1973, has drawn to a halt and it is now critical that we redouble our efforts to make this a lasting peace. The atrocities and massive loss of life we have seen on and since 7 October cannot happen again. We must do all we can to prevent that, and innocent civilians must be allowed to live their lives without fear.
The recent news has been packed with talk of various reconstruction plans and Government summits, but the current debate is neglected and a vital pathway to peace—that is, the involvement of Israeli and Palestinian civil society. The international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace is at its core an initiative designed to give agency to those often overlooked grassroots communities of Israel and Palestine. It plans to mobilise international investment in regional peacebuilding projects and, in doing so, will tackle unaddressed drivers of this terrible conflict. That is why the Government’s commitment to the fund has been such a groundbreaking move and why our continued support will be critical.
Political discussion about the conflict is often fixated on the short-term weather of the situation, day-to-day events and great tragedy in detail, but sometimes we neglect the climate, the long-term trends and initiatives that will bring us meaningfully closer to peace. Therefore, I want today’s debate, and my intention is, to shift our political priorities to longer term, to looking at how we can create the space in the hearts and minds of all affected communities to make peace a possibility.
Of course, how we accomplish that invites a great deal of discussion, particularly in the light of our Government’s necessary and timely commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP. In this era of more limited resources being available, we need to be especially sure that the budget we do have is going towards projects that are value for money in achieving security abroad, because security abroad means safety at home, and the British taxpayer must see those returns many times over. I invite other Members today to make the case for why the international fund could satisfy that requirement.
One great advantage of the fund is the opportunity that it presents for British leadership abroad. The Prime Minister has recently shown what Britain can look like as a leading force for good on the international stage. Seizing the initiative on civil society reconciliation in Israel and Palestine by championing the fund would be yet another demonstration of that power in a notably resource-efficient way. I hope that we have the courage to act and to keep the momentum of recent successes in the region going. As the examples of Syria and Lebanon show, political changes can occur suddenly and unexpectedly. Currently, however, these people and nations are suffering unimaginable pain and trauma. Innocent Palestinians have suffered the catastrophic loss of their loved ones, homes and livelihoods; and at the same time in Israel the images of the hostages are burned into the national consciousness, and the scars of 7 October will be felt for generations to come.
Therefore, with your permission, Mr Twigg, I ask that Members allow accounts from victims to always be heard. I personally have spoken with the families of hostages, and having witnessed such pain at first hand, I make clear my view that anyone who considers themselves to be on the side of peace should respect the testimony of innocents on both sides. This is not a zero-sum game. Reconciliation will take time, but history has told us that it is the only route to a lasting peace.
History has much to teach us in the pursuit of peace. In the 1980s and 1990s, Northern Ireland and Israel-Palestine were both global symbols of intercommunal violence, but today they look very different from each other. The enduring relief that the Good Friday agreement brought to the people of Northern Ireland has sadly not been shared in Israel and Palestine. There are many explanations for those differing outcomes that I am sure other Members will draw attention to, but I will note that although negotiations on the make-up of the middle east often began and stayed at the level of Presidents, Prime Ministers and leaders, the International Fund for Ireland ensured that as many people as possible were given a seat at the table and a stake in the future.
My hon. Friend is talking very eloquently about history and the need for grassroots history to be reflected. Does he agree that there has been a strong history of co-operation and co-operatives in the middle east? Is he aware of the fact that the British Co-operative Group has been working hard, with the Co-operative party, on tangible measures to support peace and economic development, including the Wahat al-Salam/Neve Shalom peace village? Do we need to see more of these initiatives in the future, and can the fund be a way of achieving that?
I agree that co-operatives and co-operation are incredibly important with regard to this fund and that we lose sight at our peril of the value of any civil society actors, including co-operatives. We recall that the fund in Northern Ireland gave everybody a seat at the table, a say in their future. The International Fund for Ireland may well have been the great unsung hero of the peace process. We therefore have in recent memory living proof that a plan for civil society reconciliation, backed by an international fund, can succeed where high-level talks may fail.
In my opinion, no one is more fit for this task than the Labour Government. Our party has a long and storied history in peacemaking, Northern Ireland being just one example of that. Equally, I am eager that we build a consensus on the fund across the House.
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield (Steve Yemm) for securing this debate, and I am grateful to all hon. Members for sharing their valuable and thoughtful perspectives. I pay particular tribute to my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), who has done so much in these very difficult months in which we have both been Ministers. Much of what I will be able to say about what we are doing in the region is a result of her efforts, and I am very glad to share Westminster Hall with her.
Securing peace in the middle east is a priority that I know we share across the House. The agreement to end the fighting in Gaza was a major step forward. As many have said, ending combat operations and increasing aid for Gazans, as well as the release of hostages—38 so far—was vital. The situation is incredibly sensitive at the moment. I will not provide a detailed commentary on the talks that are ongoing today in order to try to transition into phase 2. As we have said repeatedly, and as I said this morning to the Foreign Affairs Committee, we want to see talks move into phase 2, and into phase 3.
The ceasefire has made an enormous difference to the lives of both Palestinians and Israelis, and we want it to continue. Many Members have spoken about the deficit of trust. We think that a ceasefire going through all three phrases, with all of the difficult politics and all of the difficult compromises that that will require, is a vital part of building trust between the two communities. The Prime Minister has been absolutely clear: the decision to block aid going into Gaza is completely wrong. Aid should not be used as a political tool. I made some comments this morning about the restrictions on energy as well.
The topic of this debate is the international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace. The Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary are committed to convening the meeting that many have discussed. Given the developments in the region, I am not in a position today to commit to a time or cast list for the meeting. We want to make sure that the meeting will have the desired effect of building trust across the two communities, and we will need to be sensitive to the circumstances in the region when we meet.
I put on record my thanks to the Minister for his leadership and the work he has done, particularly in keeping us abreast of the ongoing situation. It is right that the UK takes concrete steps to support peace, including through the revitalising of the Abraham accords, which are about normalisation of relations. Does the Minister agree that peacebuilding funds that rebuild Gaza are not just for humanitarian efforts but are a regional step towards the normalisation of peace and an independent Palestinian state free from Hamas? Does he agree that providing infrastructure, homes and hope will sustain peace efforts and normalise the reality of a two-state solution?
My hon. Friend talks about infrastructure, homes and hope, and it is those three elements—in particular hope—that are so missing at the moment. It is important to make a distinction between the vital humanitarian aid into Gaza and efforts to support civil society, which necessarily will be less focused on the immediate humanitarian support required and the reconstruction, which he rightly says will be necessary in Gaza, and more focused on the efforts that many have referred to as bottom-up—trying to ensure that both communities see bridges to each other.
I very much agree that there is a terrible deficit in trust and confidence across the two communities. When we were in opposition, I travelled there shortly after 7 October—two months later—and it was striking for both communities how little they believed in common in that moment. Rebuilding trust will be vital.
I will give way first to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon).
I remind Members that interventions should be brief.
I thank the Minister for his comprehensive answer. When it comes to the moneys, there obviously has not been much, and it must be ensured that it goes far and wide. I think the issue has been debated in the past—that money has been diverted by certain terrorist groups. What we need is transparency to ensure that the moneys that are allocated are safely distributed to the right people for the right purposes.
I agree with the hon. Member. It is vital that aid goes to the purposes for which it is intended. To be clear, we imagine this international fund being of a much smaller magnitude than the much larger funds that would be required for humanitarian assistance or the reconstruction of Gaza.
I turn to the important questions raised by the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) and the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton)—the spokespeople for the two Opposition parties. In relation to what assessment we make of the various proposals, we welcome the Arab plan. We think it has considerable merit and is a good place to start in thinking through the vital questions of reconstruction and the future governance of Gaza.
I am happy to confirm to the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills that we see no role for Hamas in the future governance of Gaza. We think that the Cairo summit made important breakthroughs. We will discuss this at the G7 meeting and as Members will be aware it will be discussed over the coming days by negotiators from a range of countries in the region.
The Palestinian Authority are clearly very important in all of this. They are the authoritative voice for the Palestinian people. We are committed to supporting them through their journey of reform, which is vital. We have given £5 million to support their reform initiatives. There is a range of views about the future governance of Gaza and the role that the Palestinian Authority might play, and some of them were discussed at the Cairo summit. We will play our full role, as the Opposition spokesperson and many Members would expect, so that the provisions in place for the future of Gaza can ensure governance and security both for the people of Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the Israelis themselves.
Before I make some general remarks about conflict prevention and civil society, I want to welcome the work of the APPG on conflict prevention, conflict resolution and peacebuilding; I would be very happy to hear more about it. Civil society has a vital role to play. We will support it fully. We recognise the sensitivities on both sides. Several Members made reference to Senator Kerry’s comments that the problem in 2014 was not necessarily a gulf in the positions but a gulf in the trust, and we see that civil society plays an important role in resolving that.
I hear what the Minister has to say about how we can move to a path towards peace. However, does he agree that there must be steps taken to ensure that Israel is held accountable for its violations of international law? In doing so, will he commit to taking steps to begin ending the UK’s military support to Israel?
I have commented on the question of international law, and indeed on arms suspension, both in the main Chamber and this morning in the Foreign Affairs Committee. With just one minute left, I will say that I stand by those remarks.
I want to say a bit about some of the lifesaving assistance that my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East was responsible for when she was the Minister for Development. The assistance, which continues, included an announcement at the end of January for a further £17 million in funding to ensure that healthcare, food and shelter reaches tens of thousands of civilians across the Occupied Palestinian Territories. As my hon. Friend the Member for Mansfield said, it is absolutely right that we think about the route out of this conflict, but we will not forget those in desperate need at this moment, and our support will continue. I was asked by colleagues about the possible impact of the reduction in ODA. I reiterate what the Prime Minister has already said: we are focused on the needs in Gaza and we will seek to preserve our efforts through any changes.
UK support has meant that over half a million people have received essential healthcare. Some 647,000 people have received food, and 284,000 have had improved access to water, sanitation and hygiene services. Humanitarian needs, however, cannot be solved by short-term solutions. I will conclude by saying that we reaffirm our support for a credible pathway towards peace, leading to a two-state solution where Israelis and Palestinians live side by side in peace, dignity and security, and we agree on the merits of an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace.