Iran

Thursday 15th January 2026 Lords Chamber

Statement

12:14

The following Statement was made in the House of Commons on Tuesday 13 January.

“With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will update the House on the disturbing developments unfolding in Iran. Horrific reports suggest that potentially thousands of people have been killed and many more arrested in the most brutal and bloody repression against public protest in Iran for at least 13 years.

On 28 December, protests began on the streets of Iran following a plunge in the value of the country’s currency. Over the following week, the protests grew in scale, intensity and geographic spread. Crowds surged on to the streets, from major cities to rural towns, with voices ranging from shopkeepers to university students protesting for change. Instead, they have been met with the most bloody repression.

A total internet shutdown instigated by the Iranian regime from 8 January, together with restrictions on phone communications, mean that the full facts are not yet clear, but I am fearful that the reports that we have seen may underestimate the full scale of the horror, as further evidence and testimony reaches the outside world. Videos are still emerging, including of what appear to be protester corpses lined up in body bags outside a hospital on the outskirts of Tehran.

The Iranian regime has called for a three-day period of national mourning, but only for its security forces. There has been no acknowledgment of dead protesters; instead, the regime peddles its manufactured narrative of foreign manipulation and seeks to portray peaceful protesters as criminals and terrorists while pursuing a brutal and relentless crackdown on its own people. It takes huge bravery to protest and to speak out in the face of such oppression, especially for women who continue to endure severe repression in their daily lives. The United Kingdom therefore condemns in the strongest terms the horrendous and brutal killing of Iranian protesters and we demand that the Iranian authorities respect the fundamental rights and freedoms of their citizens.

On Friday, the Prime Minister joined with the German Chancellor and French President in condemnation of the violence and to call for its end. I also delivered that message directly to Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi yesterday, setting out the UK’s total abhorrence at the killings, violence and repression that we are seeing and urging Iran to immediately end the violence and change course. Today, as further reports come through, the Minister for the Middle East, at my instruction, has summoned the Iranian ambassador to underline the gravity of this moment and to call Iran to answer for the horrific reports that we are hearing.

This latest conduct by the Iranian regime is no aberration and it is no outlier; rather, it is all too in keeping with the fundamental nature and track record of the regime. It is consistent with its previous conduct towards its own people, as we saw during the lethal repression of protesters led by Iranian women following the death in custody of Mahsa Amini at the hands of Iran’s so-called morality police. It is consistent with Iran’s destabilising actions towards its neighbours in the region, as we have seen in its backing of terrorist and extremist proxies—Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis—and of militia groups in Iraq and Syria, and from Iran’s barrage of missile attacks on Israel. It is consistent with Iran’s malign global impact, whether in weapons support for Russia against Ukraine or its nuclear programme. It is consistent too with Iran’s state threat activities on UK soil, posing danger to dissidents, journalists and the Jewish community here in the UK, with more than 20 potentially lethal Iran-backed plots over the last year alone, as tracked through the vital work of the UK’s security agencies.

Let me set out the action that the Government are taking in co-ordination with allies in response to the consistent threat that the Iranian regime poses to stability, security and freedom and to the UK national interest. First, on domestic security threats, we will not tolerate any Iran-backed threats on UK soil. In May, three Iranian nationals were charged with offences linked to the Iranian regime under the National Security Act 2023. I thank the police, security and intelligence services for their tireless work to keep us safe. Last year, we placed Iran on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme to detect, deter and disrupt malign and undeclared efforts to undermine our democracy, we sanctioned the criminal Foxtrot network for the violent threats it posed against Jewish and Israeli targets in Europe on behalf of the Iranian regime, and we have geared up the UK’s security infrastructure to better tackle hybrid threats. As Home Secretary, I commissioned the review by the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, into what more needed to be done so that we could apply counterterrorism-style powers, including on proscription, to state-backed threats as well. We announced last year that the Government will take forward the recommendations so we can deal with all the UK-based threats that we face.

Secondly, on support for British citizens, the first duty of any Government is the safety and security of our citizens, and the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is working tirelessly to ensure the safety of British nationals in Iran. I spoke yesterday with the UK’s ambassador in Tehran about the vital work that he and the team are doing on the ground, and my department is in contact with the relevant Iranian authorities regarding detained British nationals. Their welfare in Iran remains a priority. We are, of course, deeply concerned that Craig and Lindsay Foreman have been charged with espionage in Iran. Just yesterday, the Minister for the Middle East met members of the Foreman family, and we continue to raise the case directly with the Iranian authorities.

Thirdly, there is the co-ordinated economic and diplomatic pressure on the regime. This Government and our predecessors have continually raised human rights violations in Iran through the UN and international forums, including, most recently, in the autumn, resolutions calling for an end to the regime’s reprisals against women, journalists and human rights campaigners. In October, alongside our E3 partners, France and Germany, the UK triggered the snapback process, which saw the reinstatement of six previously terminated UN sanctions resolutions on Iran. We did so because of the repeated failure by the Iranian regime to comply with its nuclear commitments. On 1 October, we updated domestic legislation to reapply extensive sanctions measures contained in the resolutions, going further by designating 71 individuals and entities in sectors that have links to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Overall, this Government have imposed over 220 Iran sanctions designations since coming into office, and we back strong sanctions enforcement. Just last week, the UK provided support to the US’s seizure of ‘Bella 1’, accused of shadow fleet activities and Iran sanctions breaches. When the sanctions were reinstated in October, I also urged those in the Iranian regime, even then, to change their approach and to work with the international community to comply with their obligations. I told them then that it would take time to fully implement the UK sanctions and that, during that window, they should start compliance and engagement with the international community and end the deception and obfuscation. They have not done so. Weapons inspectors still have not been given access and, far from changing their approach, we have instead seen a reversion to the most brutal forms of repression on their own streets.

As a result, I can confirm that the UK will bring forward legislation to implement full and further sanctions and sectoral measures. The UK has already designated key players in Iran’s oil, energy, nuclear and financial systems, and further measures will target finance, energy, transport, software and other significant industries that are advancing Iranian nuclear escalation. We will work further with the EU and other partners to explore what additional measures might now be needed in response to developments.

I also send a message to other countries that have sought to avoid implementing UN sanctions or to undermine the legitimacy of the UN sanctions reinstated following the snapback process. No one should be supporting the kind of approach that the Iranian regime is currently taking, and all member states should be fulfilling their UN obligations on such a grave and serious issue.

Let me say something else about the events of recent days. Just as in 2022, it is absolutely clear that the Iranian regime is trying to paint the protests as the result of foreign influence and instigation. It is using that accusation to try to whip up opposition to the protests among anti-western Iranians, and to try to justify the vicious and sickening attacks on the ordinary civilians marching in the streets. This is nothing but lies and propaganda being spread by a desperate regime and it must not be allowed to undermine a genuine grass-roots movement drawing together people from all parts of Iranian society and spreading across multiple cities and regions.

That is why we and other Governments across the world are determined not to play into the hands of the regime or to allow our words or actions to be twisted to support its lies and propaganda. With a functioning embassy on the ground in Tehran and British nationals being held in Iranian jails, we recognise that responsibility, as previous Governments have always done. In the last 18 months, we have taken stronger action to tackle Iranian threats at home and abroad than any recent Government, and we have done so with broad cross-party support. That must continue. The world is watching Iran. The UK will continue to confront the regime’s lies, to call out its repression and to take the steps necessary to protect the UK’s interests. I commend this Statement to the House”.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, the situation in Iran is very fast-moving, and there have been significant developments since the original Statement by the Government last Tuesday. Before moving on to the specific questions I would like to raise with the Minister, I would like to take a moment to reflect on the incredible bravery of the Iranian people who have taken to the streets day after day in protest against the cruel, barbaric and despotic regime that currently resides in Tehran. Too often, we in this country take our long-held freedoms for granted and forget that, across the world, there are fearless protesters literally risking their lives for nothing more than freedom and democracy. It is truly humbling. Those protesters face brutal treatment by their regime, and over 2,000 people have been killed, but, still, they are standing up bravely against that brutality and oppression.

Against the backdrop of the appalling actions of the Iranian regime, could the Minister please update the House on the actions that the Government are taking to hold Iran to account? What further steps are Ministers considering to ensure that the Iranian regime is subject to appropriate additional sanctions? We welcome the fact that the Iranian ambassador has now been summoned. Can the Minister please confirm whether the case of Erfan Soltani was raised with him?

Last night, it was reported that the British embassy in Tehran has been closed temporarily. Can the Minister update the House on the work that the embassy staff are currently undertaking to support British citizens currently still in Iran and how they will maintain that support as they move to operating remotely? How will embassy staff support Craig and Lindsay Foreman, who are currently being detained in Iran? Could we have an update on their case?

We have also seen reports that the Government are withdrawing some personnel from the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar. This is the first opportunity we have had to ask questions about these decisions. Could the Minister update the House on the reasons for that decision, and when the limited withdrawal of personnel will be completed?

On the actions of the US, we know that President Trump has been forthright in his public challenges to the Iranian regime. Could the Minister confirm what conversations have taken place between UK government officials and Ministers and their US counterparts? Will we work in lockstep with our American allies in giving robust response to these events in Iran? Has the Prime Minister spoken to President Trump directly to discuss our response?

Finally, I reiterate our support for the protesters in Iran who are so bravely standing up for freedom and democracy, at the risk of the ultimate personal sacrifice. The behaviour of the Iranian regime is truly horrific and we support the Government in their decision to summon the ambassador. Ministers must continue to work at pace to hold the regime in Tehran to account for its brutal oppression of those brave protesters fighting for liberty and democracy.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, we must show solidarity and support the young Iranians seeking democratic rights, and we must protect those such as journalists and those in BBC World Service radio who are working to ensure that there is information, which can be life-saving in times of crisis. Can the Minister update the House on the status of the BBC Persian service? I think we all supported the emergency support for there being radio provision at a time of internet blackouts. Can the Minister update us on the availability of information for the Iranian civilian population?

We must also ensure at this time that British joint nationals are protected. Can the Minister update us on what consular support may continue to be available? I support the Government’s actions on making sure that our diplomats are protected, but what kind of consular support will be ongoing? In extreme circumstances, especially for victims who are young women, who are being particularly targeted, these Benches believe that there does need to be a safe and legal route for asylum, potentially, which we do not currently have.

Any Government who have religious morality police is one whom liberals are instinctively wary of, but a Government who use their organs of state to repress their people, imprison and torture peaceful protesters, target young women and murder those simply wanting a say on who governs them need to be condemned in the strongest terms.

The civilians in Iran are also having to grapple with unreliable and contradictory information from President Trump from the United States. As I mentioned, I support the UK’s precautionary actions on its diplomatic staff within Iran and, indeed, those within Qatar, but I have not heard so far advice for those within Baghdad and Basra in Iraq. Having frequently visited the border of Iran in that area, I know that any turmoil in Iran will have an impact in that area. If the Minister could update us on the advice for southern Iraq, that would be helpful.

As we saw just yesterday on Venezuela, President Trump is happy to work with autocrats, as long as they are his autocrats. It does not offer much faith to liberal governance and for those protesters. Can the Minister assure us that the British Government want to see open, fair, democratic governance within Iran, not simply a regime that will offer oil rights to one of our allies?

Finally, on sanctions, which we support, we will support the Government in enhancing the work even further, but we do not support the lack of proscription of the IRGC. In the previous October, when we discussed the Iran country regulations, I pointed out a loophole, and I will add one today, to which I hope the Minister might respond. Our sanctions are on individuals and on trade and goods, but they do not cover intermediaries or brokers or those who facilitate funds to the religious police or the IRGC. The sanctions are not under the human rights regime; they are under the trade regime, whereas the human rights regime can be expanded rapidly to ensure that those facilitating human rights abuses can also be covered. I know that the Minister will say that she will not comment, but can she comment on the fact that we are open to considering the human rights regime for sanctions, not just trade sanctions, and that is catered for under the countrywide regulations? The second loophole is that the lack of proscription for the IRGC means that those who provide support or financial assistance to it are also outwith the scope of UK actions. I hope the Minister will agree that, if there are any loopholes at this time, we must close them.

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)]

My Lords, I begin by echoing the words of both Front Benches about the bravery and courage of those who are taking to the streets at considerable risk to themselves. They are risking their lives and, we know in many cases so far, sacrificing their lives because they wish to live in freedom. They have every right to express that through protest, as they are, and it is met with dismay and shock. At the moment, it is estimated that there are around 2,000 dead, and around 10,000 being detained. It is expected that, when more is known when communications become more possible, those numbers may well increase.

The UK has made statements alongside France and Germany and others. We stay closely in contact with the US and other allies and partners. We have withdrawn UK-based embassy staff for obvious reasons, and this inevitably considerably limits the consular assistance that we are able to provide to UK nationals. We have advised for some time against all travel to Iran, and the assistance that we will be able to provide should anybody there get into difficulty or need support is incredibly limited. We advise those there to make plans to leave. It is very difficult, particularly if they wish to leave over land, because we advise against all travel to many of the neighbouring regions.

I was asked about personnel in Qatar. I do not know the answer to that. I can find out, and I am very happy to update the House on that, should that be appropriate.

On sanctions, we are actively considering what next steps we need to take. Noble Lords will notice the difference between that comment from the one they usually receive, but I am unable to say any more about that. We are considering proscription-like measures in respect of the IRGC. As noble Lords will know, Jonathan Hall has recently reviewed this. I am advised that there is a need to make amendments to the legal framework that is available because the legislation is currently not designed to deal with state-backed entities. I hinted at that the other day, and I think it is important to be clear about where we are on that.

On wider travel advice, we encourage people to monitor constantly the advice on the FCDO website, because there is every chance that it may well be revised. Those decisions are taken quickly, and the information is almost instantly available to the public.

The future vision for Iran is an important question. Our vision is entirely centred on the fact that it is for the people of Iran to make their own choice about how they wish to be governed. That is not something that they have at the moment. It is not for the United Kingdom to say what the Government of Iran ought to comprise and who that ought to be. I am sure that different people in this House will have very strongly held views about that, but from the Government’s perspective our principle that will guide us is that it is for the people of Iran to make that choice.

12:25

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that history teaches that the regime of the mullahs will probably be toppled only when elements of the security forces and other elements of the regime join the protests? Is there any evidence that that is happening in today’s Iran?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I have read arguments to that effect. I am not aware that that is the case, but because of the restrictions on communications, let us watch and see. I have heard a very similar analysis, but we do not know what is going to happen. Clearly, we hope for a calm and peaceful way forward that leads to a situation where the people of Iran get the Government they need in order to prosper and thrive in safety.

[Baroness Coussins (CB)]

My Lords, can the Minister say whether any additional security and protection are being made available here to people working for the BBC Persian service, who are already being subject to harassment and worse, and who are now expected to be on the receiving end of worse?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

That is a really good point. The danger that those journalists doing that vital work are exposed to is often overlooked. Of course we keep their safety and security under constant review. I pay tribute to the work of the World Service. Those journalists—I have met some of them—are tremendous and vital, particularly at a time like this.

[Lord Hamilton of Epsom (Con)]

If the noble Lord, Lord Anderson, is right and there is unlikely to be any internal pressure to achieve regime change in Iran, the only thing that will achieve it will be outside military intervention. Do the Government support that, and is it likely to happen?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

Obviously, we all have opinions about that, but I think it is probably better that I do not speculate about that kind of intervention at this point.

[The Lord Bishop of Gloucester]

My Lords, as I said earlier this week, Iranian Christians across our churches are deeply distressed at not being able to have contact with their loved ones in Iran. I suspect that, in the coming months, we are going to see more Iranians arriving on our beaches. What are His Majesty’s Government doing to prepare for this and to be forward-thinking in the stance that will be adopted regarding welcome and hospitality?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

We clearly advise everybody not to make that dangerous journey across the channel, and it is this Government’s intention that we reduce to zero the number of people who are doing that. That is not the right way to reach this country when in need of asylum. The issue around communications is incredibly important, and we are talking to other countries about what we may be able to do to enable access to internet or telephone communications, not just because we need to know what is happening on the ground but because, as the right reverend Prelate said, it is vital for people who are intensely concerned about their loved ones and others in their community.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

My Lords, the Minister wants to discourage young people from Iran who are fleeing for their lives from coming to this country on a small boat. I entirely agree, but the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, asked, and I did not hear the Minister answer: what are we going to do to provide some safe and legal way for them to come? Some of them, particularly those who have been educated in this country and have been to British universities but now face being shot on the streets, might very well want to come here. We should be proud to receive them.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The noble Lord is right. There are many who have lived and worked here and been educated here, as he says. But it is not right that we encourage people to take dangerous journeys, and I know that is not what he would wish us to do. We do not have a formal safe route situation at the moment with regard to Iran, and we are not actually seeing large numbers of people fleeing the country at this stage. Obviously we will keep a close watch on this and, if we need to change stance, of course we can.

[Lord Cashman (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I reiterate the point that there are no safe, legal routes from Iran to reach this country. I urge the Minister to look sympathetically at this. No matter how somebody reaches the safety of the United Kingdom, if they are from Iran—and, I would argue, other countries, but in this instance we are talking about Iran—let us give them the gift of asylum and sanctuary and consider their claims.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

We do consider their claims. As the noble Lord says, there are several countries in the world where life is incredibly dangerous and people feel the need to seek refuge, sometimes in the United Kingdom. We will consider their claims fairly and in line with all our established decision-making. It is important to understand that this country takes seriously its responsibilities and its duty to provide asylum and protection to those in desperate need, but I do not want to say anything that could be interpreted as encouragement to people to fall into the arms of people traffickers or take those often deadly journeys, particularly across the sea.

[Lord Polak (Con)]

The Minister will not be surprised that I listened carefully to what she said about proscription when she talked about state-backed entities—I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Hanson, is also in his place—because that was the same argument used in relation to Hezbollah in Lebanon. They said at the time that Hezbollah was part of the Lebanese Government but, heigh-ho, Hezbollah was proscribed. I am sure the Minister has that in her mind.

I want to follow up on what the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, said. He was absolutely right about the IRGC. Perhaps an example of what he was alluding to are the reports that the IRGC has used two UK-registered cryptocurrency exchanges to move about $1 billion since 2023, evading international sanctions in the process. Can the Minister comment on those reports? What steps are HMG taking to stop the UK being used as a clearing house for Iran’s terrorist thugs?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I agree with the noble Lord’s description, of course. The IRGC has been sanctioned, but we are being encouraged to go further with proscription. As I have explained, we asked Jonathan Hall to look at this, and he has recommended that we take certain measures that we may need to legislate for. We are looking closely at it. Obviously we do not announce these sorts of decisions ahead of time, because that potentially diminishes their impact. What I have said today nudges things along in the direction that the noble Lord wishes us to go in, but I am unable to make further commitments today and I think he will understand why.

[Lord Craig of Radley (CB)]

My Lords, President Trump has made a number of possible suggestions about what he might or might not do in dealing with Iran. Have those been shared with our Government, and have our Government had any opportunity to propose alternatives or agree with what the President presently has in mind?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

Noble Lords will know that we were not involved in the measures that the United States took a few months ago. There are constant conversations between the United Kingdom and US counterparts on this and many other issues. I do not think it is right for me to answer directly the question that the noble and gallant Lord puts, other than to assure him that communication is good and constant, and we raise all the issues that noble Lords would expect us to raise.

[Lord Hannay of Chiswick (CB)]

My Lords, will the Minister give us some idea of the FCDO’s analysis and whether it demonstrates that this latest outburst of entirely legitimate demonstrations, met with extreme violence, is more serious, far reaching and widespread in the country than any that we have previously seen, and that it is extremely unlikely to be the last, even if the peak of this particular set of demonstrations may now, briefly, have passed? Can we focus our thoughts for the future on making it clear to the people of Iran that, if they were able to have a Government who could meet international obligations, whether on nuclear, human rights or other matters, Iran would be a welcome member of the international community, and many of the problems that they are facing could be addressed in a positive manner? Does she agree that making that clear is part of an overall approach to how to handle an important country in the Middle East?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The analysis that I have seen suggests that this current situation has peaked, but our interpretation—I suspect it is shared across the House—is that that does not show any diminution in the desire of the protesters to see an improvement in their situation and their ability to live in freedom. It is because so many are losing their lives, and it is a decision to stay at home because of fear. Nobody really knows how this is going to progress, but there is no doubt, as the noble Lord says, that these protests have been far more wide ranging than those we have seen previously.

Our position in relation to Iran would clearly change should there be a regime that enabled the population to live in freedom. Noble Lords know, because we have discussed this previously, that we take into account the fact that the regime in Iran weaponises things we say in order to stack up their false narrative when they purport that these protests are in some way orchestrated by external forces. Clearly they are not, but we need to take that into account. We also have British nationals being held in Iran, and we do not want to further jeopardise their situation. I agree with the noble Lord that this looks and feels very different from what we have seen before, and I think that perception will only increase once communication becomes possible again.

[Lord Dholakia (LD)]

My Lords, first, the Minister has indicated that the Government will consider applications for asylum from Iranian citizens wishing to leave that country. The embassy in Iran is now closed. What method are they going to use to make it possible for them to make a formal application to come to the United Kingdom?

Secondly, Mrs Rajavi came out with a 10-point plan for establishing a democratic, non-religious Government in Iran, which has received considerable support from Members of Parliament in this country and the rest of the world. Will the Minister take into account that the Pahlavi dynasty has an interest in assuming power but be careful that that power is not vested in a person who was deposed some years ago?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I need to repeat what I said: the future should be for the people of Iran to determine, not the UK Government.

On the issue of asylum claims and the closure of the embassy, I understand what the noble Lord is saying, but our first priority—and this is always difficult—is to our UK staff who are based in Tehran. That is a long-established way of working: we have to look after those for whom we are directly responsible. That makes support for others in Tehran and Iran more difficult. We understand that, and it is why these decisions are not taken lightly, but we had to do that in order to secure their safety.

[Lord Dubs (Lab)]

My Lords, given the strong possibility that many Iranians will seek to flee for safety from their murderous regime, I wonder whether the best approach by this Government would be to have a united European approach to asylum seekers, so that we could all take our share of responsibility for those Iranians who make their way to Europe seeking safety.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I do not think there is really anything to disagree with there. There needs to be greater co-operation internationally, not least in Europe, around support for refugees, and making sure that journeys are taken safely and that people are not exploited, and worse, along the way, which is all too often what we see happen.

[Lord Leigh of Hurley (Con)]

My Lords,

“there is a compelling case for proscribing the IRGC … what possible reason is there for the Government to delay in outlawing a terrorist organisation that threatens security both at home and abroad?”.—[Official Report, 29/11/23; col. 1082.]

Those are not my words; they are the words of a Front-Bench Labour spokesman in opposition. What has changed? One thing that has changed is that we do not have an embassy any more in Tehran; that was given as one of the principal reasons why we did not proscribe the IRGC, not least because various partners wanted us to have a presence in Tehran. Now that things have changed, and given Labour’s request and requirement for us to proscribe the IRGC, will the Government please reconsider?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

If the noble Lord had been listening to my previous answers, he would understand exactly what the Government’s position is and what we are doing to consider this at the moment.

[Lord Hamilton of Epsom (Con)]

I have been listening to the noble Baroness’s answers, and I do not think I have heard an answer on whether the Government actually support regime change in Iran. I do not think she would be betraying any confidences if she can clarify that issue.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

Our position is that regime change relies on the execution of the wishes of the people of Iran. We want to see the people there being able to live, as they are telling us they wish to, in freedom and able to exercise their fundamental rights, one of which is to protest without fear. At the moment, that is not possible. The regime there could take a different position, but we want to see a situation where those people can live without the fear that they are currently exposed to.

[Baroness Hoey (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, there are a lot of questions that the Minister, quite understandably, cannot answer, but she gave a rather strange response to one question that I asked the other day. Could she simply just say thank you to Elon Musk for providing Starlink into Iran?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I will thank Elon Musk, now that he has made his platform free of the child abuse and some of the demeaning content that he was allowing to flourish on there up until, I believe, the first thing this morning. I am glad that he has taken a sensible position on that now, so I am very happy to acknowledge what he has done to enable communications—in the incredibly limited way that he has, but it does matter. I was very happy to say the other day that the access to social media and communications that he has made possible, however that is done, is vital. We need to do whatever we can to improve that situation for people.