Commons Chamber

Wednesday 4th March 2026

(began 2 weeks, 6 days ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
13:22
13:22
13:22
13:23
13:23
13:24
13:25
13:25
13:26
13:27
13:28
13:28
13:29
13:30
13:30
13:31
13:32
13:32
13:33
13:33
13:34
13:34
13:35
13:36
13:36
13:37
13:38
13:39
13:39
13:40
13:41
Tonia Antoniazzi Portrait Tonia Antoniazzi MP (Gower, Labour)
-
-
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I beg that leave be given to bring in a bill to require police in a bill to require police officers and certain employees of police forces to declare a membership or affiliation to certain types of society, an organisation to require such declarations to be accompanied by a statement relating to that membership and for connected purposes. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, these secret or clause of private societies have often been the subject of ridicule, from Monty Python to The Simpsons.

These organisations have been seen as silly, strange, perhaps old fashioned. Even today we hear reference to the funny Handshake Club. But look beyond these parodies and you'll find networks of people with power and authority, clubs of like minded individuals that look out for their own. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, many too often do excellent work raising funds for charitable causes and supporting communities. The most well known of these groups is the Freemasons. It's one of the world's oldest social and charitable organisations.

With around 170,000 members. It offers people community support and it sets out its four core values as integrity, friendship, respect and service. And I've met several members who are loud and proud to belong. They are happy to declare their association because it means they can tell people about the good work they do, and counter any allegations of secrecy and nepotism. I first raised the issue of police declaring membership to the Freemasons in 2024, with another ten minute rule bill.

This is a matter I have long believed needs to be put right. So in December last year, I really welcomed the Metropolitan Police. His decision to revise its policy to require all officers and staff to declare whether they are members of the Freemasons or any other hierarchical association. The mandate has been largely supported by met police officers. A survey of staff showed two thirds of respondents felt membership to secret organisations affected the perception of police impartiality and public trust.

Now, around 400 met staff have declared their involvement, most of them belonging to the Freemasons. But the move has not been without opposition. Earlier this year, legal action was brought by the home of Freemasonry, the United Grand Lodge of England, along with two serving officers. They argued that the Met's disclosure policy breached members rights to privacy and free expression. However, last month, the High Court dismissed the challenge, ruling the Met's policy was both lawful and proportionate. For years, the met have been under growing pressure to get to grips with concerns about Freemasonry, influence in policing.

Pressure that intensified after the Daniel Morgan Independent panel highlighted the issue. The panel, set up to examine corruption around Daniel Morgan's murder in 1987, found serious transparency failings and recommended that officers should be required to declare memberships like Freemasonry to help rebuild public trust, and the pressure increased in March 2023, after the Casey Review delivered a stark assessment of the Met Police culture and standards, finding them institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic. The Casey Review was commissioned in direct response to the kidnap, rape and murder of Sarah Everard by a serving Metropolitan Police officer, and Sarah has been remembered today in this chamber, as yesterday marked five years since she was killed.

After her death, rebuilding public trust became something the Met Police could no longer ignore. There is still a long way to go, but they hope their new Declarable Association policy will be an important step towards greater transparency across the UK. Our policing model relies on public trust and consent, and at the heart of the principles of policing is the idea that public consent is maintained by applying the law fairly and impartially. The College of Policing's Code of Ethics states that to demonstrate they are applying the law fairly, police forces should operate with transparency.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct 2023 report into public perceptions of the police, identified increased transparency as a key measure that police could take to improve confidence in policing. And interestingly, in 2016, the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Wales Police then told Abida Bajwa If members of a club or society have to disclose, it takes away any hidden agendas and it would be best to have one common system for local authorities, police forces and health boards.

Only then can we ensure everybody is being treated equally. With these words in mind, I am seeking forward to bring forward a bill that, at its heart, provides more transparency to the public. The outcome of this bill would be to have a public register of associations for all officers and civilians working in the police. We in this House work cross-party. The issue is a policing one, not a party political one. And I thank my colleagues who have sponsored this bill, who come from three different parties.

Today. I urge this government to introduce legislation to make it mandatory for all police forces in England and Wales to adopt a consistent, standardised approach aligned with the Metropolitan Police Declarable Association policy, so that all our police are legally required to declare memberships, past or present, of any organisation with confidential membership, hierarchal structures and an expectation that members support and protect one another. I want to see all police forces in the UK following the Met's lead. Don't the rest of us who are living outside of London deserve the same level of transparency and impartiality from our police forces? After all, it's not a particularly new idea in this House.

In 1997, the Home Affairs Select Committee published its report, Freemasonry in the police and the judiciary, and it concluded that we recommend that police officers, magistrates, judges and Crown prosecutors should be required to register membership of any secret society and that the record should be made publicly available. In February 1988, the Home Office accepted this recommendation, stating that all new appointments should have, as a condition of appointment, a requirement to declare membership of the Freemasons. If I was a serving police officer, Madam Deputy Speaker, I would welcome this opportunity to be transparent and show my dedication to the force and to the public.

This is what motivates all of us who serve the public. If we are serious about reforming police culture and I think we should be, then we should leave no stone unturned. This bill serves to act as many of as one of those many stones in need of turning. I must stress that this bill is not seeking to prevent membership to societies. I am acutely aware of the right to association and previous precedent that has been set out for this in the ECHR.

For 20 years I was a school teacher, subject to DBS checks, but not a register of interest as I am now as an MP, I feel very strongly about the significance and role of culture within organisations, particularly in public services. All organisations have a responsibility to change the culture for the better by being honest and the word again, I'm going to use transparent about matters relating to governance and day to day operations. Of course, one might argue that if such declarations should be made in the place, then they should be made by members of Parliament.

Given that we are lawmakers to them, I say, why not? Being part of societies can be inherently positive, enhancing friendships and fostering new connections. But we have issues to be addressed. It is important that we restore trust in the police. This bill is no magic wand. But to quote from the Home Affairs Committee report from 1998, Freemasonry in public life. The the solution is a simple one. It requires no bands or prescriptions, which generally have no place in democratic society.

It merely requires public servants who are members of secret societies or society with secrets, as Freemasons used to say, to disclose their membership. Now, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is time to move beyond secrecy in all police forces across the UK. Here.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Here question is that the hon. Member have leave to bring in the Member have leave to bring in the Bill. As many of that opinion say I. Of the contrary, no. The ayes have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Of the contrary, no. The ayes have it. The ayes have it. Who will prepare and bring in the bill? Louise Haigh. Justin Madders.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Louise Haigh. Justin Madders. Paula Barker. Claire Hanna. Chris Bloore. David Smith. Ben Lake. Ann Bloore. David Smith. Ben Lake. Ann Davies. Liz Saville-Roberts. Llinos Medi Sarah. And myself. Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Tonia Antoniazzi. Yes. Keep it steady now. Keep it

**** Possible New Speaker ****

steady. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you. Police (Declaration) Bill Second Reading. What day? Friday, the 17th of April.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Friday, the 17th of April. Friday, the 17th of April. Right. The front benches want to quickly shuffle over. If you're comfortable. Mr. Vince, shall we wait? We now come to the Estimates Day debate. We will start with the motion on the supplementary estimate for the foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and the debate on the spending of the foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. The debate will be led by Sarah The debate will be led by Sarah Champion.

Mr. Move formally the question. The question is, as on the Order Paper Sarah Champion.
13:52
None Portrait Estimates Day: Estimates Day (4th Allotted Day). There Will Be Debates On Estimates Relating To The Foreign, Commonwealth And Development Office; The Ministry Of Defence; And The Department For Business And Trade. At 7pm The House Will Be Asked To Agree All Outstanding Estimates
-

Deputy Speaker.
13:52
Sarah Champion Portrait Sarah Champion MP (Rotherham, Labour)
-
-
And I'd like to thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting a debate on this topic, granting a debate on this topic, which takes place at such a crucial time for the foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. And may I also take this moment to thank the FCDO staff for their ongoing efforts to support British nationals caught up in the conflict in the Middle East over successive governments. We have seen a sustained reduction in UK's the United Kingdom's development Budget ODA first the cut from 0.7% to 0.5% of GNI, and now a stated path towards the 0.3% by 2027.

It's also reported that the UK's international climate finance commitment is now to be slashed by £2.6 billion. These cuts have consequences. They affect how the UK is perceived internationally and our ability to support stability and prosperity, both overseas and in our own country. Aid has always been a highly cost effective way of preventing conflict and reducing pressures that eventually reach our own borders. It allows girls to be educated, women to work, farmers to feed their communities and disease to be challenged and contained, and civil society to hold governments to account.

It is our soft superpower, and it and its benefits cannot be underestimated. FCDO, as this weekend has proved, is constantly dealing with fast shifting geopolitical sands. In this current financial year, we see further cuts as part of its supplementary estimate to both FCDO's day to day and investment spending, both of which have reduced quite dramatically day to day by 457 million and investment spending by 228 million. Most of these cuts are focussed on the ODA Budget.

Parliament has not yet provided details showing exactly where these reductions will fall. I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaker. First of all, can I commend on Witney for Rotherham champion by name and champion by conviction. And we're very, very pleased to see her in the place that she is and what she does. And we thank her very much. I think sometimes, Madam Deputy Speaker, there are opportunities for partnerships, for opportunities for partnerships, for instance, partnerships with churches who are very active in Mike Kane from my constituency in Mike Kane from my constituency in Zimbabwe and Malawi, in Swaziland and Kenya and Uganda in Nigeria as examples.

And there's perhaps a way of partnering with these church groups and with those NGOs and individuals and who have an interest in helping those who feel that maybe that's something that the Minister should take on board and government should look at as well. Thank you.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind words, but also for the sentiments, because, of course, faith communities do so much internationally because it is the right thing to do. But they should right thing to do. But they should be complementing what governments are doing. And at the moment we know the scale of the cuts. We know the scale of the cuts. We don't know the distribution and it is not fair for the philanthropic kindness to be looking to fill kindness to be looking to fill those gaps.

We know that reductions are taking place, but Minister, we do not know which programmes will be impacted. And that's not just us in this House. That is the people on the front line trying their very best to deliver these programmes to the very poorest.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

On that point. Please. I thank my hon. Friend for giving way and I appreciate that she may well give the answer that she may well give the answer that we don't know, which I think is the point she's making. But I've asked a number of questions to the a number of questions to the Minister, and she had some very good answers. I'm not just saying that because he's in his place about about about the UK and about about about the UK and leading on the eradication of polio.

So how reassured and how have you asked questions of the department and that to ensure that the UK remains a leading figure in the eradication of polio worldwide? Well.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my hon. Friend for raising it. Polio is one of the success stories which shows when success stories which shows when countries work together, we can almost completely. I think we're at 99.98% of eradication. And so I urge the Minister not to step away urge the Minister not to step away from this programme. But FCDO has indicated that more information will be released about programmes like the polio, which is going to like the polio, which is going to set out ongoing further funding for Oda projects soon.

But at present, let us be realistic. Members are being asked to vote on billions of spending authority without having that complete picture. This greatly limits our ability to assess the real world implications of the government's decisions. This uncertainty has consequences for long term partnerships for humanitarian operations, and for communities that are relying on our support. The estimate also raises questions about staffing and our capability crisis from Sudan to Gaza, from the Horn of Africa to Ukraine.

And of course, the Middle East require experienced personnel and effective programme oversight. Any reduction in FCDO staffing risks weakening the department's ability to deliver and evaluate programmes effectively. In this context, the fact that the FCDO faces cuts to its headcounts seems incredibly short sighted. A major restructure is ongoing right now and is expected to reduce the workforce by 15 to 25%. We don't know and unfortunately the staff do not yet know. The failure to produce and share a workforce plan or equalities impact assessment does little to reassure me that the FCDO has sufficient, sufficiently engaged the staff or the unions in its restructuring, or that it has considered the implications of staffing reductions on its

**** Possible New Speaker ****

ambitions for Oda. On that. Point. My hon. There are unanswered questions

**** Possible New Speaker ****

There are unanswered questions about the ability of the FCDO to retain sufficient expertise and manage its complicated portfolio manage its complicated portfolio with such a tight funding envelope. hon.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hon. Friend for making a very powerful and pertinent speech. One of the big shifts is from aid to trade, and as the trade envoy, we're trying to deliver some of our aid ambitions through trade relationships. But if we just don't have those people available, there is no way that we can we can even make that shift. So I know she has already started to talk along the the importance of making sure that we have people present, but could you elaborate on just how important it is to make sure that we have people retained in the country to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

deliver the transition that we expect to see? My hon. Friend is absolutely

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and of course we have FCDO and trade staff working together to and trade staff working together to support the work that he and many others are doing, and trade is fantastic. It's something that we fantastic. It's something that we support. I support BII and I will come on to them in a moment, but that is not something that can that is not something that can stand alone. I ODA money is there to support the very poorest in the world, to hopefully enable them to get to a point through training, through education, through entrepreneurial skills, to then be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

a trading partner with the UK. And well, of course. She makes.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

She makes. A very important point about how we develop communities and individuals. Does she agree with me individuals. Does she agree with me that actually cooperatives have a really important role to play in economic development? Because not economic development? Because not only do they create jobs, they give people a stake in the future of those jobs, too. Yeah, absolutely.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I agree with my right hon. Friend, and one of the ways were the only way I that I'm aware that cooperatives start are by groups of local people coming together. And that's what FCDO and Oda money is particularly good at doing, supporting civil society. I mentioned holding governments to account, but of course it's the economic empowerment that comes from communities being involved in the development of their own countries that we have supported so well for decades. And I really hope we're able to continue doing that.

One of my concerns is the likely money that's going to be spent on staff redundancies. And of course, I would argue that would be much better spent on furthering British priorities overseas. There are also, of course, pressures on the wider network of institutions that further UK's interests overseas, such as the British Council and the BBC World Service. These institutions play a really important role in projecting the UK's soft power, and they require stable and predictable funding. And although more funding has been provided at the supplementary estimates, this is following a long period of damaging uncertainty which has really weakened our hand.

Inadequate transparency over aid spending has been a persistent theme for the last few years. I'm proud of the work my committee has done to shine a light on where aid cuts have fallen and the impact of this. I'm also extremely grateful to the excellent support provided by my committee staff and the House of Commons Financial Scrutiny Unit in this task, but we do not do this work alone. Independent scrutiny bodies, such as the Independent Commission for aid, Aid impact Icai play a central role in maintaining transparency and accountancy and making sure that members of this House have the information that we need.

I'm deeply concerned that Icai may be axed as part of these cuts, and I really hope the Minister is able to give us some reassurance that I am wrong in that this estimate debate sits within a broader shift in the UK's aid strategy towards investment led development. This is evident in the nearly half £1 billion of funding for British international investment BII this year. BII is a model built on long term investments rather than rapid humanitarian response. However, this raises questions about the breadth of our development portfolio and whether we are still there to help the poorest of the poor.

If we do not have the other support that underpins BII. I, of course, very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank the chair of the International Development Committee International Development Committee for our opening remarks, and indeed, I echo the sentiments of the hon. Member for Strangford. But does she Member for Strangford. But does she agree with me that it was extremely disappointing that the previous government, and indeed this government, and indeed this government, did not follow the recommendation of the International Development Committee that there should be someone from the foreign, should be someone from the foreign, Commonwealth Development Office on the board of BII to ensure that BII is actually aligned with government strategy, not to make investment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

decisions, but to ensure that it is aligned with government policy. I thank my honourable.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I thank my honourable. Friend and fellow committee member and I absolutely share his sentiment. So BII, for those that sentiment. So BII, for those that don't know, is our development Bank. The FCDO is its sole stakeholder The FCDO is its sole stakeholder and it does seem very short sighted and out of line with other international development banks international development banks that we do not have a seat at the board, even if it was a non-voting seat. So, yes, I urge the Minister to consider that report that we did and the recommendations.

And I do genuinely recognise the excellent, truly excellent work that BII does.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

But it is a strategy that I will of course, give way on that point. I thank her for giving way and I declare an interest as a former declare an interest as a former employee of BII, and if I might just gently share my disagreement with the with the members opposite with the with the members opposite and with with the chair on this point, because whilst it's incredibly important that our incredibly important that our development finance institutions adhere to the FCDO's strategy, my adhere to the FCDO's strategy, my personal experience of having kind of politicisation of some of these state backed financial institutions is that it can end up in a sort of lurching to and fro.

And does she share some of my concerns about the over potential for that kind of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

political influence on some of those institutions? I do share your concern. I don't

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do share your concern. I don't agree with you about the board point, but if we look at the countries that BII under the last government was asked to focus on political interference, if you want political interference, if you want to call it that, is alive and well. And I agree we should. When we invest in organisations, we should invest in organisations, we should trust them to do the job. But that requires scrutiny. And so I go back to my point that I'm very concerned if Icai is cut, let me move away from BII.

Madam Deputy Speaker, today's debate gives members a crucial and timely opportunity to influence the government's approach to funding for FCDO and overseas aid. We face a combination of a diminished Budget, a change of strategic direction and all happening at a time of unprecedented global need. Parliament must insist on clarity about where cuts will fall. We must also insist on reassurance that development expertise will be protected, and confidence that the United Kingdom's aid spending remains focussed on reducing poverty, supporting development, humanitarian need and contributing to global stability.

This House rightly places a premium on transparency, accountability and value for money. Every pound now matters more than ever. And let us be reminded, as I frequently am, that it is the taxpayers pound that we are overseeing. Although our formal powers to amend the FCDO spending limits are limited. Debates such as this allow us to exert influence and have our say over at a pivotal moment in the UK's foreign policy, and I know my colleagues in the House will use that moment wisely.

Thank you chair.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

John Whittingdale. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I'm very grateful for this and I'm very grateful for this opportunity to debate the future spending of the Foreign Office, the Foreign Affairs Committee, which I Foreign Affairs Committee, which I sit on, has shared the concern expressed by the hon. Lady about expressed by the hon. Lady about the impact of the settlement, which is going to result in significant reductions in the headcount within the department. And we have tried in vain to discover exactly how that is going to impact on the different activities of the Foreign Office.

But it seems to me utterly extraordinary that at a time when the world is becoming ever more a
14:07
John Whittingdale Portrait Rt Hon Sir John Whittingdale MP (Maldon, Conservative)
-
-
dangerous place and the need for British diplomacy and British soft power increases, that we should be power increases, that we should be cutting back spending on the cutting back spending on the Foreign Office. I fully support the ambition of the government, indeed Preston government, to go further Preston government, to go further to increase spending on defence. But soft power is as important as But soft power is as important as hard power. And actually that is the area on which this country has built an extraordinary reputation for effectiveness.

And yet we are potentially going to cut it back just at the time when it is needed most. I would ask the Minister specifically to say, what is the future of the Soft Power Council, which was set up by the last Foreign Secretary, something I strongly welcomed the Foreign Affairs Committee to evidence about the work of the Soft Power Council. But it has gone very quiet in recent months, and I hear disturbing rumours that it is no longer regarded as a priority by the department.

So I hope he I hope he will be able to assure me that that is not the case in his response. There are three areas of Foreign Office funding that I specifically want to touch on. The first, which was mentioned by the right hon. Lady is the BBC World Service. It is the case that the need for reliable, trusted information around the world is greater than it has ever been before. And yet at this time we are seeing the withdrawal from that of America.

Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia have all been cut right back and leaving a gap, which I was told this morning, is being filled by Russia and China. It means that the BBC World Service becomes even more important as virtually the sole reliable source to which people can turn. And yet, now I understand the BBC World Service have still have still not been told how much money they're going to get in 20 2627. I was allowed to appear with the Public Accounts Committee a few weeks ago when we had the director general of the BBC and director of World Service ahead, who said to us how impossible it is to plan ahead if they don't know how much money they're going to get.

And yet now here we are, weeks ahead, weeks later, with just a few weeks to go before the beginning of the financial year, and they have not been told. So, I would ask the Minister to confirm whether or not the BBC World Service are in a position to receive the news of how much they're going to get, and also to press him to increase that money, because originally the BBC World Service were told that they should plan for either a real terms freeze or indeed a possible cash cut.

And this comes at the same time that the licence fee is under pressure and the BBC are making reductions on their contribution to world service through licence fee. So it is subject to a double squeeze. And I have said before, I have considerable sympathy with the World Service, but actually the right mechanism of funding is through the government and the Foreign Office. And I support the BBC's request that the government do consider moving back to a position where it is fully funded by the by the government.

The second area I want to touch on is the British Council. Now, the British Council, we know, face huge challenges, principally as a result of the loan that was advanced to them during the time of Covid. And unlike many other organisations which were given loans and were not required to repay them, the British Council is being required to repay them. Repay the loan. Even though that appears there is almost no prospect of their being able to do so in. In fact, at the moment the BBC, the British Council's outgoings are greater than its income.

So not only can they not pay the loan, they are not even currently viable. I know, and I thank the Minister for the briefing, which I am the chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, have been given about the future of the British Council and I would simply urge the Minister to press ahead with drawing up a plan which will both meet the existing challenges, but also set out a route forward which will put the British Council on a firm footing because it does incredibly important work, particularly in those parts of the world where malign forces are seeking to influence democratic elections and the attitudes of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

people. I give way to the hon. Gentleman. Thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way. It's making a very giving way. It's making a very powerful point about the British Council and the work that it does. Council and the work that it does. A lot of that work is required actually counter malign Russian to actually counter malign Russian to get out of the grasp of China. And they are countries that would like to have greater friendship with us.

And to do that, they are trying to encourage a shift in the culture or how their young people engage. And that is delivered through the British Council and English language training. Would he agree with me that some of the value that is applied to this training isn't necessarily seen directly, and perhaps should be assigned to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

security and defence? I think that the hon. Gentleman

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think that the hon. Gentleman makes a very fair point. He is absolutely right about the importance of the work, which is not always fully visible, both in not always fully visible, both in established countries. I mean, I have a particular knowledge and interest in the Baltic nations, which are on the front line against Russia and where there are particularly in in Latvia, a Russian minority population, which is subject to constant barrage of Russian attempts to influence, and that is an area where the British Council are very active.

And I am concerned at reports that the British Council may be forced to withdraw from its activities in the Baltic nations. But, as he rightly says, there are other countries where Russia and China are active which are strategically of huge importance, but which are at risk of tipping back towards the orbit of hostile powers. And the British Council can play an important part in seeking to prevent that. I'll give way again to the gentleman.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm just. That's a very good example. But I also want to make sure that we all understand that sure that we all understand that those examples aren't just at the front line against Russia. Actually, some of these countries are in Africa when they're when they actively need help in being able to draw our aid. And the other draw our aid. And the other contributions that we give away from that influence. And we should be actively supporting countries be actively supporting countries such as Gabon, where they are trying to be a strong partner for the Commonwealth, or in Mozambique, where the language isn't of of English, naturally.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. Africa is of huge importance, and if ever we needed a importance, and if ever we needed a reminder of the risk to the values we hold from hostile powers and in we hold from hostile powers and in particular China, we got a perfect demonstration of that in the statement just an hour or so ago. statement just an hour or so ago. The third area I just want to touch on, and the Minister, I'm delighted, has specific responsibility in this has specific responsibility in this area, and I very much welcome the commitment he has already shown to it, and that is media freedom.

The Global Coalition for Media Freedom was established under the last government by the Secretary of State for culture, foreign Secretary at the time, I'm trying to remember is Jeremy Hunt's constituency, but. The right hon. Gentleman for Godalming. I'm most grateful to my to the whip on the bench, and it is great news that the Foreign Secretary was able to announce, I think, at Munich just recently, that the UK is going to take back the chair of the Media Freedom Coalition.

It is even more important today than it was when it was set up. But I would just hope that by taking back the chair, it will not just be symbolic, but it will be matched by a real commitment to promote media freedom, which also is under huge threat at the moment in a wide range of countries. We have seen journalists threatened with imprisonment, harassment and in some cases murdered. And the UK has a very important role to play in promoting media freedom and taking a lead with such things as the introduction of visas for journalists who are under threat with sanctions against journalists.

And I was pleased to see that. We have just placed sanctions. Madam Deputy Speaker, you are indicating to me that and I know other people wish to speak, so I will leave it with those three areas, and I would

**** Possible New Speaker ****

hope the Minister will be able to say a little more about that in his response. If colleagues can keep their contributions to under ten minutes,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

contributions to under ten minutes, that will help every other colleague in the chamber. Dave committee. Thank you very much.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you very much. Madam Deputy. Speaker, I want to begin by paying tribute to the strength and the bravery of FCDO staff in the Middle East. Today. They're giving Middle East. Today. They're giving support and guidance to hundreds of thousands of Brits who were stranded and are scared and are desperate to return home. And there are so many lessons to learn from what is happening in the Middle East at the moment and in the Gulf at the moment.

But for the purposes of this debate, I think the lesson we should learn is all about the vital importance of the Foreign Office. And it's not all about wearing linen and drinking gin under jacaranda trees. It is. It is.
14:17
Emily Thornberry Portrait Rt Hon Emily Thornberry MP (Islington South and Finsbury, Labour)
-
-
under jacaranda trees. It is. It is. It is a great deal. I've done it. But it is a it's also a great deal of hard work and, and it's very of hard work and, and it's very important that we recognise that it's never been harder. And I mean, just look at what they're having to just look at what they're having to deal with right now. I heard on the radio just a few days ago, a 21 year old who had gone out to to Dubai to celebrate her birthday.

She was there all by herself and she was being interviewed, and she was clearly really frightened. And it is the it is the it is the embassy that will be looking after her. And I hope it will be the embassy that will be getting her home to her mother. And it's our brave Foreign Office staff at a time like this that have to step up. And I'm sure that they themselves are terrified, but they will be getting her back. They're going to call in favours.

They're going to call in favours that they've developed over years. They're going to rely on relationships that they have developed. They're going to rely on, on the credit that they have in the bank because of their professionalism and because they work together and they work on behalf of our country and they cultivate relationships. They, they they use that strength. And hundreds of thousands of Brits in the Gulf will be relying on that professionalism in the next few weeks and months. And they will be acutely aware that they are being charged also with attempting to put down the seeds for how it will be that a peace will develop in the future, and that will also rely on their relationships and their professionalism.

And they do that against a background of knowing that it is very important that Britain continues to be a force for good, which Britain can be when it is at its best. And yet, when we are asking all of this from them and we're asking all this service from them, we are expecting them to work twice as hard. Against a background of rumours and stories about cuts to their jobs where they could be, 25% of them could be losing their jobs.

Madam Deputy Speaker, it is really important for the House to remember the sacrifices that these civil servants make and and because of their work, they they do a different job for our armed forces, but effectively, they are keeping us safe. And it is very important that that is understood. And, you know, I am concerned that the strategy for the restructuring of the Foreign Office is not very clear when it comes to strategy. I mean, I appreciate that it seems that what's happened is that we're taking a top slice off.

So the directors are being are being shorn. There are fewer of them, and then they themselves will be expected to cut their staffing back by, we're told, about 25%. I would just warn the Minister and perhaps to reflect on this, which is that that kind of restructuring is not one which prioritises or which which is particularly sensitive to Ministers priorities. It would seem to just be we are restructuring in order to restructure, but not looking first and foremost about what it is that the Foreign Office is about.

What is it that we should be doing and how do we make sure that we retain the expertise, the knowledge, the connections, the best people in order to be able to deliver those priorities? Because otherwise I, I fear that we undermine yet again the the morale in the Foreign Office. I could go into some of the reasons why under the previous government, the Foreign Office morale was gravely undermined. But this is not the place. But I don't want us to be doing it again ourselves.

The and the. I mean, we've the. So in the limited time that I have, I don't I'm not going to go into any more details. I think what I'm going to do, given how little time there is, what I want to do is I want to say this. I share the right hon. Gentleman's concern about the British Council. He has a great expertise. We have had private meetings. We have had public meetings. We've had the now over. We've sent our own auditors into the into it.

We've we are we've spoken to the unions. We are doing everything we can as a foreign affairs committee to support the Foreign Office, to ensure that the British Council, when it is restructured, is restructured in a way that is for the benefit of our country and the benefit of our culture and the benefit of soft power. And we do want to we are watching you carefully. That's all I'm saying at this stage. May I move on then? Perhaps, given the time that left, I have promised myself to give myself full range until the speaker stops me to to talk about about the about the, the.

I think one of the most important things that we do as a country, which is that we support the BBC across the world. There are countries that are using huge amounts of money, £8 billion China and Russia are using on their global news platforms every year to spread lies. And we have against that Goliath, the David that is the BBC. But the advantage the BBC has is that it is a badge of truth, like no other organisation. I mean, it's other countries would just die to have this.

We have this, we have the BBC, we have the World Service. People turn on the World Service. They turn over from other channels. When a war has been called, they turn over and they go, oh, let's see what the BBC saying, because they want to know what the truth is, and not just the nonsense and not just the spin. And what are we doing at this time, at this time when there is a new type of warfare, the new type of warfare, which is not about about about guns, it is not about about tanks rolling over the hills, it is about the the war for people's minds.

And that war for people's minds is about the promotion of lies. And that is the new type of warfare. And we are so complacent about it. We are not sufficient alive to how much manipulation is going on. And we are allowing this jewel, this gift that Britain could give to the world to diminish. Why are we doing this? I personally feel that it is not just a matter of making sure that the funding for the Foreign Office doesn't get cut for the World Service doesn't get cut, I would say, particularly if our presence in the in in Africa is going to be diminished as it unfortunately, most definitely will given given what's happening in terms of our aid Budget, at least let those countries hear a bit of truth and let it be promoted.

Look, it's not like we're nothing. I mean, I don't want to overstate this. We're already communicating with 313 million people worldwide. That's pretty good. Let's make sure that they all get an opportunity to hear what it is that the BBC can do. The very, you know, the, the, the new unit when it comes to fact checking is is second to none and is so important at a time like this to crack the lies so that people can get back and see the truth.

I will.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Extremely grateful to the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee endorse absolutely Select Committee endorse absolutely everything she said about the BBC World Service. Would she just make a brief comment in the time available about the sister organisation of BBC monitoring? The monitoring service used to have a modest ring fenced grant from the Foreign Commonwealth Office, as it Foreign Commonwealth Office, as it then was. This was done away with and it is now entirely dependent on the BBC's wider organisation for its funding.

Is it not long overdue that the dedicated, ring fenced grant for BBC monitoring, which filters out all the most interesting comments that other

**** Possible New Speaker ****

countries broadcasters are saying was restored? Banbury. I don't think I need to repeat

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I don't think I need to repeat the points that the right hon. Gentleman has made, and he's and he's made them very well. But perhaps I could perhaps go to a perhaps I could perhaps go to a specific, which is, of course, at this time BBC Persian, BBC Persian. You look at the incredible work You look at the incredible work that they're doing. They are sharing vital, life saving information to millions of Iranians suffering right now in internet blackouts. You know, the ones that are doing the fact checking, they are a source of truth.

They are an independent voice. They are not propaganda. And if you want to see how effective they are, all you have to do is look at the fact that the regime absolutely loathes them. So if you need a badge of truthful and you know, gold star, that must be it by itself. Why are we not supporting? Why is it that that that the Arab radio station that was, that was on in, in Lebanon got cut? And guess what? Sputnik took over the airwaves straight afterwards.

I mean, what are we doing? What is the matter? This must be a priority, in my opinion. I will finish with this because I can see the beady eye of the of the of the Deputy Speaker on me as we speak. Let me give this as the. I think this is the best example. I was told that where the BBC is, the World Service is growing more than anywhere else, is in the fringes of China, as in the countries around the edge of China and its TikTok accounts, the BBC, TikTok accounts.

And what story does that tell you? It tells you that young people want the truth and they are desperate to find it, and they are doing it in the way that young people do through TikTok. But they go to the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

good old BBC. Yeah. Yeah. David Mundell. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I want to begin with one very specific ask of the Minister, and hopefully it's one that he can give, hopefully it's one that he can give, and that is a continuing commitment to Abercrombie House in East to Abercrombie House in East Kilbride as the FCDO's second headquarters, the government scrapped plans to build a new headquarters building in Glasgow
14:27
David Mundell Portrait Rt Hon David Mundell MP (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, Conservative)
-
-
and have confirmed up to now that they're staying at Abercrombie House. But as the International Development Committee has heard, Development Committee has heard, that building requires significant investment and at a time of such investment and at a time of such significant cuts to the FCDO Budget, obviously, and staffing changes, there is a concern as to whether there is a concern as to whether that will be that will actually be done. Turning as a member of the International Development Committee to the issue of a Oda and development finance, as the Ft reported, recent analysis from the centre for Global Development reveals a startling reality that this Labour government is providing is presiding over cuts to our overseas aid Budget that not only deeper but faster than those being implemented by the Trump administration across the water.

I can't believe that that was the objective of a government that said that it wanted to achieve global leadership on these matters, and I do understand the necessity of financial discipline and, of course, the funding pressures that the Treasury are wrestling with, even if some of them are self inflicted. I have often argued in this House that we must be pragmatic and strategic with our development resources, looking for where we can make the best and most profound difference.

I do not think, as the chair of the committee has said, scrapping Icai, which is monitoring how we get value, is the best way forward in achieving that. And there has been some very significant and important Icai reports, such as the 2020 report, which highlighted how much value the government got from investment in nutrition. For every pound that was spent. And that's why, as a champion of nutrition, I have long supported the Child Nutrition Fund with a relatively modest investment by the UK government.

This fund can leverage philanthropic and private capital whilst mobilising domestic resources to dramatically improve the well-being of millions of women and children. And the Child Nutrition Fund, in my view, is something that does meet the test of public expectations for Oda funding that of food in stomachs and jags in arms. Now, I've also supported because I realise that we are in a changing world. The IDC's inquiry into the future Shape of aid. And we do recognise that things will have to be different, but we want to see leadership from the UK government in this regard, and we want to see a plan when the UK government is slashing development spending to the extent to which it is by some 27% by 2027, as I have said, outpacing the reduction proposed in Washington.

One must ask how this stacks up against other government objectives and where is the plan? And whilst the US Congress has acted as a vital check, I see very little of that same approach here in the UK, despite the very best efforts of the International Development Committee. As I have said before, if cuts are to happen, they need to be thought through and that thinking needs to come prior to the cutting. This, sadly has not been the case and unless the Minister pulls it out of the hat at the end of this debate, there is no evidence of a plan.

Reductions in Oda were announced over a year ago, but the UK's future of aid conference will not be taking place until May this year, if at all, I suspect. In the meantime, services are falling over that could otherwise be put on a sustainable footing through new and innovative approaches, or being transferred to capable local partners. And the issue of the change in policy in the US has significant ramifications, which we should be addressing now, particularly the withdrawal of funding on LGBT and family planning issues.

And this is most certainly, Madam Deputy Speaker, not the time for the FCDO to be cutting its LGBT Budget as the Elton John Aids Foundation have, amongst others, highlighted. We are told that these reductions are to fund our defence capabilities against Russian and indeed now Iranian aggression. The government must, however, be careful not to create a vacuum of influence as others have already highlighted, and allow malign actors to move in. While we do this, one need only look to Russia's Wagner Group and their operations in Africa, particularly around critical minerals.

As another example of this. Now, as a co-chair of the APPG on HIV Aids, I want my final remarks to focus specifically on the impact of the changes on the fight against HIV and Aids, and I particularly commend The Independent newspaper and their correspondent, Bel Trew, for highlighting some of these issues last November. I was pleased to be able to welcome the government's pledge of £850 million to the Global Fight Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria in a time of tight resources.

It does offer real value for money, dealing directly with devastating and widespread diseases, but also building the capacity in the health systems of partner countries. It can be a crucial pathway to ending dependency. But while £850 million is welcome, it was nonetheless £150 million reduction from 2022. And it was also coupled with uncertainty for other organisations like the Robert Carr Fund, Unit Aid and UNAids. The One campaign expect this shortfall to result in a very tangible 250,000 additional deaths and 1 million new infections here in the UK.

The government's ability to reach our target of zero new transmissions by 2030 would be imperilled by rising rates of HIV elsewhere and the UK's life sciences and pharmaceutical sector will also suffer, for whom the Global Fund, amongst other organisations, is such an important partner? Madam Deputy Speaker, what that tells us, as we've heard already, is that these reductions come at a cost, particularly if they are not thought through. They come at a cost of influence, the economy and sadly lives.

At the end of this debate, I want to hear from the Minister what the government's plan actually is. Everybody understands there will be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

reductions, but they must be on a planned basis. Speaking limit of seven minutes

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Speaking limit of seven minutes Noah Law Madam Deputy Speaker. The government is cutting our

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The government is cutting our aid Budget by a third, from 0.5 to 0.3% of national income by 2027, the steepest reduction in a generation driven by the Defence Spending Review. Now, much has already been said on this, and I'm
14:35
14:35
14:35
Noah Law Portrait Noah Law MP (St Austell and Newquay, Labour)
-
-
the right moment in the arc of economic history to ask how we do more with less, and what are we actually buying with this money? And how can we get to a point where And how can we get to a point where we can say, hand on heart to our constituents that we know what the constituents that we know what the impact of our spend is? The FCDO's own stated aims remain, that alleviating poverty and stabilising countries to enable them to go on that journey themselves.

And that's the right ambition. But the model we have used to deliver that has for far too long been confused. We often hear of the financing gaps, the trillions that must be filled to meet the Sustainable Development Goals and to overcome the challenge of climate change. But the reality is that overseas development assistance cannot so much as touch the sides in all of this. And furthermore, we know that our developing partner, developing country partners across the world, the world over want investment primarily not aid partnership, not paternalism, but to unleash that we level the financial playing field, build the capital markets, public and private, in these countries that ultimately drive growth and prosperity.

Global debt reform, an area in which the city and the English courts could play a globally leading role, is just one of many ways in which we can strengthen the macroeconomic stability and financial capacity that these countries so desperately need. Lazard need not by any means mean less investment. Overall. It means we can no longer afford the means we can no longer afford the luxury or at worst of waste. But we can no longer afford the luxury of, at worst, waste, but at best misallocation of resources.

And and investment means that trusting local knowledge and building local institutions and empowering local businesswomen and men who are the ones ultimately responsible for delivering economic growth that poverty.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Would my hon. point. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend is giving an My hon. Friend is giving an excellent speech and I think very powerful points being made. Would he agree with me that many development charities have made development charities have made these points for some time, including Oxfam, Cafod and many others? And this is a well known

**** Possible New Speaker ****

others? And this is a well known approach in their experience. I greatly welcome my hon. Friends the charities. He mentions Friends the charities. He mentions that advocacy work, but also the grassroots work that charities which are increasingly not funded directly by ODA even as it stands, I welcome the work that they do because it's really important that we build up a coherent view of the kind of financing, investment and donor ecosystem that we need to work with going forward in this constrained world.

Now, as I've suggested, I very much welcome that shift of our governments to from donor to investor. But can I ask the Minister at a time when we're effectively when we effectively have an inbuilt bias towards capital investment over resource spending in our government's fiscal policy? Why are we not able to go further in capitalising some of the very institutions which we know will deliver on those development and climate goals, and help to mobilise the vast sums which we know are needed to help develop the world's poorest economies, whilst returning that capital back to British public coffers to be put to future use, overseas development aid must be allocated first and foremost to those problems which investment cannot solve, whether that be the world's worst humanitarian crises or investment in, for example, the public goods which, like climate adaptation, cannot easily be monetised and yet can save billions of dollars worth of damage to some of our most climate vulnerable countries around the world in the long term, and at a time when we've been considering cutting ikai, why are we then looking to create new bodies such as the Oda delivery board, the new Soft Power Council, rather than without that is just working to embed rigorously those value for money assessments and explicit, albeit qualified, return on our goal of lifting those numbers of people out of poverty for every pound spent.

Why are we not working to incorporate those better into every aspect of the development work FCO does, so that we can say hand on heart to our constituents that it's beyond all doubt, money well spent, and so that we can show that despite those smaller sums, it's money that's going further and further every year. So let us, Madam Deputy Speaker, be partners, not patrons. Let us invest smarter, trust deeper, step back a little further where necessary, and let us measure success by not by how much

**** Possible New Speaker ****

we give, but how by how little is eventually needed. Yes. Thank you. Madam Deputy Speaker. I have to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Madam Deputy Speaker. I have to declare an interest before coming to this place. I had a 30 year to this place. I had a 30 year career as an aid worker working in wash that is bringing water, sanitation and hygiene to some of sanitation and hygiene to some of the poorest people on the planet. So yes, I'm passionate about this So yes, I'm passionate about this issue, but I make no apologies. Now, there are a number of sectors that have been assisted by UK aid, from
14:41
Brian Mathew Portrait Brian Mathew MP (Melksham and Devizes, Liberal Democrat)
-
-
girls education to health to nutrition, to climate finance, and nutrition, to climate finance, and to disaster and war mitigation in places like Gaza and Sudan. And since I was elected, I've had the privilege of serving on the International Development Committee. International Development Committee. So I've had a chance to hear of the results and implications of our cuts to our aid programme and indeed to US aid, which has been virtually destroyed to the shame of the US administration and its president.

But let me say a few words about the sector I know best. Even prior to the recent cuts, things have been bad for Wash. Between 2018 and 2023, the UK's annual Budget for water, sanitation and hygiene was slashed by 82% from 206 million, down to just 37 million a year. Currently, Wash represents a mere 0.71% of our bilateral aid, and I hate to think what will be left after the latest cuts are announced. In my opinion, in a time of rising humanitarian crises, the need with need and with growing instability globally, this is not just short sighted.

It's indefensible. You cannot ignore the global water crisis. 2.1 billion people, 1 in 4, lack access to clean water, 3.4 billion do not have a safe toilet. Nearly 400,000 children under five die each year from diseases caused by unsafe water and poor sanitation. And these are preventable tragedies. Wash is one of the most cost effective ways for the UK to deliver on its international aid priorities. Wash is not peripheral to these priorities. It's foundational. It underpins progress right across the Sustainable Development Goals, including those on health, education, gender equality and climate action.

Without clean water and sanitation, children miss school. Women and girls spent hours each day collecting water, limiting their education and economic opportunity. Healthcare systems cannot function. 2 in 5 healthcare facilities globally lack basic hygiene services. Investment in Wash is investment in global health security. It reduces the spread of disease, economic productivity, builds resilience to climate and delivers long term sustainable impact. The UK has historically been a global leader in international development, but continuing this legacy requires consistency and vision.

Safe water and sanitation are not luxuries. They are the foundation upon which health, prosperity and stability are built. I urge the government to restore all aid funding, especially Wash, and embed it firmly within all our priorities. In doing so, we will not only save lives, we will uphold the values and the global leadership that this country has historically championed. In three words our soft power. Thank you.
14:44
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page