(4 days, 10 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI would warn any businesses against associating themselves with potential breaches of international law, and also against becoming involved in a process that is undermining peace and security for the region. As for the operations in London, which were also mentioned by the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller), we will pursue any issues that we can raise relating to anything that might be in breach of the law. However, I think that organisations, including businesses—and particularly charities, in respect of which we have additional enforcement powers—have a moral responsibility not to support the illegal settlements that are not only in breach of international law but are undermining regional security and peace.
I agree with the Foreign Secretary’s statement, and I agreed with the Government’s decision, which I supported from day one, to stay out of this totally counterproductive war. I hope that we have all learnt our lesson and that we are never going to listen to liberal imperialists or neocons, with their endless wars over regime change in the middle east, all of which have been a disaster—Syria, Libya, Iraq and now Iran.
What influence do we have on the Trump Administration? They are the only people who Netanyahu cares about. I can see the wonderful Justice Secretary, a chum of the Vice President, sitting next to the Foreign Secretary. Is there any way the Foreign Secretary can convince the Trump Administration in her conversations with Secretary of State Rubio that, although we are not naive about Hezbollah and Hamas—we know they are horrible organisations—we could at least start to detach the Palestinian people from these organisations if the Trump Administration were absolutely firm that the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in the west bank must stop now? We have to stop the total destruction of Gaza and the appalling suffering. We have read this very day about people in Gaza getting cancer and dying in agony. What influence do we actually have on the Trump Administration?
The Father of the House is right. We took a different view to that of the US and Israel at the start of this conflict, and we did not get drawn into offensive operations against Iran. We did take defensive action to support Gulf partners when they were under attack from Iran, but we took a different view at the start of this conflict, and I believe that was the right thing for the UK to do and was in the UK’s interest.
The US remains a close security partner and ally, and I have many conversations with Secretary of State Marco Rubio about a whole range of different issues, not just in the middle east but across the world. We were involved in many discussions with the US in the run-up to the adoption of the 20-point plan and the Gaza peace process last autumn, and it was US leadership that got the final agreement to the 20-point plan. However, the plan is at risk of falling apart right now, which is why we are engaging with not just the US but partners across the world. We will be having the peacebuilding conference in Paris on Friday, because we need to restore the energy and commitment to the 20-point plan, which is being flouted repeatedly and dangerously across Gaza every single day. We urgently need humanitarian aid and support for families in Gaza, but we also need the restoration of energy behind the 20-point plan.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberAt the end of the Foreign Secretary’s statement, I am no wiser on whether the Government approve this action, or on whether they believe that it breaks international law. The Prime Minister is such a devotee of international law that he is not prepared to defend our borders from the small boats, and to take the necessary action there. Why is there one law for the American President, when he is doing what is right for his country and defending it, but a different law for us? My simple question is this: do the Government believe that this breaks international law, and do they approve this action?
As I said in my statement, and as the Prime Minister said on Saturday, there can be no tears shed for the Maduro regime, given the damage that it has done over many years. It is for the US to set out the legal position following its actions. We were not involved in those actions. We continue to be guided by international law in our approach, and we continue to work on the most important issue: getting a transition to peaceful democracy in Venezuela.
(7 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberFifty years ago, I was working down the corridor here for Margaret Thatcher. I make that point to give an opportunity to the Foreign Secretary to pay tribute, on the centenary of her birth, to the lady who won the cold war with Ronald Reagan. The other point I want to make is: why did we win the cold war? We did not fire a single bullet; it was all about economic pressure on the Soviet Union—Russia’s precursor, of course. Following the point made by the former Prime Minister, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), I think the whole House is determined and united on the issue of Russian assets. I also serve on the Council of Europe, and everybody there is passing motions trying to propel this forward. Is the Foreign Secretary confident that we can make progress on this, because the way to bring down this regime and end the war is, as we did with the Soviet Union, to break them economically?
I think all of us, no matter our party, would recognise the challenging nature of the job for all Prime Ministers. The Father of the House will understand that in a coalmining constituency like mine, there were obviously very strong views against the former Prime Minister to whom he refers, but I pay tribute to his long service in this place, which he also mentioned.
There is strong agreement across this House: we have to get those assets mobilised, and get that investment and support into Ukraine. It is right that Russia should pay the price for reconstructing, rebuilding and also defending Ukraine.
(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe number of small boat crossings is driving people mad and eroding support for the Labour Government, just as it eroded support for the Conservatives. I worry for the Labour Government; I want them to do better on this, for all our sakes. Have not our French friends got a point about this country being uniquely attractive to illegal asylum seekers? We do not have identity cards, and we do not do what the Belgians do, which is to refuse to put them in reception centres. Can we make a study of what every other member of the Council of Europe is doing, and replicate the strongest actions, so that this is not the most attractive country for illegal asylum seekers?
I agree with the right hon. Member that we need to take action on a whole range of things. That includes action in France, further action on the network of criminal gangs, action on the water, and action to tackle illegal working and reform the asylum system in the UK. We inherited a system in which there was not enough action on illegal working; that is why we have ensured a 50% increase in raids and arrests. We will also bring forward more reforms on asylum.
(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberWill the Home Secretary consider raising an obvious lacuna in the law in the Committee of Ministers at the Council of Europe? Under the refugee convention, we can automatically deport foreign criminals who enter this country illegally, but under the convention on human rights, we cannot. Surely we can address that in partnership with other members of the Council of Europe.
The right hon. Member will know that we have increased the return and removal of foreign national offenders significantly since the election. Deportations, returns and removals had plummeted under the previous Government. We are increasing them, and I believe it is right to do so. By working internationally, we have secured a new agreement with Germany, which will now go after the trafficking and smuggler gangs and the illegal warehouses in that country, but we need to ensure that we take action against dangerous foreign criminals.
(1 year, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberI agree with the Home Secretary that the failure of the last Government to control immigration was unconscionable, and our new leader has rightly apologised for our failure. Some of us on the Back Benches warned the Government at the time, but there we are—that is the past. Looking to the future, I agree that we all want to return illegal migrants to where they came from, but will the Home Secretary list the countries that human rights lawyers say are so unsafe that people cannot be returned to them? What is the deterrent for people from those countries if we do not have an offshoring policy?
Obviously, each individual case needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. It has been agreed through the courts that, for example, some people could be safely returned to Iraq, but the process, or the bureaucracy, is extremely slow. Many people are currently in the immigration enforcement system. The previous system was just not following up and taking action, which is why we have been able to increase the returns substantially in a short period. Of course, each case has to be looked at on its merits, but we can do substantially more to ensure that the rules are properly respected and enforced.