Poverty: International Development Aid

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Monday 15th January 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

I totally agree with my noble friend I am sure that Hansard will correct me otherwise, but I think I did mention trade. I agree that trade is part and parcel of this, which is why we are working with the BII and British investment partnerships to ensure that we raise and leverage more financing to ensure sustainability. It is not just about providing aid; this is about development support, which allows countries to really progress directly themselves, and we need private finance and the private sector to work hand in glove with us on this.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords, does the Minister, or rather do the Government, understand that there is a link between the super-rich getting richer—for example, five men have since 2020 been adding £14 million per hour to their wealth—versus 5 billion people who have fallen into greater poverty? There is a link between inequality and the whole issue of being able to mop up poverty. Do the Government understand that link?

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

The noble Baroness differentiated between me as a Minister of the Crown and the Government. I assure her that we are at one and we totally understand the connection that she makes, because it is right. That is why we must focus on the most vulnerable. Again, I reiterate our focus on issues of girls’ education and the empowerment of women, because it is the most vulnerable who suffer and inequalities fuel that. We will focus on this in many of our programmes. That is why my right honourable friend the Development Minister has published our figures beyond this year and into next year, to demonstrably show how we are increasing funding, notwithstanding the challenges we face with the reduction to 0.5%, to ensure that there is real transparency in the British Government’s spending.

Ethiopia: Peace Process

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Monday 5th December 2022 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, equally, I know that the noble Lord has detailed insight of this area and particularly this conflict. As he and I discussed only a couple of weeks ago in a very—as ever—informed debate in your Lordships’ House, there is great hope for Ethiopia. Of course, however, I take on board his practical suggestion and I assure him that, at the highest level, we will look to engage. It is not just about Eritrean forces withdrawing; they need to withdraw now.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords, this conflict has been going on for two years. In that time, thousands have been killed and raped, people have lost their homes and livelihoods, and they are starving. Now the World Health Organization says that it does not have access to all areas in Tigray. What are the UK Government doing about that?

Iran: Women Protesters

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Wednesday 9th November 2022 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, we will and I do so now.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords, the Minister mentioned that sanctions had been put on some of the morality police and others. What were those sanctions? Could there not be sanctions on much higher-profile people, such as the ruling caste?

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, the noble Baroness rightly raises the issue of sanctions. The sanctions are consistent in their application in terms of travel bans, finances and bank accounts held. She will know that I cannot speculate on future sanctions policy, but I assure her that we are considering very carefully every element and tool at our disposal in our response to Iran.

Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Friday 9th September 2022 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, it is an immense honour for me to follow the noble Lord, Lord Jay. I reflect on the contributions that have been made, and I pay tribute to my noble friend Lord True and the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, for setting the tone and once again demonstrating your Lordships’ House at its very best.

All of us will reflect on the incredible contribution of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, but as one foreign dignitary who rang me last night said, “She was not just your Queen, Tariq, she was all of ours.” That reflects the love and affection all of us are experiencing and seeing demonstrated across the globe. Her Majesty truly transcended barriers—barriers of religion and different nationalities. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, alluded to Paddington Bear. I have an eight year-old who connects in a different way, but very poignantly, with our great sovereign who has passed. I saw directly, through various experiences, how, in a room full of hundreds, at times touching a thousand people, she made everyone she met feel that they were an individual. They cherish those memories.

We all have anecdotes. I remember 1977. I did not then know that I would carry the name of my town in your Lordships’ House, as I was but a young boy. We were terribly excited about the Silver Jubilee. Virginia Wade had reached the final of Wimbledon. The great citizens of the town of Wimbledon were told to line up and, dutifully, we did, neighbour to neighbour, friend to friend. We were all dressed in our red, white and blue and waving flags. As it happened, Her Majesty the Queen’s car passed directly in front of our house. It was a slow passing and, just for a moment, it stopped. Her Majesty the Queen looked towards my brother, sister and me. She smiled, her eyes twinkled, and she waved. Of course, the rest of the evening in the Ahmad household was spent arguing about who that wave was directed at. I still take possession of that wave. Again, it showed the ability of Her Majesty the Queen to connect. She knew that millions loved her, but she treated everyone as an individual because she loved her nation, and she performed her duty like no other.

To continue that personal journey, I am delighted that the Senior Deputy Speaker is in his place. It was along with my noble friend Lord Gardiner and the noble Lord, Lord Newby, that I had the great privilege of becoming a Lord in Waiting to Her Majesty the Queen and a government Whip. The three of us dutifully lined up together for that first meeting on official duty. As someone engaged at the Foreign Office, I wish my current Whips on the Front Bench well as we look towards welcoming the world for Her Majesty’s state funeral. As we lined up, there was a degree of trepidation, and then the doors opened and we went in. Each of us was treated as an individual. Her Majesty sat me down, and as I took my seat she said, “Lord Ahmad, I understand your mother is from Jodhpur.” She then shared her experiences of India and the south-Asian continent. Then she said, with a smile, “I understand your father was from Gurdaspur but he started life in the early 1950s in Glasgow. Now that’s a change if ever there was one.” These things matter.

I remember from various subsequent meetings her warmth and affection, and the real sense of trust she showed. At a one-to-one meeting when I was ending my tenure as a Lord in Waiting, she did not address me as Lord Ahmad but said, “Tariq, come and sit next to me.” It was the day after the Scottish referendum, and what was said will rightly remain private, but two things stayed with me. One was the trust she showed in sharing her views with me; the other was that maybe I was doing something right, as we had done away with my formal title and she had called me by my first name.

During my tenure as a Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, I saw Her Majesty at her best when it came to diplomacy. During the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, she made a personal connection with each president and head of government she met, each dutifully lining up and waiting their turn to meet Her Majesty. If a training module for diplomacy is ever designed for diplomats and Ministers, Her Majesty really did set the standard. She demonstrated what connecting means, and the value of people-to-people connection. As Minister of State for the Commonwealth—I am delighted that my noble friend Lord Howe is in his place—I saw her love for the Commonwealth. It was shown not just by her words or actions, but by her connection with the people of the Commonwealth, and she is rightly mourned across the 56 nations today.

As we have heard from various noble Lords, Her Majesty had a real sense of humour. I shall share a final anecdote, which I shared with a couple of colleagues in your Lordships’ House just a few moments ago. Saddiqa, my wife, Lady Ahmad, and I were at one of the many diplomatic receptions we have attended, and there was a new official at the palace. Those who have attended these receptions will know that you have your place to stand in respect of who meets which member of the Royal Family, and where. Of course, I took my place, as I had done it a few times. The official came in and said, “Sir, you’re standing in the wrong place”, and wanted to move me into the diplomatic line. In a year in which we celebrated the diversity of this United Kingdom and what it represents, I assured the official that I was standing dutifully in the right place. She returned a few moments later and said, “I really must insist that you and your wife stand in the right place.” I smiled and said to her, “Madam, I assure you I am standing in the right place.” I continued standing where I was, together with Saddiqa. A few moments later, the official returned again and said, “I really must insist”, and as we were about to embark on our third bout of that conversation, who should come round the corner but Her Majesty, and she said, “Leave him alone. He’s one of mine”. There was a real demonstration of the best of Her Majesty’s wit, wisdom and knowledge.

My noble friend Lord Forsyth talked of Her Majesty’s deep faith. We had conversations about faith, as I have had the great honour to have with His Majesty King Charles III. Faith mattered to her. As Her Majesty now embarks on her final journey, to meet her maker, I end my humble contribution with the words I uttered when I was informed yesterday by my private secretary of Her Majesty’s passing: to almighty God we belong, and to almighty God we shall return.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

I rise to express sincere condolences to the Royal Family at this time of loss and grieving. As many noble Lords have said, it is true that the whole UK is grieving in a similar way.

The Queen represented us in all sorts of ways for her whole life and for 70 years of public service, and she was absolutely tireless. I first met her when she opened City Hall in 2002. We were a new Assembly, we had a mayor and it was all very exciting to be in a new building. It was obvious that she took it very seriously. She went along the line-up at the end, probably 80 or 90 people, as if she was really enjoying it. Prince Philip took the opportunity of telling me what was wrong with the Greens. He told me quite forcefully, and I took it to heart; perhaps he was right.

I met her on other occasions, and the same attitude was there: absolute dedication to and concentration on what she was doing at the time. It was not like someone doing a job or performing their duty but someone who seemed interested and curious in what was happening.

I had a tiny taste—a glimmer—of what it was like to do such public service when I was deputy mayor under Ken Livingstone. He gave me lots of jobs he did not want to do—to meet people, go to meetings and make speeches he did not want to make. It was the first time ever that I was not representing myself or my political party. Sometimes I had to do things that were at odds with my nature: being very polite, listening to boring speeches and generally appearing to be interested and polite the whole time. I found that putting on a fascinated face, which is what Her Majesty did for 70 years, was incredibly difficult. I did that for 13 months; she did it for 70 years. It left me feeling what an extraordinary woman and an amazing monarch she was.

Iran: UN Arms Embargo

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Thursday 8th October 2020 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, as Ministers at the UN we often take a decision to abstain. It is very rare for us to veto any resolution: it should be a last resort. On this issue, the Security Council resolution is valid, and can go forward, only if all P5 members agree to it, and we will continue to work with permanent members of the Security Council to find a resolution.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords, last year the Government were found to have acted unlawfully in selling to Saudi Arabia—another oppressive regime—arms which it then used for the Saudi-led bombardment of Yemen, leading to a huge humanitarian crisis. The Government have resumed sales to Saudi Arabia: how do they justify that?

Diesel Vehicles

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Monday 3rd April 2017 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

Given my noble friend’s knowledge of London roads, she is well suited to be adviser to the Mayor of London. She makes the salient point that we need to ensure that any road schemes are integrated and that any changes that are implemented are sustainable for the long term in addressing the issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, in his Question.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb]

My Lords, one of the problems I have with this Government is that they show no leadership on issues that are national scandals. Air pollution is not only killing thousands of people every year, it is reducing children’s lung capacity so that in the future they will have endless respiratory problems. Why do the Government not see that the health of the people is their biggest concern?

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

I do not agree with the noble Baroness, and perhaps I may put this into context. I have already talked about a total of £2 billion spent since 2011, with £116 million invested in green bus technology. We have also talked about the £5 million investment by Transport for London in 900 buses, along with £14.1 million for the clean bus technology fund, £8 million for the clean vehicle technology fund and £100 million for Highways England. Those are some of the examples of how the Government are putting money towards schemes across the country for transport support. I accept that we are currently facing challenges on health, but at the same time we are pursuing sustainable transport solutions.

Roads: Drink-drive Limit

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Thursday 17th November 2016 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb]

To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they are planning to lower the drink-drive limit in England and Wales.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Transport (Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon) (Con)]

My Lords, the Government have no plans to lower the drink-drive limit in England and Wales. Our approach in tackling drink-driving is through rigorous enforcement, tough penalties and changing the social acceptability of drink-driving, including through our award-winning THINK! campaigns.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply, but the RAC Foundation said last year that 25 lives would have been saved if the limit had been lowered. Police Scotland is about to produce a report on its two-year trial. If the report suggests similar findings, will the Government use that evidence to reduce the limit at the next available opportunity?

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

We are certainly watching the situation, and the noble Baroness is quite right to raise the issue about Scotland, where the limit has been lowered. We have previously said—indeed, I have said from this Dispatch Box—that we will look at the evidence that is presented from the programme that was initiated in Scotland, we will reflect on that evidence and the experience there and then take forward any reviews that we need to. But let me make it absolutely clear: we currently have no reviews planned; we are not looking to review the limit as it stands.

Bus Services Bill [HL]

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Report: 2nd sitting (Hansard - part two): House of Lords
Monday 24th October 2016 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

I have indicated to the noble Baroness the timelines behind this. Let us not forget that the Bill is going through its first iteration, as it was introduced in the Lords. Looking at this from where I am standing, I think that it would be better to allow full consideration of this issue by allowing it to be considered in the other place. If that is so, then as we move this legislation through it may be something to consider in the other place as well. What I am trying to say is that, as this is an amendment from the noble Baroness, it is not for me to instruct or direct her as to what she wishes to do at the next stage of the Bill.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb]

I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and his promise not to try to direct or instruct me. That could prove difficult in any case, but I am always interested to see how people try.

I thank the noble Lords, Lord Berkeley and Lord Kennedy, for supporting the amendment. It is very logical, when this system is already in place in London and is working so well there. I congratulate the noble Earl, Lord Attlee, on his comments on near misses. Of course there is no such thing as a near miss; what it is is a near hit. Quite honestly, we are very lucky that those near hits are not real hits; many of them are a matter of pure chance. If he had talked to the campaigner Tom Kearney, who has talked to me about the impact his being in a coma for two months had on his family and how much worse it would have been if he had died—as so many people have already died—he might feel a bit differently about it.

I would be happy to supply any more information to the Minister that he felt he needed. Personally, I feel that a lot of the bus companies in London that are using the system could use it outside London but choose not to. That is a bit of an indicator that this has to be in legislation and compulsory. If we are trying to understand companies’ safety records then we have to have the data, and what is lacking in the Bill is an instruction for companies to submit safety data.

For me, this issue is about whistleblowing. It is noble and honourable for employees to alert their companies secretly to the problems that they see. It is difficult for them to do so openly but much easier when they have confidentiality. This would be a natural extension of what happened in London so, very sadly, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

London Airport: New Runway

Debate between Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb

Thursday 2nd July 2015 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon]

I assure the noble Lord that the Prime Minister and the whole Government are fully committed to pushing Brussels to get greater control over a raft of issues concerning national sovereignty.

[Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)]

My Lords—

[Lord Rosser (Lab)]

In 2009, as we know, the Prime Minister said that he would not support a third runway and did so with a certain degree of finality, since he said “no ifs, no buts”. Can the Minister confirm that that still represents the Prime Minister’s and thus the Government’s policy on a third runway at Heathrow? If it does not, could he draw our attention to any statement by the Prime Minister retracting his very clear policy statement that he would not support a third runway at Heathrow?