Iran Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate

Lord Callanan

Main Page: Lord Callanan (Conservative - Life peer)
Thursday 5th February 2026

(1 day, 9 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
We continue to monitor developments closely and will not cease in our demands to Iran to protect fundamental freedoms, including access to information and communications. We are also continuing to take robust action to protect UK interests from Iranian state threats. Those threats are unacceptable. They must and will be defended against at every turn. We will continue to work with our allies and partners to improve regional stability and prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. The UK will continue to challenge the actions of the Iranian regime and we stand proudly on the side of freedom and human rights”.
Lord Callanan Portrait Lord Callanan (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, while, understandably, all our attention in this country at the moment has been focused on the survival of our own Government, we should also be keeping a close eye on the future of the regime in Tehran. It has destroyed and brutalised one of the world’s great civilisations, threatened the world with nuclear devastation and exported terror around the globe, including to this country. The Iranian people, in my view, have no future if the mullahs remain in power. Can I ask the noble Baroness two questions? First, the EU has now proscribed the IRGC, while this Government have given only a vague promise to do so, so please can we have a firm timetable for that necessary action? Secondly, can the Minister confirm that we will work in lockstep with the United States if they decide to take military action against that despotic regime?

Baroness Chapman of Darlington Portrait The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

On the IRGC, we welcome the moves that the EU has taken recently. As noble Lords will know because we have discussed it before, there has been a piece of work done by Jonathan Hall. We accept the recommendations, but there are legislative changes that we need to make because, in our law, there is a difference between the way we can deal with the proscription of state actors and with terrorists. I think that the noble Lord understands this. We are proceeding, I must say with absolute respect to him, with rather more alacrity than he did when he was in power.