Ukraine and Russia

Debate between Lord Coaker and Baroness Meyer

Tuesday 15th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

First, I thank the noble Lord for his comments about standing up against Russia. The UK Government have made significant efforts to disrupt the Russian economy through sanctions and through various measures that we have taken. I think it is really important to recognise the impact on Russia. Billions of pounds have been sanctioned and many ships have been disrupted, et cetera, et cetera.

This is not often done, but let me just share with the noble Lord the economic impact on Russia so far. The idea is that nothing has worked. Russia’s GDP growth has slowed from over 4% in 2023-24 to around 1% in 2025, with Russia’s Ministry of Economic Development forecasting only 0.4% growth in 2026. That is a significant achievement, I would say, and we need to say more about its impact. Inflation expectations rose in July to 14.7%, their highest level in years. The deteriorating economic picture is directly hitting average Russians, with growth in Russians’ real incomes projected to slow to 1.6% in 2026, down from 7.7% last year. We have also seen the queues that there have been for fuel.

All I am saying is that there is a lot more to be done —I absolutely accept that—but let us also give credit to the impact on Russia of what we are doing as well. At the same time, let us remind ourselves that our dispute with Russia is with the leadership, not with the Russian people.

[Baroness Meyer (Con)]

My Lords, I agree with everything that my noble friend Lord Minto said and I want to come back to home. As the Minister said, the threats are real. But one has the impression that the Government are not doing enough to protect British citizens. It reminds me a little bit of my father, who is French, who said that, just before World War II, the French were so much in disbelief that Germany could invade them, as they had suffered so much during World War I, and had their heads in the sand. I have the feeling that we are not taking the threats to this country seriously enough.

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

It is difficult to argue that completely. If that were the case, why would we be doing what we are doing in Ukraine, under the last Government and this Government? If we did not believe that the freedom of Ukraine was ultimately and intrinsically linked with our own freedom and the freedom of all of Europe, why would we be supporting NATO in all the ways we have, with respect to infringements of airspace and what we do with Poland? Why do we have troops in Estonia? Why are we talking about the possibility of tactical nuclear weapons on F35As? Ultimately, why is it that we spend a quarter of the defence budget on the nuclear deterrent, which is the ultimate guarantor of our freedom, the freedom of Europe and the freedom of the world? Let us remind ourselves that, although the Prime Minister retains the ultimate decision on its use or not, that nuclear guarantee, our nuclear umbrella, is explicitly given to the defence of Europe. There are challenges, but I do not think it is fair to say that this Government are weak when it comes to Russia.

Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill

Debate between Lord Coaker and Baroness Meyer

Committee stage
Monday 12th February 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

If Clause 1(6) is completely purposeless and meaningless, it is worth the noble Lord asking the Minister why the Government have included it in the Bill. It obviously has to mean something if it is included in the Bill. All I am doing is reading from the Bill, which says that

“the validity of an Act is unaffected by international law”.

It then goes on to define “international law”. I am simply pointing out that there is a big list of international conventions and legal treaties that we have been members of for decades, in many cases, which we are now saying unilaterally do not apply with respect to this Bill. That is a very significant constitutional change and something to be regretted.

That is why I welcome the fact that the noble Viscount, Lord Hailsham, has tabled Amendments 9 and 13. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Jackson—I thank him for his nice remarks about me—that one of the ways the Labour Party can win at the next general election is to say that we are proud to stand up for the international law to which this country has traditionally adhered, and propounded across the world. That is why we take action in many areas of the world to reinforce those rules. The international rules-based order is something of which we can be proud. The Labour Party will stand—or indeed fall—on the basis of being proud to stand for that.

[Baroness Meyer (Con)]

That was devised in the 1950s when the circumstances were quite different and were more important than taking care of the citizens of this country.

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

Of course taking care of the citizens of this country is necessary and important. There is no debate in the Chamber about that. The noble Viscount, Lord Hailsham, started the debate by saying that all of us want to stop the boats and believe that illegal migration is harmful to the country. I say, and I believe my party will say, that the levels of legal migration are too high, and something needs to be done in a controlled and managed way. The debate is about how you do that and what the correct policy response is. That is where the division is. The division is not about whether we need to stop the boats; of course we do. We need to do something about the levels of migration; but to do it in a way that undermines the standing of this country in the world is not the way.

[Baroness Meyer (Con)]

The noble Lord says that the Labour Party agrees that we need to stop the boats and reduce illegal and legal migration because it is unsustainable. But who has come up with a better solution? Those are just steps towards a solution.

Ukraine: Update

Debate between Lord Coaker and Baroness Meyer

Thursday 19th January 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Coaker (Lab)]

My Lords, I made a mistake in not noting the helicopter incident at the beginning of my remarks, even though it was in my notes. So I associate myself with the remarks made by the Minister and the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, on that subject. I apologise for keeping the House, but it is important, from the point of view of His Majesty’s Opposition, to put that on the record.

[Baroness Meyer (Con)]

I will also add that, apparently, a lot of children were killed in that incident, because the helicopter landed next to a school.