Syria

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement that was made fairly recently in the other place. The Statement is as follows:

“My Lords, 10 days have passed since Assad’s departure. This Government welcome the fall of his cruel and barbaric regime and the opportunity that this offers for the Syrians. However, while there is some cause for celebration, fighting and violence continue across the country.

The situation in Syria has developed rapidly over the last week. In the north-east, the US-brokered ceasefire between the SDF and the pro-Turkish SNA has been temporarily extended but the situation remains highly fragile. In Damascus, HTS has appointed a Prime Minister to lead an interim Government until March 2025 but has given very little detail on the shape and focus.

This Government remain committed to the people of Syria. We support a Syrian-led and Syrian-owned political transition process based on the principles of UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. We are hopeful that anyone seeking a role in governing Syria will demonstrate a commitment to the protection of human rights, including for women and girls; unfettered access for humanitarian aid; the safe destruction of chemical weapons stockpiles; and combating terrorism and extremism. The United Kingdom urges the transitional Government to adhere to these principles and build a more hopeful, secure and peaceful Syria.

On Saturday, Jordan convened an Arab Foreign Ministers discussion, followed by a meeting with EU, French, UN, US and UK representatives. All involved, including the United Kingdom, reiterated their support for an inclusive political transition process. It is critical that the international community works together in a co-ordinated and complementary manner to ensure the best outcome for the Syrian people. Along with our partners, we want to see a new political process that is comprehensive, representative, inclusive and, more importantly, determined by the Syrian people themselves. We must also ensure that chemical weapons stockpiles are secured, not used, and that the transition to new governance is peaceful.

For all these reasons, it is right that the United Kingdom seeks to use all the channels available to deal with HTS, where we have to. To this end, senior officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office travelled to Damascus. They have underlined the UK’s support for the Syrian people and discussed the pathway to a more hopeful, representative and peaceful future for Syria with the new interim Syrian authorities and civil society.

During their visit, senior officials also discussed the importance of an inclusive transitional political process that protects the rights of all Syrians and prevents further instability. Of course, these words are important but they must be supported by actions. The humanitarian situation on the ground remains dire, with over 16 million Syrians in need of humanitarian assistance in Syria alone. That is why, on Saturday, the Government announced a new package of international aid to help the most vulnerable Syrians, including in Jordan and Lebanon, coming on top of that announced by the Prime Minister on 9 December. The United Kingdom’s £61 million in aid will help to provide emergency healthcare and nutrition, and support displaced Syrian children. We call on more of our partners to join us in committing greater humanitarian support”.

That ends the Statement. There has been a summary of developments since, but I think that is for my briefing, so I will leave it there.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, we normally thank the Minister for advance notice and sight of a Statement. I sympathise, as I do not think he had it himself today, but I am grateful for the text. I agree with its content and the Government’s position that the future of Syria should be for the Syrian people, that there should be territorial integrity and that there should be a political process.

The reporting on the prisons and mass graves draws attention, again, to the venal barbarity of the al-Assad regime. As he sits in his multimillion-dollar apartment in Moscow, he should know, as should other facilitators of grievous crimes against humanity, that there are many—including in this House on all Benches—who believe that there should be no impunity for his horrific crimes against humanity. However, the new appointment to replace the al-Assad regime appears to be from an extremist element in Syria. I would be grateful for His Majesty’s Government’s assessment of those taking positions in the potential new regime.

The terrible scenes of the mass graves reminded me of the situation that we saw in Mosul after ISIS’s occupation. Are the Government willing to provide technical assistance around data capture and evidence building for those who fell victim to the previous regime, including what the UK did so well for those victims in Iraq—using DNA sampling to identify loved ones so that there can be decent burials, as well as evidence building for the potential prosecution of crimes?

We hope that there will be a move away from the levels of corruption of the previous regime. However, the early signs are that al-Jolani’s brother, who has been appointed as Minister for Health, and his brother-in-law, who is now in charge of a major crossing with Turkey, will see these positions as a major source of personal income and from which they can siphon off potential humanitarian assistance. What measures are in place to ensure that the welcome additional humanitarian assistance will go to the people who need it most? Can the Minister indicate whether we are assessing what mechanisms there would be for the delivery of humanitarian assistance? One option that has been suggested is that aid is best provided to localities—to the municipal level directly and to NGO communities—rather than to some of the new regime factions in office.

On Syria’s territorial integrity, can the Minister restate that it is government policy that both Turkey and Israel should respect its boundaries? There is a possibility of ongoing tension between Israel and Turkey and their seeking great territorial advantage from the recent internal situation in Syria. What is the Government’s assessment of Russia’s aims for strategic economic relations? There is a concern in my mind that we, along with the United States, may offer to open up the Syrian economy but, if it is to be filled only by Russian interests, we will not be helping the Syrian people.

On our domestic situation, a couple of weeks ago I asked what the Government’s assessment of HTS was with regard to the 2017 proscription order and the 2020 Syria sanctions. Has our assessment of HTS changed? I acknowledge that, within our proscriptions, there are mechanisms for diplomatic contact. Will the Minister take on board the concern that, while contact is justified, it is important how it is done? With photographs and a degree of legitimisation to those who have not yet earned it—with regard to de facto control—and who are not progressive actors, we have to be very cautious that we are not legitimising those who will continue to be proscribed.

Finally, on the decision by the Government to pause asylum, I acknowledge that that has been done alongside our allies. But these Benches believe that asylum processes should be blind to the political situation on the ground. Those seeking refuge from persecution should find a home open in the United Kingdom. There is great uncertainty and a fear that automatic stability will not be guaranteed within Syria. We should maintain an open mind for those minorities who could still be vulnerable to persecution. While the persecution may not be on the scale of the al-Assad regime, the UK should not close all doors to those who potentially still need refuge. I hope the Minister can confirm that the pause is temporary and that there is ongoing work to ensure that we do not become closed to those who need security, safety and refuge.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank both noble Lords for their contributions and questions.

I reassure the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that we are working very closely with all allies, not only the UN, US and EU but also all Arab Foreign Ministers, to ensure the stability and sovereignty of Syria. Of course, the situation remains incredibly fluid. We continue to monitor developments closely and we are co-ordinating that monitoring through our international partners. I reassure noble Lords about that. We remain, as the Statement said, committed to the people of Syria and to a Syrian-led, Syrian-owned political transition process based on UN Security Council Resolution 2254, leading to an inclusive, non-sectarian and representative Government. I reassure the noble Lord that that is what we will continue to do.

Both noble Lords addressed how we will judge that transition and the people involved in it. As the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, alluded to, the fact that HTS is a proscribed terrorist group does not prevent the UK engaging with it in our efforts to secure a political settlement; nor does it prevent engagement with any future transitional Government in Syria who include HTS. Its proscription will not inhibit the pursuit of our foreign policy objectives in Syria. We will be guided by a set of core principles in any diplomatic interaction with the interim Syrian authorities, with inclusion and protection of human rights being key considerations.

As I mentioned in the Statement, the information I have is that on 16 December senior officials travelled to Damascus to underline the UK’s support for the Syrian people and discuss pathways towards a more helpful and representative peaceful future for Syria, involving Syrian authorities and civil society. They discussed the importance of an inclusive transitional political process, protecting rights, and will continue to stand for the people. One of the things we have consistently underlined is the importance of protecting all civilians, including religious and ethnic minorities. We have done this publicly and in our engagement with regional and international partners.

On sanctions, and particularly on the accountability of the Assad regime, I remind noble Lords that, since December 2024, the United Kingdom has listed 310 individuals and 74 entities, including Bashar al-Assad, his associates, those complicit in committing the atrocities and individuals who have supported or benefited from the Assad regime’s behaviour. On 9 December, the Foreign Secretary said that he will do everything in his power to ensure that no one from the Assad family finds a place in the United Kingdom.

The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised the position particularly in the north-east of Syria and Turkey. We have been in close contact with both Turkey and the Syrian Democratic Forces since the start of the escalation and we urge all sides to refrain from activity that will lead to further loss of civilian life or damage civilian infrastructure, further destabilising the region. We are absolutely on top of that.

On our humanitarian support, as noble Lords reminded the House when we last discussed this, the United Kingdom—both the previous Government and this Government—has to date committed over £4.3 billion in aid, which is our largest ever response to a single humanitarian crisis. The support has reached millions of Syrians across Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt, helping them to meet the urgent needs of those suffering. On 15 December, we announced the further £50 million to support vulnerable Syrians across those countries, and this funding will enable an urgent scale-up of humanitarian assistance where needs are at their highest—in particular, support to Lebanon and Jordan—and will reduce the likelihood of Syrians having to make perilous journeys to leave Syria and the region.

Within the £30 million of humanitarian aid, up to £24 million will be provided to the UN, including to UN OCHA-led Syria pooled funds for multisector emergency needs, and UNICEF—for education, health, nutrition, water, sanitation and child protection—as well as through UNFPA, particularly for the prevention of sexual violence. The remaining funds—up to £6 million—will be provided to UK-supported emergency health NGOs for healthcare and mobile clinics. I am trying to show that we are supporting a multiplicity of delivery vehicles and agents, which will minimise the risk of the corruption and leaking that the noble Lord was talking about.

The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised refugees and asylum. We agree with the UNHCR’s recent assessment that large-scale forced returns are inappropriate at this time, due to the many challenges facing the Syrian population. Therefore, I repeat what I said last week: this is a temporary pause. The Home Office has temporarily paused decisions on Syrian asylum claims while we assess the current situation. That does not mean that claims cannot be made—they are and they are being processed—but decisions have been paused. So I repeat to the noble Lord that this is a temporary arrangement.

Can I just say, on a point that the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, made, that we are ensuring that we continue financing that critical work on ensuring accountability for the crimes? We have committed £1.15 million to accountability and documentation-related programmes this year alone, and we will continue that work, because it is important that we are able to show people that for such crimes they will not have impunity—so that will lead to more accountability work.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

I endorse particularly what the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, said about accountability, and thank the Minister for how he has just replied to that point. He will recall that, on the day after the fall of the Assad regime, when he spoke to your Lordships’ House, I asked him specifically about the position of minorities and about the Kurds. Will he comment on the attack that was made yesterday, when several gunmen opened fire on an Orthodox church in Hama? On the situation of the Kurds themselves, as we have reached the point of maybe having negotiations and discussions and a possible settlement, will he particularly take into account that the Kurds should be fully included in any settlement? Will he comment on the role that they have played in ensuring that people who committed atrocity crimes in northern Iraq and northern Syria have been held in prisons that have been run by the Kurds? What will happen now to those prisoners? It is an issue that the Joint Committee on Human Rights raised with the previous Government and which it is returning to in this Session. I would be grateful, if the Minister cannot give a full reply to that today, if he would write to me.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his contributions. As I said in my opening responses, we are absolutely focused on protecting civilians, including religious and ethnic minorities. We have made that clear publicly but, more importantly, in all our conversations with groups. The noble Lord is absolutely right to draw attention particularly to the religious minorities, which have been focused on, and on which we have been keen to focus. By the way, I am sure that the noble Lord will be pleased that we have now appointed a Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief. I have met him, and we are working together now. This is a key area that we will be particularly focused on.

The noble Lord’s other point came up in our last Statement, and I responded to the noble Baroness, Lady Helic, on it—but at the moment I cannot find it in my notes, so I shall write to noble Lords.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, first, in recognising and welcoming the Statement, I think that the sentiments in the Statement are reflected in what we all think—but the importance is in actions. Syria is in a very fluid situation, as the Minister acknowledged. I welcome his update on which Minister attended the Aqaba meeting, which Geir Pedersen also attended, along with US Secretary of State Blinken. What were the outcomes from that meeting on specific responsibilities on who does what, and what process will be taken forward, bearing in mind the situation with warring factions and the instability in Syria, as well as the notable challenges that neighbouring countries are facing; for example, from the drugs trade in Captagon, a major challenge for neighbouring states?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

On that last point, of course Captagon is a real challenge, and the Assad regime used it to fund many of its activities. Certainly, it has regional implications, and it has spread to countries in the region. Fortunately, there is no evidence that it has spread to this country, but we are acutely aware of the dangers of it in countries in regional proximity, and we are giving what assistance we can in challenging that.

The noble Lord asked specific questions about the post process. As I said at the beginning, it is very fluid—and it is clear that we need to engage a range of partners, including specific neighbourhood countries but also international multilateral institutions, as we are doing. We are also acutely aware that there are changes ahead in the new year, and we need to ensure that we have consistency of approach. We are working closely with all our colleagues and allies and all countries in the region to ensure that stability, peace and security remain at the forefront of all our efforts.

[Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for the Statement. On sanctions, I understand the fluidity of the situation—we all recognise that—but there is a prima facie case that sanctions were imposed on a regime that has now been deposed. Syria is the third most sanctioned country in the world. Can my noble friend outline the process by which we are making decisions about when and how to ease the sanctions that we impose? Of course, another feature of Syria is the number of other countries that have not just an interest but a direct military presence, particularly Israel in the south and Turkey in the north. What representations are we making to Istanbul and Tel Aviv, and the Governments in those two countries, about limiting their military interference as Syria faces such a sensitive and febrile moment?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

To answer my noble friend’s latter point—again, we addressed this in the past week—we are of course aware of the presence of Israel across the Alpha line in the Golan Heights. The UN Disengagement Observer Force agreement of 1974 is important for the stability of the wider region. The Foreign Secretary discussed developments with his counterpart on 8 December, making sure that Israel honoured all those commitments under that agreement. As I said earlier in relation to north-east Syria, we have done the same with Turkey regarding honouring those commitments and sticking to the agreements.

In terms of sanctions, as I mentioned, there are 310 individuals whom this country has sanctioned who remain accountable for their crimes. We are certainly looking at ways that we can ensure that we follow them and make sure that they cannot use any assets that they get out of Syria. In fact, my objective would be to see just how those illicit funds could be followed. The important thing is that we have given, and will continue to give, aid and support to the people of Syria. When things become more stable, we will be in a position to review sanctions.

[Lord Swire (Con)]

I thank the Minister for his earlier comments, which are reassuring, up to a point. I follow on from the comments of my noble friend Lord Ahmad. On Captagon, we are presented with a unique opportunity to interdict and to stop the spread of Captagon. The Minister said that it had not reached the UK, which is reassuring, but it has certainly reached mainland Europe through some Italian ports. This is a $57 billion a year industry funded by the Assad family and their wider relations, not least the Makhlouf family. Can the Minister assure us, first, that we will take a forward-leaning role in this? It has affected mainly countries in the Middle East, as he says, but the UK could play a serious part by bringing expertise to destroy this pernicious trade. Secondly, will he keep under review the sanctions list to ensure that all those involved in this trade are sanctioned?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his question. Let me be clear that, while we are unaware of Captagon reaching the streets of the UK, shipments have been seized in Europe, as he rightly points out. As I said before, it presents a wider threat in the region, which is why we are collaborating and working with our allies to ensure that this trade can be stopped. I hope that one positive result of the situation in Syria will be that it will be stopped. That is something to be positive about. I repeat, as I said to my noble friend, that we are committed to maintaining the sanctions that we have introduced to ensure that people are held to account for their crimes, including this illicit trade.

[The Lord Bishop of Winchester]

I am very grateful to the Minister for repeating the Statement. I particularly welcome what he said about the appointment of a Special Envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief, and what he said about north-east Syria. Forgive me for returning to that subject, given the reassurances he has given, but the semi-autonomous region of north-east Syria is an oasis of plurality in the region, where freedom of religion or belief is respected and women take a leading role in governance. It provides an exemplar for the whole region, yet it is under significant pressure from repressive forces supported by our NATO ally, Turkey. I believe that this is an asymmetric aggression, so can the Minister please assure the House that the UK will continue, along with other NATO allies, to bring pressure to bear on Turkey to desist from its destabilising activities in the region?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the right reverend Prelate for that question. I give him that reassurance: we are urging all sides to refrain from activity that will lead to further loss of civilian life or damage, and to avoid further destabilisation and damage in the region. Certainly, the Foreign Secretary has been talking to Turkey on this issue.

On the camps and detention centres in the area, raised by the noble Lord, Lord Alton, we continue to monitor conditions in those camps and will continue to promote security and stability and ensure that Daesh’s territorial defeat continues and that it can never resurge. As the present situation unfolds, we are working closely with partners to monitor the threat, including through our work with the global coalition against Daesh. As the Border Security Minister has said, the intelligence services are looking closely at the risk posed by terrorism and we will take all necessary action to protect the UK’s national security.

[Lord Hogan-Howe (CB)]

My Lords, I pick up on that point about terrorism. I cannot profess to have the same expertise as many people around the Middle East, but in 2011 to 2013, when the Syrian civil war started, we saw two immediate impacts. One was that around 1 million people left; they walked, sailed and swam across Europe. The second was that we saw a lot of those refugees based in the countries around Syria. We also saw an extremely large number of awful terrorist attacks. We particularly remember the Bataclan theatre attack. Many were instigated by ISIS within Syria and as it expanded its remit across Iraq.

Visiting Jordan at the time, we were all struck by the generosity of Jordan in looking after about 6 million refugees. It needs our support. I was told recently that about a third of the MPs in Jordan have now declared for the Muslim Brotherhood, which has a worrying and destabilising impact. What efforts are we making directly with Jordan? The Minister mentioned UN efforts, but what can we do with our friends in Jordan to help them stabilise and make sure that the children and young people who are growing up in these refugee camps have hope? Otherwise, other people will get their hope and direct them in a way that has an impact on our streets, as well as on the rest of Europe.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right. We have known for a very long time the huge impact that the situation in Syria was having on neighbouring countries, particularly the influx of refugees. We have been focused on giving financial and humanitarian support, not least to ensure that that support is not simply limited to the refugees but that the local population can accommodate and support them. One of the areas we were looking at previously was education and other facilities, and ensuring that people could work and contribute to the local economy. Even the recent further £50 million was also focused on giving support to those refugees in Lebanon and Jordan, and we will continue to do that. The real focus has to be on the causes of this refugee migration crisis, and one of the biggest causes has been the situation in Syria.

[Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)]

My Lords, I return to the situation in north-east Syria, which was raised by the right reverend Prelate and the noble Lords, Lord Alton and Lord Purvis. Al Jazeera and many others reported today that a Turkish official has denied yesterday’s statement by the US that Turkey was talking to the SDF, the group headed by the YPG. I applaud the Minister’s call for an end to military aggression in north-east Syria from the Turkish-backed forces and Turkey directly. What steps can the Government take to push Turkey to permit the Kurdish groups and the HTS-SNA alliance to talk to each other, and ensure that Kurdish interests are fully represented in the final destination for Syria?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I would not use the word “push”. What we are doing, with all international allies, is trying to push for an inclusive process that ensures that everyone forms part of the solution that leads to a Government decided by, and supported by, the Syrian people. We will continue to do that multilaterally, but also bilaterally, with all supporting countries.

[Lord Young of Norwood Green (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome what the Government have done, but we seem to have forgotten that a regime that was seen to be so solidly entrenched that it was incapable of being removed was in fact removed very swiftly by groups of people who fought to ensure that there was a free Syria. It is bound to be an imperfect situation, but we ought to welcome what those people did. We have ensured that the threat of Captagon being used as a weapon, as Assad was doing, is no longer as valid as it previously was.

My plea is that we recognise that this Government are going to take a while to establish themselves. We want to ensure that the freedoms that have emerged can stay. When the prisons were opened, people who probably would have faced more torture or death were released, so my plea is that we recognise what those brave freedom fighters achieved and monitor the situation. The point was made that we ought to monitor how we apply the sanctions, and I think that is right.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for that contribution. He is absolutely right that we need to judge the situation by deeds, rather than simply words, and we will continue to do so. I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, is in his place because he was one of the longest-serving Ministers in the last Government, as Minister for Foreign Affairs. He and I had debates on Syria in which we supported his Government’s position in not recognising Assad and not recognising that the situation was simple. We were as one in ensuring that we did not give support to Assad’s criminal actions. Some people felt that was the wrong position, but events have proved that both the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, and the then Opposition were absolutely right.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

I feel compelled to rise to my feet in the time left to thank the noble Lord. In the same way, we want to work constructively to ensure that the group that is HTS— Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham, the ideological base of this—should not be forgotten. The fact is that it is an extremist organisation with terrorism roots. Yes, they say a leopard does not change its spots—the jury is out. We want to work constructively to ensure that ideological base is challenged. As the noble Lord rightly said, actions speak louder than words.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for that comment. I hope I can speak for the next six or seven seconds to ensure that I do not have to respond to any further questions.

[Noble Lords]

Oh!

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

It has been a very positive exchange. It is a very fluid situation, and one in which all parties in this House can work together to support the people of Syria and ensure they have a better future. With those remarks, I wish everyone a merry Christmas and a happy new year.

Georgia

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Tuesday 17th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Brinton]

To ask His Majesty’s Government, following the Foreign Secretary’s statement on 9 December concerning attacks on protesters and journalists by authorities in Georgia, whether they plan to sanction those involved in the elections in that country.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

My Lords, in his statement on 9 December, the Foreign Secretary called for violence towards protesters and journalists in Georgia to stop. Until Georgian Dream halts its move away from European democratic norms and freedoms, the United Kingdom is suspending programme support to the Georgian Government, restricting defence co-operation and limiting engagement with representatives of Georgian Dream. It would not be appropriate to speculate about future sanctions designations, as to do so would reduce their impact.

[Baroness Brinton (LD)]

I am grateful for the Minister’s response. Georgian Dream, the pro-Putin party of unconstitutional actions and democratic backsliding, last Saturday appointed a new President, having cancelled the people’s presidential elections. Protests continue to grow in towns and cities across Georgia, but security threats and police violence against protesters—including killings—are growing and worsening daily. Will the Government seriously consider following the examples of Estonia in sanctioning Georgia’s Prime Minister and 13 officials, and of the European Council, which yesterday agreed to suspend visas for all Georgian officials?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Baroness will know that I will repeat that it would not be appropriate to speculate on future sanctions designations, as to do so would reduce their impact. I repeat what my honourable friend Minister Doughty said yesterday when he

“reiterated in the clearest terms to Georgian Dream representative … that police violence and arbitrary arrests in Georgia are unacceptable”.

He said:

“The UK will consider all options to ensure those responsible are held accountable”.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I want to back up the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton. The UK has always been widely admired in Georgia for the support we have offered to that country since it was freed from the shackles of the Soviet Union. Earlier today I was in contact with a friend of mine in Tbilisi—a former Member of Parliament. She said the situation is getting worse every day. Police brutality against innocent civilians is horrible. More than 500 people have been arrested. The Georgian Parliament is passing laws significantly restricting people’s freedom. The US and EU member states are imposing personal sanctions or visa restrictions against the ruling party’s leadership. I understand the point the Minister made earlier, but the UK is in danger of being left behind here. Will he please consider sanctioning people in Georgian Dream immediately?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I will not repeat it a third time because the noble Lord knows exactly what the Government’s position on sanctions is. The shocking scenes of violence towards protesters and journalists by the Georgian authorities are unacceptable and must stop. We are working with our allies to ensure that we can convey that message in the strongest possible terms. We are determined to uphold what is, after all, the constitutional position of Georgia. When I was there 18 months ago I saw that it has strong constitutional rights and very good laws, which are being breached by its Government. It is right that we stand up and point that out.

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

My Lords, we have close links with Georgia, and as a country we therefore have some clout. The European Union has more clout. What level and type of co-operation do we have with the European Union in respect of Georgia?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right and we are in regular contact with international partners, including the EU and the US. We are collaborating multilaterally, including on support for joint statements through the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations, where we have consistently called for human rights to be respected. We will work in consultation and in collaboration with our allies, because that is the most effective way we can ensure that they listen to us.

[Lord Harries of Pentregarth (CB)]

The scores of thousands of people peacefully protesting on the streets of Tbilisi are very impressive. They include religious leaders—Jewish, Muslim and Christian—walking together. Does the Minister agree that Georgia is a crucial tipping point and that Putin is doing all he can to manipulate the situation there? I was very glad to hear that His Majesty’s Government are prepared to do “all” things. Will he please keep us informed of what those things might be? We must keep on as hard as we can, as the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, and the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, asserted.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble and right reverend Lord is right. The people of Georgia are making absolutely clear their opposition to Georgian Dream’s decision to pause the country’s further moves towards a European future—a decision that directly undermines the constitution of Georgia. By the way, the Georgian people are making their position clear not just in Tbilisi but throughout the country. We will offer whatever support we can. I will keep the House informed of all our actions and ensure that we convey very strongly how we are co-operating with others to make our position clear. Russia and Putin have a reputation of interfering in democratic processes, and we need to challenge that.

[Lord Blencathra (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, to the Council of Europe, which she will join in January. Three weeks ago I led a debate in Gdańsk on how disabled people could observe elections in other countries. I did that myself four weeks ago in Georgia, where we ran into a little trouble—my vehicle was sabotaged and a bunch of heavies were not very happy at our observations. It was not so much the individual intimidation at the polling stations that mattered but the way it was orchestrated at a high state level by the Georgian Dream party—which said it would outlaw the opposition party, and therefore intimidated all those who voted for it—and criminals.

On the day there were 3,000 video cameras, featuring in every polling station. The report that my PACE team made stated that these cameras gave the impression, “We know who you are, we know who you voted for and we are coming to get you”. But trying to find the people to sanction is very difficult, so I ask the Minister to please keep looking to find the Georgian Dream leaders who were responsible for that high level of state-orchestrated intimidation. They are the guilty ones, rather than individual thugs at the polling stations.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his contribution. The important thing is that the United Kingdom supports the preliminary findings of the OSCE ODIHR’s report on parliamentary elections in Georgia on 26 October, for which we contributed 50 short-term observers in a monitoring mission. That report found “misuse of administrative resources”, a “highly polarized” campaign environment, as the noble Lord quite rightly pointed out, and widespread “intimidation” and coercion against voters. That, along with the impact on civil society of Georgia’s law on transparency of foreign influence, are not the actions of an open, democratic society and run contrary to international standards. More importantly, they run contrary to the constitution of Georgia itself.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

The Government were aware that the United States and the EU would be placing visa restrictions on these individuals. The UK now finds itself in the invidious position where these individuals would be able to travel here but not to the EU or the United States. Without prejudicing any decisions on future sanctions, surely the Minister can say that these individuals should not travel to the UK because that would not be conducive to our public good.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord has made the point precisely—of course it would prejudice any future designations. I will not be tempted into doing that, because it would harm the impact. I repeat what my honourable friend said yesterday: we

“will consider all options to ensure those responsible are held accountable”.

I repeat that we are absolutely working in collaboration with the United States and the EU to ensure that whatever we decide in the future has maximum impact.

[Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)]

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra, asked an excellent question. With no disrespect to the European Union, does my noble friend the Minister not agree that it is the Council of Europe, of which Georgia is a member, that is important in dealing with this matter? Surely the Minister should work with the UK delegation to the Council of Europe, which is now headed by my noble friend Lord Touhig, and the Secretary-General, to see what pressure can be brought through that organisation.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. As I said in an earlier response, we have supported the joint statements through the OSCE, the Council of Europe and the United Nations, where we have consistently called for human rights to be respected. I am certainly prepared to sit down with our noble friend to talk about how we can take this matter further.

International Anti-corruption Court

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Monday 16th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hain]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made in considering whether to establish an international anti-corruption court.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

My Lords, we look forward to considering the draft treaty, which is expected next year, for the proposed international anti-corruption court. This Government fully support the objective of holding kleptocrats to account, but the idea of an IACC carries challenges and requires detailed consideration. Meanwhile, we will use all our tools to deliver an ambitious government-wide agenda to tackle the devastating impacts of corruption and illicit finance, both at home and overseas.

[Lord Hain (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for confirming the Government’s support for an international anti-corruption court. As he has indicated, international experts from countries north and south, right across the world, now have an agreed draft treaty and will soon begin consulting with interested parties. So far, these include Botswana, Canada, France, the Gambia, Kenya, Mozambique, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, South Africa and Switzerland. Will Ministers ensure that the UK both participates officially in this treaty-drafting process and encourages more states to do so? Such a new court is vital to help combat global corruption, costing $2 trillion each and every year.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My Lords, as I said, we support the objectives of the proposed international anti-corruption court. We look forward to considering the draft treaty and will continue to engage in international discussions on this subject as they arise, and as we have done to date. As my noble friend said, these discussions should not detract from the work the Government are already delivering to hold kleptocrats to account. For example, the UK’s international corruption unit has a world-leading capability and has successfully investigated international bribery, corruption and related money-laundering offences within a UK nexus, resulting in prosecutions and the confiscation of stolen assets.

[Lord Swire (Con)]

My Lords, does the Minister recall the problems that we have had with the ICC, for example, as some countries simply will not sign up to these international bodies? Some of the most corrupt countries in the world are not going to adhere to anything that such an international court would do. I broadly welcome the idea of such a court, but wonder whether, in reality, some of the worst offenders simply will not turn up.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord makes a valid point. We are working collaboratively, as my noble friend said, with other countries to ensure that we can look at this in principle and then see how we can achieve it. My main point is that we should follow the money. We have actually been extremely successful: the unit I just talked about has been successful in ensuring that illicit funds are returned and that we sanction people. An important tool in our armour is that ability to ensure that people know that, when they try to get funds out of their country, we will follow it and return it.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I welcome the Government’s recent announcements on anti-corruption, including the announcement that the noble Baroness, Lady Hodge, will be the Government’s anti-corruption champion. Is now not the opportunity for the UK to play a leading role in the drafting of a treaty, not simply to wait for it to be presented to us? If the UK is part of the drafting, we will have the best opportunity in a long time to address the very point that the noble Lord, Lord Swire, made: that never again will global corruption be channelled through London, the City of London, London lawyers or any part of the British establishment. That will be an opportunity if we help draft the treaty, rather than wait until it is presented to us.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

There is a range of options here, and I have met Judge Wolf. A range of experts is looking into the draft treaty, and we have been talking to international countries. What we need to do, if we are to get this court off the ground, is ensure that all these countries are working together and supporting the treaty. I heard what the noble Lord said, but I come back to my fundamental point: I will not wait until an international court is established, which can take time and requires consensus. We are determined—and this is why the appointment of my noble friend Lady Hodge is so critical—to follow the money and make sure that people do not get away with corruption.

[Lord Keen of Elie (Con)]

My Lords, the United Nations estimates that the cost of kleptocracy is something in the region of $40 billion per annum, much of which falls on the poorest countries in the world. When the international anti-corruption court was being mooted originally, the United Nations established the International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre, which is intended to operate a joint working platform and intelligence sharing. As the Minister indicated, the centre, having become operational in 2017, is hosted by the United Kingdom’s National Crime Agency. Can he advise the House on how many cases the centre has dealt with in the last seven years? In addition to the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore, how many countries participate in the work of the centre? What steps are the Government taking to promote participation in the work of the centre? He said that one follows the money for the purposes of jurisdiction, and the United Kingdom is of course a centre for such funds.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I very much welcome the noble and learned Lord’s comments and I look forward to working with him to ensure that we can achieve these objectives. Since July 2017, the IACCC has received 331 referrals of grand corruption from 40 different countries, has identified over £1.4 billion of assets suspected to be the proceeds of corruption, helped freeze £631 million of stolen assets, and supported the arrest of 48 suspects in grand corruption cases. We will work collaboratively with all the countries that the noble and learned Lord mentioned.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, I refer the Minister to remarks I cited, when we discussed this last, by the right honourable Gordon Brown, the former Prime Minister, who is a strong supporter of the international anti-corruption court. In pointing a finger at kleptocracy, he mentioned the Panama papers, the Pandora papers and Russian assets being used in the Channel Islands, the British Virgin Islands and UK dependent territories. In addition, he cited the need for this court to deal with the crime of aggression and the other offenses committed by Putin during the war in Ukraine. Can the Minister assure us that he will be used as one of our best advocates in the discussions which will take place on the formulation of the forthcoming treaty and making this court come about?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I welcome the noble Lord’s comments. I met Judge Wolf, who has proposed this for some time and has been campaigning for it. A range of international experts is looking at the proposed treaty, and they are doing very good work. We are committed to examining the outcome of that work and the development of a draft treaty as it proceeds. I emphasise to the noble Lord that we are not standing still and waiting for these institutions to be established. I have visited eight African countries, all of which faced corruption. One of the things that they have been incredibly pleased about is our ability to co-operate with and support them in ensuring that illicit funds not only are returned but do not get out of the country. We are absolutely determined to do that. With the appointment of my noble friend Lady Hodge, I know that we will push this up the global agenda, and we have a strong advocate in her in fighting this crime.

[Baroness Whitaker (Lab)]

My Lords, following the remarks of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Keen of Elie, does my noble friend the Minister agree that corruption is of crucial importance to developing countries and that, once the court is in operation, our very much diminished aid budget will be very much more effective?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. I stress that not only are we following the money, ensuring that we take action against those who commit this crime, but in recent times we have been supporting the African Beneficial Ownership Transparency Network. I addressed its first in-person conference. With the African Development Bank, we are working to ensure that people cannot hide what they own. Transparency is another important tool in ensuring that we combat illicit finance.

Women, Peace and Security Bill [HL]

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

3rd reading
Friday 13th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con)]

I would like to say a few words of thanks. First, I thank all noble Lords who spoke in support of this Bill at Second Reading. It had support from all around the House, and I was grateful for all the backing and encouragement from noble Lords. I hope that the Government will take note of the strength of feeling. I also thank Theo Pembroke in the Public Bill Office for his work in preparing the Bill two years ago and those who gave advice in amendments to this version of the Bill. I thank those outside the House who helped with advice, support and assistance. I very much hope that the Government will find a way to support this Bill, which puts into law their commitments already adopted under UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the subsequent 10 UN Security Council resolutions on the women, peace and security agenda.

We have just had 16 days of activism against gender-based violence. Still one in three women worldwide has experienced physical or sexual violence, and the figures are much higher in conflict and in insecure countries. We all recognise that women’s rights are rolling back across the world. As next year is the 25th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the 30th anniversary of the Beijing platform for action, supporting this Bill would demonstrate that the UK is standing firm and continuing to lead the world on this agenda.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I intervene briefly to repeat what I have said before, which is that the Government support the ethos of this Bill and that our support for the WPS agenda is unwavering, as the noble Baroness knows. I am committed to ensuring that the key principles in the Bill are followed through. We have had a good initial meeting, and I have committed to meeting the APPG. The important thing is how we deliver that agenda, and we are determined to do so. I am grateful to the noble Baroness for putting forward this Bill.

[The Earl of Effingham (Con)]

As my noble friend Lord Courtown said at Second Reading, we welcome this Bill. I join other noble Lords in congratulating my noble friend Lady Hodgson of Abinger on bringing it forward. His Majesty’s Official Opposition are fully supportive of the principles behind my noble friend’s Bill. It is a testament to the hard work she has relentlessly actioned for in this arena, promoting women’s rights and campaigning for peace and security. This Bill received wide-ranging, cross-party support at Second Reading, notably from the noble Baronesses, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, Lady Bennett of Manor Castle and Lady Foster of Aghadrumsee, the noble Lord, Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale, and my noble friends Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon and Lady Anelay of St Johns. This is an important Bill. We hope that the Government will listen carefully to my noble friend Lady Hodgson as she continues her brilliant work in this focus area.

Ukraine: Humanitarian Assistance

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 12th December 2024 Grand Committee

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness for securing this debate. I think the closing remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, are absolutely correct. Russia’s illegal and unprovoked invasion of Ukraine poses a direct threat to European security. His comments reflect is that we are united in supporting Ukraine in its fight against this illegal invasion. The Prime Minister has made it clear that we need to double down on our support for Ukraine. As the Foreign Secretary told the United Nations Security Council last month, we will stand with the people of Ukraine for as long as it takes.

The noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, highlighted the humanitarian situation as being dire. It certainly is. September saw the highest number of recorded civilian casualties since the invasion, and the numbers continue to grow. As much as 40% of the population is in need of humanitarian assistance this year. Over the past month Russia has intensified its air strikes, primarily targeting energy infrastructure, causing blackouts in several regions, as all noble Lords have highlighted. Its continuing assault has led to Ukraine losing over two-thirds of its power generation, leaving it to manage an energy deficit this winter—a very difficult winter.

As the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, pointed out, further attacks and low temperatures risk making access to power, water and heating intermittent, further aggravating the humanitarian situation on the ground. As ever, it will be the vulnerable who suffer, leaving millions without heating, electricity, clean water and medical care.

Let me explain how the United Kingdom is helping. We remain a leading bilateral donor and will provide over £240 million this year for humanitarian support, energy and recovery reconstruction programmes. As the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler, asked me, I will give a breakdown of this support. First, on humanitarian support: when the Foreign Secretary visited Kyiv alongside US Secretary of State Blinken in September—the first such joint visit to any country in over a decade—he announced that the United Kingdom would provide at least £100 million in humanitarian support this year. The allocation is still to be determined, but this will bring the United Kingdom’s humanitarian aid to £457 million. This support is helping people, especially the most vulnerable, cope with the endless onslaught of the war, including by providing, as the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, pointed out, mental health and psychosocial support. Again, this was referred to by the noble Baroness, Lady Tyler.

The Ukrainian Red Cross Society—funded by UK assistance channelled through the British Red Cross—provides that psychosocial support to about 1,500 vulnerable children and adults in the front-line oblast regions in Ukraine. In practical terms, that means providing child-friendly spaces and support sessions for adults and older people. We will have given £9.5 million to the Red Cross to achieve this. We also support the Kyiv burns unit and train Ukrainian Red Cross staff and volunteers. As asked by my noble friend Lady Goudie, we also enable the WHO to rehabilitate professionals through stress management training. This helps to reduce the psychological distress and increase referrals for specialised care among healthcare workers and patients.

I move now to our energy support—another issue raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Suttie. The UK has been working closely with Ukrainian officials and international donors to fund repairs and provide back-up power generation during the colder months, while also supporting efforts to ensure that civilians have access to warm places. During his visit in September, the Foreign Secretary also announced £20 million for emergency energy needs. Our funds, worth over £60 million, are bolstering the Ukraine energy support fund, helping to protect energy infrastructure.

When it comes to long-term recovery, we are supporting innovations across both countries to develop new technologies that can rebuild a greener and more resilient energy grid. Finally, we are also providing essential fuel to nuclear power plants to ensure that Ukraine does not have to rely on Russian fuel.

To turn to UK support for recovery and reconstruction, our non-military support is helping address immediate needs, including public services, while also funding rebuilding efforts in Ukraine. That is why we are supporting investments now and developing a pipeline of early recovery projects with partners to build local capacity to prioritise, plan and deliver these initiatives. It is why we are working with industry and development partners to improve access to finance for firms in Ukraine and extend war risk insurance cover to investors in Ukraine.

Finally, we are helping the UN refugee agency to prepare safe places for internally displaced persons. It has helped to host over 100,000 people in temporary accommodation across Ukraine. The noble Lord asked about Homes for Ukraine in the UK; it is a Home Office lead, but I will ensure that we write to him on that question.

An area that every noble Lord highlighted is the scale of destruction caused by Russia. That is why we are in no doubt that it must pay for the damage. The G7 will provide Ukraine with up to $50 billion as part of the extraordinary revenue acceleration loans to Ukraine scheme. These loans will be repaid using the extraordinary profits generated on immobilised Russian sovereign assets in the EU. The UK’s contribution of £2.26 billion is earmarked for additional military support for Ukraine.

We are also holding Russia accountable by supporting Ukrainian investigations, pursuing an international register of damages and joining the core group with our international partners on the crime of aggression. We will continue to help the International Criminal Court increase its capacity to collect evidence and support survivors. We will not let Russia get away with its crimes.

In conclusion, the United Kingdom will do whatever it takes to support Ukraine’s self-defence. The alternative would be to confirm the worst claims—that international law is merely a paper tiger and that aggressors can do what they want. The suffering in Ukraine cannot be ignored. It is our collective responsibility to act decisively to end this war and work towards a future where a just and lasting peace can prevail.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am very happy to do so.

Committee adjourned at 4.42 pm.

Syria

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 12th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I thank both noble Lords for their questions.

I start by making the following correction to my intervention to this House last week, during questions on a Statement on Syria. In response to questions from the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, and the noble Lord, Lord Dodds, I stated:

“We gave an additional £4 million to the United Nations in October”.—[Official Report, 3/12/24; col. 1108.]


I would like to correct the record to reflect that we gave an additional £3 million funding on 23 October to humanitarian partners providing life-saving emergency assistance and healthcare to the most vulnerable people fleeing from the Lebanon conflict into Syria and the communities that host them. Of the £3 million in funding, £2 million had been allocated to the UN OCHA-led Syria Humanitarian Fund, with £500,000 given to both the International Medical Corps UK and the UNFPA.

I also point out that, as both noble Lords said, these events in Syria are extraordinary. We are monitoring them very closely and are co-ordinating with our international partners and our many Syrian contacts. We reiterate the importance of protecting civilians, including minorities, as the noble Baroness said, and of moving quickly to an inclusive political transition. As the UN Secretary-General said:

“The future of Syria is a matter for Syrians to determine”.


Assad, with support from Russia and Iran, has committed brutal atrocities against his own people for the last 13 years. As the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, said, both the Opposition and the Government made it very clear that we would not tolerate that. The Syrian people suffered too long under his cruel tyranny, and they deserve a brighter future.

We have been at the forefront of the response to this fast-moving situation, speaking regularly to regional and other partners about the situation. As the Foreign Secretary said, he has spoken to the UN Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria and a number of regional counterparts, and my honourable friend Hamish Falconer, the Minister for the Middle East, has also discussed developments in Syria with regional partners and Syrian civil society actors. I am unable to give specific details about that because obviously these circumstances are changing quickly, but the UK special representative for Syria continues to engage with regional partners, including Turkey, which is a vital component to ensuring that we have a fair transition to democracy.

I say to the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, that the vast majority of Syrians were fleeing the Assad regime. We do not know what will replace it at the moment, so there is no way of judging an asylum claim and whether it is safe for someone to return. We will keep all country guidance relating to asylum claims under constant review so that we can respond to emerging issues.

The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, is absolutely right: we have seen how, with Russia’s military support, the Assad regime was able to continue its brutal campaign against the Syrian people for 13 years, and that included horrendous crimes. It comes as no surprise that Putin, himself indicted by the ICC for suspected war crimes, has elected to give sanctuary to Assad. The UK has long condemned Iran’s reckless and destabilising activity, which puts at risk the security and prosperity of the region.

In terms of accountability and justice, UK-funded partners have played a pivotal role in developing a credible evidence base to record atrocities committed in Syria. We continue to provide extensive support to our UK ISF partners and have committed a total of £1.15 million ODA towards accountability and documentation-related programmes in the financial year 2024-25. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that people are held to account for their crimes.

The noble Baroness, Lady Smith, also asked about the humanitarian response. On 9 December, the Prime Minister announced an additional £11 million of humanitarian aid for the Syrian people. That is an additional amount. This has helped the UN and NGOs meet the needs of the most vulnerable across the country, including the more than 1 million people estimated to have been displaced by recent events. Of course, on 6 December, we announced an additional £300,000 in funding to the White Helmets, to which she referred, to facilitate humanitarian access, allow the expansion of its existing ambulance system and enable the safe removal of unexploded weapons.

We call on all parties to support humanitarian access, including for humanitarian workers, in all regions of Syria, and we are working closely with humanitarian and other partners to get a fuller picture of the situation, assess the impacts and needs, and determine how best to respond. We are constantly monitoring the situation.

I hope that I have covered most of the points that noble Lords have asked about, but of course we have opportunities for Back-Bench questions.

[Baroness Blackstone (Lab)]

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend the Minister a little more about how this £11 million in extra aid will be spent? He mentioned the use of the UN and other NGOs, but I wonder whether there have been any preliminary contacts with HTS and, if not, when these might take place, to discuss how aid should be distributed but also to try to establish a little more about its intentions and assess whether they are entirely benign, which I hope they will be.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Well, the situation is fast moving, and we are keeping it under constant review. HTS is a proscribed organisation in the United Kingdom, having been added as an alias of al-Qaeda in 2017. I say very clearly that we will judge HTS by its actions and continue to monitor closely how it and other parties to this conflict treat all civilians in areas that it controls. The Government do not routinely comment on whether a group is being considered for proscription or deproscription, but I stress that we are keeping the matter under constant review and will be making judgments based on actions, not just on the original position.

[The Lord Bishop of Leeds]

My Lords, although Governments might learn a lot about not establishing red lines in other countries where we then breach them, which we have done with Putin and, particularly, in Syria with chemical weapons, it is clearly too early to know how Russia will respond to this. We know that it has withdrawn some of its naval fleet, but we do not know what the immediate future holds in Putin’s mind. These are early days—I am glad to hear in the Statement that asylum claims have been suspended, as it were, for the time being—but can the Minister give any guarantee that nobody will be returned to Syria before we are clearer about what they might be going back to, especially if they belong to a minority, and that proper hearings will still be held so that justice is done for some very vulnerable people?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Let me make it clear to the right reverend Prelate that the Home Office has temporarily paused decisions on Syrian asylum claims while we assess the current situation. The vast majority were fleeing the Assad regime, but we do not know what will replace it at the moment, so there is no way of judging an asylum claim and whether it is safe for someone to return. That is why we have paused the decisions. We have not stopped the process; applications are being considered. But we will keep all country guidance relating to asylum claims under constant review so that we can respond to emerging issues.

[Baroness Falkner of Margravine (CB)]

My Lords, I hear what the Minister has said about proscription or de-proscription. However, as someone from a Muslim background who has, alas, too much familiarity with the travails of the Middle East over decades, can I urge the Minister, in making those judgments, to disaggregate between terrorism and Islamism? We know that HTS now proclaims to be Islamist rather than belonging to the terrorist family from which it came, but it is profoundly important in making these judgments to be clear that Syria is not going to turn into a secular liberal democracy overnight—it would be the first Muslim country in the Middle East to do so if it did—but will require engagement in the longer term. That engagement must be based not on religious grounds but on clear security grounds.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The important thing to stress, as I said earlier, reflecting the Secretary-General’s comments, is that it is for the Syrians to determine their own Government. Turning to HTS, it is important to repeat that we will judge HTS by its actions and continue to monitor closely how it and other parties in this conflict treat all civilians in all areas under their control. As the US special envoy said, we want an inclusive transition process and that is something that we will be monitoring extremely closely.

[Baroness Helic (Con)]

My Lords, what assessment has been made of the threat that those being kept in the al-Hawl camp in northern Syria might present to the United Kingdom were the camp is to be disbanded? What consideration has been given to discussions with the new authorities and with our allies about the future of that camp?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

To be honest, I have not got a specific answer on that. In terms of speaking to all our allies, we are looking to ensure the protection of all civilians in all parts of Syria. I will inquire in more detail about the current situation and return to the noble Baroness.

[Baroness Hooper (Con)]

My Lords, given that we no longer have an embassy in Damascus—although I feel sure that British embassies in neighbouring countries are being very helpful in this present situation—the main voice and the main channel of communication is the BBC and other brave journalists. Can the Minister comment on the role of the BBC and the relationship that the Government are trying to build on that base?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

We have had many debates in this House about the role of the BBC, and in particular the World Service. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that it can continue to function. The important thing about the BBC is its independence. It is a reliable voice. It is not for me to comment on it. We must ensure that it is able to continue broadcasting that reliable and truthful voice. All our actions in Syria are through NGOs and other civilian groups. We will continue to support them in humanitarian ways and in other ways; it is an inclusive process that we want to ensure for the future of Syria.

[Baroness Lawlor (Con)]

I thank the Minister for the Statement. Among regional partners, he identified Turkey. What exchanges are taking place with the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, who is involved in going to Turkey to discuss in Ankara the clashes between US forces in northern Syria and Turkish-backed rebels?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Both the Foreign Secretary and Minister Falconer have been trying to ensure the de-escalation of any potential conflicts. We want to see a process of transition that is inclusive. That is what Secretary of State Blinken is ensuring, that is what his discussions are doing and that is what Minister Falconer is trying to do. We are in a very fast-changing situation, but it needs calm heads to stay above it.

[Lord Waldegrave of North Hill (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the tone of the Minister’s Statement in another place and of the Front-Bench spokesman today. I do not envy him the decisions that are coming in the next few days. Will the Minister assure us that, if things go wrong, and HTS turns out to be not as friendly as their first statements appear, we will be ready to pivot to look after that community? A third of the population of Old Damascus is Christian, and there will be Alawites and other Sunnis. It will need real resource from the Government to respond quickly to what might be a completely new challenge. I hope not, but they need to be prepared.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I do not want to be repetitive, but we are monitoring the situation and keeping it under review. We are judging HTS by its actions, and so far we are hopeful for a positive, inclusive, peaceful transition. Reflecting the point of view of the Secretary-General of the United Nations, all our efforts over the last 14 years have been to support civilian groups and we will continue to do that. Protection of civilians is a vital part of our strategy on Syria.

[Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)]

My Lords, like the noble Baroness, Lady Lawlor, I am addressing events particularly in the north-east of Syria. There are reliable reports coming out that Turkish-backed militias known as the Syrian National Army are attacking the Syrian Democratic Forces across the region in central Syria and in the north-east autonomous self-governing region known as Rojava. There are reliable reports of Turkish aircraft and drones hitting Kobani and the capital, Qamishli. Does that reflect the Minister’s understanding of what is happening there? Has he seen some of the horrendous social media footage that is emerging from that area? What are the Government doing in diplomatic and humanitarian terms to address this situation? I should, perhaps for transparency, declare that I met with representatives from Rojava in Ankara in 2016.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I have not seen social media, but I think that the important thing is that we act based on the evidence presented to us. We have been focused, in terms of north-east Syria, on the battle against Daesh, and we will continue to focus on protecting the safety and security of all UK citizens, particularly in that area.

As the present situation unfolds in Syria, we are working closely with all partners to monitor the threat, as part of the global coalition against Daesh and other terrorist threats. I do not want to go into any more specific details except to keep repeating that we are working closely with all allies to focus on what needs to be an inclusive transition. At the moment, we are continuing to judge HTS on its actions and not simply on what others are saying.

[Baroness Berridge (Con)]

My Lords, approximately five years ago the media made us aware that there are children who are British citizens by descent in north-eastern Syria. It took a while, after meeting with Government Ministers, for their families—their relatives here—to realise that the appropriate jurisdiction was to make them wards under the family court. Decisions were made about whether to bring them to the UK. It is reported today that about 65 British-linked people have already been identified. Can His Majesty’s Government ensure that those who went out there as older teenagers or as adults are not grouped together with children who were born and raised out there but who are British citizens by descent? Their families here need to know they exist in order to exercise the jurisdiction of the High Court here so that decisions can be made about whether they come here. Are His Majesty’s Government making sure that those children are identified, if they are out there?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I repeat the point that I made: it is a focus of our activity, particularly in north-east Syria. The safety and security of the UK and its citizens remain a top priority for the Government. We will do whatever we can to protect UK citizens, but I will not go into the details about how that is achieved. I do not think it would be appropriate at this stage.

[Lord Sentamu (CB)]

My Lords, I am very glad that His Majesty’s Government have already given £11 million towards humanitarian aid. That is such good news. Secondly, our watchword surely should be that old adage: loose lips sink ships. We have to be extremely careful what we say. The material at the moment is very delicate. I encourage the Minister not only to judge and watch what the new Government are doing but to find ways of communicating a slightly more positive view of engagement. Somehow, in a very clever way, we have to become participants.

Finally, we all are concerned about biological and chemical weapons. What steps are His Majesty’s Government taking, together with all our partners, to work hard with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the convention? If those weapons get into the wrong hands, or the new Government think, “We’d better keep them, in order that we may use them”, that would be pretty dangerous. What steps will the Government take to make sure this is handled delicately and quickly?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The best thing I can do is reflect the noble and right reverend Lord’s sentiments. We need to respond to the actions rather than simply what people have said before. We want to ensure that we focus all our diplomatic efforts in relation to all regional and other partners. We are working through the UN special envoy to ensure that we do so. Also, Minister Falconer is speaking to civil society actors within Syria. The security risks are very clear, but we need to ensure that we react with caution and sensitivity to focus on how we can support the genuine calls for an inclusive transfer. The last 13 years have shown the horrors of what a dictator can do. We now need to focus on supporting the Syrian people in determining their own future. The films that I have seen certainly reflect the jubilation of some people being released from those horrendous prisons. We should understand that.

[Lord Tugendhat (Con)]

What is the Government’s view of the recent Israeli military actions in Syria?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Well, Israel has said that its presence in the buffer zone is defensive, limited and temporary, in response to the evolving security situation in Syria. As we have witnessed over the past year, Israel has legitimate security threats across its northern borders. Nevertheless, I will be clear that Israel’s presence in the buffer zone must not become permanent and I condemn the statements from some Israeli politicians who have already called for that. Israel has said that it remains committed to the principles of the 1974 separation of forces agreement and is committed to supporting the UNDOF peacekeeping force. The UK expects Israel to adhere to these commitments and I will hold it to them.

[Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury (LD)]

My Lords, it was a bittersweet moment for me when we heard about the fall of President Assad, because my great friend Marie Colvin was a brave and brilliant journalist in Homs whom we now think was targeted by him. Picking up on what my noble friend Lady Hooper—if I may call her that—said, and given everything that has been said, it is important that our journalists, particularly from the BBC, are able to report what is going on there. So can we please confirm support for the BBC World Service, in particular its Arabic service?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Baroness knows my support for the BBC, including the World Service and its activity, and certainly she is absolutely right to draw attention to Marie’s outrageous death. I have been very keen to work with our allies to focus on media freedom. We are part of the Media Freedom Coalition, working with allies such as Canada. We are determined to ensure that the authentic free voice is heard, and we will do everything we can to ensure that the World Service is able to fulfil its functions in that regard.

House adjourned at 5.47 pm.

North-west Syria

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I commend the noble Earl for standing in on international affairs issues; he would be very welcome to continue to participate on these issues. I agree with him that the spectre of the conflict that took place a number of years ago is still with us. It was a frozen conflict in many respects, but there was no sustainable peace.

Obviously, the speed of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham’s advance took the Assad regime off guard. That pernicious regime is economically and morally bankrupt, but perhaps there is less surprise that some groups are taking advantage of the duration of the conflict in Gaza. As much as the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has said that he is seeking to defeat Islamic terrorism, al-Qaeda in Syria has made a dramatic move for territory that may well have much wider ramifications across all Syria’s borders, including for Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan and Iraq. The latter two are still struggling to restore normality after the 2016 freezing of hostilities.

My colleague Calum Miller MP reminded the House of Commons after he spoke with the Jordanian ambassador that there are still 1.3 million Syrian refugees in Jordan. I saw fairly recently the Syrian refugees in Lebanon, who, on a humanitarian basis, have also been victims of the extension of the conflict against Hezbollah. What ministerial discussions are taking place with the Foreign Minister of Jordan on a shared security assessment between the UK and our friends in Amman? Do we plan to have high-level discussions with Turkish officials, given their key involvement with a number of the groups in this part of Syria, not least their contact with HTS?

If we continue to proscribe HTS, as we will, have the Government carried out an assessment of what it represents today? There has been considerable press reporting that HTS has sought to distance itself from our proscription on the grounds that it was simply a different name for al-Qaeda in Syria. Is our assessment of the presence of HTS the same?

It was noticeable that, after the visit by the Foreign Minister of Iran to Damascus to meet Assad, the very next leader to offer him full support was the leader of the UAE. In recent years we have supplied the UAE with over £400 million of arms exports. Given its support of the Assad regime, that it is hard to judge the extent of what may happen next, and the ease with which Russia, Iran and the UAE have offered support to Assad, can the Minister reassure the House that none of the arms we have sold to the UAE will be used in potential conflict in Syria? Given that in certain parts beyond the north-west there is already violence within the Kurdish groups and Turkish interests, there is a real potential that this will spread—which, as the noble Earl said, will compound the humanitarian situation.

Secondly, with regard to the UAE, the UK’s 2020 Syria sanctions regime is still in place. Have we had contact with UAE officials to ensure that they are fully aware that any support they provide to the Assad regime must, from the United Kingdom’s perspective, be consistent with our Syrian sanctions regime?

Finally, given that our principal interest is UK national security, have the Government had discussions with our allies in Washington? With a new Administration in Washington, there is a potential change of policy regarding the force posture of the 1,000 US troops in the region. US officials were at pains to say that they are watching the situation very closely and the US has no position on the recent incursions of HTS. However, the 1,000 troops are part of a combined operation which continues to incarcerate those the UK has considered a potential threat to the UK. At this time of great uncertainty and complexity, national security should be a priority for us all, as it is across all parts of this House. If the Minister could update us on our discussions with the United States regarding their essential force there, that would be extremely beneficial.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I thank both noble Lords for their questions. Of course, my starting point is to say that the Assad regime has created the conditions for the current escalation through its ongoing refusal to engage in a political process, and its reliance on Russia and Iran. The regime and all actors in Syria’s conflict must support and engage with the negotiations, as called for by UN Security Council Resolution 2254.

I think both noble Lords share the UK Government’s concern about escalation. This new escalation, particularly the large-scale attacks by the regime, and Russia’s attacks against civilians, will undoubtedly cause new surges in displacement and increased human suffering if continued, as both noble Lords said.

Both noble Lords asked about our diplomatic engagement with regional neighbours. We issued a national statement on 1 December, as noble Lords will be aware, calling for the protection of civilians and civilian infrastructure, the need for talks and a return to the political process. On 1 December we also released a joint statement on the issue with the Governments of Germany, France and the United States, urging de-escalation by all parties and the protection of civilians and infrastructure.

As my honourable friend in the other place, Hamish Falconer, said, we are urgently talking to our regional counterparts to reiterate these messages and to follow through with direct discussions. The Minister met his Turkish counterparts on 2 December to reiterate this point—an issue the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised. The UK Special Representative for Syria spoke to UK-Syrian civil society about developments to ensure that the diaspora was fully aware of what we were doing. The UK Deputy Permanent Representative will participate in the UN Security Council session taking place today. I am not sure whether he has already spoken or not, but we will certainly be heavily engaged in that.

I welcome the noble Earl to his place on this matter. He also focused on the humanitarian situation, acknowledging—as I also acknowledge—the huge amount of support the United Kingdom has given: £4 billion over the period of the conflict. I also recognise what the previous Government did. We gave an additional £4 million to the United Nations in October to ensure that support is ongoing, particularly food, education, healthcare and other life-saving assistance for civilians in north-west Syria in particular.

The noble Earl asked how we ensure that this reaches the people it needs to reach. We are working through the United Nations and NGOs to ensure that that happens. Of course, as the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, knows, we had quite lengthy discussions on the Syrian sanctions in Grand Committee. There were calls for exemptions to ensure that NGOs and the people needed to supply, support and distribute that aid are not affected or impacted by those sanctions. I give that reassurance to the noble Earl.

On arms, as the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, knows, we have a rigorous arms export process, and that process will apply wherever it goes. So I reassure him that that will very much be in place.

We need to focus on working with our allies, but we also need to ensure that in Syria, as in Ukraine, there can be no impunity for violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law. We will continue to provide leadership in holding perpetrators to account. Russia must change tack on its destructive support for the regime’s military campaign and instead support de-escalation and a political settlement.

The noble Earl also raised the issue of Captagon production and distribution. Of course, that is an issue on which we have already had quite serious debates in this Chamber—how we can stop that and influence things, working with our allies. It is an extreme danger, and we will continue to enforce that.

When I was watching the debate in the other place, I saw Emily Thornberry, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, raise the serious issue of refugees, particularly in other countries but in Turkey as well, and ensuring that their safety is considered and that they are not returned to another situation. We are acutely aware that HTS is a proscribed terrorist organisation and an extreme danger, but this action, as was rightly pointed out, could lead others to come in and benefit from this situation.

The reason we made this Statement is to show Parliament that we are absolutely committed to keeping an eye on this, to engaging with regional neighbours and to ensuring that de-escalation is our No. 1 priority.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, under the unwelcome cover of darkness, there have been conflicts in Gaza, Ukraine and Sudan, and we have seen even today the announcement of martial law in South Korea. Now there are these unwelcome developments in north-east Syria, with the re-emergence of ISIS and other proxies. I would like to ask the Minister about the position of the Kurdish community and other minorities. Kurdish forces and other ethnic and religious minorities are facing renewed threats from the proxy terrorist groups of regional powers. This marks the re-emergence of yet another bloody chapter in the existential struggle faced by those communities.

In 2019, I visited north-east Syria and Bardarash in northern Iraq, where 11,000 people fled from the violence sweeping across that part of the world at that time. As we approach the 10th anniversary of the liberation of the Syrian city of Kobani—a crucial moment in the defeat of ISIS, with considerable sacrifices made by Kurdish forces at the time; some 12,000 Kurdish fighters lost their lives in that struggle—we should note the reports coming from Aleppo and the Shahba region that there are again thousands and thousands of people fleeing for fear of their lives.

What can the Minister tell us about the position of the Kurdish community and other minorities? Can we increase diplomatic and humanitarian support? What is our strategy to support stability and the protection of those populations in northern Iraq and northern Syria in the long term?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I tried to address that issue in my previous Answer. We have raised humanitarian aid to north-west Syria. In particular, we have focused on working with NGOs to ensure that the aid gets to the groups that need that sort of protection. We have also engaged with the forces operating in that area. Obviously, we have had no contact with HTS but, as a member of the global coalition against Daesh, UK officials have engaged with the Syrian Democratic Forces and the democratic Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria. We are continuing that engagement to ensure that what they did to ensure that Daesh did not get a hold continues, and we will offer that sort of protection.

We have expressed particular concern about the human rights situation in SNA-controlled north-west Syria, including the arbitrary arrests and the lack of justice and accountability. We will focus on that and raise that concern. I hope that reassures the noble Lord of our actions.

[Lord McInnes of Kilwinning (Con)]

My Lords, I will follow the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Alton, on minorities. One of the minority groups that is very concerned in the Aleppo region is the Armenian community. In 2011, there were 200,000 Armenians in the Aleppo region, but that figure is now 10,000. If that community were to fear that it could face the kind of genocidal outpourings that have happened in other areas of the Middle East over the last 10 years, the Armenian Government have offered to relocate as many of those Armenians as they wish to Armenia. Would His Majesty’s Government give support to the Armenian Government to do so and engage with them if that situation were to arise?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As a general point, one of the things that we are concerned about doing is giving support to refugees who have fled Syria, and we are working with all neighbouring countries. I do not have a specific response on Armenia, but I have taken the noble Lord’s point and will certainly raise it in the department. As a general principle, we are very concerned to ensure that those fleeing the conflict are properly supported in neighbouring countries.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, we need to remember that Bashar al-Assad has been kept in power by Russia to do all his dreadful, bloody work over 20 years or thereabouts. I am not quite sure where HTS comes from or what its stance is as it sweeps down from Aleppo, but we need to remember that Kissinger once remarked that there are many situations where one rather wishes both sides could lose—and I am afraid that this may be one of them.

More broadly, these situations arise again and again, and there will be many more in this high-tension area, where everything is amplified by the digital age and hyper-connectivity and where the bloodshed seems to increase all the time. Each time, we issue Statements, we talk with our allies, we wring our hands a bit and we go to the United Nations and have a good chat. Then, somehow, the situation slides on away from us, which is extraordinary, because 20 years ago we thought that democracy was winning everywhere, but now it seems to be sliding away. Are we really using all the modern communications technology, of the kind that the Chinese in particular use with great effect, to maintain the case against bloodshed, killing and Russian troublemaking and the case for democracy, balance and a sensible commitment to a degree of freedom and the rule of law? Our story needs to be brushed up a great deal.

Are we making full use of the Commonwealth of 56 Nations, although I understand that there are soon to be rather more than that? Are we making enough use of our UN representations, with the desperate need for UN reform at every level, despite having Russia and China sitting in there like cuckoos in the nest? This is a world in which the medium is the message 10 times over. It needs a constant and new story to be developed. I ask that we think of that and do not just assume that, having issued a Statement and talked to a few of our allies, there is nothing more we can do.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I absolutely share the noble Lord’s views about our values and how we can restate them. I attended the whole of the United Nations General Assembly, including many events where we engaged with civil society. Our policies should not be just about Government-to-Government relationships, and that is why the noble Lord is absolutely right about the Commonwealth. It is a commonwealth family as well as a commonwealth of peoples. The Commonwealth institutes great people-to-people and parliamentary contact, which restates the importance of democracy.

We also translate our policies through soft power, a term that I do not particularly like. Through the BBC World Service and other means, we are using greater, more effective communication tools and ensuring that we counter what the Russians are doing. It is important that we see the value of that sort of people-to-people communication.

I restate the position on Syria that I said earlier: we are supporting the United Nations Resolution 2354 and a political process that engages as many groups as possible. It is a political process; this is not a war that can be won by conflict. This situation can be resolved only by political dialogue and we urge all parties to engage in that.

[Lord Deben (Con)]

Can the Minister assure us that the Government are also talking to the Greek Government about refugees? What happens is that refugees move further and further, and the Greeks are in a really difficult position now with Syrian refugees. Can we be assured that we are working with the Greek Government too?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I reassure the noble Lord that we are working with all regional neighbours, and we are focusing on both that diplomatic effort and the support for refugees. We are also working in terms of an EU response to that sort of migration. I reassure the noble Lord that we are doing that.

[Lord Winston (Lab)]

My Lords, the drug Captagon was mentioned in the opening of this very short debate. As I am sure the Minister knows, this is a rather complex drug which has a number of different compounds, including amphetamine-like drugs. The spectre of hordes of terrorists fuelled with that sort of drug is really quite alarming. Does the Minister know whether we have adequate protection against such drugs as this at border control? Have we detected those drugs at customs or anywhere else in Britain?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

In relation to the specific question, we are unaware of any Captagon being on the UK’s streets. However, shipments have been seized in Europe and this presents a wider threat to our allies in the Middle East. Certainly, we are sharpening global awareness of the risks posed by Captagon. In March 2024 we co-hosted an event with Jordan which brought together the international community alongside expert researchers to discuss the impact of the trade in the region, and in March last year, in co-ordination with the US, we imposed sanctions on 11 individuals who facilitated the Captagon industry in Syria, including politicians and businesspeople, so we are very focused on the dangers.

[Lord Dodds of Duncairn (DUP)]

My Lords, it is appalling but, I suppose, not particularly shocking that once again the Syrian people find themselves in this terrible situation, caught between two vicious forces and, indeed, a multiplicity of other actors, with the country being used as a melting pot for the interference of so many, such as Russia, Iran and so on.

On the humanitarian aid point, the UK has been extremely generous in welcoming Syrian refugees. The Minister mentioned that over £4 billion has been given over the past 13 years. I had the opportunity to visit one of the camps in Jordan and saw what UK aid has been doing there. Has the Minister considered whether there is a need for an increase in the ODA budget to cope with what is likely to be the outworking of this latest crisis, as well as all the other pressures that have been referenced already in the Chamber?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

What my honourable friend said in the other place is that we are looking at how ODA is distributed and what more we can do, and I mentioned the additional £4 million to the United Nations. Certainly, this is something that we have to be very cognisant of. I keep saying that the refugee situation is imposing heavy burdens on neighbouring countries that could exacerbate the situation and we are very concerned to ensure that we get the aid to those who need it as quickly as possible through the NGOs, as I previously said, but I hear what the noble Lord says.

UK Leadership on Sudan

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Monday 2nd December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I declare an interest, as I have done on previous occasions: I have made previous visits to Sudan, and I continue to support civilians in making the case that a future Sudan should be a civilian-led, rather than a military-led country. I know the Minister is supportive of that aim, and I thank him for the Statement and for the update to Parliament. He and colleagues have honoured a commitment to do that, and that is welcome.

I also welcome, as referenced by the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, the additional humanitarian support package. In particular, I welcome the more than £10 million of additional support for children, especially for education provision. This has been one of the most pernicious elements of the conflict in Sudan: according to UNICEF, up to 17 million children are not being schooled.

It is estimated that UK aid will provide vital education facilities for 200,000 children, many of whom are displaced. Can the Minister say how we can ramp up support among other donors, so that they too focus on this issue and the conflict does not have the terrible consequence of millions of children being permanently uneducated and unschooled? The UK’s leadership on this would be extremely welcome.

I also thank His Majesty’s Government and the Minister himself with regard to working with others, especially African nations, on putting forward a draft Security Council resolution. I noted that it was with Sierra Leone; unfortunately, the A3 Plus members of the African community on the Security Council were unable to reach consensus among themselves, but I thank the UK for taking the initiative. I hope the Minister might say a little as to why the A3 Plus group was not able to have consensus, which caused me great sadness.

However, as the Statement from Minister Dodds said, ultimately the work was met by a Russian veto. I read the entire remarks of the Russian representative in the Security Council, made with utter brazen hypocrisy laced with cynicism, as he sought to say that that was an argument. While the warped views of the Russian Government might suit their own venal foreign policy, the real victims of the veto are the Sudanese civilians in desperate need of protective measures now and the reassurance that there is no impunity for the illegal and horrific crimes being inflicted on them by SAF and the RSF.

The veto is a reality, though, and therefore what is the view of His Majesty’s Government on the measures that we can take alone and with a coalition of the willing for the protection of civilians in Sudan? How will we now take forward support for the ICC in ensuring that there is no impunity for those inflicting both war crimes and crimes against humanity, including the growing evidence of clear ethnic cleansing and the genocide now apparent again within Darfur, as the new head of OCHA Tom Fletcher will be seeing personally? I welcome his position as the head of OCHA. The UK leadership continues in that immensely important role, and I wish him well. I was very glad that he was in Darfur and the BBC was with him. This draws the attention of the United Nations and hopefully also of the British public with Lyse Doucet’s reporting.

Russia has refused any calls to enforce an arms embargo. It rejected the need to have humanitarian aid access. What can His Majesty’s Government do with regard to a potentially wider suite of sanctions and the option of secondary sanctions—I suspect the Minister will say that he keeps this continuously under review—on those who are failing to cease the supply of arms, now including drones, to the belligerents that are being used so venally on civilians? In these areas and others, the UK has acted—for example, on the prescription of the Wagner Group—on a cross-party consensus. There is more that can be done on the gold trade and other areas with regard to the supply of funds to the belligerents.

Finally, it is depressing news that I received this week that, possibly within days, the RSF may also declare that they are the Government of Sudan and effectively we could have a “Libyafication” of the country. Both sides, I am certain, will be seeking to have as much advantage as possible before President-elect Trump takes office in January next year. If there is to be a division of the country, one thing will be guaranteed, and that is that civilians will still be set aside and the humanitarian priorities will become secondary to the continuing military advantage of territory. Therefore, I hope the Minister can agree that only a civilian Government can guarantee one Sudan and the integrity of the country.

I hope that there will be others in the humanitarian community now taking UNICEF and the IRC’s lead in calling for public appeals of humanitarian support. The Minister has heard me, in this Chamber and separately, call for the Disasters Emergency Committee to open up a public appeal, and I hope that if there is a public appeal then the Government will match that funding. Having more publicity will address the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that this is an ignored war, and I hope the Government stand ready for continued support.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome the comments of both Front Benches on the Statement. What we face, as they have quite rightly said, is a huge humanitarian crisis which, sadly, does not attract the attention of the world that it deserves. I, too, like the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, was incredibly moved to hear the report on Radio 4 this morning from Tom Fletcher, who had got into Port Sudan and was able, with a BBC team, to report on the circumstances—not only to report on what he saw but to amplify the voices of the victims and the survivors of this terrible situation—so I certainly congratulate him.

As the noble Lords have quite rightly pointed out, we have used all diplomatic efforts as penholder, particularly at the United Nations, to bring about a ceasefire to ensure humanitarian access and the protection of civilians. That priority was reflected, as both noble Lords said, in terms of our UN Security Council resolution where we have used the presidency of the Security Council. The Foreign Secretary not only announced a doubling of aid in response to the conflict but led that resolution to ensure the protection of civilians, which, as the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, said, was so cynically vetoed by the Russians.

Despite that veto, we are not giving up on these efforts. Both warring parties made commitments at Jeddah to limit the conflict’s impact on civilians, yet we know from reports that widespread violence continues. We will continue to push for the United Nations Secretary-General’s recommendations on the protection of civilians, including compliance mechanisms, to ensure that the warring parties stick to the commitments they made at Jeddah and there are tangible results on the ground.

As the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, knows, we are absolutely committed to a civilian Government. We want to ensure a future for Sudan under proper civilian rule. That is why I have met regularly with the former Sudanese Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok, whom I know the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, knows well, and we have given absolute support to the pro-democracy Taqaddum coalition and we will continue to do that. We have to see a future without the military activity that we see the consequences of.

The uplift that the Foreign Secretary announced is a further £113 million aid package, doubling our aid in response to the conflict to £226 million. This will support over a million people affected by violence. We are ensuring that we have a big impact on the ground, and we are also providing just under £70 million for neighbouring countries impacted by that violence, including Chad, as the noble Lord knows, South Sudan and Uganda. The Foreign Secretary chaired a Sudan session during the G7 with the Arab Quintet Foreign Ministers on 25 November to ensure that we can have collective action to improve humanitarian access but ensure greater financial support, and we are going to continue to do that.

The noble Lord mentioned the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal. We will do all we can to support the people of Sudan to ensure that there is far greater volume on the situation. Of course, DEC appeals are subject to broadcasters, but we do need to raise this up the agenda. I have tried to raise it since being appointed as the Prime Minister’s special representative on PSVI. I was in Colombia to talk to the International Alliance on Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict last week and I focused on ensuring that the voices people heard were not mine but those of the survivors, the people who have experienced this terrible crime. I am absolutely determined. What we did at the General Assembly of the United Nations, but also at the special Security Council meeting that I chaired, was to ensure that the voices of survivors are heard. We must not simply sit back and quote statistics: we need to ensure that the population hears that first-hand evidence.

I think I have answered all the questions and I want to ensure that there is time for other noble Lords to ask questions, so I will leave it there for now.

[Lord Boateng (Lab)]

My Lords, the Government’s Statement and the Minister’s active engagement on this issue are to be warmly welcomed. The increase in humanitarian aid is helpful and necessary, but state institutions in Sudan are weak, there is active mischief-making by external parties, including Russia, and the best hope for Sudan surely lies in civil society organisations. Those are assisted by the Addis process and the African Union’s expanded mechanism, which is being helped by the United States, but what proportion of this additional funding from the UK is going to go to supporting civil society institutions within Sudan and their contribution to conflict resolution and peacekeeping?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right: we are financially supporting Taqaddum, which is operating outside but also operating within civilian groups inside. Picking up the point that the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, raised, on education and children, Education Cannot Wait will also receive £14 million to provide safe learning spaces and psychosocial support to over 200,000 vulnerable children in refugee and host communities in Sudan, as well as in Chad and other countries.

On civil society, it is absolutely right that we have to mobilise and give voice to that. We should not restrict it just to those organisations that we know exist; one of the things I will be doing on Wednesday is attending a round table hosted by Zeinab Badawi, president of SOAS, who is establishing a Sudanese diaspora group initiative called Humanitarian Action for Sudan. We are going to take every opportunity to ensure that we can build support, both inside Sudan and outside.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, I join others in welcoming the work that the noble Lord has been doing on this issue, but, in the context of all too many unprecedented crises in the world, the conflict in Sudan has, at times, appeared invisible to too many world leaders, who appear to be missing in action. We had Jan Egeland here recently, speaking to the All-Party Group on Sudan. He has said that Sudan is in danger of becoming another failed state because civil society is disintegrating amid a proliferation of armed groups. Will the Minister comment on that? He also talked about how, as well as the two warring parties in Sudan, the army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, there are many other smaller ethnic armies looting and, as he put it, “going berserk on civilians”. The parties are tearing down their own houses and massacring their own people. What can the noble Lord say to us about that?

In echoing what has been said about the plight of children, all of us were deeply moved last week to hear the report from Lyse Doucet, who said:

“Nowhere else on earth are so many children on the run, so many people living with such acute hunger”.


She went on to describe the situation in Darfur. It is 20 years since I went to Darfur, when nearly 300,000 people were killed and 2 million people displaced. This is in danger of happening all over again. Will the noble Lord, in responding to the points the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, put to him about genocide and about justice, tell us what accountability mechanisms are being put in place?

Finally, there is the issue of refugees and displaced people. There are 120 million people displaced in the world, 12 million in Sudan and an extra 7.5 million since this war began 18 months ago. What are we able to do, using the leverage of His Majesty’s Government, to bring together statesmen, stateswomen and world leaders on the kind of regular basis on which the COP meets, to do something, until we start to dramatically reduce the number of people who will otherwise end up in small boats, drowning on dangerous and treacherous journeys of escape?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord is absolutely right: we cannot afford for Sudan to fail. It is absolutely important that we focus on ensuring that we can have a return to proper civilian rule. It is because of that that I do not suggest that the conflict is simply about two generals. That is the consequence of it, but the conflict has other roots within it, and that is why it is important to focus on that civilian resolve to bring people together.

When I spoke to the Taqaddum leader, what he stressed to me and I stressed to him was to have an inclusive process to ensure that all groups are brought together to find a solution. He is absolutely committed to that, even though it is difficult because he is sitting down with people who are not easily friends. It is very difficult to build that situation together. The noble Lord is absolutely right that we have to build consensus and see the solution in much broader peace-building ways. He is also right that we cannot allow people to act with impunity. He knows that, since 2003, we have supported the ICC investigation and we are committed to continue that. We are certainly committed to ensuring that violations of international humanitarian law are properly monitored, and evidence gathered, so that we can eventually hold people properly to account for their crimes. At the end of the day, what we have done is consistently condemn such violence.

As the noble Lord knows, our long-standing policy is for competent courts to determine whether genocide is taking place, but that does not stop us acting to ensure that we prevent such crimes and actually hold people to account, so that they know that if they continue to commit such crimes, we will hold them to account. So, he is absolutely right. One thing that we have to keep stressing is the importance of our peace-building and development efforts, which are all about creating a much more secure world. If we are really to address migration, we have to focus on that, and certainly that is what this Government are determined to do.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, this Statement from the Government is obviously extremely welcome, as my noble friend Lord Boateng has said. The Minister’s own leadership on this is exemplary. Clearly, bringing an end to this conflict is where we ultimately want to be. Alongside the humanitarian efforts—which we are obviously putting in and which are laudable—what avenues are there for diplomacy? This might go along with the kinds of questions that the noble Lord, Lord Alton, asked, about the fora in which we might be able to discuss these matters.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right: we cannot simply focus just on the humanitarian situation, as desperate as that is. Our efforts should go into not only trying to establish an immediate ceasefire but longer-term diplomatic work to ensure that that ceasefire is sustainable and that we can return to civilian rule.

Of course, we have seen the talks in Geneva where RSF turned up but SAF did not, and there was engagement. Our first step was at the Security Council, where sadly there was the cynical application of that veto by the Russians, but that does not stop us in our determination to seek other diplomatic means. Our beginning is to ensure that those parties follow the commitments that they made at Jeddah, and that they have confidence in a mechanism where they can stick to their commitments.

It also means that we have to work with all our allies to ensure that people understand how important that ceasefire is, and how important it is for it to be sustainable. We are working with all our allies to ensure that we can put maximum leverage on those parties to stick to the commitments they have made and achieve a ceasefire. I assure my noble friend that we are using all diplomatic levers to ensure that.

[Baroness Stuart of Edgbaston (CB)]

My Lords, when Minister Dodds visited Sudan, she welcomed the then opening of the border between Chad and Darfur for three months. She then commented that it was important that the Sudanese Armed Forces should not impose any unnecessary restrictions and should make the flow of aid possible. In the Statement, she quite rightly welcomed a further opening for three months but again referred to restrictions by the Sudanese Armed Forces. Can the Minister say more about how much progress we have made in allowing aid to arrive?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is absolutely right that we welcome the three-month extension, but the barriers to delivering aid are not simply that border, and it is not simply what we are able to get through. The simple fact is that both parties are imposing all kinds of constraints on it, which is why we are using our calls for the protection of civilians and the call of the Secretary-General to focus on that access issue. We are working with all NGOs, including the United Nations, to ensure that we can get that aid right through the country. We will certainly be monitoring the situation and holding those people to account. In effect, some of those parties are using starvation as a weapon of war, and we have to hold them to account for that.

[Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Lab)]

My Lords, the additional money going to Sudan is very welcome, likewise the money going to neighbouring countries which are dealing with refugees. It is such a dreadful problem, as the noble Lord, Lord Alton, acknowledged. I pay tribute to the noble Lord for all his work, including by giving voice to the voiceless, as he has been doing in Colombia. I know he will do that throughout the world. I also pay tribute to Tom Fletcher, who is extraordinary. The fact that he went there in his first two weeks of having been appointed to OCHA is quite amazing.

Many noble Lords have rightly spoken about civil society, but what exactly are we doing, together with the international community, to support the cultivation of an inclusive, representative, apolitical civilian bloc to provide a viable political alternative to the warring parties and to build the longer-term routes that are needed to a healthy, active Sudanese civil society that can underpin the governance systems that are so necessary?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, has been working on this too, in terms of Abdalla Hamdok’s activity and the Taqaddum coalition. That coalition is seeking to broaden its base and engage all parties. The noble Lord, Lord Alton, mentioned proliferation. There are groups proliferating from this, using all kinds of conflicts that have previously occurred and reigniting them between communities. That is why, when we sat down with Abdalla Hamdok, we focused on how he needs to have the most inclusive process possible—and our allies are also focusing on this. That is not easy in all the circumstances, but it is what we are doing.

My noble friend is right that we need to ensure that we have all those voices heard. That is the most important thing, as we heard on the radio this morning with Tom’s report—like my noble friend, I think that it is great that he was able to get into Sudan so early; it shows that he will be absolutely focused on making sure that the world hears from those survivors and from those women and children who gave their first-hand accounts. We need to focus on that, which is why I am also concerned to ensure that we build that coalition not just among Sudanese within Sudan but among the diaspora here so that we get an inclusive approach to a final solution which will help to return civilian rule.

[Lord Sentamu (CB)]

My Lords, in the late 1970s, I was administering law in northern Uganda, and there were many refugees from south Sudan. Archbishop Luwum did a fantastic job in persuading the Uganda Government to provide places where refugees could go, allowing them to go to schools and universities. He did a fantastic job. If the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Leeds was here, he would have told the story of how he put his life in danger by visiting Sudan regularly, because they are linked together. I think that one of his messages would have been to ask the Minister to ensure that he and many others—who have a lot of first-hand experience and know where the NGOs are—are part of a conversation, because he has been doing amazing work in terms of civil society.

Finally, I thank the Minister. His voice has been heard, and he should keep that voice. I have every confidence that with what he is doing in terms of partnership, particularly with the African Union, he will get a breakthrough, because he has been very consistent. He has also honoured people. He does not do things like a colonist does; he does things all on the same level.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble and right reverend Lord for his remarks. The approach of the Foreign Secretary and of the whole Government is to ensure that we raise this issue and put it higher up the global agenda. I have also spoken to the right reverend Prelate about this situation. The Church, particularly the Church of England, has close connections in Sudan. I am working with it to ensure that we can support its activity, building cross-community support for peace.

It is also important to recognise that we are supporting 700,000 people who have been affected in neighbouring countries such as Chad and South Sudan. We are working with UN and NGO partners to provide food and cash. We have organised cash-transfer systems to ensure that the local economies in those countries are not severely impacted, and we are also providing shelter and medical assistance. Those are important actions to ensure that this terrible conflict does not spread and undermine security in that part of Africa.

Women, Peace and Security Bill [HL]

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 15th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con)]

My Lords, it gives me great pleasure to reintroduce this Private Member’s Bill on women, peace and security. I first tabled it in 2022, but sadly it did not have time to progress to the other place before Parliament was prorogued in October 2023.

As many noble Lords know, I have long been outspoken on many of the topics that fall within the Bill and I draw their attention to my register of interests: I co-chair the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Women, Peace and Security; I am a member of the steering board of the Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative; I am the honorary colonel of Outreach Group; and I set up, and chair, the Afghan Women’s Support Forum.

I begin by formally congratulating the Minister on his appointment. I was heartened by his response to my Written Question HL343, in which he stated:

“Empowering women and girls and preventing the conflicts that disproportionately impact on them is a key priority for this new government”.


I know that in opposition he was a champion on this agenda.

Some may question the necessity for a Bill on this. As we see the conflicts of today raging on our TV screens, especially in Ukraine and Gaza, I wonder where the women are. Why do we not hear their voices? Of course, there are many countries where other conflicts are raging that we do not see so much of in our media—Sudan, Yemen and Syria, to name but a few—with women suffering but unseen and unheard.

The foreword of the UK’s fifth national action plan, published in February last year, stated:

“From Afghanistan, to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to Russian occupied parts of Ukraine, it is plain to see how conflict and insecurity have a disproportionate impact on women and girls. Too often women are also locked out of efforts to prevent and resolve conflicts, and build peace”.


While generally the UK has been robust on this agenda, at times there has been slippage. Enshrining this in law will mean that the women, peace and security agenda is in the DNA of all foreign and defence policy, is not dependent on ministerial good will and cannot be ignored. The Bill puts into law the commitments that the Government have already signed up to under UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the subsequent 10 UN Security Council resolutions on the WPS agenda. It is not asking for a new or onerous commitment.

The ground-breaking UN Security Council Resolution 1325, introduced in 2000 with much support from the UK, recognised the terrible and disproportionate effects that conflict has on women and addressed this through its four pillars of prevention, protection, participation and relief and recovery. This and the subsequent UN Security Council resolutions around the subject have tried to address the situation, but we all recognise that this is still a work in progress, with much more needing to be done. Progress has been too slow.

Today more than ever, many women are experiencing a devastating rollback of hard-won rights, services and democratic freedoms—from abortion rights in the US and rape used as a weapon of war in Ukraine, to the gender apartheid in Afghanistan, with the Taliban issuing over 50 edicts to suppress women’s and girls’ rights, returning to the oppression of the 1990s and, most recently, making it illegal for their voices to be heard in public.

The UK’s work around women, peace and security and preventing sexual violence in conflict are two initiatives where the UK has led the world. As Britain continues to redefine its role in the world in the wake of Brexit and the pandemic, it is a time to build on all the investment and good work that has gone before and fight the growing challenges to gender equality. The Bill that I propose today is another tool through which we can demonstrate our commitment and, more importantly, implementation of our promises in this area.

With only two clauses, this short Bill seeks to ensure that the Secretary of State will have a duty to have regard to the national action plan on women, peace and security, which we are committed to under UN Security Council Resolution 1325. Clause 1(2) requires an annual report to Parliament on progress in relation to the national action plan. This would formalise what the department currently does and would not create extra reporting burdens.

Clause 1(3) does what it says on the tin and puts in place the key duty on the Secretary of State to have regard to the NAP when “formulating or implementing” government policy “in relation to foreign affairs, defence or related matters”.

Clause 1(4) stipulates several considerations for which the Secretary of State must have particular regard. For example, paragraphs (e) to (h) cover issues around peace processes. Data from the Council on Foreign Relations show that roughly seven out of every 10 peace processes from 1992 to 2019 did not include women mediators or women signatories. Of 18 peace agreements reached in 2022, only one was signed or witnessed by a representative of a women’s group or organisation. In 2022, women participated as conflict party negotiators or delegates in four of five active UN-led or co-led peace processes. However, women’s representation stood at only 16%, a further drop compared to 19% in 2021 and 23% in 2020, all of which remain well below the peak of 37.1% in 2015.

Evidence that gender equality is essential to building peace and security has grown substantially since UN Security Council Resolution 1325 was introduced. In fact, involving women increases the chances of a longer-lasting and more sustainable peace, yet they continue to be excluded.

We live in a globally interconnected world. War zones are poor zones. The Institute for Economics and Peace estimates that every $1 of peacebuilding would lead to a $16 reduction in the cost of armed conflict. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has said that there is a

“direct relationship between greater investment in weapons and greater insecurity and inequality for women”.

Sadly, it is apparently not obvious to many that you cannot build peace by leaving half the population out: look at Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan. We should not have to justify women being included; we should ask the men to justify their exclusion. Ambassador Barbara Woodward at the UN Security Council highlighted the importance and value of women’s economic inclusion for maintaining peace and stabilising peace in post-conflict settings. She argued for

“gender equality today for a sustainable tomorrow”.

Paragraphs (d) and (i) of Clause 1(4) relate to conflict-related sexual violence. Do noble Lords know that none of the ceasefire agreements reached between 2018 and 2020 included gender provisions or the prohibition of sexual violence? Gender-based violence is one of the most systemic and widespread human rights violations of our time, with one in three women worldwide experiencing physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime.

There were 2,455 UN-verified cases of conflict-related sexual violence in 2022. We all know that there is much underreporting, so the actual figures are hugely more. Gender-based violence is rooted in gender inequality. It threatens the lives and well-being of girls and women and prevents them from accessing opportunities that are fundamental to both freedom and development.

The Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative was inspiring, and I welcomed the conference held under the Conservative Government in 2022. This initiative was always going to be a marathon, not a sprint. More than 50 countries and the UN signed the UK-led declaration, and 40-odd made national commitments outlining the steps they would take. Do the Government have any assessment of how all those commitments are progressing?

After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, reports of sexual violence committed by Russian soldiers against civilians escalated. In the DRC, sexual violence continues to rage, and I recently had the honour of meeting the inspirational Dr Mukwege, who told us that 83,000 brutally raped women and girls had been repaired at Panzi Hospital, with ages ranging from five into their 80s. Sexual violence occurs in every theatre of war. Including these stipulated considerations in the Bill will help keep conflict-related sexual violence front and centre of our diplomatic, security and conflict work. Meanwhile, the wording of Clause 1(5) ensures that the UK will also seek to keep the pressure up on all these issues when working with other multinational organisations.

It is not enough to pledge our commitment to the women, peace and security agenda without delivering meaningful change for all women and girls on the ground, living through the daily realities of war. As I have said before, we must not fall into the trap of mistaking process for progress, status for impact, or rhetoric for action.

I sincerely hope that the Minister will not mind me gently reminding him of his words from the Third Reading debate on the Bill last July, when he said:

“Things do change and Governments change. Hopefully, the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, and I can work together to ensure that the sort of changes she is advocating become law”.—[Official Report, 14/7/23; col. 1981.]


I trust he is not going to dash my hope this afternoon.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

Things change.

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con)]

Next year is the 25th anniversary of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the 30th anniversary of the Beijing platform for action. I believe that the Bill is the perfect tool to demonstrate to the international community the UK’s commitment and leadership on this agenda. Passing the Bill will legislate for all future Governments our commitment to have systematic gender consideration and responsiveness in UK foreign and defence policy. By sealing this agenda into legislation, the UK can be an example and encourage other countries to follow suit.

I hope that Members from all sides of this House can support and work with me to make the Bill a reality. I beg to move.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords, particularly those who keep reminding me of what I said in opposition. I pay tribute to the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, for bringing this Bill before Parliament, particularly for her steadfast commitment to this agenda of women, peace and security and for her dedication in championing the protection and, more importantly, the empowerment of women.

I also thank the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, and the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, for spearheading vital work during their tenures as the Prime Minister’s special representative for preventing sexual violence in conflict. I shall focus on the work by the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, because during his leadership we hosted the 2022 conference on PSVI and, as he said, we launched the Murad code. I pay particular tribute to the noble Baroness and the noble Lord for their focus on this important area of work.

I want to stress—I think all noble Lords know this —that it is also a key priority for me. To reassure the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, I am delighted to announce today that the Prime Minister has appointed me as his special representative on preventing sexual violence in conflict. The global scale of conflict-related sexual violence cases is deeply concerning, with a 50% increase in the number of UN-verified cases recorded globally in 2023. In this role, I will work to galvanise international action to prevent and respond to CRSV. Sexual violence in all forms must stop, all perpetrators must be held accountable and survivors must be supported.

Let me begin by saying—noble Lords have heard me say this before—that the Government fully support the ethos of this Bill. Unlike the position that the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, found himself in, I can say with confidence that the Government are absolutely committed to this agenda. This September, at the United Nations General Assembly, the Prime Minister gave a clear commitment to work together for peace, progress and equality. Empowering women and girls is at the heart of this work and a key government priority.

The proportion of women killed in conflict has doubled compared to 2022. Levels of conflict are at the highest since World War II, disproportionately impacting women and girls. In her introduction, the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, made a point about the level of involvement of women in peace agreements, and that was also highlighted by the noble Baroness, Lady Northover, my noble friend Lady Kennedy and others. It is shocking that no peace agreement reached in 2023 included a woman representative or women’s group as a signatory. This is unacceptable.

Like the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, I was at the Magnitsky awards last night and was incredibly moved by the tributes and the people we were saluting. She is absolutely right—guarantees for human rights are more reliant on civil society, as I have repeatedly said. This Government will remain committed to supporting civil society and women’s groups in particular.

There are good examples of supporting women’s involvement and meaningful participation in peace processes. The UK-funded Women Mediators across the Commonwealth is supporting the direct involvement of women in mediation in Niger and Sierra Leone. As the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, said, we have been committed to the establishment of the anti-war and pro-democracy Taqaddum coalition, with which over 200 women are involved.

I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, that, in Colombia, we continue to support the Government to increase women’s participation in the ongoing ceasefire peace agreement. To reassure the noble Baroness, I say that I will be in Colombia next week and will raise those concerns, working with my colleagues in government on how we can focus on that in particular. I have a long record of supporting civil society in Colombia, and that is the key to protecting human rights for the future.

The Government are unwavering in their commitment to women, peace and security. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, that it is jointly led by the FCDO and the Ministry of Defence, but we also have contributions across the United Kingdom, with Scottish Government and Northern Ireland Executive involvement, which has been clear from the start. No one knows what the outcome of the defence review will be, but my noble friend Lord Robertson has been involved with a range of participants in his review, including groups of women.

I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Foster, that the Integrated Security Fund is funding work in the Northern Ireland Office to improve awareness of UN Security Council Resolution 1325 and the UK national action plan, building links between Northern Ireland civil society and the national action plan. She is absolutely right to focus on those very human examples that she gave us.

On ministerial engagement on WPS, we need to show the evidence of how committed we are. In September, I attended the UN General Assembly high-level week, where, alongside my fellow FCDO Ministers, I raised the current global crises, from Gaza to Sudan and Ukraine, and their disproportionate impact on women and girls. I certainly agree with my noble friend that Russia’s deportation of Ukrainian children is a clear violation of international humanitarian law, and we continue to monitor that. We sanctioned 10 Russian officials and one entity linked to child deportations in 2023, including the Russian children’s rights commissioner Maria Lvova-Belova, and we will continue to investigate all those examples. We are very involved in—and, as my honourable friend Minister Stephen Doughty has said, absolutely committed to—supporting the people of Ukraine in their fight against Putin’s invasion.

The noble Lord, Lord Berkeley, was absolutely right to raise FGM. Through our programme, Support to the Africa-Led Movement to End FGM, we have been offering survivor leadership training, really focusing on getting into the communities. We will continue to do that and ensure that we can also break down the stigma associated with FGM, so that we can address the problem openly and transparently.

At the UN General Assembly—again, I am picking up a point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis—I hosted an event on the situation on Sudan. We engaged with P5 members, but we also heard from women who were Sudanese survivors. They came to talk to the United Nations General Assembly, courageously providing crucial evidence on how we can give assistance to survivors.

On Tuesday this week, while we have the UK presidency of the Security Council, I hosted a stakeholders’ meeting in New York to discuss the appalling situation in the DRC. We opened our discussion by hearing first from key stakeholders, such as Physicians for Human Rights, on the rising number of cases of conflict-related sexual violence in eastern DRC. We focused on their recommendations for action.

In Ethiopia last month, I saw how UK aid is supporting survivors in Tigray. I met inspiring women leaders working to make a vital change in their communities. Following her visit to South Sudan, the Minister for Development and for Women and Equalities announced an additional £15 million to help Sudan, South Sudan and Chad support vulnerable people.

Minister Falconer has met Afghan women leaders to hear their perspectives and discuss the inclusion of women in Afghanistan’s future. I certainly hear what my noble friend Lady Kennedy described: what is, in effect, an apartheid policy being adopted against women. The FCDO is actively considering legal and policy questions in relation to the proposal on gender apartheid. We have also given £161 million in aid—noble Lords asked about this—50% of which is focused on women and girls. Last week, my noble friend Lord Coaker, the Minister of State, was also in Bosnia and Herzegovina working on WPS actions there, so we are absolutely focused.

The noble Lord, Lord Purvis, asked why Sudan and Gaza are not WPS focus countries. The UK utilises a focus country model to prioritise efforts and ensure that we can triage support to where it is most needed. This model is agile to ensure that where crises emerge, we can respond quickly, as has been the case for Israel, the OPTs and Sudan.

The noble Baroness, Lady Northover, raised abortion. We remain absolutely committed to adhering to abortion services, which should be offered in the cases that she described. Even where our policy trumps local laws, there is no doubt about that.

I turn now to the vital issue of the Government’s stance on the Bill. As I said at the beginning, I would like to support its ethos as we approach the 25th anniversary of the WPS agenda. The UK Government were at the spearhead at the time, as noble Lords have pointed out, and I am grateful for the focus on redoubling our efforts on this agenda. Things have moved back, and we need to refocus on it, and I am grateful that this Bill has been brought before the House for consideration. However, as the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, repeatedly told this House when I was in opposition, the Government have some reservations. It would be absolutely right for me to focus on those, but these reservations have to be seen in the light of our absolute commitment to this agenda and its implementation, so I hope that some of the things I say will reassure the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, that we will deliver what she so keenly wants.

We are delivering key principles of the Bill. We have been implementing the WPS agenda through national action plans, as noble Lords pointed out, since 2006, demonstrating strong cross-party support for the agenda. I reassure noble Lords, and in particular the noble Baroness, Lady Foster, that the Government support the approach and ambition of the fifth National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security and intend to build on this ambition during the 25th anniversary year, advancing implementation and focusing on new priorities. The Bill as proposed does not match our ambition—for example, taking a narrow view of participation—and includes provisions which we could not support, including potential overlap with existing legislation and conventions, and those that would constrain foreign policy.

In specific response to the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, we acknowledge the importance of continuous training of peacekeeping forces on gender issues. The British peace support team in Africa has taken steps to support peacekeeping missions by providing training and addresses critical issues such as sexual and gender-based violence and sexual exploitation and abuse. I have met people on my visits to Africa in recent months and have seen this training in action.

I also agree with the noble Baronesses, Lady Hodgson and Lady Anelay, that accountability is crucial. I recall the efforts of the noble Lord, Lord Ahmad, to strengthen engagement with this House. I reassure the noble Baronesses that I share that commitment. Following today’s Second Reading, I want to meet the noble Baroness and the APPG to discuss all the options for strengthening that sort of accountability and participation. I absolutely remain committed.

Before I hand over to the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, I thank all noble Lords. This has been an excellent debate. I know that we often talk about the responsibilities of opposition and government, but I know that all of us in this House are absolutely focused on delivering on this agenda. I am proud of the UK’s work on a cross-party basis, and I look forward to co-operating with the noble Baroness, the APPG and others in ensuring its proper delivery.

International Engagements

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 31st October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, the Commonwealth is a greatly valued institution, in which the UK should be playing as full a part as possible. Therefore, the communique from CHOGM requires very careful study. These are the priorities of our Commonwealth partners, and the UK has a special obligation to support them in the delivery of them.

I want to ask a number of questions to the Minister regarding the Statement, primarily in regard to intra-Commonwealth trade. I declare an interest: in 2018 I co-chaired an inquiry into intra-Commonwealth trade with the then Nigerian Trade Minister. I welcome the technical support and the elements of supporting intra-Commonwealth trade, but what is the Government’s ambition? What is their estimate as to how much intra-Commonwealth trade can grow? Under the previous Government we had an aborted investment summit for African nations and within the Commonwealth. What is the Government’s intent when it comes to ensuring that the UK, with our trade partners, can be an investment priority and can migrate continuity trade agreements with our Commonwealth partners into full free trade agreements?

Primarily, I wish to ask about the part of the Statement that said:

“We will be confident about championing the power of international development so that we make progress wherever we can,”


and recognise that putting our best foot forward in all we do at home and around the world is

“in everyone’s best interests, not least the British people”.

Can the Minister explain how this Statement, given on Monday to the House of Commons, was then reflected in the Budget on Wednesday, in which development assistance was cut to the lowest level in 17 years? We have seen development assistance cut in a truly terrible way by the previous Conservative Government; very few people would have been expecting further cuts under a new Labour Government. The cuts now are stark, with £2 billion in reductions. This means that development assistance has gone from 0.58% to 0.5%. In addition, there are real-term reductions in the Foreign Office budget overall.

How will the ambitions in the Statement be met? Of the 45 least-developed countries in the world—the poorest nations on earth—14 are Commonwealth countries. It is one thing for the Government to say that they do not intend to provide funding for reparations, but it is starkly another thing for the Government to cut development partnership assistance to the very nations that need it most, especially those in the Commonwealth.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lords for their questions. I will start with the question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, who referred to cuts. He and I expressed shock and horror when the previous Government cut ODA from 0.7% to 0.5%. This was not just about the principle of working within the economic circumstances then; it was the way those cuts were adopted and the speed of them. There was not a planned approach; bilateral programmes were simply stopped midway through, causing damage to our reputation. That is not what we are doing.

We are committed to creating a world free from poverty. To do this, we will take a new approach to international development, based on genuine partnership, trust and respect. We will once again restore our position as a leader in development, particularly with partners, and will reform international institutions. The FCDO’s ODA programme budget in 2025-26 will be £9.24 billion—the highest level in recent years. I do not accept the noble Lord’s characterisation of where we are. We are determined to ensure that we have effective spend on our ODA and we are looking at the priorities.

On the CHOGM element of the Statement, it is really important that we focus on what the Commonwealth can deliver for our partnership approach. The noble Lord, Lord Callanan, mentioned my own participation. I deliberately went to CHOGM at the start, when all the fora were taking place. I had seven bilateral meetings, five of which were with delegations from Africa, including from Gambia, Malawi, Zambia, Uganda and the Cayman Islands. I met with civil society, including the Commonwealth Trade Union Group and the Commonwealth Disabled People’s Forum. It was a busy CHOGM in those forums. I spoke at the Commonwealth Equality Network on LGBT equality. I also spoke at the high-level sports breakfast, profiling the launch of the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow. We had a very positive engagement. This was the first CHOGM in a Pacific island that a Prime Minister attended. We are absolutely committed to it and to strengthening our partnerships.

I turn to the final communique. We fully recognise the horrific impacts of the transatlantic slave trade and the understandable ongoing strength of feeling on the issue across communities in the United Kingdom and our Commonwealth family. Commonwealth heads agreed in Samoa that the time has come for a meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation on the issue. We remain committed to continuing that dialogue with our partners in the Caribbean and beyond as we work to tackle the issues of today, in particular strengthening our partnerships for the future. We are focused on making a real difference to the lives of people today, building partnerships to address challenges such as how to catalyse growth, tackling the climate and nature crisis, and empowering our youth. Minister Dodds in the other place made it absolutely clear that there is no contradiction and no change in our policy in relation to reparations. It has not changed, but having a positive dialogue with partners is the vital point that we make.

On Security Council reform, I point out to the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that his party, when in power, and my Government today have had a long-standing policy about strengthening the Security Council by expanding its membership, reflecting the realities of today and not the realities of 1945. I spoke at the Security Council in August, supporting the African case for permanent representation from Africa. It is that policy that we are expanding and pointing out. There is no question about our permanent seat on the Security Council—I do not know why the noble Lord raised it. He should reflect on his own party’s policy to support the expansion of the Security Council, in particular to include Africa, which by 2025 will make up one-quarter of the world’s population. The idea that they should not be represented on the Security Council is absolute nonsense.

[Baroness D'Souza (CB)]

My Lords, can the Minister confirm that the parliamentary visit by the former president of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, planned for earlier this month, was in fact cancelled on the advice of the FCDO because of the Foreign Secretary’s forthcoming visit to China?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The invitation extended by the representatives of the Government has nothing to do with that. There was no issue about advice or a challenge. The timing is very much up to the people who invited the former president of Taiwan and certainly nothing to do with the Foreign Secretary’s visit to China at all.

[Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)]

Does my noble friend agree that a key justification of the Commonwealth is allowing smaller countries, particularly island countries, to walk tall? Is there not a danger that reparations could be a diversion from the real tasks facing the Commonwealth today? I fear that that issue will not go away, however. Is there not a danger also that expectations will be raised and we will be led unwillingly along a path we do not want to take?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

All I can say is that genuine concern is being expressed. The transatlantic slave trade is a diabolical stain on our history, and we do have to remember what happened in the past, condemn it and say why it was entirely unacceptable. That is the sort of dialogue we need to have with our partners in the Commonwealth. What I do know is that the agenda discussed at CHOGM was far more extensive and was looking to the future, particularly that of small, developing island states, which will experience the huge impact of climate change. I was at several launch meetings in CHOGM where we directly addressed that issue by providing information and support. The Commonwealth is dynamic and forward-looking, and I have every confidence we will be able to face the challenges of the future.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, we are about to commemorate our war dead. Will the noble Lord reflect on the 1,000 British soldiers who died during the Korean War—more than in Afghanistan, Iraq and the Falklands combined—and on our agreements with the dynamic democratic Republic of Korea as it faces dangers on the peninsula itself as well as in Europe, with North Korean soldiers fighting alongside Putin in his illegal war? How can we strengthen our relationship further with the Republic of Korea and ensure that we see off what the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, has described as a “deadly quartet” of dictatorships that is a threat to our democracies?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am glad that the noble Lord has raised our relationship with the Republic of Korea; I think he and I share a respect for its democratic credentials. Our relationship is as close as ever, and certainly, the Downing Street accord elevates that relationship to a global strategic bilateral partnership, placing it second only to that with the US in terms of strength. The noble Lord said that it looks like the DPRK is extending tensions further globally. The assessment is that its troops could be deployed in Ukraine, and that would be a very significant and concerning development. I reassure him that our relationship with the Republic of Korea has never been stronger, and we are determined to develop it.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

My Lords, perhaps there is a typo in the Statement. The first sentence refers to reconnecting Britain. From my seven years as Minister, I recall us being pretty well connected and respected.

I congratulate the excellent new secretary-general elect, Shirley Botchwey, who has done some fantastic work in co-operation with the United Kingdom. A number of countries were not represented at leader level, including South Africa, India and Pakistan. What assessment have His Majesty’s Government made of their absence, and of the importance of elevating the Commonwealth and working with the new secretary-general elect in ensuring that the Commonwealth is at the heart of British policy?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I reassure the noble Lord that I completely respect his commitment to the Commonwealth and his engagement when he had that responsibility; he did an excellent job, and I hope to ensure that I can continue his work. In that respect, the attendance at CHOGM was incredible. Despite the travel difficulties, we had the highest level of participation from all Governments. The communiqué reflects the importance all our countries place on developing that partnership, which does include economic and trade relationships but is also focused on the challenges the world faces at the moment.

I am hugely optimistic about the role of the Commonwealth in the future. The fact that it is growing and people are expressing an interest in joining is a reflection of its becoming even more relevant today. One of the things I kept saying at the CHOGM meeting when I met government officials is that the Commonwealth is more than Governments and Heads of State, and that is why I spent so much time with the civil society fora talking about building those relationships. So I am very optimistic about the future, but I acknowledge the noble Lord’s work and hope to continue it.

[Baroness Prashar (CB)]

My Lords, I absolutely agree with the noble Lord that the Commonwealth is a commonwealth of people and that strengthening the civil society connections is therefore very important. Going back to the question of reparations, I like the approach of a constructive dialogue, but it does seem rather vague to me. Does the noble Lord agree that we need to create a structured forum through which a dialogue can take place, and where there can be a proper conversation about the past and how you reconcile dealing with some of the future issues? At the moment, it seems rather vague—a dialogue, but to what end? A structured forum would be of some help.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I acknowledge what the noble Baroness says, but it is important not to be too prescriptive. We will have such opportunities next spring, at the UK-Caribbean Forum, where I think this issue will be raised and we can have that honest exchange and dialogue. I will be absolutely clear: there is no change in the position of the United Kingdom Government on reparations. But the change is: how do we address those issues and have an honest, open dialogue? That was the important thing in the Commonwealth, and if you read the whole of that paragraph, it does say that the Commonwealth is the place we can be honest with each other, and that is what we will continue to do.

[Lord McNally (LD)]

My Lords, during many years, on all sides of the House, there was a campaign for 0.7% of GNI on overseas aid, not just as a number but as a direction of travel. No one doubts the Minister’s commitment on these issues, but it is very worrying that virtually the first step of a new Labour Government should be a step backwards on overseas aid.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I do not accept that definition—we are not stepping back. We remain committed to restoring ODA spending to 0.7% of GNI as soon as fiscal circumstances allow, but, sadly, the OBR’s latest forecast shows that ODA fiscal tests are not due to be met within the Parliament. We will continue to monitor forecasts closely each year and will review and confirm, in accordance with the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015, whether a return to 0.7% for ODA is possible against the latest fiscal forecasts.

As I say, next year’s spend and the year after’s will be some of the highest. I have said to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, before that this Government are committed to ensuring that we have effective spend on ODA; it will be about the priorities in building that partnership. I have a strong view that, if we are to deliver the SDGs, it will be on the basis of a partnership of all aspects of society, including the private sector. We have to get investment back into Africa; we have to join that partnership and get jobs going. That is why I was at the Financial Times conference yesterday morning, focusing on how we can deliver partnership for growth across the African continent.

[Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon (Lab)]

My Lords, my understanding is that the transatlantic slave trade is always talked about as historical, but if slave owners were receiving money until 2015 then it is not historical. This Government and the previous Government seem to have missed the fact that countries’ resources were reaped and taken, and the people suffered so much. Now is the time to apologise and think about reparation, because countries have suffered. Every time each Government speak about this, they seem to forget that slave owners were being paid until 2015.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I recognise my noble friend’s strength of feeling on this subject. She is absolutely right to describe the horrific nature of the slave trade, which is a stain on our history and something we need to have honest and open dialogue about. I believe that the current Government’s position is clear: we will focus on the future and build an inclusive and fair economic partnership for the future. We will focus on addressing the real and genuine challenges that the world faces at the moment—primarily climate change and security.

[Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB)]

I respectfully ask the Minister whether words may be part of the problem. It is clear that such overseas aid as the Government have will be distributed to various countries, including in the Caribbean I would expect. I hope the Government will be able to give this as part of overseas agency and not in respect of reparations—the money would be there, but the wording could perhaps be changed.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Let me be clear that we are committed to supporting overseas development and those countries that face challenges today. That is what we will do. I do not have a problem with words when committing to that partnership for growth and delivering economic development. We need to acknowledge the genuine feelings that exist. It was an abhorrent trade, and its consequences are still being felt by people today. If we do not acknowledge that then we are not part of the human race.

[Lord Polak (Con)]

The Statement talks about the Prime Minister announcing

“a new UK trade centre of expertise”,

based at the Foreign Office. Do I read into that the demise of the Department for Business and Trade? My second question is on the Disasters Emergency Committee in the Middle East. Can the noble Lord be confident that the money will reach the people who need it, not those who have a history of abusing it?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I will address the latter point first. We are absolutely committed to ensuring that the hundreds of thousands of people affected get that aid. Our problem currently is getting it in. I assure the noble Lord that, like the previous Government, we are absolutely determined to ensure that those most in need get it, and we will continue to do that.

My absolute common narrative with the eight African countries I have visited in the last three months has been how we develop a partnership for economic growth. That win-win situation develops from trade too. I see myself not in competition with the Department for Business and Trade but rather in partnership. We are taking a one-government approach, working together.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, if there are no further Back-Bench questions, I will have another go at getting an answer from the Minister. In his reply to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, and me, he spent some considerable time saying that he had worked with the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, when they were both in opposition, to condemn the reductions in overseas aid under the previous Government. That is a reasonable point. However, he neglected to say why that therefore meant that the current Government were going to cut it even further.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The straightforward answer is that the economic circumstances that this country now faces are very much down to his party and his Government. We should fully understand that. I find it rich for him to lecture me on overseas development, when we had a Prime Minister who crashed the economy of this country and caused huge damage. We are absolutely committed to returning to 0.7% and to getting value for money from our ODA—nothing will change from that. I will give the noble Lord a straight answer: we are giving the maximum amount under the 0.5% commitment. We are sticking to that commitment and will increase it when fiscal circumstances allow.

[Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Con)]

If we have time, I will ask a question based on that final point. The previous Government invested a great deal, and both the noble Lords, Lord Collins and Lord Purvis, supported the international development strategy that the Government delivered. Can the Minister reassure me that the new Government are absolutely committed to the international development strategy? A lot of time went into its creation and the consultation. I hope the Government will keep it as a guiding principle for development assistance and support around the world.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord knows that, when Andrew Mitchell launched his international development White Paper, he repeatedly said that he did it in consultation. I do not recall the consultation, but I was very happy with the contents of the White Paper. As the noble Lord knows, the new Government are absolutely committed to drawing from its elements. That is why we have asked for an international development review from a Cross-Bench Peer—I have a mental block and cannot remember her name. We are committed to a review that will, I hope, be published in the new year, and it will reflect and build upon that. I know that there is banter in competitive Opposition/Government politics, but one thing we are absolutely determined to do in the international development space is ensure the long-term picture. Far too often there has been short-termism; so much of our international development work requires a longer-term strategy, so we will build upon it.

[Baroness Hodgson of Abinger (Con)]

My Lords, while we cannot undo the painful wrongs of the past, did the meeting consider the question of slavery that continues today? Is there a move across the Commonwealth to ensure that people are properly paid for the work that they do?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am pleased that the noble Baroness has asked that question, because I think that is absolutely right. Modern slavery was addressed, and certainly when I addressed some of the civil society groups, we looked at that issue. However, it is not just about issues of modern slavery, which is outrageous; it is also about the exploitation of workers across the board. Supply chains and labour have been a real focus, which is why I found the meeting with the Commonwealth Trade Union Group and other trade unionists in CHOGM really interesting. They were concerned that we work within the ILO, promote ILO conventions and ensure that those supply chains truly reflect our aspiration for people to be delivered sustainable development goal 8 in terms of fair employment. That was absolutely discussed, and it was a very positive exchange.