UK Strategy Towards the Arctic (International Relations and Defence Committee Report)

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Lords Chamber

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

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton of Hyde, for securing this long-overdue debate and I congratulate him on his opening remarks, which set the right tone for a comprehensive debate.

As everyone says, this is a challenging time for the Arctic. High co-operation and low tension remain this Government’s long-term objective. Yet there is no doubt that the region is at an inflection point. Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine has undermined the peaceful co-operation that has characterised the Arctic Council, including collaboration on science and research, since its inception in 1996. Climate change is impacting the region, warming places up to four times faster than the global average, fuelling mass wildfires, and melting ice. Greenland alone is losing 30 million tonnes of ice every hour, while growing global interest in the Arctic from state and non-state actors threatens a new era of competition for resources.

All these things put the region’s stability, security and environment at risk and threaten to replace its reputation for co-operation with competition. These are, of course, huge issues for its 4 million inhabitants, and the wider ripple effect has profound implications for the United Kingdom as the nearest non-Arctic state. As noble Lords know, that includes impacts on our weather, climate, ecosystems, fish stocks and domestic resilience, along with wider threats to the United Kingdom’s regional and global security.

This Government recognise the gravity of these issues and their significance for UK interests. As the Minister for the Polar Regions, my honourable friend Stephen Doughty, noted at the Arctic Circle Assembly in October, we are determined to navigate the challenges ahead in a spirit of co-operation and respect with our partners in Europe and elsewhere. We will put internationalism and multilateralism at the heart of our work and be guided by the Arctic policy framework, which we will continue to update and develop in the light of the science and the strategic challenges we face.

Critical to this co-operation, as the committee’s report identifies, is the Arctic Council, which we consider the pre-eminent intergovernmental forum in the region. Following a pause in relations with Russia, the council has re-established collaboration at a technical level over the past 18 months, as noble Lords have mentioned. While challenging, such efforts have seen progress in science and research co-operation for the benefit of the region as a whole. We commend and support Norway’s work as chair of the council in bringing these developments about, because effective governance, characterised by co-operation and constructive dialogue under its auspices, is key to building a secure and peaceful region.

To address the contribution by the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, and others in relation to some of the statements currently being made, we will offer our support to the Kingdom of Denmark when it takes the chair of the Arctic Council in May.

Constructive progress in the council has been a welcome development, but our objective for an Arctic of high co-operation and low tension depends on more than that alone, and of course there are some who may seek to undermine that objective. That is why we have been clear that we will protect and, if necessary, assert our rights to support wider regional governance and security. This includes protecting the centrality and integrity of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which I addressed recently at the United Nations General Assembly, in the face of attempts to undermine stability, disrupt critical infrastructure and restrict freedom of navigation in the region.

Alongside our resolute support for Ukraine, we are working tirelessly with partners, including the Nordic states and beyond, for peace, security and stability. I reassure the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, that the UK’s commitment to NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force and the Northern Group is ironclad, because while we recognise Russia’s rights and role as an Arctic state, we are not naive about the challenges we face in the High North or their importance for the UK. There can be no global security without Arctic security. The recent reports of damage to electricity and telecommunications cables in the Baltic Sea connecting Finland, Estonia and Germany underline the importance of partners, including the United Kingdom, continuing to work together on these shared challenges. The Foreign Secretary made these issues a focus of his first 100 days in office with visits to Sweden and Norway, where he discussed Euro-Atlantic security, and the Prime Minister joined leaders of other Joint Expeditionary Force nations in Tallinn last month to discuss the security threats and challenges in the Baltic, north Atlantic and High North and reiterate our commitment to the security of the region.

It is also clear, as we have heard in the debate, that climate and environmental change are exacerbating the growing geopolitical competition, including for the critical minerals necessary to power the green transition, while being critical issues in their own right. The committee’s report rightly identifies the United Kingdom as a world leader in polar science. The UK has invested over £135 million in Arctic research over the last decade, including through UK centres of expertise. The UK’s Royal Research Ship “Sir David Attenborough” paid its first visit to Greenland last summer. The Minister with responsibility for the polar regions, Stephen Doughty, took the opportunity to engage with many British and international polar scientists on his visit to Norway and Iceland in October.

Additionally, the United Kingdom’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency recently launched an £81 million call for proposals for research around Greenland to explore the potential for an early warning system for climate tipping points of global importance. Given that this is the critical decade for climate action, and as we head towards the next International Polar Year, in 2032-33, our efforts and collaboration have never been more important. We will work closely with Arctic state partners, wider allies and, critically, indigenous people to better understand and assess climate and environmental change in the region and beyond.

However, to address the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Stevens, while we expect other countries to deliver their climate commitments, we also respect their right to determine the routes they take to meeting these goals, including how they regulate the production and use of hydrocarbons. To address the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, the UK continues to actively encourage UK polar science. In addition to our bilateral Arctic science research partnerships, the Government have recently committed additional funding to support engagement of UK researchers with the Arctic Council working groups. In total, government support for this engagement now amounts to £710,000.

On the other issue that the noble Baroness, Lady Coussins, raised, which I have just mentioned, I reassure her that Minister Doughty met a number of Arctic state representatives and representatives of indigenous people, among others, on his recent visit to the Arctic Circle Assembly. In respect of indigenous people, he conveyed that we are committed to better recognising the vital role that they play in the region and to working with them in genuine partnership to tackle the challenges we face. We have much to learn from their experience and knowledge.

Noble Lords will understand that the committee’s report also highlights the need to give the Arctic sufficient attention, and I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton, for his questions on this point. As I have sought to highlight, what happens in the Arctic has wide-reaching implications for the United Kingdom, thrown into ever sharper relief by the climatic, environmental and geopolitical challenges it faces.

The Minister for the polar regions has established a cross-governmental ministerial group on those regions, involving Ministers from nine other departments. This will meet for the first time in February and play an important role in supporting the agreement and delivery of a strong and co-ordinated Arctic policy. This is how we can ensure that we are best placed to support the long-term peace, sustainability and prosperity of the region and protect the UK’s long-term interests. The group will also help to ensure that the Government tackle the issues of climate change, nature and security in a joined-up way across the polar regions.

To address the point made by many Lords, including the noble Lords, Lord Teverson and Lord Hannay, this is not something to be delivered just from the United Kingdom. As I have highlighted, FCDO Ministers are actively engaged in the region, with support from wider ministerial colleagues and at official level by the head of the polar regions department and the senior Arctic lead, part of whose role is to represent UK interests with partners in the region. With UK interests co-ordinated through a lead Minister for the polar regions, we consider this an effective way of co-ordinating and delivering our Arctic policy. That is a specific answer to the noble Lord, Lord Ashton.

I am also grateful to the noble Lord for his further questions. I hope that I have already given a flavour of the Government’s position on key areas of Arctic policy, but let me highlight three key things. First, there is our desire to see strong collaboration under the auspices of the Arctic Council, as part of our commitment to multilateralism and deepening our relationships in Europe and beyond. We see the council as key to binding together the growing global interest in a region characterised by ever increasing economic competition. Secondly, there is our steadfast commitment to the security of the Arctic, including through NATO, the Joint Expeditionary Force and the Northern Group. Thirdly, there is the centrality of action on climate and nature to the Government’s work. There are few places where the impacts of climate and environmental change are more clearly seen than in the Arctic. We will continue to press for action to reduce emissions and build collaboration through the United Kingdom’s contribution to Arctic research, including with indigenous people.

In relation to the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, we support the objectives of this agreement, which came into effect in 2021. It seeks to prevent unregulated high seas fishing in the central Arctic Ocean. As noble Lords have said, it places a moratorium on commercial fishing in the area covered by the agreement until 2037. We remain committed to joining the agreement at the earliest opportunity. This requires an invitation from existing parties. However, there is currently no formally established accession process. The United Kingdom recently attended the third CAOFA conference of the parties in the Republic of Korea in June 2024, where a discussion on the United Kingdom’s accession took place for the first time. All parties but one were supportive, but the parties agreed to discuss an accession process. In the meantime, we continue to engage as an observer.

I turn to some of the other questions raised in the debate but that I have not addressed so far. Noble Lords particularly asked about my noble friend Lord Robertson’s strategic defence review. While the UK is not an Arctic state, our capabilities in the Arctic and the High North are being considered as part of the strategic defence review, the outcome of which is due to be published in the first half of this year. We have strong relationships as allies with seven of the eight Arctic states, with which we will co-operate to ensure the stability of the region. The SDR will help to determine the nature of that co-operation, but our commitment to our allies through NATO and the JEF will remain steadfast. That review will precisely address those priorities that noble Lords have raised in this debate.

The noble Lord, Lord Willetts, raised a really important point in regard to space. We are supportive of the ambition to launch satellites from spaceports across the United Kingdom. Assured access to launch capability is important to the MoD, and we will seek to achieve the greatest value for money from providers which can meet this requirement. We are supporting our partners and allies, as the noble Lord said, as a participant in the STARLIFT programme, which will create a network of space launch capabilities across the alliance. He also asked about Northlink. We will continue to engage with NATO to understand the vision and concept of Northlink.

The noble Lord, Lord Stevens, asked about biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. The ratification of that agreement is in line with the Government’s determination to reinvigorate the United Kingdom’s wider international leadership on climate and nature, and we are completely committed to ratification. Precisely when is a question of parliamentary time, as he knows.

There was a question about search and rescue in the Arctic, which of course rests with the Arctic states. We are ensuring that the rescue agreements allow for co-operation to ensure timely and effective response. HM Coastguard works closely with them in the North Atlantic Coast Guard Forum, as well as other multilateral research projects. Certainly, HM Coastguard also represents UK interests in search and rescue discussions in the Arctic Council.

The noble Lord, Lord Mountevans, raised the issue of increased shipping across the Arctic, which, of course, is not risk-free. As such, the United Kingdom will continue to advocate for the highest possible shipping standards and adherence to the polar code. New technology will be required to regulate and predictably meet the challenges of operating in the Arctic.

Despite the delay in considering the report in the Chamber, this has been a timely opportunity for us to consider all these challenges. I certainly welcome the attention that noble Lords have given to this at this critical time. The Government are committed to working together with partners and allies in a spirit of collaboration and co-operation to ensure effective governance, underpinned by a strong Arctic Council; to support regional security and, more importantly, uphold international law; and to strengthen our science and research collaboration to tackle and respond to climate and environmental change, for a more stable, secure and sustainable Arctic for the future.

Pro-democracy Campaigners: Arrests

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, I am sure that the whole House will agree that this news is very worrying, particularly for those from Hong Kong who have BNO status. Given that the noble Lord’s ministerial friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is visiting China next week, can he ensure that she will raise these human rights issues, and the multitude of other human rights violations, during this cosy little tete-a-tete with the Chinese Communists? Will she also raise, again, the case of Jimmy Lai?

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

Our approach to China is not to pivot between a golden era and a deep denial of any contact. We are taking a consistent approach that is rooted in the United Kingdom’s interests and global interests. We will co-operate where we can, compete where we need to and challenge where we must. Let me reassure the noble Lord that, at every opportunity, the Prime Minister and other Ministers have made it absolutely clear to the Chinese Communist Party and its leadership that they should release Jimmy Lai. We have made representations on that and have strongly condemned the recent announcement of Hong Kong police targeting individuals who are exercising their right to freedom of expression. We have called on Beijing to repeal the national security law. We do not tolerate any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics overseas, especially in the United Kingdom.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, the wholly unacceptable issuing of bounties for the arrest of innocent British residents and citizens is contrary to the promotion of and respect for democracy, the rule of law and good governance in the United Kingdom. That is one of the criteria for Magnitsky sanctions. Will the Government act and ensure that those who issued those bounties will now be sanctioned by this Parliament as a statement and signal of that being completely unacceptable behaviour? In the light of these actions just before Christmas, will the Government now move with pace on the designation of China under national security legislation for the enhanced mechanisms, so that it cannot interfere in our democratic processes?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows I am obliged to say that I am not going to respond by predicting future sanctions. To come back to his point about FIRS, we have not yet made any decisions on which foreign powers or foreign power-controlled entities will be specified on the enhanced tier. The Foreign Influence Registration Scheme will further strengthen our national security, while maintaining the UK as an international hub for business. Announcements will be made after due consideration. Certainly, we have been clear, and we believe that our approach of engaging directly and robustly with China where it is in the UK’s national interest is the right one. It is firmly in line with our G7 and Five Eyes partners.

[Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)]

My Lords, in another place yesterday, the Minister, Catherine West, said that we have to “balance” national security with the need to be

“an outwardly facing … trading nation”.—[Official Report, Commons, 7/1/25; col. 760.]

Can the Minister explain what that means in the context of the 19 year-old young woman, Chloe Cheung, who now has a £1 million bounty on her head, along with several other young people, including Nathan Law, a former legislator in Hong Kong, whose own family have been threatened regularly, as he is now here in exile in the United Kingdom? Chloe said:

“Fear cannot restrain me. Suppression cannot silence me”.


Can the Minister tell us what more the Government will do to support people in her position? As the Joint Committee on Human Rights has decided to hold an inquiry into transnational repression, I hope the Minister will agree that that is an inquiry to which he will make a significant contribution as the Human Rights Minister.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I am certainly willing to do that. Let me reassure the noble Lord that our position is quite clear. China is our fourth-biggest trading partner and the second-biggest economy. Trade between these countries has existed for some time. The United Kingdom Government, under both parties, have been very clear and robust about these breaches of international law. To suggest that we have done nothing that the Chinese Communist Party has been annoyed about is not true. The noble Lord can grimace, but the fact that we have given BNOs the right to come here was very much a concern of the Chinese Communist Party. We have acted—this has included sanctions for four Chinese officials and one entity for serious systematic human rights violations—and we continue to act. The idea that we can simply conflate our very strong condemnation of human rights abuses and then say that therefore we are not going to have any economic ties is simply not in the interests of this country or of the global economy.

[Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Con)]

My Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that last answer. He is quite right that we should not be pivoting on the basis of headlines; we should have the closest relationship compatible with our national security and the principles that we uphold. None the less, I am sure the Minister will recognise that there was a substantive change in Chinese policy towards Hong Kong from 2020. Until then, the letter, if not always the spirit, of the Sino-British declaration had been honoured. With the national security law and the cancellation of the LegCo elections and change in the rules, China is now blatantly in violation of the “one country, two systems” deal, which was the basis on which the transfer of sovereignty was made. Whether it is by the kind of targeted sanctions suggested by the noble Lord, Lord Purvis of Tweed, or by some other mechanism, surely there must be some response from the British Government when we see such an overt violation of a treaty to which we are one of the two parties.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Ongoing breaches of that agreement have been registered with the United Nations. As I have said, one of the biggest consequences of those was the United Kingdom Government’s actions in facilitating BNOs being able to come to this country—a very successful operation, on which I congratulate the previous Government. It was the right decision. It certainly annoyed the Chinese Communist Party, which saw it as a breach of the agreement, whereas it was a reaction to its ongoing breaches of the agreement. We are taking every possible step to raise our concerns about human rights violations, not only the introduction of the security legislation in Hong Kong but the ongoing breaches of human rights in other parts of China.

[Baroness Falkner of Margravine (CB)]

My Lords, will the Minister accept that there are consequences for not upholding international law and not sticking by treaty obligations? I remind him that our capitulation in the light of the violation of the Budapest memorandum vis-à-vis Ukraine led to certain inevitable actions. I suggest to him that exactly the same may happen if the Government appear to be so relaxed about signing up only to bits of international law that they rather like and not enforcing obligations internationally elsewhere, particularly as a UN Security Council member.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I totally refute the noble Baroness’s suggestion that we are not being robust in our response in defending human rights. The actions of the United Kingdom Government have been very clear. I repeat that the biggest response to the introduction of this law in Hong Kong was the facilitation of BNOs coming here, and we are making the strongest possible representations. I also refute the idea that we have not used sanctions; we have, and I could go into examples of upholding international humanitarian law and human rights. I do not accept for one moment that we failed to show a robust response. But we are living in a global world and we face global challenges, not least as one of the biggest economies in the world. We have to co-operate with China to address our biggest threat, which is climate change. That is what I hear from people when I attend international fora. I refute the noble Baroness’s suggestion.

Northern Gaza

Lord Collins of Highbury Excerpts

Wednesday 8th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, we all want to see this terrible conflict in Gaza come to a sustainable end as quickly as possible, with the emphasis, of course, on “sustainable”. I am sure we are all watching the current developments in Cairo extremely carefully. The key to a sustainable end to the conflict in Gaza remains the release of the hostages. Can the Minister update us with any further information the Government have on the status of the hostages, particularly the British national hostage, Emily Damari? We also want to see more aid reach Gaza because we all know that innocent civilians in Gaza are suffering and desperate. Sadly, they continue to be used as human shields by Hamas, which seems to have no regard at all for their safety and welfare. Does the Minister agree that Hamas has the power to end this conflict immediately by releasing those hostages? Does he agree that there is no moral equivalence between Israel’s defensive war and Hamas’s terrorist atrocities?

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

I think the noble Lord knows the answers to those questions because he has heard me speak repeatedly of the need for the immediate release of the hostages. Both sides need to show flexibility and do a deal now. We reiterate our call for the safe release of all hostages, including the British national, Emily Damari, and three hostages with strong UK links. Ensuring their release is a top priority for this Government. I also emphasise that we are facing a severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza and that our response has been to focus on that too and make it clear that some of the actions that the Israeli Government have taken need to cease, so we need flexibility on both sides. We have announced £112 million for the OPTs this financial year, including £41 million for UNRWA, which provides vital, life-saving services to civilians in Gaza and the West Bank and to Palestinians across the region. As the noble Lord said, what we need is an immediate ceasefire and proper access for humanitarian aid.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, it is an outrage that the innocent hostages are still being detained. Yesterday, Minister Falconer said in the House of Commons of the Israeli military:

“Air strikes within the designated humanitarian zone show there are no safe spaces left for civilians”.—[Official Report, Commons, 7/1/25; col. 733.]


The most pressing threat is to the 50,000 pregnant women and the 17,000 unaccompanied children. There is now hunger and no health facilities at all. Not only that, in December, we saw the lowest levels of aid getting into Gaza, and the Israeli Government, as an occupying power, was blocking its distribution within Gaza, contrary to international law, and contributing to the looting and criminal activities by gangs and Hamas. Notwithstanding the Minister’s concern and the number of times that Ministers have expressed their frustration with the Israeli Government, what consequences will there be for the relationship between the Israeli Government and His Majesty’s Government? There now need to be consequences; otherwise, nothing that Ministers say about their concerns will have any influence on the Israeli Government.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows that when this Government were elected, we took specific action. We have not been complacent here. On the mounting civilian deaths, we are absolutely determined to ensure that Israel does much more to comply with international humanitarian law and provide protection for civilians.

The Foreign Secretary continues to raise issues of international humanitarian law compliance in Gaza with the Israeli Government and since 2 September there have been no extant UK export licences for items to Israel that we assess are for use in military operations in Gaza. We have also restored funding to UNRWA to ensure that humanitarian aid can get in. I repeat to the noble Lord that we have not been complacent. We have acted and continue to act and put pressure on the Israeli Government and work with all our allies, as we have shown in our votes at the United Nations and the Security Council. I refute the suggestion that we have not taken action.

[Baroness O’Loan (CB)]

My Lords, I recently met Dr Omar Alshaqaqi, who works in the cancer centre in Belfast City Hospital. He and his wife Dalal have seen 80 members of their two families killed in Gaza. On 4 December, Dalal was able to speak to her mother and sister in the camp that they had moved to on the instructions of the Israelis. As they concluded their conversation so that Dalal could go and collect her children from school in Belfast, she heard a bomb explode. When she returned with her children she learned that her mother and 34 year-old brother had been killed, and her three sisters and two of her three brothers had been seriously injured. All the hospitals have been destroyed. There is no anaesthetic and no medication to treat their terrible injuries. We all accept that Hamas must return the hostages but what more can be done after the destruction of all the hospitals to allow such injured people to get out of Gaza to a safe country?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness for her contribution and her question. The situation in northern Gaza is absolutely dire and reports from Kamal Adwan Hospital have continued to shock and distress the international community. The United Kingdom has repeatedly raised concerns about the impact of this conflict on Gaza’s healthcare system and medical staff, including reiterating the requirement for all parties to comply with international humanitarian law. We are looking at all ways that we can ensure that proper health facilities are made available to those who need them and I hope, in the near future, we will be able to make certain announcements about that.

[The Lord Bishop of Norwich]

My Lords, three days before Hamas’s horrendous attacks on Israel I was in Gaza visiting the Anglican Al-Ahli Hospital. That hospital was struck again on 29 December by an Israeli artillery shell—the fifth strike it has had. Earlier this afternoon, I asked the archbishop in Jerusalem for an update and he provided me with a list of things that are urgently needed by his medical director at that hospital. They include antibiotics, anaesthesia drugs, sterile gloves, plaster of Paris, surgical knives, abdominal swabs and much more. All of that is in a container that has been in Amman for two months, held up because the Israeli Government will not allow it in. What might His Majesty’s Government do to try to enable that medical equipment to get to the Al-Ahli Hospital urgently?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Both the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have raised the issue of access to humanitarian aid and medical supplies with the Israeli Government. We are also giving support to UNRWA to try to get those supplies through. I think the right reverend Prelate makes an extremely valid point. It is unacceptable that such supplies should not be able to get through to those who need them. We are certainly making the strongest possible representations to ensure that they do get through.

[Lord Pickles (Con)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, I do not underestimate the difficulty of what I am going to ask my noble friend but on Monday I asked whether His Majesty’s Government could possibly consider the urgent temporary medical evacuation of children facing death, very serious illness and terrible injuries because clearly there are no medical facilities in northern Gaza which can deal with the situation they are facing. I repeat: is it possible for His Majesty’s Government to consider urgent temporary medical evacuation?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I tried to answer that question earlier, because there was a specific point raised. We are looking at all possible ways to ensure that there is access to medical assistance. I am not in a position to make any announcements today, but we are working with allies to see how this can be facilitated urgently.

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.