Israel: Trade

Lord Gascoigne Excerpts

Thursday 8th January 2026 Grand Committee

[Lord Gascoigne (Con)]

My Lords, it is a great honour to follow the noble Baroness. The problem with speaking so far down a list of many eminent speakers is that, I am afraid, a lot of the good stuff I was going to say has already been said—but I am still going to crack on.

This is the first time I have engaged with the Minister, so I congratulate him; I appreciate that he has been in his position for some time, but his is a fantastic role. I also congratulate my personal friend, the noble Lord, Lord Austin, not just on securing this debate but on all of the great work that he does as a trade envoy, in standing up for the Jewish community in this country and in tackling antisemitism.

As everyone has already said, it is important that we are honest about what is already true and the facts of the relationship with Israel, which are often, I am afraid, overlooked or selectively disregarded. The relationship, as has been said, is incredibly strong. Co-operation extends beyond trade into counterterrorism, research, technology and AI. It is one of the few major trading relationships in which we enjoy a trade surplus, and it is one that continues to grow. I am sure that the Minister will agree that it is one of the many virtues of Brexit that the ability to pursue new trade agreements means that we can also pursue our own national interests at the same time. As has been said, sadly, part of a new trade agreement under discussion has been halted.

Trade is not just commercial, though: it is the arena for engagement, co-operation and influence. If the Government felt unable to continue those talks during the war, what precisely is preventing their resumption now that the war is over? If the issue is aid, surely the Government can set out the threshold they expect to see. If it is about human rights, are we saying that we will suspend or abandon all trade discussions with every country with whose record we have concerns, or is this approach being applied only to Israel? If the concern is around a lack of progress on the peace plan, this week, even the Government briefly touched on the need for Hamas to disarm as part of that process, as my noble friend Lord Massey noted in the debate last night. The point is that it is widely recognised that the obstacles on the ground are not solely of Israel’s making.

So what is holding us back? Is our economy performing so well that we can afford to turn away deeper trade with a key partner? If the Government are so opposed to Israel’s actions, do they no longer consider Israel an ally? If we truly objected to Israeli policy, why did we not suspend all trade rather than only these new discussions? Like my noble friend Lord Blencathra, I am afraid to say that this makes me feel as though this was simply something for the Prime Minister to placate his Back-Benchers. If we were so opposed to what Israel was doing, why did we not apply the same approach to the United States, whose support for Israel was unequivocal?

If the Prime Minister objects to President Trump’s actions in Venezuela on the grounds of international law, will we now curtail economic ties with America on that basis? I hasten to add that I do not agree that we should—personally, I think that we should be congratulating it—but this is an inconsistency. I cannot help but feel that, at times, the Prime Minister appears to be intentionally trying to send different messages to different audiences, banning Israelis from the Royal College of Defence Studies and cancelling certain defence exports to appear tough to one group, as has been said, while maintaining the bulk of defence co-operation and the purchasing of arms—that has been mentioned—to reassure another. There was the announcement of the recognition of Palestine—but not immediately—and the halting of new trade talks while maintaining the wider relationship.

If we are serious about supporting a two-state solution, disengagement does not help. The Trump peace plan explicitly envisages Israeli investment in the reconstruction and economic stabilisation of Gaza. A prosperous and secure Israel is essential for Israelis, Palestinians, the region and our own national interest. Now that the war has ended, surely this is a moment to re-engage, rebuild momentum and strengthen that relationship, to the benefit of both nations; that is in the interests of the region, economic growth in this country and our shared security.