Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

Lord Mann Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The answer is supporting the Palestinian Authority on their road back to reform to become much more legitimate. That is the pathway to a two-state solution. There is no role for Hamas in the future. It is a terrorist organisation that has committed heinous crimes. We should never forget those crimes. The noble Lord is absolutely right that it is repressive and resisting any form of scrutiny, but the Israeli Government have not allowed journalists into Gaza as well. We should be very clear: we want a road map to peace and a solution, but that will be achieved only if we can ensure that the Palestinian Authority can reform, be supported and be the legitimate voice of the Palestinian people. Palestine is not just the Gaza Strip; it is also the Occupied Territories. We need to ensure that all the people of Palestine, represented by the Palestinian Authority, can have the voice they deserve.

[Lord Mann (Lab)]

My Lords, I had the unfortunate need this morning to privately message my long-standing friend Ted Deutch, the leader of the American Jewish Committee, whose event on peacebuilding was ended with the murder of two Jewish people. When Jewish people cannot walk the streets of Washington safely, that shows how dangerous a world we live in.

From my capacity as government adviser on antisemitism for the last six years, I know that every time there is such an incident, the Government in this country immediately renew and relook at the security of the British Jewish community. It does no damage to ask the Minister to ensure that, as that is happening, our citizens—particularly those in sensitive areas or international organisations, and our diplomats abroad—are fully incorporated into such reviews. Jewish people in particular, wherever they are at the moment, are in danger from terrorists. Will the Minister take back the strong message that, whatever important decisions the Government make on our position on Israel and Gaza or on freeing the hostages, they need at all times to demonstrate to the British Jewish community that they are reinforcing their priority of tackling antisemitism in this country and abroad?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. I heard on the “Today” programme this morning a discussion on precisely these issues. It is really important that we challenge antisemitism. I hope I have conveyed today the very clear distinction I make between the Government of Israel and its people. The people of Israel deserve all our support and protection, particularly from malign states such as Iran that are trying to undermine it and committing state terrorism across the globe. He is absolutely right to draw attention to the need to protect our communities. I am determined that everyone should be able to express an opinion and walk safely through our streets. Sometimes walking that path can be extremely difficult; I am criticised on the one hand for saying that I support the State of Israel and on the other for saying that what is happening in Gaza is unacceptable. I think everyone in the House feels the same and wants a two-state solution that provides security for both communities. We will continue to work towards that.

House of Lords Reform

Lord Mann Excerpts

Tuesday 12th November 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Mann (Lab)]

My oh my, democracy is a bit of a pain, is it not? This Palace has been here for 1,000 years. Eventually women were given the vote, and by 1970, 18 year-olds were given the vote. It took a bit of time. We have been patient.

The preamble to the Parliament Act 1911 had something else in it. It described it as an interim measure until the second Chamber could be

“constituted on a popular instead of hereditary basis”.

We have had plenty of opportunities since 1911 and plenty of manifestos—including from the Labour Party. I was elected in the Commons by the people in 2001. I had a look today to see how many people still in the Commons were there before I was. There are 33. All the rest, the vast majority—diligent, hard-working, decent people—were slung out. The electorate removed them. Some constituencies removed many in that period and some did so in pretty much every recent election. That is democracy: decent people removed by the people.

Should any noble Lords ever choose to go on the many parliamentary tours that I do, they may not approve of my explanation of the history of this country. Succinctly put, I explain how our democracy emerged. We had kings. They wanted to be king of France as well. Our democracy basically emerged as kings fought wars with France to grab a bit of France and then fought wars to keep that bit of France. To fight wars, they needed taxes and soldiers, so they got soldiers—or money for soldiers—saying in return, “We’ll give you a title. You can have Scotland or Lancashire as well as part of the deal”. That is a simplification, but it is not an exaggeration of how this place built up over the years, with a few scandals built in as well—we were not in the days then of DNA testing to prove who had the entitlement.

That has passed on down the generations to determine the laws of the country. It might have been good enough for 900 years, but in the last century we started to evolve into something called democracy: that the people choose. I caution against referendums. Extra questions should be added. “Should the House of Lords be abolished immediately?” I am not sure that it is in the interests of our sustainability to put that question to the people. We could decide each to fight our own by-elections with the people but have “none of the above as an option”, but there might not be many left if we went down that route. So the move towards democracy also includes someone winning an election on a manifesto and saying, “Here is what we are going to do”.

I put it to the House that people are a bit fed up with politicians who win elections and then do not do what they have promised to do and that people have voted for. It may not suit people in here that the people of this country have voted for the abolition of hereditary Peers and an age limit in here, but they have.

There are weaknesses in democracy, and people argue and say, “Ah, they voted for other things”. If we want the people of this country to trust our Parliament, it gets quite simple when there are simple propositions. Therefore, if there are alternatives, those alternatives have to be absolutely in the spirit of what was in the Labour manifesto, not washing it away and pretending or negotiating but delivering it or coming up with something equally good as an argument. I am not hearing those alternative arguments today: I am hearing special pleading. We have had hundreds of years of special pleading, and, for democracy, that is not good enough.