Iranian Regime: British Citizens Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Leader of the House

Iranian Regime: British Citizens

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts
Thursday 27th February 2025

(1 day, 19 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Purvis of Tweed Portrait Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my noble friend in a debate where only Bishops and Liberals have spoken so far. I am not sure that has ever happened before during my 12 years in this House. Therefore, it has been a very high-quality debate in my humble opinion. I commend the right reverend Prelate for bringing this debate to us.

I had the pleasure of being in my place during the right reverend Prelate’s maiden speech, when she spoke so powerfully of her family background and of the contemporary situation within Iran. It is absolutely right that this remains part of our proceedings and is at the top of our mind. With the tumultuous events happening in the world, we should not forget that there are, as she put it, whole swathes of people who are trapped, imprisoned politically and literally by a regime that denies the very basic human rights that we in this country take for granted.

I commend my noble friend Baroness Brinton for her work within the global network. I am convinced that, even though many young people in Iran see a regime where there is for them perhaps little hope, they will know that there are people around the world who are listening to their struggle, are watching the regime and ultimately will take action. It is therefore right that the Minister has been asked a number of questions about what actions the Government will be taking.

The right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans was right to refer to the extreme use of the death penalty. There is unanimity in this House on opposition to the death penalty, but the extreme nature of it should focus all democratic Parliaments around the world on those who are unable to defend themselves in a very flawed judicial process.

We have debated on a number of occasions the malign involvement of Iran in its near neighbourhood, more recently within the Red Sea and the Middle East but also in north Africa and—an issue very close to my heart—in Sudan. We see on a daily basis the regime seeking to destabilise and to interfere in other nations.

To return to the domestic situation in Iran, all contributions have mentioned the profoundly moving work of Richard Ratcliffe in support of Nazanin; it has been an inspiration for anyone who has had the privilege of meeting them. I did so with their daughter, who was getting to know her mother again. On a very human scale, one of the consequences of Nazanin’s detention was that it was the detention of the mother of a very young child. Something that struck me was that after she was detained in 2016, six Foreign Secretaries had her file on their desk, but it was the different approach at ministerial level that led to a consensus, I hope, that there should be a more systematic way of approaching those who are denied basic access to consular services. We therefore support the Government in their efforts to establish an envoy for complex cases, but also a statutory underpinning of the right to consular access where there are human rights violations. Like others, I ask the Minister to confirm that progress is being made and in what timeframe we will see legislation brought forward, so that we can properly debate it and ultimately support it.

There are other measures that the Government can take, not just sanctions on the human rights aspect. I debated the Iran sanctions regime, as did the noble Lord, Lord Collins. We have a unique approach to our sanctions—a countrywide ability to have sanctions that are flexible and that can be activated immediately if the United States, Canada or the European Union does so. That reinforces the point, which has been made in the debate, that we should be working with our allies to put more pressure on the Iranian regime, especially when it comes to the flawed judicial processes that are abused by a political regime when such individuals are detained.

The UK could do more regarding the judiciary in Iran. In the debate in January last year, I asked the previous Government, specifically the noble Lord, Lord Benyon, to move on that issue. The US, under both the Biden and Trump Administrations, is seeking to exert pressure, and I hope the UK will follow.

I want to put on record that, because of the malign influence of Iran on its near neighbourhood, and because of those individuals who are struggling, there are two aspects of the policies of both the previous and current Governments that I hope we can reflect on. First, there continues to be no safe and legal routes for any Iranians, especially young Iranian women, if they are seeking refuge from persecution and trying to come to the UK. We know that the Iranian diaspora in the UK is strong, welcoming and stable, so anyone persecuted in Iran would be able to seek shelter here, but there is no safe and legal route. I hope the Minister might reconsider that and speak to Ministers in the Home Office. It is not too late, and it would make a meaningful difference. It would also provide hope for many individuals who see the UK as a potential area of refuge.

Finally, all the programmes that are currently scored as official development assistance in near-neighbourhood countries are defending human rights and those persecuted for promoting democracy and seeking resilience against interference. Those are the very programmes we want to see in place, because they are about the security of the United Kingdom, but they are going to be slashed. I hope that, at the very least, we can protect those programmes scored as ODA which are about national security and are pro-democracy.