Gaza: Ceasefire

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I believe the international community is united. I thank Qatar, Egypt and the US for their support in bringing those individuals who have been released back to their families. Our thoughts are very much with those still waiting to be reunited with their loved ones, including the family of the UK-linked hostage, Avinatan Or. The simple fact is that release of the hostages is a vital component of the ceasefire deal, and it is the ceasefire deal that we have to be focused on to ensure that the hostages are released, that there is peace back in Gaza and that we get humanitarian aid in there, which is essential.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, given the unacceptable civilian casualties, the withholding of life-sustaining aid and the comments by the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, representing the Israeli hostages’ families, who said that they were “shocked” by the strikes and

“the deliberate disruption of the process to return our loved ones”,

it looks as if there is little chance that there will be the next stage of the ceasefire. Given that the Government believe that there is a very strong possibility of IHL being breached, is this not now the time to enact the precautionary principle and for there to be targeted actions against the extremist members of the Israeli Government who have rejoined the cabinet and must have been given an element of impunity by the United States? We must act unilaterally in this country and use the precautionary principle.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I think the noble Lord knows my position very clearly. All our diplomatic efforts are engaged with neighbouring countries, the US and all others to ensure that the parties to the ceasefire return to the table and implement the commitments they made. That is essential. That is how we will see the release of the hostages and see aid get back into Gaza. That is our priority. The noble Lord is fully aware that I am not going to comment on any possible future sanctions or actions; we do not do that. It is important that we focus diplomatically on ensuring a return to the ceasefire agreement and then at least we can get the aid into Gaza.

Media Freedom Coalition

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Monday 17th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Baroness makes an important point. Media freedom is absolutely part of this Government’s missions, particularly economic growth, because transparency is needed for that, as well as for climate and security. Media freedom plays an important part.

We are aware that the American Government have made significant changes to the US Agency for Global Media and related agencies such as Voice of America. I come back to how much we value the BBC World Service as it continues to provide impartial and accurate news to global audiences. I stress why it is so vital: it is a trusted voice. It is not the voice of the UK Government. I hesitate to use the term “soft power”. It is an independent voice, trusted globally, and we value that very much. We will monitor developments in relation to the USAGM and review carefully with the BBC any impacts on the World Service.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, further to that, the Minister and the House know that countering mis- and disinformation, especially in hostile environments, is a key part of our national security and defence. Over the last five years, the UK has committed over £500 million in this regard, all scored as official development assistance. On 7 March, the Minister’s colleague, the Minister for Development, gave an instruction that all new funding programming is now paused in advance of the spending review. Can the Minister say, at the very least, when it comes to this key part of our national security—countering mis- and disinformation—whether this funding will be protected?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The Prime Minister has announced a strategic vision for spending on defence and security. This has the impact on ODA that the noble Lord has mentioned, but the Government are absolutely committed to a significant development role. We will make detailed decisions on how the ODA budget will be used. We will work through this, as part of the ongoing spending review, on the basis of various factors, including impact assessments. I will not predict or predetermine what that review will undertake, but I have been very clear in my responses about the importance of media freedom to our security.

Gaza

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Lords Chamber

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

I thank the noble Lord for his questions. On the next stages of the process, we welcome the efforts by Arab leaders to put forward a plan for the next phase and the recovery and reconstruction in Gaza. The UK stands ready to work with partners to develop these ideas and to support all parties to get behind a single, viable plan for Gaza that meets the needs and aspirations of the civilian population and ensures a peaceful political framework for a negotiated two-state solution. As I have said to the House before, we are very clear that Hamas cannot govern Gaza and that any plan must ensure Israeli security and should support the unity of the West Bank and Gaza under the PA’s mandate.

On humanitarian aid, I reassure the noble Lord that we have committed a further £17 million, as the previous Minister for Development announced. We have also announced £129 million for the OPTs so far for this financial year, including £41 million for UNRWA. As the Prime Minister said in his Statement, we are absolutely committed to ensuring continued support for the Palestinian authorities.

The halt on goods and supplies entering Gaza is a serious matter, and Israel risks breaching its obligations under international humanitarian law. Today, we have issued with France and Germany a statement in which we express deep concern at Israel’s halt on aid to Gaza and urge it to lift all restrictions. It is vital that the ceasefire is sustained, all hostages are released, and aid is resumed.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I have read the E3 statement, and I agree with every word of it. These Benches support the Government’s statement, including the fact that the withholding of aid access to the people who need it most is contrary to international humanitarian law, and I am grateful that the Government have been clear on that. Given that the United States and the Israeli Governments have rejected the Arab plan, which was agreed yesterday, the UK Government may be in a position where they will have to choose whether to support the Trump proposals or the Arab proposals. In that regard, perhaps I may ask a specific question.

The UK has been the lead country in supporting the training, professionalisation and funding for the Palestinian Authority police force. Any police force in the new arrangements for Gaza will be of fundamental importance. Can the Minister reassure me that our support will continue for the professionalisation and training of a civilian police force? It would probably be one of the strongest ways to prevent gangsterism and Hamas regaining footage in that area.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right. We will continue to support the Palestinian Authority, not only with the training that he mentioned but in other ways, to enable it to take part positively in that plan. We have insisted that any dialogue should include Palestinians, and we will certainly continue with that. The Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister have obviously been in dialogue with all partners on this, and we will continue to work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the US and regional partners to build a consensus on the governance of post-conflict Gaza and the security framework that supports the conditions for a permanent and sustainable peace.

Ukraine

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Tuesday 4th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Lord for his experience of these issues; we would all do well to heed him. He is right: a peace negotiated without Ukraine at the table will not endure and be sustained. He is also right to refer to a security guarantee, which has been part of the issue in negotiations. The important thing is that everybody strives for peace. It is clear that there are different ways and different views on how that can be achieved. The two crucial points that the noble Lord mentioned—Ukraine at the table and a security guarantee—are the only way to have something that will endure.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I agree with the Prime Minister’s comments on President Putin’s appetite for chaos. I assume that the Government believe that he should not be rewarded for that. I should like to ask the Leader two questions. First, there are other countries in the near neighbourhood of Russia which are very anxious because the UK has been a critical supporter in resilience to the interference of Russia, whether it is in Moldova or the Baltics. That has been under UK’s ODA. Can the Leader ensure that the UK’s ODA support, which is up to £500 million under the integrated security fund, will be protected from the cuts to ODA that are proposed to fund defence expenditure?

Secondly, on the assets that we are seeking to use the interest of, I am assuming that the Government believe that Russia and the Kremlin’s apparatchiks should not have that money back. In that case, we should be receiving, as my noble friend Lord Newby said, the capital interest, with the capital itself going towards funding the Ukrainian recovery.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

The noble Lord makes an important point. The security of the Baltics and Moldova is extremely important, which is why the Prime Minister has had long conversations with those countries recently. He has also spoken to them about how they can be better engaged and we can ensure that we have wider engagement when we talk about Europe as a whole. That will be very important. He has assured them in these conversations that we will look again at the configuration of meetings with those states and other allies to ensure that they are properly represented and their views can be heard, particularly because of their vulnerable position.

The noble Lord will understand that I will not make commitments on particular areas of ODA. My noble friend Lady Chapman talked today about how important the ongoing work is; it is not just a case of pulling the rug out from under people—there has to be a proper discussion and we must look at the impact. It will take some time to work this through carefully. I will draw his comments to her attention.

On Russian assets, we are using the interest now and there are ongoing discussions about that. If it were easy, it would have been done already. It is not through reluctance that it is not being done. It is being actively pursued.

War in Sudan

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Monday 3rd March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As I think the noble Lord knows, I will not discuss future possible sanctions, but we have already made a number of sanctions against both sides and against individuals and companies involved. However, the future must be about how we build an international coalition for peace and humanitarian support. That is why the April conference is so important; it will bring together Foreign Ministers, including not just our international allies but all regional players, to ensure that they understand that there must be a better way forward. There is no military solution to this conflict, and the only people suffering are the civilians. The so-called representatives of the two warring factions have no interest in defending their civilian population, so we have to change that attitude and get the international community working together to ensure that we put people first.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I declare significant interest in supporting the pro-democracy civilian groups in the dialogue within the conflict. Given the recent decisions by USAID, I welcome the fact that the Government will be protecting their support for the crisis. I welcome the ministerial conference that is coming up. One of the particular aspects which needs to be commended for the civilians is the provision of community kitchens and emergency rooms. In many areas—whether in RSF or SAF controlled areas—the only functioning services for providing food and medicine for civilians are through other civilians themselves. A lot of that has been funded through diaspora communities, and that has been drying up. Can the Minister update us as to what additional support there is—notwithstanding that there is no UN resolution for the protection of civilians—for the community kitchens and the emergency rooms, which are a lifeline for so many civilians, including women and children?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

The noble Lord is absolutely right. One of the things we have been concerned about—which we have raised with both parties—is access to humanitarian aid. While one side says you can have that access, it does not cross the warring parties, so we cannot get to the people who desperately need it. He is absolutely right that we have to look at all means to ensure that we get help in. In terms of the April conference, we are engaging with civil society and the Taqaddum leadership—now called Somoud, where there has been a slight breakaway—and we are concerned to ensure that we have an inclusive dialogue. I met the chargé d’affaires for Sudan last week, and I made clear that we demand humanitarian access. We have committed additional funds, but we want proper access to all parts of Sudan so that nobody suffers.

Iranian Regime: British Citizens

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Thursday 27th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

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.

Democratic Republic of the Congo: M23 Group

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Browne of Ladyton (Lab)]

My Lords—

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords—

[Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)]

We will hear from my noble friend Lord Browne and then from the Liberal Democrat Benches.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend makes a very good point. The real risk was that this was going to create regional instability, which is why we not only supported the Luanda process but very much welcomed the convening of the SADC-EAC meeting in Dar es Salaam last week, which set out a very clear process. He is absolutely right to draw attention to the huge humanitarian cost of 2.7 million people displaced—IDPs in eastern DRC. The United Kingdom is the leading humanitarian partner in DRC and the second-largest donor in the country, allocating over £62 million for this financial year for humanitarian programmes in eastern DRC. I also take seriously my responsibility as the envoy for the prevention of sexual violence in conflict. That is a huge risk at the moment, and we are devoted to supporting survivors of sexual violence in that region. We are not going to rest until we ensure that all parties are focused on that agreement reached in Dar es Salaam at the end of last week.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, during the passage of the Illegal Migration Bill and the safety of Rwanda Bill, I asked the previous Government for details—but failed to get them—of the £240 million economic and integration fund that the previous Government gave to Paul Kagame’s Government. Can the Minister assure me that not a single penny of UK money has gone to non-humanitarian assistance in Rwanda, and especially the £20 million credit line provided to Paul Kagame’s Government for preparation of facilities that were not then needed? How much money are we getting back from his Government?

Syria

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Thursday 6th February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My noble friend is absolutely right. I repeat that support for women and girls continues, and will continue, to be at the heart of our policy and programmes in Syria. But I emphasise that we have long supported Syrian civil society and will continue to do so. As the noble Baroness, Lady Hodgson, says, that means that we move towards a more pluralistic solution. My noble friend is absolutely right: we need to engage the broad range of women’s organisations.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, first, the self-declared President of Syria is also head of a proscribed terrorist organisation that restricts the rights of minorities and women. Has the Government’s assessment of proscription changed with regard to that organisation? Secondly, given the news from the United States yesterday that the Trump Administration are now preparing to withdraw from Syria 2,000 troops who are part of the anti-terrorism work with the UK, what are our contingency arrangements to reduce terrorism in that part of Syria if the US troops are withdrawn?

Sudan and Eastern DRC

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, the latest atrocities unfolding in Sudan and eastern DRC are a sobering reminder of the human cost of conflict and the duties that we all share to respond decisively and compassionately. A brutal attack on the hospital in El Fasher, which has claimed the lives of 70 patients and their families, is a grim illustration of the callous disregard for international humanitarian law by many of these armed groups. Stories of women and children suffering unspeakable violence shared by the Foreign Secretary from his visit to the Chad-Sudan border really do underline the urgency of our necessary response.

In the DRC, the resurgence of M23 and the appalling reports of atrocities against women and children are heart-wrenching. There has been some fantastic reporting recently from British reporters in those areas. The bravery of the UN peacekeepers who lost their lives in Goma must not go unacknowledged, and we extend our deepest condolences to the nations that supplied them and to their families.

What concrete steps are the Government able to take to help to secure lasting peace in these regions? Diplomatic efforts are of course welcome, but can the Minister clarify how the Government plan to strengthen Britain’s role in African-led peace processes and ensure sustained international engagement, especially with partners such as Rwanda and Uganda, who bear responsibility for much of the violence there? In the other place, the Foreign Secretary said that the Minister spoke to the Rwandan and Angolan Foreign Ministers last week. I would be interested if the Minister could update the House on what he discussed, particularly with the Minister from Rwanda.

It is deeply concerning that Russia vetoed the UK’s and Sierra Leone’s humanitarian resolution at the Security Council. What efforts are being made to circumvent the paralysis of the UN, possibly through regional alliances or coalition-building outside of the Security Council framework?

On humanitarian aid, I welcome the UK’s commitment to increasing assistance, including the additional £20 million for Sudan and £62 million for the DRC. How do the Government intend to ensure that this aid actually reaches those in need, given the persistent blockages and insecurity on the ground, and the dangers for international organisations operating there?

Finally, I echo the Foreign Secretary’s point about the lack of global outrage. The selective attention paid to different conflicts is not just morally indefensible but strategically foolish. Neglecting African crises risks exacerbating instability, illegal migration and the proliferation of armed groups, all of which have consequences for all of us. We must never be indifferent to suffering, regardless of where it takes place. I urge the Government to maintain their focus on these crises, not just in the headlines but through sustained diplomatic and humanitarian efforts. I am sure that the House stands ready to support any measures that bring us closer to peace and relief for the benighted people of Sudan and the DRC.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I am very happy to associate myself with the final remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Callanan.

The House is aware, as is the Minister, of my ongoing interest in supporting Sudanese civilians in exile. The humanitarian suffering continues on an enormous and heartbreaking scale, with what the US had previously categorised as genocide in Darfur, again, and atrocities committed by both sets of belligerents, civilians slaughtered by Chinese drones, reports of chemical weapons being used, and the systematic blocking of humanitarian aid to the communities that need it most, especially women and children.

There are still far too few safe zones, which should have been established many months ago. The Minister is aware that I have supported the Government’s work at the Security Council. It is worth reminding ourselves that, had it not been for the Russian veto, many of the diplomatic actions and work that we have been calling for would have been put in place as a result of the UK-drafted resolution.

The scale is enormous. That was brought home to me when I was in Nairobi last weekend, with civilians in exile, as part of dialogue. One of the former diplomats who is working tirelessly to try to bring about cohesion in the civilian voice told me that his brother had been killed the day before.

For those who are working to try to bring about an end to the war, who cannot return home and who have many family members at home in great peril, this is very real. In a country in which so many of its population face starvation—although Sudan is a country that could feed itself, and indeed export food elsewhere—there are still the basic needs of clean water, medicine and food.

Will the Minister reassert that there should be no impunity for those who are afflicting these terrible breaches of international humanitarian law and war crimes on the civilian population? There should be no hiding place for those who are committing the atrocities, or for those who are systematically blocking food, hydration and medicine. These are war crimes and need to called out as such. I commend the work that the UK is doing with others to ensure that there is the proper collation of evidence, so that there can be consequences to this.

It is not just about those who are afflicting the war crimes; it is about those who are profiting from it. I appeal to the Government to do more to reduce the illicit gold trade. I read a credible report that that part of the economy of Sudan is now more profitable as a result of nearly two years of war than it was prior to the war commencing. That means that near neighbours, including allies of the United Kingdom, are profiting from this humanitarian horror. What work are the Government doing to ensure that there is no profit from war for many of those within the Gulf or near neighbours who are seeking transactional relationships with the belligerents in the gold trade?

The same goes for possibly the most disgusting trade of all: that in human beings. There has been a proliferation of trafficking and smuggling. What actions are all parts of the UK Government taking to ensure that that element of the war economy is closed and there is no future for those who are profiting from war by securing advantage in any form of peace?

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s visit to the Chad border, and what he has said and is doing, as well as the work of our envoy and diplomats. Indeed, we are lucky to have the Minister for Africa in our own House, and I commend the work that he is doing. However, given the reports that the RSF may be seeking to form an administrative authority of its own, which it will call a Government, can the Minister confirm that we will not recognise or provide legitimacy to the RSF? At the moment, there is too much consideration of what Sudan might be if it becomes like Libya: two Governments—two competing authorities. The RSF may seek to an end to the war but it will also seek to have permanent influence; however, it should have no right to govern Sudan.

Does the Minister agree that there is an urgency to this? We are just a matter of eight or nine weeks from the second anniversary of the war, but there should be no third year. All efforts should be focused on these short weeks ahead to ensure that there is diplomatic effort to bring the belligerents to the table and to create the space where civilians can have the opportunity to govern one civilian-led Sudan at the end of the process.

Can the Minister say what assessment the UK has made of the terrible decisions that the Trump Administration are making on USAID? Have waivers been provided for US humanitarian and food assistance in Sudan? What is the Government’s assessment of the likely impact of the USAID decisions?

Turning to the DRC, there is little surprise that there has been ongoing territorial violence in that region; many have warned about that for many months. I commend the UN forces and any UK personnel who have been contributing to the end of this. I also send condolences to the families of those who have paid with their life in attempting to have peace in this area.

The work of the Rwandan Government and M23 has been raised in this House repeatedly. I raised it in June 2023, when I asked the Minister’s predecessor what actions the UK Government were taking with the Rwandan Government to cease the latter’s funding and support of the M23 group. It was marked that the previous Administration refused to make any public statement, probably because of the partnership agreement that they had signed with the Rwandan Government. I hope that the Government will not be shy of the consequences for UK funding support for the Rwandan Government if the latter continue to support an organisation that has been repeatedly held up for multiple violations of international humanitarian law and human rights abuses. Can the Minister comment on whether the Nairobi and Luanda process has now completely ended?

I close with an appeal to the Minister. What we have seen, both in Sudan and the DRC and with the Trump Administration, is that the need for UK development assistance and presence is greater than ever before. If there was ever an opportunity for the Government to review, take stock and then change course on their cut to development assistance, it is now. As well as helping with conflict prevention and humanitarian assistance, we need to ensure that the UK’s global soft power can be a force for good, and so we should not follow the Trump Administration in reducing official development assistance.

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

My Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their comments.

I will focus first on the DRC, because the noble Lord, Lord Callanan, asked for an update. I decided that it would be better to discuss this Statement today so that I could afford the House an update on the situation. The United Kingdom remains firmly of the view that all parties should cease hostilities and return to diplomatic talks immediately. Their engagement in good faith in African-led processes is absolutely key. Of course, there can be no military solution.

Noble Lords will be aware that I have been engaged in following this conflict since day one. The very first country I visited was Angola, followed by the DRC and then Rwanda. Throughout those visits, I was focused on President Lourenço’s attempts at a new peace process to ensure that there was an inclusive process that could guarantee a future secure peace.

When I arrived in Angola, the Government there announced the ceasefire, and our attempts since that day have been to ensure that that ceasefire held. When we saw and heard the movement of M23 towards Goma, we made very clear our view that that should not happen and that Rwanda should cease supporting M23—and there was clear evidence that RDF forces were there also, supporting that move on Goma.

When I spoke to the Foreign Minister of Rwanda on 24 January, I made it clear that such a move would have consequences: the international community would respond on a collective basis—and the Foreign Secretary made the same call the next day to President Kagame and repeated that. Now, of course, Goma has fallen and it looks like M23 is determined to move further to Bukavu.

I have had conversations with the Angola Foreign Minister, as well as the DRC Foreign Minister, repeating the fact that we should keep Luanda as a process that is there and which can guarantee an inclusive dialogue if ceasefire is held and the combatants stop fighting immediately. I spoke to the Ugandan Foreign Minister just an hour ago to reiterate that collective view about the way forward in terms of the Luanda process and ensuring peace. The Foreign Secretary has had conversations with European allies, including the EU high representative, and I have also had conversations with European Foreign Ministers on the same subject. Yesterday we had the G7 statement, which very much reflected the United Kingdom’s position of ensuring that those combatants cease their conflict and cease moving towards the second largest city in eastern DRC. I know that the Foreign Secretary also had discussions with Secretary Rubio on this question, and the United States and the United Kingdom both remain concerned about the situation and want to ensure that there is de-escalation and a ceasefire as soon as possible.

We also should not underestimate the huge humanitarian impact of this conflict. Hundreds of thousands of people have been forced to flee since the beginning of the year. Currently, 7 million are displaced, and that has huge impact. We have also seen the terrible rise of sexual violence in conflict, which of course we are absolutely focused on. We also saw foreign embassies attacked in Kinshasa; fortunately, our staff were secure and safe. I have made it clear to the Foreign Minister, and I know the Foreign Secretary made it clear to President Tshisekedi, that the protection of diplomatic staff is essential.

We are going to take the matter forward. We are reflecting on our actions, but we think it is really important that we are sending a very clear message to Rwanda that it must cease this support and return to the negotiating table. We have made it clear that its presence in DRC is unacceptable. So we are not holding back in terms of communications, but we are absolutely determined to support the African-led peace processes, and SADC and the other regional organisations are very clearly coming to that view too. I will keep the House updated on what our attempts deliver, particularly as we move to a further meeting of the UN Security Council. We have already had two on the DRC, and we are absolutely committed to that collective action.

I appreciate the comments of noble Lords regarding the Foreign Secretary’s visit to Chad. I think it is the first visit of a Foreign Secretary to that situation. His visit to Adre, on the border, made absolutely clear our focus on the humanitarian situation and how to get aid in. This has created the worst humanitarian crisis, with half of Sudan’s population, 30 million people, in urgent need of aid, 12 million having been forced from their homes and 8.7 million on the brink of starvation. We need to move this up the global agenda and we are certainly determined to. We have worked with international partners, as a penholder at the United Nations Security Council. Noble Lords have mentioned the Russian veto on our last attempt, but that has not stopped us raising this question at the UN. We are focused on the Secretary-General’s call for the protection of civilians and in particular holding the combatants to their Jeddah commitments, to ensure that there is a mechanism to protect civilians.

We are absolutely convinced that more needs to be done. We are convening a meeting of foreign ministers, hopefully next month, in London, to galvanise efforts on Sudan, in particular on humanitarian support but also in terms of a political solution. The noble Lord knows very well how we have been seeking and supporting civilian actors in Sudan so that we can see a return to a civilian-led government. The integrity of Sudan is absolutely vital. We cannot afford to see it collapse and we are certainly not accepting that there should be any breakaway or any recognition of any force outside the move towards a democratically elected Sudan Government.

Of course, we have recognised the scale of this crisis with an unprecedented response. The Foreign Secretary has doubled UK aid to Sudan this year, as well as visiting the border in Chad to draw attention to the crisis. I am clear that we all must do more. Funding is just one part of the problem. Far too much of the aid already committed is unable to reach those who need it most. We are pressing all parties to ensure that there is safe and unimpeded access to humanitarian support.

Middle East

Lord Purvis of Tweed Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Courtown (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the announcement of the ceasefire, as I am sure noble Lords do. This is an extremely important moment for the Middle East. However, we must not overlook—I paraphrase the Minister from the earlier Question—the fragility of the current situation or the long and challenging road ahead. Can the Minister tell the House what actions His Majesty’s Government are taking to encourage the ceasefire to hold?

This pivotal juncture was tragically precipitated by the horrific Hamas terror attack of 7 October: the worst terror attack in Israel’s history and the most murderous pogrom against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. The atrocities committed on that day stand as a chilling reminder of the dangers of allowing such groups to operate unchecked. We are heartened to witness the return of the first hostages under this agreement, including British national Emily Damari. These brave individuals, who have endured unimaginable trauma, will now face the long journey of rebuilding their lives. I hope all noble Lords will join me in praying for their continued health and well-being.

As we reflect, we must also remember the victims of those appalling attacks: those who lost their lives, those murdered in captivity and those whose lives have been irrevocably altered. The cruelty of Hamas over the past 15 months underscores the necessity of holding such groups accountable. Every single hostage must be safely returned to their loved ones and the international community must continue pressing for their unconditional release. Can the Minister tell me what actions His Majesty’s Government are taking to support the safe return of all hostages?

I echo the Foreign Secretary’s acknowledgement of the essential roles played by Qatar, Egypt and the United States in facilitating this agreement. These efforts underscore the importance of diplomatic engagement, and the UK must continue to be an active partner in supporting the next steps to ensure that the ceasefire holds.

In other debates in your Lordships’ House, we have looked at humanitarian assistance. Could the Minister say what additional humanitarian assistance the Government are planning to provide to alleviate the suffering of civilians affected by the ongoing conflict, particular in Gaza? How will the logistics work? From what I have heard in this House before, part of the problem is the logistics of getting the aid to those who need it. I look forward to the Government’s response and their continued commitment to playing a constructive role in this critical moment for the Middle East.

[Lord Purvis of Tweed (LD)]

My Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that this is an incredibly fragile situation, and I acknowledge the caution in the Foreign Secretary’s remarks and tone in the House of Commons last week. It is fundamentally a cessation of hostilities rather than a peace agreement, and there is still a very high level of uncertainty in many areas for the days and weeks ahead.

I also wish to put on record the work of the intelligence services of Qatar, the USA, Egypt and Israel. It was noted that, until fairly recently, Prime Minister Netanyahu refused diplomatic negotiations; it was all led by the intelligence services. However the agreement was made, we all hope that it will be sustainable.

I also share the noble Earl’s welcome for the fact that many families are now being reunited with the hostages. It is a tragedy that many families are waiting for the bodies of hostages, rather than live hostages. Hamas should never be forgiven for their actions.

There will be many in Israeli society who were shocked at the armed al-Qassam Brigades being very visible on the streets. Many had assumed that, as a result of the IDF’s actions, Hamas was removed, but it still looks as though it is very present. Does the Minister agree with the previous US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, in his assessment, which he made public, that Hamas has recruited the same number of fighters today as it has lost? What is the Government’s assessment of the current standing of Hamas, and how will that have an impact on any relationship with Fatah and the PLO in the Palestinian Authority?

On reconstruction, the needs are enormous. I will not repeat the question I asked the Minister in Oral Questions some minutes ago; I will just put on record that I agree with everything he said in response. I hope that the Government will find a way of ensuring that education for children in the region is at the top of our priorities. One of the consequences of conflict is that it is often the next generation that is more radicalised than the previous one. Given the scale of the conflict in Gaza, we all fully understand that, without interventions now in relation to child trauma, psychosocial support and education support, there will be potential threats and danger in the future.

On the situation in the West Bank, what is the Government’s assessment of the report of concessions that the Israeli Prime Minister gave to the remainder of the extreme right wing in his Cabinet? According to those reports, while there could be support for the agreement on Gaza, there are now to be far more IDF and Israeli actions in the West Bank—leading to full annexation, as one continuing Minister in the Israeli Government said. Will the Minister state that that is unacceptable to the UK Government? Will he put on record that we will not follow the new Trump Administration in removing the sanctions that were put in place on the settlers for the violence that they had carried out against innocent communities in their own home areas? Will the Government also take the opportunity to reject the fact that the United States has reinstated supply of the Israeli Government with 2,000-pound bombs, which can bring about only mass destruction of community areas?

On the longer term, does the Minister recognise that my noble friend Lady Northover’s Private Member’s Bill, which we will now debate on 14 March, is an opportunity for us to consider the validity of a two-state solution and the need for the recognition of a state of Palestine? If there is to be diplomatic work on both reconstruction and some form of political way forward, the viability of a Palestinian state needs to be in place.

Finally, I acknowledge that the Government have increased support for the Palestinian Authority, as the Foreign Secretary has indicated. However, our support is still way below the level before the 2018 aid cuts. What is the Government’s intent in respect of replenishing the humanitarian reserve so that we can provide extra support and restore fully the level of governance support to the Palestinian Authority that we provided before the previous Government cut ODA from 0.7%?

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

I thank both noble Lords for their questions and contributions. As the noble Earl, Lord Courtown, repeated, this is a fragile situation. The deal is incredibly fragile, so we have to do everything possible to ensure that we can build confidence on all sides to help sustain the ceasefire and move it from phase 1 to phase 3 and into a lasting peace. It is important to turn this deal into a political process that leads us to the two-state solution. That is the only way to ensure, in the longer term, peace and security for both Palestinians and Israelis.

I join the noble Earl in welcoming the release of the three hostages in Gaza, including, of course, British national Emily Damari. I too place on record our thanks to Qatar, Egypt and the US for their support in bringing these individuals’ and their families’ horrific ordeal to an end. Our thoughts are also with those still waiting to be reunited with their loved ones, including the families of United Kingdom-linked hostages Eli Sharabi, Oded Lifshitz and Avinatan Or—three people who should be reunited with their families.

I shall focus on how we build the future and stability. For the deal to work, parties need to co-operate to make sure that the ceasefire lasts and moves towards a lasting peace. Planning for governance, security and reconstruction must be predicated on progress towards a Palestinian state, with Gaza and the West Bank united under one Government, and the Palestinian Authority must play a key role. The security arrangements must protect both Israelis and Palestinians and, as we heard in the previous Question, allow the safe distribution of aid. We will continue to work with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the US and regional partners, including Arab and Gulf states, to build consensus for a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework that supports the conditions for a more lasting and secure peace. Stability in the West Bank is crucial to ensure that the fragile ceasefire in Gaza can last. All sides should work to ensure a lowering of tension in the West Bank at this time.

On Palestinian statehood and support for Palestinian reform, as the noble Lord said, the Foreign Secretary has spoken with President Abbas and the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, Mohammad Mustafa, and offered the United Kingdom’s support as his Government implement much-needed reforms. An effective PA is vital for lasting peace and progress towards a two-state solution. Our long-standing position has been that we will recognise the Palestinian state at a time that is most conducive to that process—not the end but as part of that process. We remain absolutely committed to that.

As I say, this ceasefire provides an opportunity to get aid in—and we have heard that just under 1,000 trucks got in in one day last week. We need to ensure that that continues. I shall not repeat what I said in response to the Oral Question. We have given the funding and, as the noble Lord said, we need to focus on medical and educational support. Obviously, the longer-term rebuilding of Gaza needs a much bigger investment. In addition to the £112 million, we have matched up to £10 million of public donations—we should not forget that. The United Kingdom public have been absolutely concerned, and they have matched their concern with money through the Disasters Emergency Committee Middle East humanitarian appeal, which has provided life-saving aid, including medical supplies, shelter and clean water, to people in the West Bank.

We have to ensure that the process delivers that longer-term building of confidence and dialogue. I was concerned when I read in the Guardian this morning about increased levels of violence in the West Bank. As the noble Lord pointed out, we have moved to sanction those responsible for violence in the West Bank and announced designations against eight extremist Israeli settlers and nine entities known to have supported, incited and promoted violence against Palestinian communities. We will not hesitate to take further action if it is needed. The UK is deeply concerned by IDF military operations in the occupied West Bank.