Ukraine

Lord Risby Excerpts

Friday 25th October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, I greatly welcome the statements of His Majesty’s Government regarding their continued support for Ukraine in the face of Russia’s horrific and illegal invasion. It is my hope that the Government will continue remorselessly to be one of the leading supporters of Ukraine.

The current situation in Ukraine is of great concern, in terms of the assault on legal and moral international norms that Russia has unleashed, and of our strategic interests in deterring any potential further aggression towards NATO by Russia. As it is, in the light of my discussions with businesses in Ukraine, the electricity and water supply has diminished considerably. Although Putin failed in his initial war goal of establishing a client state, this surely remains his ultimate goal. That simply cannot be allowed to happen.

One feature of the war in Ukraine that is sometimes overlooked and is worth reminding ourselves of is the degree to which the conflict has highlighted the necessary and growing links between the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific. Russia’s continued offensive actions are in large part enabled by ammunition, and indeed soldiers, supplied by North Korea, and by weapons and dual-use equipment supplied by Iran and China. But Australia has helped to supply Ukraine with military equipment, and South Korea and Japan have been increasing their levels of support for Ukraine. These Indo-Pacific nations have realised how interlinked their own security is with the situation of the Euro-Atlantic. North Korea is sending soldiers, but I would encourage the Government to persuade South Korea to step up its support for Ukraine to include directly supplying military equipment. South Korea has in its possession a number of T-80 tanks given to it by the Russians. The Ukrainians are already familiar with these tanks and could put them to excellent use there.

Another issue is the eastward shift of the centre of gravity of European security. Poland will soon possess Europe’s premier fighting force on land, and Finland and Sweden, having joined NATO, are increasing their defence spending; indeed, that is true of other nations too. They are seeking to deter Russia and support Ukraine more fulsomely. Does the Minister agree that we would be wise to consider how to be in a better position to support these allies and work hand in glove with them to bolster security among NATO’s eastern flank?

Happily, much supported by the eloquent noble Lord, Lord Spellar, the Council on Geostrategy has recently published a report, along with Polish and Ukrainian think tanks, outlining how the trilateral initiative between the UK, Poland and Ukraine can be used. The trilateral initiative was announced just days before Russia’s full-scale invasion. The report sets out how the three nations can support the Ukrainian war effort and help shape a post-war Europe. In the military context, this includes allowing Ukraine to launch western missiles at targets in Russia, and ramping up support for Ukraine to develop and build long-range attack drones in greater numbers. It also recommends putting much greater pressure on the Russian economy. In combating corruption and aggression, the Minister will know of the Financial Action Task Force. I ask the Minister, why, under the auspices of the FATF, Russia is not on this organisation’s key grey list.

The BBC has admirably highlighted the mental health issues afflicting Ukraine, as acknowledged by the Ukrainian health ministry. The Lancet reported that 54% of Ukrainians have PTSD, an estimate shared by the World Health Organization. MedAid, a British not-for-profit organisation, is financing support groups to provide mental health experts free of charge to those suffering grievously in this terrible conflict and is teaching how best to offer support. The expertise of Combat Stress, the UK veterans mental health organisation, is also deeply appreciated.

The fabric of Ukraine will require huge funding for reconstruction and renewal in due course, but there will remain the absolute need for demining. It is estimated that up to 2 million land mines have been laid in the past two years. The agricultural output of Ukraine has been badly hit by this, let alone the appalling human consequences. We can be proud that mine clearance is being carried out by British experts but, post war, the task will be enormous and deserves our support.

Finally, I have raised the matter before of the deaths of millions of Ukrainians in 1932-33, the Holodomor, literally “by starvation”, caused by Stalin’s ruthless attempt at agricultural collectivisation, but also by the enforced suppression of Ukraine’s spirit of independence, a gruesome foretaste of Russian brutality today. I can hope only that the newly elected Government will give fresh consideration to officially recognising this horrific event as genocide, for that it unquestionably was.

King’s Speech

Lord Risby Excerpts

Thursday 25th July 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, I welcome the sentiments laid out in the gracious Speech on the defence of the United Kingdom, in particular the recognition that geopolitics has grown increasingly unstable and that security will be one of the principles on which the legislative programme will be based. I applaud the decision to choose the noble Lord, Lord Robertson, who is so respected, to lead the strategic defence review, aided, I am sure, by the new defence ministerial team in your Lordships’ House.

As we move further into this more volatile era, so-called minilateralism will grow in importance to British defence and foreign policy. Minilaterals bring together small groups of nations collaborating to pursue specific goals or tackle specific issues. They have long been present in international affairs but today they are proliferating. Given the Government’s emphasis on their commitment to NATO and full support for Ukraine, the minilateral to which I draw the attention of your Lordships is a specific trilateral initiative.

On 17 February 2022, a joint statement between the United Kingdom, Poland and Ukraine was published, announcing the intention to develop a trilateral memorandum of co-operation between the three countries to further strengthen strategic co-operation and engagement. Days later, Russia launched its horrific illegal invasion of Ukraine, so, perhaps inevitably, the trilateral initiative escaped notice. However, it remains a very promising framework.

The Council on Geostrategy, with which I and my noble friend Lady Neville-Jones are associated, has, in conjunction with the Polish Institute of International Affairs and the Foreign Policy Council “Ukrainian Prism”, written a report on how Britain, Poland and Ukraine can together support the Ukrainian war effort and help shape a post-war Europe—primarily by strengthening national resilience and military interoperability, and consolidating defence industrial co-operation. Poland is to be applauded for its huge increase in defence expenditure and military reorganisation. I encourage those working on the strategic defence review to explore the potential of the trilateral initiative as an example of a way forward.

AUKUS is the second agreement that I draw attention to. In their desire to pursue a NATO-first approach, I am hopeful that the new Government will not reduce any of the efforts currently directed towards this truly ground-breaking security pact between the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States. Critically, pillar 1 of AUKUS will see Australia acquire, with support from the UK and the USA, nuclear-powered conventionally armed submarines, which are vital to upholding deterrence in the Indo-Pacific, and will culminate in a joint UK-Australian submarine design which will support thousands of jobs in this country. I much look forward to my imminent visit to Barrow. A key element within pillar I will also see the rotational deployment of British and American submarines to Australia.

The importance we give to maintaining a presence, even though the Euro-Atlantic remains our priority, clearly signals our commitment to our partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific. Pillar 2 of AUKUS will see the three nations work together in developing a range of advanced military capabilities, in particular new and cutting-edge developments that will prove vital for our technological expertise. There are now 10 workstreams, covering areas such as hypersonics, artificial intelligence and cyber capabilities. This will see a deeper integration of defence-related science and technology, industrial bases and supply chains, leading to the three partners spreading the risks and sharing in the success of innovation.

Much work has been done, to the great benefit of our future security, in putting together these projects. The new Government would be wise to continue these efforts and see the promising potential from these bold new partnerships exploited to the full.

AUKUS

Lord Risby Excerpts

Thursday 29th February 2024 Grand Committee

Asked by

[Lord Risby]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made in respect of the AUKUS agreement, the defence and security partnership between the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States.

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, for over a century there has been an enduring relationship between three trusting countries, Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, all of which share embedded democratic values. In 2021, the three nations began a consultation process—particularly referencing Australia, which had been concerned by unwelcome Chinese naval activity in the Indo-Pacific region—to upgrade its submarine capability in partnership with the United Kingdom and the United States: AUKUS.

For us, our own defence thinking has extended to the Indo-Pacific, underscoring our passionate historic commitment to the freedom of the seas. A year ago, this consultation led to an agreement that Australia acquire conventionally armed nuclear-powered submarines through the trilateral partnership, which sends a clear message of our shared commitment to protecting global security and, most specifically, a secure and prosperous Indo-Pacific.

That consultation, in 2021, reflected great prescience. Since then, the world has become increasingly scarred by war and violence, such as Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, supported by his linkages to countries such as North Korea and Iran. Violence in the Middle East has once again erupted, and in the Indo-Pacific China continues to assert itself, backed by a sustained build-up of military capabilities and indeed a close relationship with Russia. It is these national linkages that present democracies with a threat to the world we live in, attempting to rewrite the rules of the international order to better suit their interests. What happens in the Euro-Atlantic clearly now reverberates in the Indo-Pacific, and vice versa. The two regions are increasingly inextricably linked.

The UK is already fully integrated into the security architecture of the Euro-Atlantic, and in recent years His Majesty’s Government have chosen to engage the nations of the Indo-Pacific with much greater commitment, as well as to integrate the UK more deeply in the region’s security, while benefiting from the economic and business opportunities offered there. So far, we have been successful with trade agreements and, of course, our membership of the CPTPP. But it is AUKUS, the technology accelerator agreement signed between the UK and two of our closest Indo-Pacific partners, Australia and the United States, which promises to have the greatest potential impact on regional and, ultimately, global security.

Through pillar 1, which is concerned with equipping Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and Britain’s next-generation undersea capabilities, the United Kingdom is ensuring that its future defence infrastructure is of the highest standard. This will allow us to continue to participate with consequential impact in upholding a world free from coercion and the use of force in both the Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific. In this spirit, it also specifically involves a rotational presence in Australia of one British submarine and four American submarines. Through pillar 2, which is concerned with accelerating and deepening the development and delivery of state-of-the-art military capabilities, the UK is further ensuring that in a world so influenced by advanced technology systems, we will not fall behind key developments.

AUKUS acts as a transparent and intensively close way of enhancing our trilateral relationship. It gives Britain a chance to share in the upgrading of the capabilities of two of our close partners. It is an opportunity of a magnitude that cannot be overstated. We already have a strong relationship with the US and Australia, but AUKUS plans to better operationalise this bond and take it to further heights.

AUKUS positions itself as an initiative that goes above and beyond the vagaries of electoral cycles, and indeed it must, as the project will require sustained effort and expenditure from Governments into the 2040s. It is a firm signal that we are placing greater emphasis on each others’ geostrategic sensibilities and objectives, but also embedding a long-term step-by-step strategic commitment.

In order to maximise the functional benefits of AUKUS, it must absolutely be viewed as a national endeavour, expressed as such and be given overarching focus across all relevant parts of government. This will enable us fully to embrace the generational commitment that AUKUS demands. It is a focused effort at building a more integrated deterrence posture. This will require increasing interoperability between the three nations. This enhanced interoperability informs collaborative projects through pillar 2, such as shared approaches to the next generation of advanced weaponry—for example, hypersonic missiles. There are obvious dangers associated with countries choosing not to obey the rules of the sea, and AUKUS is the UK, Australia and the USA united in their effort to resist and if necessary push back together against such activity.

A key element to ensuring that the long-term vision of AUKUS is realised will be enhanced people-to-people, governmental and educational links between the three countries. This is already beginning to happen. Regular port visits from British submarines to Western Australia in the 2030s will also further this, and I am encouraged to learn that Royal Australian Navy representatives have begun training at British and American nuclear-powered submarine schools. Is my noble friend the Minister content that we are adequately deepening our education and workforce development systems’ link with the United States and Australia, which is key to the realisation of the agreement?

The benefits of that long-term generational partnership will not be felt just in the realm of international security but here in Britain directly. We are experiencing the impact on shipping and the British economy that Houthi attacks in the Red Sea are having. AUKUS contributes to Britain’s ability to resist and detect such activity, as well as to deter actors from disruptive action, wherever it arises.

What we know is that the nature of defence and warfare is changing dramatically, such that in pillar 2, key areas have been identified for sharing and development. Fundamentally, they are undersea capabilities, but also quantum technologies, artificial intelligence, advanced cyber, hypersonic and counter-hypersonic capabilities, electronic warfare, and innovation and information sharing.

The Minister will know of the 17 working groups that have been established. Can he indicate how their functioning is progressing? All this work to bring the pillars to fruition highlights the intensity of shared mutual trust. Indeed, the evolution of AUKUS is being watched with positive interest by New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, all of which have security concerns.

Of considerable and enduring importance, AUKUS offers a concerted attempt to integrate our top civil and private companies with our own industrial base. This will in turn stimulate the British economy by providing jobs and improving skills—a transformative boost, particularly for the local economy of Barrow-in-Furness, where the new submarines will be built. In fact, as Barrow is so pivotal to AUKUS, I must ask the Minister if he is satisfied that there is an adequate skills base there, what we are doing to upgrade it and whether the transportation system in and around Barrow is appropriate for the construction of AUKUS submarines.

The people of the United Kingdom want to live in a world free from coercion and blatant aggression. Today, this vision is under increasing pressure. We thus need bold new ideas, and to pursue them in tandem with our closest allies and partners. AUKUS is key to this. It is about investing in and with our partners, shoulder to shoulder, for the future, so that we can uphold and maintain the international order that has benefited us and many others so greatly.

Ukraine

Lord Risby Excerpts

Thursday 21st September 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, all of us are aware of the scale of destructive landmine activity by the Russians—literally creating killing fields—which has impacted the Ukrainian fight-back. I pay heartfelt tribute to the way Ukraine has undertaken de-mining most professionally. Many take enormous personal risks to do this, not least led by two British organisations.

Your Lordships have rightly dealt with the necessity of securing an environment in which Ukraine can victoriously return to normality. This is essential for the Ukrainian people to live in a free, democratic and prosperous state within internationally recognised borders. The Ukraine Recovery Conference, held here in June and cohosted by ourselves and Ukraine, laid down a clear foundation. Some 500 global businesses from 42 countries had already signed the Ukraine business compact, and priority sectors included energy, technology, infrastructure and finance. I note the further initiatives taken by our Government.

But I believe that we are now at a stage to move to building on these admirable objectives, while making it plain that Russia must fully contribute to the reconstruction of Ukraine. In Ukraine, many schools, hospitals, universities, homes, roads, railways, water systems and ports will need to be rebuilt. The planning and construction time needed for these large-scale projects, including their funding, designing, regulatory requirements and building, could take years. Thus, setting a clear road map and timeframe now for Ukraine’s recovery will make potential investors in the country’s renewal and redevelopment more confident in the future. Without a clear plan for how Ukraine can be rebuilt, private sector funding may be out of reach, jeopardising recovery.

I would therefore like to explore the critical matter of commercial insurance, an increasing demand among businesses which wish to invest in the country. At the June conference, the war risk insurance framework was launched. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development announced a pilot war risk insurance scheme among other positive announcements, but policy development and implementation remain work in progress.

Apart from the immense security pressures, let us examine the economic situation in the country—a budget deficit of $40 billion, now essentially being covered by the USA, European countries, the IMF and others. Unemployment inevitably remains high with diminished tax revenues. But by generating revenue through a stronger domestic economy, Ukraine will become less reliant on external financial support. Western investors moving early can help to shape the kind of economy Ukraine should have after the war, with higher standards of good governance.

An absolute key to making Ukraine investible is a sufficiently viable wartime insurance programme for investors. The French are planning an insurance programme for French investors under the auspices of BPI, their public bank for investment: up to 90% of the amount of any investment, with ultimate decisions made by the French Government. I believe that we, with our exceptional credibility and reputation in Ukraine and our highly professional financial sector, could take the lead on this, also encouraging greater collaboration between the private insurance sector and G7 countries. The present situation in Ukraine calls for a multilateral public-private solution approach. I encourage my noble friend the Minister to give real consideration to this insurance matter, given the foundations laid at the June renewal conference.

My noble friend will be aware of the lessons we have learned in recent years about the secure supply of critical minerals. My understanding is that Ukraine’s potential in the field of mining—with of course critical minerals in particular, as well as energy and agriculture—will be included at a critical minerals partnership meeting to be held in London. Will my noble friend confirm that this meeting will take place?

If Ukraine’s own regulatory and policy frameworks improve, the country’s energy production potential can be further deployed. According to the International Energy Agency, Ukraine has substantial renewable energy potential, including significant biomass resources and waste management possibilities, largely untapped. Furthermore, Ukraine holds gigantic gas reserves, the second highest in Europe. Before the war started, Kyiv developed a reputation for high-level technology capabilities. I welcome the TechBridge agreed between ourselves and Ukraine.

To conclude, the moment is coming when real incentives for investing in the country are needed, but with assurance that war risk cover can be introduced to bring this about.

Armed Forces

Lord Risby Excerpts

Thursday 7th September 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Soames for securing this most timely debate, deploying his immense experience and knowledge of defence matters. The refreshed integrated review and the 2023 defence Command Paper represent a concerted effort to target Britain’s foreign policy where it is most able to have impact. The documents are forthright in acknowledging the changing nature of the rules-based international system and the myriad threats to it, but we need to step up British efforts to defend this system. However, it would have been inconceivable to have predicted the international environment as it exists today.

I will say just a few words about Ukraine, a country I have visited many times, including Crimea, in my capacity as the former chairman of the British Ukrainian Society. We are aware of the millions of Ukrainians who have sought refuge elsewhere, but let us remind ourselves of the huge internal displacement. Every week I get emails from Ukraine and, despite the economic situation, the splitting up of families and the atrocious Russian drone attacks, Ukrainians never, ever complain. Their stoicism and resilience are astonishing and very humbling for us all. The decision to begin the training associated with Operation Orbital in 2015 and what followed paid dividends, and the gratitude of Ukraine towards us is enormous. The leadership shown by this country, and the role of Ben Wallace, are universally acknowledged there.

President Putin has talked and written about Ukrainians and Russians being effectively one people and one country; this is absolutely not the view of Ukrainians. He argued that he invaded Ukraine because of a threat by NATO via Ukraine. Now, despite all the Russian threats, Sweden and Finland have abandoned their former neutrality; despite a hesitant initial response from some NATO countries, 22 of NATO’s 31 members have increased defence spending; imports of Russian fossil fuels have been dramatically curtailed; and new defence and foreign policy structures have led to much more strategic convergence. But Putin’s major miscalculation has been on the focus and generosity of the United States. It is not the first time that this country thousands of miles away has ridden to the rescue, and thank heavens this has happened again. Far from abandoning Europe, it would have been impossible without the US for Ukraine to have fought back so effectively. Our relationship with the United States today, in intelligence, security and defence matters, is hugely appreciated in Kyiv and must be retained.

Russia’s grotesque war of aggression against Ukraine shows how developments in the Euro-Atlantic area can affect countries in the Indo-Pacific, which the 2021 integrated review tilt has now developed further. As Penny Wong, Australia’s Foreign Minister, said at King’s College in London earlier this year:

“In our modern, tightly-woven world, what happens in Europe reverberates in the Indo-Pacific. And what happens in the Indo-Pacific reverberates in Europe. No region—indeed, no country—is an island”.


Our relationship with Australia has developed exponentially. Its defence strategic review of April this year is particularly focused on naval modernisation and long-range maritime strike forces, reflecting the aggressive activities of China in the region. The initial AUKUS partnership links us to Australia and the United States, reflecting a common analysis of the region’s challenges but also offering greater longevity to our own shipbuilding industries. This new partnership reflects our shared values. We can be pleased that Australia is building important relationships with countries such as India, Indonesia and the Philippines. Just as European countries have re-established common defence objectives—for example, the UK, Japan and Italy’s global combat air programme—so we see the same in Japan and Korea.

However the Ukraine war ends, Russia is likely to retain its sea and air capabilities essentially intact. The United Kingdom is one of its least favourite countries, and we remind ourselves that China does not share our view of international maritime law. Defence spending has at times in the past been seen as lacking electoral appeal. The last few years have been a dramatic wake-up call, to which we now absolutely have to respond.

Ukraine

Lord Risby Excerpts

Thursday 9th February 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

It is a great pleasure to follow the speech of my noble friend Lord Marlesford. I warmly congratulate my noble friend Lord Soames on his excellent maiden speech. I was his Parliamentary Private Secretary when he was a Minister in the MoD. He was extremely successful and popular, largely because of his amazingly good judgment and common sense. Those characteristics will, I know, inform our discussions in the months and years to come.

It was my role in the other place to take through for the Opposition the legislation to enlarge the European Community, which was unanimously agreed. I say this only because, at the time, I had some remarkable conversations with an exceptional individual who was the Polish ambassador. On a number of occasions, he said clearly to me that we needed to provide a pathway for Ukraine to come and join the family of European nations; and that, if this did not happen, a certain other country would inevitably interfere. That is exactly what has happened, of course; his words were of great prescience.

I have been to Ukraine on multiple occasions, having in the past chaired the British Ukrainian Society for some time. I should declare an interest. For more than a year, I have been much involved with a new think tank, the Council on Geostrategy. We have done much work on Ukraine; we wrote a paper before the invasion as we were already alarmed at the anarchic environment in the Black Sea being created by Russia.

No country is more committed to the freedom of the seas than ours, as we have demonstrated by Royal Navy activity in the Black Sea. Given our current considerable credibility, does my noble friend the Minister agree that, when this horrific war ends, we should promote and encourage much closer co-operation among Black Sea states—particularly given the critical importance of Ukraine as a food exporter with huge energy exploration potential and the importance of the Black Sea as a central gateway between Europe and Eurasia, underpinned by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Montreux convention?

Ever since the construction of the trans-Siberian pipeline into western Europe, European nations have had to live with the leverage provided by Russia’s energy exports. This has created inordinately high dependence and, at times, unacceptable supply abuse, with the price of energy before and after the invasion being determined by political judgments, not market conditions. Of course, this has all funded Russian aggression and expansionism. It is insufficiently known that Ukraine has the second-largest gas reserves in Europe and holds equivalent to 27% of the EU’s gas storage capacity. It has huge potential as a reliable and diverse energy provider, enhanced by more integration of the Ukrainian energy sector with Europe, to our mutual advantage.

As many of your Lordships have said, we do not know when this terrible conflict will end, or on what basis, but your Lordships will welcome the hosting by the UK and Ukraine of the Ukraine recovery conference, drawing international support and building on the Lugano principles, which takes place in London in June. All of us will want Ukraine to embrace formally the Euro-Atlantic defence and political umbrella, but the cost of reconstruction will be enormous, and Ukraine itself will need to undertake reforms, particularly on the rule of law, which it is already addressing.

In July 2020, the Lublin Triangle was agreed between Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine, at the heart of which is the creation of a zone of security and prosperity, linked to Euro-Atlantic alliances and strengthening military, cultural and political co-operation. In this spirit, in 2022, ahead of the invasion a trilateral memorandum of co-operation was agreed by the Foreign Ministers of Poland, the United Kingdom and Ukraine, to demonstrate a commitment to further strengthen strategic co-operation and engagement. With considerable support and encouragement, think tanks in Warsaw and Kyiv and ourselves will be meeting this month in Warsaw to take matters forward.

This trilateral could play an instrumental role in the post-war reconstruction effort and in putting Ukraine more fully on the track towards Euro-Atlantic integration. In the longer term, the trilateral initiative could assist Ukraine towards a platform where the three countries work together to secure economic and geopolitical objectives, especially as Poland’s role in the European Union becomes more significant.

I echo the powerful words of the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton. When we reflect on post-war reconstruction, let us not underestimate the huge depth of the problem. More than 20,000 Ukrainian children have been taken from their families and orphanages and sent to Russia. The terrifyingly traumatic experiences of children will require special educational responses. On another level, reports suggest that mined areas are now equivalent to the size of Great Britain, and the clearing will be a huge undertaking, so well described by the noble Baroness, Lady Jones. Can my noble friend please give consideration, during the important reconstruction conference in London in June, to issues such as this being discussed too? This should be an integral part of the successful reconstruction and recovery of Ukraine that we are planning.

Finally, I add my support for a clear mechanism to punish those who initiated this war in such an atrocious and shocking way and to seek reparations for the totally unjustified invasion on the people of Ukraine.

Queen’s Speech

Lord Risby Excerpts

Wednesday 19th May 2021 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend Lord Udny-Lister on his excellent speech and warmly welcome him to your Lordships’ House.

In the words of the Government’s integrated review, we are living in an era of “intensifying geopolitical competition”. In this country, we certainly know that in Russia we face a country which has interests and ethics very different to our own, and which does not share our regard for a European order based on rules. To this day, Russian troops remain in Ukraine, and not only in Crimea. I say this with feeling as chairman of the British Ukrainian Society. We should not forget that 2014 saw the first use of armed force to change European borders in more than a generation. Suffice to say that the considerable help we quietly give Ukraine on a number of levels, on a scale unmatched by any other European country, is deeply appreciated and valuable.

We as a nation have, as a result of the long-drawn-out Brexit process, inevitably seemed to some to have become somewhat more inward-looking. However, irrespective of whether Brexit was or was not the right decision, we must now move on—and that is exactly what we are attempting to do. We remain a country of hard and hugely admired soft-power reach—reference has been made to the BBC World Service. Who more than us has the will to try to underpin an international order that is open, one where our allies and partners, frequently less capable, are made more secure from predatory activity? The integrated review alludes to the kind of world we will soon inhabit if we do not become more outward looking and engaged—a world where authoritarianism advances and liberal democracy, which we all cherish, assume an increasingly defensive posture.

Our American friends remain our closest and most significant allies. We should never forget the role they played in helping us to keep western Europe free in the Cold War. For all the aspirations of European defence initiatives, however intentioned, today the United States uniquely has the means—and, for the most part, the will—to uphold the geostrategic posture that dissuades and deters threats to peace. Today, on our continent it finances 70% of NATO’s budget, an act of extraordinary and continuing generosity, irrespective of who is in the White House. There were some murmurs a few months go that the new President’s Administration would look away from us in Europe. With Secretary of State Blinken’s recent meeting with our Foreign Secretary, these notions are clearly misplaced, following his most positive statements.

We have also shown our willingness to underpin the international order, from the pre-eminent role we play in NATO’s enhanced forward presence and Baltic air policing mission to the support we provide to Ukraine. Likewise, our renewed involvement in the Indo-Pacific—a geopolitical theatre increasingly connected to our Euro-Atlantic area—is welcome. Operation Fortis, the maiden operational deployment of HMS “Queen Elizabeth”, and the escorting Royal Navy strike group includes US aircraft and US naval assets, seeking to underline the freedom of international waterways.

Japan has openly welcomed our growing naval presence, as have India and the countries of the five-power defence arrangements. They understand that we are one of the few countries external to the Indo-Pacific that can contribute to this role. Indeed, Japan has welcomed us, not only as a security provider but also as a valuable trading partner. Japan actively supports our admission to the CPTTP, which it chairs, which is set to become the largest zone of high economic growth in the world.

Our tilt to the Indo-Pacific region, the refocus on the Euro-Atlantic area and our willingness to step up and act internationally in terms of collective security show that Britain is re-engaging with the world. It shows how we can move on after a particularly stressful political and health period in our history.

Finally, while maintaining our strong US links, reconnecting positively with our European neighbours and forging new relationships further abroad, we should move to make our Commonwealth links more central in our country and fellow members’ countries. That grouping of countries puts up a mirror on the world in all its complexity. I look forward to the day when many countries can have an intermediary or associate status that is now not possible but would be very well received by our many friends and allies in the world.

Queen’s Speech

Lord Risby Excerpts

Tuesday 7th January 2020 Lords Chamber

[Lord Risby (Con)]

My Lords, as we depart the European Union, we should remind ourselves that in wide areas of mutual activity we have created structures that have enabled us to co-operate effectively with our neighbours on matters such as migration, aid, defence and security—that is certainly to the fore at the moment—and also mutual recognition of qualifications. I very much hope that that will continue, to our mutual benefit.

However, as has also been mentioned by other noble Lords, we have seen our soft power work very well over many years, and that includes the British Council, the BBC overseas service, Chevening scholarships and the English language. We are an open society and we have an incorruptible judiciary. However, as we chart our own new course, I find it perplexing that our Foreign and Commonwealth Office enjoys such meagre funding, past and projected. I hope that the Budget will begin to address the new realities of this matter.

There have been some announcements and discussion about forming a specific government body which would strategically embrace defence, trade, overseas aid and the Foreign Office. I hope that my noble friend the Minister can inform us further about this. Again, this is exactly the right time to be achieving such a structure. It should be a great source of pride to us that we have such a generous, well-regarded and focused overseas aid and development programme. Yet, in my view, there is some disproportionality in this. Out of a total managed government expenditure of some £840 billion promoting our national interest in countries abroad, even with some ODA funding, we have a budget of just £1.1 billion. This is, of course, a fraction of what we commit to overseas aid and development. I am not suggesting that the functions are to be aligned, but it seems disproportionate as we look to the future.

In the past, our economy has been less export-oriented than many others, but huge and imaginative efforts have recently been made to promote trade and investment. I happen to be one of the Prime Minister’s trade envoys. All of us work very closely with our embassies abroad, and I have seen how British companies, even small and medium-sized enterprises, are being vigorously encouraged to enter overseas markets with a substantial increase in UK export finance provision. The results are frankly impressive, springing from a new professionalism which has been developed in the last few years.

However, many of your Lordships will know something very important: our visa system needs urgent reassessment. It is all too often hit and miss. Our ambassadors, almost uniquely and all too often, have very limited discretion, which causes acute embarrassment at times, even to those who hold diplomatic passports. Important foreign individuals and officials often wish to come here to examine our incentives and flexible employment policies, which have spurred on our admirable start-up rates, especially in the sphere of technology and particularly as we are so committed now to sharing our experience and expertise with them. This is something I have witnessed often, but I have to say that, frequently, ambassadors are left saying silent prayers as visa applications are submitted because the system is so erratic.

This month, we will see the fruits of some productive interdepartmental co-operation at the UK-Africa Investment Summit in London, with attendance at the highest level. I applaud the emphasis on Africa that is now taking place, with huge challenges, including some dreadful situations of famine and the effects of climate change, but with huge opportunities too. We can share our expertise with our friends in Africa; people are coming at a high level to increase their prosperity, and we can open up opportunities for ourselves.

I conclude by saying that the Prime Minister has rightly called for us to move on from what has seemed at times over the last few years to be a very unhappy period in our long history. It is now incumbent on us to support fully those who, directly or indirectly, are forging our new relationships, and all too often in need of our fulsome praise and gratitude.