Business of the House

Debate between Baroness Winterton of Doncaster and Fiona Bruce

Thursday 6th July 2023 Commons Chamber

[Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)]

Labour-led Cheshire East Council has proposed to close all libraries for at least one and a half weekdays every week. In my constituency, that will affect libraries in Alsager, Sandbach, Holmes Chapel, Middlewich and Congleton. Does the Leader of the House agree that members of Congleton Town Council and others are absolutely right to oppose that inexplicable proposal, bearing in mind its negative and, indeed, potentially damaging impact not only on young people’s learning but on many of my least well-off constituents, who depend on libraries for welfare checks, bus applications, computer use for job applications, to read the local papers, and many other everyday essentials?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)]

Order. It is quite important to ask the Leader of the House in such a way that it is relevant to the business, rather than just asking whether she agrees with the comments that have been made.

Rohingya Refugees in Bangladesh

Debate between Baroness Winterton of Doncaster and Fiona Bruce

Tuesday 2nd May 2023 Commons Chamber

[Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)]

I thank every Member, without exception, across the House who has spoken during the debate, for their authoritative, impassioned and moving speeches, many if not most of which were well informed by personal visits. Madam Deputy Speaker, I thank you for calling me, but in the light of such a high-quality debate, I feel that all I can do is echo the profound concerns that have been expressed for the Rohingya, but I do want to do so because I want to put it on record that I share them.

Few, if any, communities around the world have suffered such severe, grave, continuous and prolonged persecution as the Rohingya. They have been targeted both by the Myanmar military and by extremists from the Rakhine ethnic group and by other proponents of religious intolerance and extremist Buddhist nationalism within Myanmar.

The Rohingya people have been the victims of a sustained and appalling campaign of hate speech, discrimination, violence and, since 2016-17, a campaign that resulted in atrocity crimes, which the US Administration and other international experts have recognised as genocide. The Rohingya are targeted because of their ethnicity and their predominantly Muslim faith.

Since August 2017, hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people have fled Myanmar into neighbouring Bangladesh. According to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, at the end of March this year there were nearly 961,000 refugees in Bangladesh, almost all of whom are settled in refugee camps in the Cox’s Bazar area of Bangladesh, forming the world’s largest refugee settlement. More than a million Rohingya people have fled Myanmar in successive waves of displacement since the 1990s. The UNHCR said in an emergency appeal that

“most walked for days through jungles or mountains, or braved dangerous sea voyages across the Bay of Bengal. They arrived exhausted, hungry and sick—in need of international protection and humanitarian assistance.”

Since the coup in Myanmar on 1 February 2021, the human rights and humanitarian crisis inside the country has only worsened. The very military that perpetrated the atrocities against the Rohingya are now inflicting similar atrocities against other ethnic groups, particularly the predominantly Christian Chin, Kachin and Karenni, as well as the Karen population, which has a significant Christian population. Indeed, I recently met a teacher from the Karen population who told me how, in order to give the children any education at all, they could not use any of the schools; they had to teach them in the forests and in the trenches to avoid the airstrikes.

This military regime are brutally suppressing civil society, independent media and pro-democracy activists. It is such a sad change from the country of Myanmar that I travelled across just a few years ago, where I met young people who were so hopeful about the future of their country. The conditions for the safe and voluntary return of Rohingya refugees to Myanmar, therefore, are almost certainly not there at present. Indeed, as the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Türk, said as recently as March this year, the small Rohingya community that remains in Myanmar

“continues to face widespread and systematic discrimination in every area of life”—

and that—

“the necessary conditions for voluntary, safe and dignified returns of refugees to Rakhine State simply do not exist.”

Yet Bangladesh, which has provided sanctuary for the Rohingya for many years, cannot be expected to shoulder this responsibility alone, as indeed we have heard tonight. Bangladesh is preparing a pilot scheme for repatriation, which Human Rights Watch has called for a halt to because

“lives and liberty may be at grave risk.”

Conditions in the camps in Bangladesh are dire, leading to thousands of Rohingya refugees risking their lives in precarious boat journeys across the sea to south-east Asia, particularly Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand, in search of a better life. Traffickers who facilitate these dangerous sea crossings are giving Rohingya refugees false promises and false hope and placing them in grave danger yet again.

The Rohingya people are trapped. They are stateless, unable to return home to Myanmar, unwelcome in other countries in the region, and in a desperate situation in Bangladesh. The solutions to this appalling humanitarian crisis are twofold: in the immediate term, increased aid to the refugees in Bangladesh to improve their conditions and security, and to assist the Bangladeshi authorities in supporting the refugees; and in the long-term, pressure on the military regime to stop their campaign of crimes against humanity and war crimes, action to hold the military accountable for their crimes, and pressure on the democracy movement to ensure that, in any future democratic transition in Myanmar—when it happens—the Rohingya people’s right to citizenship and basic human rights, including the right to freedom of religion or belief, are respected, protected and upheld.

In closing, I welcome the Government’s provision of £350 million in aid to Rohingya refugees since 2017 and of £15 million in 2022-23 alone, but there is a need to do more. Will Ministers commit to reviewing the needs of the Rohingya refugees and ensuring an increase in aid this year and in the years ahead? Will they commit to working with like-minded countries to ensure that no Rohingyas are repatriated to Myanmar against their will? Will it be a priority for this Government to do everything possible to protect the Rohingyas’ dignity, their rights and the better future that they deserve and that they have, for far too long, been so tragically denied?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)]

I call the SNP spokesperson.

Health and Care Bill

Debate between Baroness Winterton of Doncaster and Fiona Bruce

Report stage
Tuesday 23rd November 2021 Commons Chamber

[Fiona Bruce]

My right hon. Friend makes exactly the right point.

Our law needs to be updated. The current 24-week limit was set over 30 years ago, in 1990. That legislation removed the previous time limit of 28 weeks. In 1990, 24 weeks was considered the point of viability outside the womb, but the scientific advances in those 31 years have been enormous. The latest guidance from the British Association of Perinatal Medicine establishes 22 weeks gestation to be the point of viability and enables doctors to intervene to save premature babies from 22 weeks. A study from a neonatal intensive care unit in London found that survival rates for babies born at 22 and 23 weeks gestation went from zero in the period from 1981 to 1985 to 19% in the period from 1986 to 1990, and then up to 54% in the years from 1996 to 2000. We would no doubt find that the figures had increased substantially since then, were those figures available. Just in the past few weeks, we have seen the incredible story from the American state of Alabama of the birth of a baby boy at just 21 weeks old. Weighing just 14.8 ounces, Curtis Means needs oxygen support and a feeding tube, but he is in good health. New clause 31 is a probing amendment, so I will not be pressing it to a vote on this occasion. However, I would welcome the Minister’s views and I look forward to a greater debate on this issue.

I also want to take a few moments to give my support to new clause 51, in the name of the hon. Member for Upper Bann (Carla Lockhart), which would clarify that abortion on the ground of the sex of the foetus is illegal. This relates to the truly awful exploitative practice whereby women can be pressurised into abortions based on the sex of their unborn child. I also support new clause 52, also in the name of the hon. Member for Upper Bann, which seeks to bring parity to the law in equalising time limits on abortions that take place on the ground of disability, so that they would be equal to the limits on most other abortions. The current law permits abortions up to birth if the baby is deemed likely to be born seriously handicapped. This is interpreted to include entirely non-fatal disabilities such as Down’s syndrome and easily surgically rectifiable conditions such as cleft palate and club foot. One of my sons was born with club foot, and I know how rectifiable it is. The law is plainly inconsistent with the disability discrimination legislation that applies after birth, and it sends a dreadful message to people who are living and thriving with disabilities about how little their lives are valued under abortion law. Again, I look forward to hearing the Minister’s views.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)]

In order to try to get as many people in as possible, I am going to put on a three-minute time limit.

Christmas Adjournment

Debate between Baroness Winterton of Doncaster and Fiona Bruce

Thursday 17th December 2020 Commons Chamber

[Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)]

Before I start, can I wholeheartedly endorse the expression of appreciation for the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon)? It has been my great pleasure to work with him on a number of issues, especially freedom of religion or belief. He is an inspiring leader on that issue, in particular in his role as chair of the all-party parliamentary group.

As my term of office serving as chair of the Conservative party human rights commission comes to an end shortly, I would like to pay tribute to all who over the past few years have contributed to our inquiries and reports, in particular the brave people who have given evidence to us, many at personal risk, and who either themselves or through their families have suffered greatly, often at the hands of their own Governments. I want to put on record my thanks and respect to them. Many are named in our reports. Without them, we as commissioners could not have highlighted the human rights concerns in those reports.

The commission’s reports include a 2016 report on human rights in China, 2013 to 2016, entitled “The Darkest Moment”—sadly, now a misnomer. That was followed later that year by a report on forced organ harvesting in China. Under a year later, there was a report on human rights in Russia today. In 2019, there was a report on China’s Confucius Institutes, as well as a report entitled “The Limits of Consent on Human Trafficking and Modern Slavery and their Impact on Prostitution in the UK”. This year, we have held nine sessions to inform a further report, which we will shortly publish on human rights in China 2016 to 2020, entitled, sadly, “The Darkness Deepens”.

Promoting and protecting freedom and human dignity should be at the heart of foreign policy. The Conservative party human rights commission was set up by my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) to highlight international human rights concerns; inform, advise and enhance the party’s foreign policy; and ensure that fundamental human rights are kept high on the political agenda. A number of Members of Parliament have been the chair of the Conservative party human rights commission since its creation, but the deputy chair has throughout this 15-year period been the same person, Benedict Rogers, to whom I pay particular tribute. I want to put on record my profound thanks and respect to him. He has not only carried the bulk of the commission’s work throughout this entire period, organising witness sessions and producing the first draft of most of our reports, but he has also travelled to dozens—probably hundreds, I have lost count—of places across the world, often at great personal danger. He has been refused entry to one place and arrested and detained in others, meeting directly with those subject to human rights abuses to ensure that our reports are as reliable and authentic as they can be. I know that my respect for Ben is shared by very many parliamentarians in both Houses, and it has been a true privilege to work closely with him in this role.

Four years ago, the Conservative party human rights commission was a canary in the coalmine in Westminster, calling attention to China’s human rights crisis almost as a lone voice—in fact, an urgent question I raised in 2015 prompted a furore from some parts of Government—although, of course, many other courageous voices, such as Bob Fu of ChinaAid, have been raising such concerns for years well beyond Westminster. Today, it is heartening that the Conservative party human rights commissioners are but one of many such voices here in the UK Parliament, as yesterday’s urgent question on the Uyghurs demonstrated—including voices from within the current Government. We welcome that.

As mentioned, we will shortly be launching a further report expressing concerns on the deepening deterioration of human rights in China, which we hope will serve to continue to highlight these issues and inform further debate—a debate it is critical we have if we are to better understand how, as parliamentarians, we can help to shape a new international order in which the value of human rights and human dignity, the rule of law, democracy, international treaty promises, and freedom of expression, association and religion or belief are better promoted and defended. It is heartening to me how, over my 10 years in this House, expressions of concern by parliamentary colleagues on these issues have noticeably increased, and with impact and effect, not least as we have seen recently with regard to Hong Kong.

Sadly, any such impact cannot yet be said to have happened with regard to the deteriorating human rights situation in China. Among the most dramatic evidence of the decline in human rights there since our commission’s last inquiry in 2016 are the violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief. These have become even more egregious, widespread and systematic, according to evidence received by the Conservative party human rights commission this year. As we now know, some of the most egregious violations of freedom of religion or belief affect the Uyghurs, and they encompass an almost total denial of every basic human right. They include their own Government’s attacks on the Uighur identity, culture and religion, the breaking up of families, the destruction of thousands of mosques and the recent heart-rending sight of people being loaded on to trains to be transported to prison camps with purpose-built factories alongside them. This was all too reminiscent of the holocaust.

However, it is by no means only the Uyghurs who are being persecuted. For every major religious community in China today—Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, Muslims, Buddhists, practitioners of Falun Gong and others—the situation has become more restricted. Believers across the faiths have been arrested, imprisoned, tortured and even killed in connection with their religion or belief. There are other Muslim groups as well as the Uyghurs in Xinjiang that are affected, as well as the Buddhists in Tibet. Violations against Christians have intensified with the imprisonment of pastors and the desecration or destruction of hundreds of churches.

Accounts to the independent China tribunal, chaired by Sir Geoffrey Nice, QC, which delivered its final judgment in March this year on the persecution of Falun Gong practitioners, were truly heart-searing. We are told that persecution by way of forced organ removal is taking place on an industrial scale. It is almost too horrible for the human mind to comprehend. Human beings are being cut open while still alive, without anaesthetic, for their kidneys, livers, hearts, lungs, corneas and skin to be removed and turned into commodities for sale.

We, as commissioners on the Conservative party human rights commission, have found that human rights concerns do not always come neatly packaged and presented. Engaging can be messy, awkward and risky, and speaking truth to power is not comfortable, often as much for the hearer as for the speaker. So, why raise these concerns? It is because, whether we agree with their beliefs or not, these are fellow human beings who are being affected. It is because we should respect the worth of every human being, and because every created individual has value. It is because once we have heard of these things, we should not stay silent. As the holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel said:

“Whoever listens to a witness, becomes a witness”.

We speak simply because we should, and because, however distant the sufferings of those who hurt might be, we share in their common humanity. In this House we have been granted the profound privilege of having voices that can resonate across the world, and we must use them to speak out on behalf of the most vulnerable, afflicted and oppressed.

Royal Assent

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Dame Rosie Winterton)]

I have to notify the House, in accordance with the Royal Assent Act 1967, that Her Majesty has signified her Royal Assent to the following Acts:

Taxation (Post-transition Period) Act 2020

United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020

Trade (Disclosure of Information) Act 2020.