(1 day, 4 hours ago)
Commons ChamberLet me make two points in response to the hon. Gentleman’s question. First, as he will know, the UK has extremely strong controls on arms exports, including to prevent any diversion. That remains important, and we will continue to take that immensely seriously.
Secondly, we need all countries with influence in the region to push the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces to ensure the protection of civilians. There are real, deep concerns about atrocities in Sudan, including sexual violence and the use of rape as a weapon of war. The hon. Gentleman will be aware of the new work being done through the Quad countries—the US, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt—which have condemned the violence and called for an end to external support for the warring parties. We are pressing for the urgent implementation of that work.
As penholder at the UN Security Council for both Sudan and the protection of civilians, the UK has a special responsibility following the fall of El Fasher and the appalling reports to which the Foreign Secretary referred. Will she call an emergency session of the Security Council focused on the protection of terrified civilians in Darfur, given recent events? She talked about the Quad. That statement was before the appalling events of the last three days. Will she push every country in the Quad—the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE—to act now to prevent further massacres?
I agree with my right hon. Friend that Sudan, the escalating violence and the humanitarian crisis must be on the agenda for the Security Council. We are pressing for that meeting to take place as soon as possible, and to ensure that the protection of civilians is at its heart. There was already a humanitarian crisis in Sudan, with huge numbers of people at risk of famine even before the escalating violence. I also agree on the urgent need to press all parties to cease the violence and to ensure that humanitarian aid can get through.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
It is a pleasure to speak in this really important debate. I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Huddersfield (Harpreet Uppal), who was absolutely right to state that the war in Sudan is a war on civilians—that is what it is. She set out many of the truly grim statistics. I will try to put them in some perspective before building on the many calls to action that we have already heard.
My hon. Friend talked about the extent of displacement. I want Members to imagine that every single person living in this city of London had been forced to move, and then half again—every man, woman and child, whether frail or strong, ill or healthy, had been forced to move. That is the extent of the displacement that we have seen taking place in Sudan.
My hon. Friend talked about the extent of hunger—24 million people facing acute hunger. That is the same number of people as live in London, the south-east and the west midlands combined. It is only just less than the number of people who live in Australia. Can we imagine an Australia in which either people are already malnourished or they can stay nourished at the moment only by selling off livestock or other essential means of survival? That is the number of people we are talking about.
My hon. Friend talked about the 638,000 people who face catastrophic hunger—people who are living in famine. That is more than the population of Glasgow, Bristol or Cardiff. Can we imagine entering one of those cities and finding that one in three people is already acutely malnourished and there is an extreme shortage of calories per person per day? That is the extent of this catastrophe.
The numbers of those impacted by violence are staggering, and so is the depravity of the violence. Many Members have spoken incredibly powerfully about this. I have seen footage, particularly from Humanitarian Action for Sudan. I am very grateful for the work of that organisation, and to Zeinab Badawi and others who are so engaged. I have seen footage that I can never unsee. It is absolutely appalling. We have seen so many Rubicons being crossed. Sexual violence has already been referred to by colleagues. We have also seen camps for displaced people being purposely attacked, individuals being kidnapped and homes being burned.
So what to do? We have to maintain the political profile of Sudan. There is such a strong moral case; we all know that. There is also a strong security case, regionally and globally. We also know that, of the unaccompanied asylum-seeking children coming to our country, the highest number are from Sudan. We must maintain pressure for a ceasefire. We must work with the African Union. We must work with the EU-convened consultative group on Sudan. We must put pressure on those who deny famine, deny atrocities and refuse to engage with those processes. We must do more as the penholder on Sudan at the UN Security Council. I know that my hon. Friend the Minister is committed to that, as are the broader ministerial team. We must ensure that perpetrators are held to account. Above all, we must act with urgency. We have already heard that Sudan is now moving to the rainy season. That, coupled with the appalling behaviour of all warring parties in restricting access to aid, will make the situation even worse.
I will end with a personal story—so many Members have told such stories about this situation. I met some of those who had fled from violence in Sudan when I was in South Sudan. At the camp of Bentiu, I met people who had fled. They were the only members of their family to have survived. Their siblings had died while trying to walk through floodwater. They had died because of exposure. They had died because of diarrhoea. They had died because they did not have enough food to eat. They had died because they had been killed by warring parties. They had been abducted by warring parties. That is happening time and again, and it is happening while the international community is failing to act.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I am grateful to the Minister and to my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson) for enabling me to make a brief contribution to this debate, and to highlight an issue about a Brit from my constituency who faced a very difficult situation in Laos. I wish, however, to start my remarks by saying how sorry I was to hear about the truly tragic death of my hon. Friend’s constituent. I very much appreciate the family being here today, and all the work they have undertaken.
My former extremely vulnerable constituent was coerced into drug trafficking, apparently enabled online, and detained at the Laos border in June 2024. From then onwards he was detained awaiting trial and facing the death penalty, and under Laotian procedures he was unable to move prisons for more than six months before he died. In December he spent one night in hospital before being discharged back to prison, where he died at the age of 65, thin and with wounds on his body apparently from scurvy. I know that the FCDO engaged with his case when he was still alive and after his death, but I wish briefly to underline two points.
First, the length of pretrial detention can make British citizens and their families vulnerable to financial extortion in Laos, and there is a particular problem with obtaining good quality legal support. I urge the Department to continue to engage with my constituent’s family on that issue, given their concerns about recommended lawyers. I appreciate that the FCDO’s travel advice indicates that legal representation is far below UK standards in Laos, but the impact of that on people in desperate situations cannot be underestimated.
Secondly, and finally, it is imperative that the risk of what is effectively the transnational exploitation of vulnerable people is better recognised. There must be a co-ordinated response between police and border services, especially when clearly vulnerable individuals are travelling to countries such as Laos. The FCDO website is rightly clear about penalties in Laos for illegal drugs, and that the standard of prisons is poor, but vulnerable and coerced individuals are being manipulated, and they need more than information on a website to protect them.
(5 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank the hon. Gentleman for his point of order. We will cross that bridge when we come to it. We are currently asking Members to keep their contributions to 15 minutes and that, of course, will be reassessed very shortly—I can give him assurances about that.
Madam Deputy Speaker, since I have been in the Chamber, I have received the truly awful news that three people died last night in a fire in Bicester, including two members of the Oxfordshire Fire and Rescue Service. The hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) has had to leave the Chamber to liaise with those on the ground and we both want to take this opportunity, if we may, to convey our deep sorrow for and solidarity with the families of those who have died, and our fervent and heartfelt best wishes to the two firefighters who remain in a serious condition. We are grateful for their heroism and that of their colleagues when, as ever, they ran towards danger to serve us all. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”]
I rise to speak in favour of new clause 16 and amendment 14, and I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak. When the Bill first came before the House, I was a Minister attending Cabinet and therefore unable to speak on the subject. I genuinely thank my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) and every single Member who served for so many hours on the Bill Committee for this incredibly important Bill. I also thank the hundreds of my constituents who have contacted me with their views. I genuinely believe that every single one of them was motivated by compassion and a determination to reduce suffering, and in many cases their views were shaped by their experience of death and of suffering in life. I know that that is the case for many of us in the Chamber as well, so I hope that the same spirit of respect that we saw previously will continue throughout the passage of the Bill, whatever our views may be.
New clause 16(1)(a) would exclude from the scope of the Bill those who do not want to be a burden on others or on public services, and paragraph (b) would exclude those experiencing a mental disorder, including depression. On the former, we have discussed this morning whether it is appropriate to mention international analogies. They will, of course, be instrumentalised by those who have different views about this important subject. I have personally found survey evidence from the Oregon example of people expressing that they felt they were a burden to be highly compelling. I do not believe that it indicates that that was the primary reason why they sought assisted dying, but I believe that it is an important piece of evidence that we need to take into account.
I also believe that we need to look at situations where people who are potentially subject to coercion have been evaluated by professionals in our society, and where we might be concerned about the outcomes. I ask for Members’ understanding here.
On the point that the right hon. Lady has just raised, the Oregon example suggests that in 2023, 47 people who opted for assisted dying gave as one of their primary motivations that they felt they were a burden to others. Is that not a great concern for everybody in the Chamber? Does it not undermine the argument about passing the Bill on the grounds of autonomy? That argument is not accurate, because the provisions affect the autonomy of people who will self-coerce.
I personally believe that it does. I have heard countless times the phrase, “I do not want to be a burden.” I know Members will come to different conclusions about whether it is sufficiently excluded by the Bill. I believe it needs to be on the face of the Bill, so that we can ensure that it is out of scope.
I tabled an amendment to ensure that the self-defined responsibility to go for assisted dying did not become a rationale. What is the right hon. Lady’s view on the impact of intersectionality on this issue? We know that, in practical terms, a number of people do not have full control over their lives. The Mother of the House, the right hon. Member for Hackney North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), made the point that people who are often pushed around by their families and their wider society—particularly women from ethnic minorities—will be at particular risk from the gentle advice or suggestions from authority figures to whom they will be overly deferential, which could lead them into a very dangerous position.
I agree with the right hon. Gentleman. I believe it is exactly those individuals who would be more likely to be subject to coercion by others, and I am afraid the evidence does indicate that. Sadly, we can see it in the experience of our courts, which have dealt with so-called mercy killings. I appreciate that many Members in this Chamber would not want that example to be used in the context of this discussion—of course, we are talking about something very different from those court cases. None the less, I believe it is instructive that in those cases, highly trained legal professionals have often described the actions, particularly those of former partners, as motivated by compassion, but when the circumstances have been investigated in detail, there has been substantial evidence of coercion and abuse. It is important that we consider that now.
Is my right hon. Friend reassured by the fact that the Bill creates a criminal offence of coercion and pressure, which does not exist at the moment? No one is checking for coercion when victims of domestic abuse or others take their own lives under desperate circumstances.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for making that point. I believe the Bill has been substantially improved through the many amendments that she and others have tabled. I know that these issues were discussed in detail in Committee, but I have to be honest: sadly, the prospect of a prosecution has often not been sufficient to prevent abuse. I note that in the discussions in Committee, a number of medical professionals mentioned that they often have to assess whether coercion has taken place and that they are confident in that assessment, but there is a huge amount of contestation around whether that confidence is rightly placed or otherwise.
Does my right hon. Friend share my concern that there will only be three hours for a panel, and that the first and second doctors might not actually know the patient or have met them? Their ability to spot coercion will be very limited.
Yes, I do share my hon. Friend’s concern in that regard. Sadly, we all know how perpetrators of coercion operate. They will often school the subject of their coercion in how to respond to questioning, to try to hide what they are doing from others. That is a concern.
Dr Opher
Does my right hon. Friend not see that, in Committee, we were very aware of coercion? That is one of the reasons why we have a social worker on the panel of experts. Additionally, clause 1(2)(b) says it will be necessary to establish that a person
“has made the decision that they wish to end their own life voluntarily and has not been coerced or pressured by any other person”.
It is very clear in the Bill.
I very much appreciate my hon. Friend’s efforts, and those of my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley, to ensure that these matters were covered in Committee. Sadly, because of the patterns of behaviour that we see time and again with those who have been subject to coercion, I do not believe that the safeguards go far enough. That is my assessment, and I know that other Members will come to a different view.
I will make some progress, because I know others wish to speak.
I want to speak briefly about subsection (1)(b) of new clause 16, which relates to mental disorder. Colleagues will dispute whether analogies are appropriate, but it is important that the House is aware—this was covered in Committee—that in the Netherlands, which of course has a different regime from the one proposed in the Bill, two cases involving psychiatric suffering were subject to assisted dying in 2010; in 2023, that figure was 138. That is a very substantial increase. I understand that, as was said earlier, it is a completely different set of circumstances in the Dutch case, but I am concerned that there is some confusion about the scope of the mental capacity provisions in the Bill.
I supported the Bill on Second Reading on condition that it would be strengthened to tackle the issue of capacity. Does the right hon. Lady accept that the Bill that we see today is very different from the one that we saw on Second Reading? There is a requirement for capacity. If there is any doubt at all, a doctor is compelled to report that person for additional assessment, and independent advocates have been introduced for people with learning disabilities, autism or mental disorders. Social workers are now included in the panel of experts, specific training on mental capacity is required, and there is a disability advisory board too. Does the right hon. Lady—
I agree that the Bill has been improved, but there is a difference between mental capacity, at least as assessed by medical professionals, and the presence of mental disorder. I know the Committee examined that subject at length. It was very clear from the discussion in Committee that it anticipated that elements such as being able to assess information and make judgments between alternatives would be covered by the mental capacity provisions—but the evaluation of those alternatives, which can be impacted by mental disorder, is not part of that process. The reality is that those subject to a number of mental disorders—including, sadly, eating disorders—may be highly intelligent and may well be able to carry out many logical procedures to assess information, but their evaluation of the value of their future life and their assessment of the value of bodily control, in relation to other factors, are different from those of someone who is not ill. I believe that issue has not been fully understood.
I will not give way at the moment.
That is why it is important that that exclusion is put very clearly on the face of the Bill.
Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)
Does my right hon. Friend agree that clause 2(3) makes it very clear that no one can qualify for assistance under the Bill by reason only of either disability or mental disorder unless they also have six months’ terminality and capacity?
I am aware of what my hon. Friend quite rightly refers to. Of course, any such condition would have to be coterminous with a terminal illness, but we know—the Committee thrashed this out for a long period—that depression is often present at the same time as a diagnosis of terminal illness. We also know that concepts such as “terminal anorexia” have started to be used in certain contexts. That unfortunately suggests that, despite the many protestations of those who understandably support the Bill, there is the possibility that those subject to eating disorders will be pulled within its scope. I am very pleased that amendment 14 would rule that out—it is important that it does so. It is critical that this Chamber sends that message too, given the potential confusion about scope.
I am very grateful for the opportunity to speak to new clause 16 and amendment 14. Above all, I hope we can continue this important discussion, which is critical for so many of our constituents.
(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Falconer
We went through many of these issues in some detail last Wednesday, and I am sure that I will return to this House to do so again. My position remains as it was on Wednesday.
I have stood opposite the spokesperson for the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton), many times and engaged in the rough and tumble of political debate. It is not part of the rough and tumble of political debate to seek to justify the detention and deportation of fellow Members of this House. Does my hon. Friend the Minister agree that the position taken by Opposition Front Benchers poses a risk to all of us as parliamentarians?
Mr Falconer
My right hon. Friend speaks with force, and I condemn the position taken by Opposition Front Benchers. We have just heard from a fairly trenchant advocate for free speech; I thought that was the position of the Conservative party.
(6 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI rise from the Back Benches for the first time in many years, having resigned from my position as Minister for Development and for Women and Equalities. The view is “much better from here”, as the late, great Robin Cook said, but I do deeply regret that I could not continue to serve in the Government for which I campaigned for so long. I wish my successors, Baroness Chapman and Baroness Smith, all the very best. I will not try their patience—or indeed yours, Madam Deputy Speaker—by reprising the contents of my resignation letter, but I do want to explain why I have chosen to break my silence during this debate.
The new Government entered office at a time of unprecedented geopolitical and economic flux. There is no muscle memory in Government, or indeed in politics, for the instability we are currently seeing, and as democracy backslides globally, instability is the new normal. It demands a strategic, not tactical, response. Economically, I believe, as I set out in my letter, that we must be prepared to reassess shibboleths, whether on the fiscal rules, as Germany has done, or on taxation, especially when the very best-off are seeing so little impact on their wellbeing from the economic headwinds.
In addition, we must work with our allies—particularly in Europe but also beyond—to build our resilience on defence production and exports, with productivity growth hammered by post-Brexit impediments to trade and now, as we have heard this morning, with US-imposed tariffs. From Turkey to Somalia, people are desperate for democracy, stability and economic growth. In supporting them, we also support our country’s security.
I therefore regret that, on top of the huge cut to official development assistance that led to my resignation, the shift to a cash basis may limit resources further. I welcome the Prime Minister’s commitment to work closely with other countries to bridge some of that gap, but it must include radical action to tackle indebtedness, increase financial guarantees, protect lifesaving health services, and to support and reform multilateral bodies as they come under attack from autocrats.
I believe that we need the same strategic approach—not tactical—when it comes to the protection of our democracy. Last summer saw the worst racist riots in our country since the second world war. None of us can forget the appalling scenes when racist thugs set fire to hotels knowing that people remained inside, and all in the name of three poor beautiful little girls—may they rest in peace. The policing and criminal justice response was swift, and I commend the Government for that, but in this case and others the influence of social media has not been fully digested, let alone acted upon.
There are many other canaries choking down the coalmine, not least due to the growth and impact of violent online misogyny. Here I commend the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) not just for her steadfast campaigning, but for the fact that even as she has received such appalling abuse herself, she continues to stand for women and girls. I stand in solidarity with her, as should all Members in this Chamber.
Considerable progress is being made to defend democracy by the new Government, through: the taskforce of that name; the joint election security and preparedness unit; the foreign influence registration scheme that was released a couple of days ago; the Speaker’s Conference focused particularly on the safety of candidates; and the new ban on the creation, as well as the sharing, of sexually explicit deepfakes, whether they are focused on politicians or other victims. But attempts to degrade our democracy have involved actors from states that are not classified as hostile, and they have taken place outside election times, too. Policy must deal not with how things were 10 years ago, but with the reality of an online world that is having huge offline consequences.
First, I agree with the hon. Lady that we lack tools to deal decisively with the growth in disinformation. The Online Safety Act does includes measures to protect content of democratic importance, but without a clear definition of that content, and with Ofcom’s advisory committee on disinformation and misinformation apparently not having met yet, that must be remedied speedily, given that over half of people now receive news through social media, and that rises to 82% of young people. Recommender algorithms, as she said, privilege engagement above all else, and extreme content engages more. I urge the Government to consider including independent audits of recommender algorithms, as contained in the EU’s Digital Services Act but not in our Online Safety Act.
Secondly, our new legislative regime, although welcome, relies on an antiquated separation of large and small platforms. Last summer showed how the far right often switch from Telegram to YouTube to Rumble, and to other platforms large and small. When they spread disinformation, they do not keep it only on large platforms, so regulators should be prepared to act on small platforms, too.
Thirdly, the new regime was created when the major complaint against platforms was that they were failing to heed their own rules. Now, powerful platform owners are ditching rules and firing compliance officers, and are themselves pumping out disinformation. There are no minimum standards in the new regime for platforms’ terms of service. I urge the Government to look again at that, with the care that I know the Minister always displays.
Finally, we must work more closely with others seeking to protect their democracies, from Helsinki to Rio, Tallinn to Ottawa, and Chisinau to Berlin. In that vein, paralleling the Prime Minister’s push for a UK-EU defence partnership, we surely also need a UK-EU structured dialogue on digital policy and the defence of our democracies.
In conclusion, I remain grateful to the Prime Minister and my party for providing me with eight months where I could seek to serve my country as a Minister of State. That was only possible because my constituents in Oxford East afforded me, through their free choice, the opportunity to represent them. Voters’ free choice, taken for granted so often in our country but so precious, is what is ultimately at risk if we fail to defend our democracy.
(7 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the potential merits of an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian
peace.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. One of the most violent cycles of Israeli-Palestinian conflict in history, the largest since 1973, has drawn to a halt and it is now critical that we redouble our efforts to make this a lasting peace. The atrocities and massive loss of life we have seen on and since 7 October cannot happen again. We must do all we can to prevent that, and innocent civilians must be allowed to live their lives without fear.
The recent news has been packed with talk of various reconstruction plans and Government summits, but the current debate is neglected and a vital pathway to peace—that is, the involvement of Israeli and Palestinian civil society. The international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace is at its core an initiative designed to give agency to those often overlooked grassroots communities of Israel and Palestine. It plans to mobilise international investment in regional peacebuilding projects and, in doing so, will tackle unaddressed drivers of this terrible conflict. That is why the Government’s commitment to the fund has been such a groundbreaking move and why our continued support will be critical.
Political discussion about the conflict is often fixated on the short-term weather of the situation, day-to-day events and great tragedy in detail, but sometimes we neglect the climate, the long-term trends and initiatives that will bring us meaningfully closer to peace. Therefore, I want today’s debate, and my intention is, to shift our political priorities to longer term, to looking at how we can create the space in the hearts and minds of all affected communities to make peace a possibility.
Of course, how we accomplish that invites a great deal of discussion, particularly in the light of our Government’s necessary and timely commitment to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP. In this era of more limited resources being available, we need to be especially sure that the budget we do have is going towards projects that are value for money in achieving security abroad, because security abroad means safety at home, and the British taxpayer must see those returns many times over. I invite other Members today to make the case for why the international fund could satisfy that requirement.
One great advantage of the fund is the opportunity that it presents for British leadership abroad. The Prime Minister has recently shown what Britain can look like as a leading force for good on the international stage. Seizing the initiative on civil society reconciliation in Israel and Palestine by championing the fund would be yet another demonstration of that power in a notably resource-efficient way. I hope that we have the courage to act and to keep the momentum of recent successes in the region going. As the examples of Syria and Lebanon show, political changes can occur suddenly and unexpectedly. Currently, however, these people and nations are suffering unimaginable pain and trauma. Innocent Palestinians have suffered the catastrophic loss of their loved ones, homes and livelihoods; and at the same time in Israel the images of the hostages are burned into the national consciousness, and the scars of 7 October will be felt for generations to come.
Therefore, with your permission, Mr Twigg, I ask that Members allow accounts from victims to always be heard. I personally have spoken with the families of hostages, and having witnessed such pain at first hand, I make clear my view that anyone who considers themselves to be on the side of peace should respect the testimony of innocents on both sides. This is not a zero-sum game. Reconciliation will take time, but history has told us that it is the only route to a lasting peace.
History has much to teach us in the pursuit of peace. In the 1980s and 1990s, Northern Ireland and Israel-Palestine were both global symbols of intercommunal violence, but today they look very different from each other. The enduring relief that the Good Friday agreement brought to the people of Northern Ireland has sadly not been shared in Israel and Palestine. There are many explanations for those differing outcomes that I am sure other Members will draw attention to, but I will note that although negotiations on the make-up of the middle east often began and stayed at the level of Presidents, Prime Ministers and leaders, the International Fund for Ireland ensured that as many people as possible were given a seat at the table and a stake in the future.
My hon. Friend is talking very eloquently about history and the need for grassroots history to be reflected. Does he agree that there has been a strong history of co-operation and co-operatives in the middle east? Is he aware of the fact that the British Co-operative Group has been working hard, with the Co-operative party, on tangible measures to support peace and economic development, including the Wahat al-Salam/Neve Shalom peace village? Do we need to see more of these initiatives in the future, and can the fund be a way of achieving that?
Steve Yemm
I agree that co-operatives and co-operation are incredibly important with regard to this fund and that we lose sight at our peril of the value of any civil society actors, including co-operatives. We recall that the fund in Northern Ireland gave everybody a seat at the table, a say in their future. The International Fund for Ireland may well have been the great unsung hero of the peace process. We therefore have in recent memory living proof that a plan for civil society reconciliation, backed by an international fund, can succeed where high-level talks may fail.
In my opinion, no one is more fit for this task than the Labour Government. Our party has a long and storied history in peacemaking, Northern Ireland being just one example of that. Equally, I am eager that we build a consensus on the fund across the House.
(8 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)
Investments in the Global Fund, Unitaid, UNAIDS—the Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS—the World Health Organisation and others have helped to cut new HIV infections by 60% since 1995 and AIDS-related deaths by 69% since 2004. I was pleased to meet HIV-positive activists in Parliament recently and to be videoed while undertaking a quick and easy HIV test. Together, we can eradicate HIV/AIDS.
Paul Davies
The Minister is aware that PEPFAR—the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief—is the largest and most successful global health programme and has saved 25 million lives. It has been advised that freezing PEPFAR will result in 228,000 fewer HIV tests being carried out daily. UNAIDS predicts that 6.3 million AIDS-related deaths will occur if PEPFAR lacks funding for the next five years. Can the Minister ensure that the Foreign Office includes HIV in all international discussions, especially at the G7 in Canada this year?
Tests and treatment are critical. I am pleased that the Prime Minister recently announced that, together with South Africa, the UK will co-host the eighth replenishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. The Global Fund is the leading financier of the global fight against HIV/AIDS, and we will work with Canada to draw attention at the G7 to the importance of the Global Fund replenishment.
What details can the Minister give us about the financing that will be given to the Global Fund? More importantly, there is a rumour that official development assistance is going to be cut from 0.5% to 0.2%, to cover an increase in defence spending. Can the Minister confirm whether that is the case?
The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the importance of funding for global health. Of course, this is not just important for those directly impacted; it is important for us here in our country, because we know that diseases do not respect borders. I set out a few moments ago the fact that the Prime Minister is committed to that Global Fund replenishment, and rightly so.
Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)
Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)
We condemn the Taliban’s appalling treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan. The Taliban must reverse their barbaric decrees, and we keep working hard with international partners to maintain collective pressure.
Rebecca Smith
The cruelty and inhumanity of the Taliban should appal us all, and no doubt we all condemn the ban on medical training. The UK has provided significant aid to Afghanistan to support the health of women and babies, but with the Taliban now undermining women’s health as well as their rights, what will happen to these aid programmes and funds? What actions can we take to put pressure on the Taliban to reverse their decision?
The hon. Lady is absolutely right that the Taliban have been undermining so much of women’s and girls’ lives in Afghanistan. We are determined to support girls in Afghanistan, including when it comes to education. I have directly discussed that with the Aga Khan Foundation to ensure that support is getting directly to girls, but we also need to push hard politically. I was very pleased to announce that the UK is politically supporting the initiative to refer Afghanistan to the International Court of Justice for violations of the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.
The treatment of women and girls by the Taliban is disgusting, and pressure must be exerted in response. The Minister will know that there are concerns about the protection of rights for women and girls and other minorities in Syria too, given the ideology of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. Ministers have issued a statement on the future of the UK sanctions on Syria. Can the Minister give details of the measures that need to be put in place in Syria to protect those rights, and say whether such issues will be tied to future decisions on sanctions?
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her question, and for her passion for the protection of women and girls. Protecting them, and, indeed, religious and ethnic minorities, has been at the core of the UK’s engagement with the Syrian authorities. It was at the core of the interventions I made at the conference on Syria that I attended in Paris just a few days ago, and it is also very important in relation to the changes to sanctions that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary set out.
Freddie van Mierlo (Henley and Thame) (LD)
The slave trade was abhorrent. We recognise its horrific impacts and the ongoing strength of feeling, but there have been no such discussions. As the Foreign Secretary made clear to the Foreign Affairs Committee after the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting,
“There was no discussion about reparation and money. The Prime Minister and I were absolutely clear that we will not be making cash transfers and payments to the Caribbean”.
We are focused on working with our Caribbean partners to tackle the most pressuring challenges of today and the future, including security, growth and climate change.
Last week saw the 38th ordinary session of the African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government, the topic of which was “Justice for Africans and people of African descent through reparations”. Caribbean Heads of State were also present, and we know that the Caribbean Community, or CARICOM, has long engaged in discussions on reparative justice. Whether or not we participate in these discussions, they will continue to happen. Does the Minister accept that the world and its power structures are changing? In our turbulent post-Brexit reality, we need allies and friends, but we will not even say that we are sorry. We would be foolish to think that we are not deeply resented for that. Is it not better for the UK to engage in these discussions and ensure that we play a constructive role in addressing the enduring legacies of slavery and colonialism?
We recognise that this is an issue of enduring concern to many. We listen to views from our Caribbean partners on the full range of bilateral issues, but our policy on reparations is clear: we do not pay them. We are determined to work together for the future.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
A quick question: to what extent do the Government support CARICOM’s 10-point plan for reparatory justice?
As I just stated, our policy on reparations is clear: we do not pay them.
Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)
On 28 January we announced a further £17 million for healthcare, food and shelter, and to support vital infrastructure across the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This was an investment in the ceasefire, which must hold.
Andrew Pakes
It is utterly heartbreaking to see the desecration of hostages’ bodies, and to see men, women and children returning to Gaza to try to rebuild their lives among the rubble. I welcome the Government’s efforts on humanitarian aid during this fragile ceasefire, which is becoming more fragile as tanks roll into the west bank. What more can we do to ensure that the ceasefire is implemented in full, and to protect human rights and communities in the west bank?
I know that many Members on both sides of the House will share my hon. Friend’s revulsion and concern at those scenes. We are committed to working with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the United States and regional partners to build confidence in the ceasefire and support conditions for a permanent and sustainable peace, including Palestinian reconstruction. To support immediate needs, £2 million of the recently announced funding has been committed to critical water and energy infrastructure projects.
I refer the House to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests.
I visited Israel recently as part of a delegation from this place, and met politicians from across the political spectrum. Some support the Israeli Government’s current approach, while others do not, but what unites them is their criticism of the UK Government’s continued support for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. Will the Government please reconsider that support?
I too have had such discussions, both in Tel Aviv and elsewhere. I recognise that there was particular concern about the events that led to the production of the Colonna report. As was mentioned earlier, there were disturbing allegations about the involvement of UNRWA staff, and there is also concern about reports that Emily Damari may have been placed within an UNRWA camp. We have taken this up with UNRWA, and have supported its reform agenda. It has delivered change, and it is the only organisation that can deliver the humanitarian support that is so desperately needed by millions of Palestinians.
We remain desperately concerned about the humanitarian situation in Sudan. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has set out the measures taken by the UK to seek to ameliorate that appalling disaster, included a doubling of aid to Sudan.
In recent days, Sudanese armed forces have advanced into El-Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state, ending a two-year siege by the Rapid Support Forces. This has caused serious food shortages in North Kordofan, which is deemed to be suffering famine conditions under the integrated food security phase classification. What are the Government doing to ensure that aid is fast-tracked into the city?
I thank my hon. Friend for raising that issue, because the situation she has described is intolerable. I was grateful to the international counterparts who attended a discussion on these subjects, in which we took part, at the Munich security conference. My hon. Friend referred to the famine designation. We regret the fact that the Sudanese armed forces have said that they will not co-operate with that assessment, but we have seen both the RSF and the SAF restricting aid and using it as a weapon of war, and that must end.
The Genocide80Twenty campaign group at Hampton school in my constituency recently met members of the Darfur diaspora who have fled the atrocities in Sudan, and they would like to know what the UK Government are doing to help those targeted simply for who they are. With a staggering 16 million children desperately needing food, shelter, healthcare and education, could I ask the Minister for assurances that we will not see any cuts to UK aid to the region, and what assessment has she has made of the impact of the Trump Administration’s cuts to US aid?
The hon. Member is right to raise the disturbing accounts of atrocities that we have heard. She will be pleased to know that the UK led efforts to renew the UN Human Rights Council fact-finding mission mandate last October, and I was very pleased to see additional African countries coming on board with that. We have doubled our aid to Sudan, so that commitment is not in doubt.
I welcome the Government pushing a ceasefire in Sudan and doubling aid. Sudan’s civil war, now in its third year, has triggered one of the worst humanitarian crises of the decade, with 5.1 million internally displaced people and 1.3 million refugees since April 2023, and famine is now looming. Given this, will the Minister outline what urgent steps the Government are taking with their international counterparts to help de-escalate the conflict in Sudan?
Ending the conflict in Sudan, and the appalling consequences of it, is a UK priority. Both the Foreign Secretary and I have visited the region, including Chad and South Sudan. We have increased aid, and we have been determined to increase international attention. That includes the April conference to which the Foreign Secretary referred, but I also convened Development Ministers from a number of countries a few days ago, with the emergency relief co-ordinator, to try to pile on the pressure.
Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)
The last time the Minister was in the House talking about Sudan, she told us it was important to have trust in the international system. Given that the RSF are accused of ethnic cleansing and genocide, are so far acting with complete impunity and have just pledged to form a rival Government, what are the UK Government doing to garner trust in the international system and to hold the RSF to account?
I regret that we see both parties to the conflict behaving in a manner that is having a truly catastrophic impact on civilians—we see famine and appalling levels of conflict-related sexual violence—and the international community must step up. That is why the Foreign Secretary is seeking to convene leaders on this in April, why I have pulled together Development Ministers on this and why we have repeatedly raised these issues at the UN.
Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)
Gaza’s healthcare system has been devastated, and many civilians are in desperate need of treatment and specialist care, which is not available in Gaza itself. Will the Minister ensure that the Government continue to raise with Israel the importance of allowing safe passage out of Gaza for those children in need of urgent medical treatment? Will they consider additional evacuation routes for critically unwell children?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that important question. We have been working closely with Egypt, which has sought to support many of those requiring medical assistance. Across Government we continue to look carefully at this issue, but Gazans need healthcare support in Gaza, and the UK Government have been supporting that.
As I am sure those on the Treasury Bench know, soft power and diplomacy are most effective when they are backed up by hard power. When will the Government commit to spending 3% of GDP on defence, to make sure that we have a real voice at the international table to encourage European countries to increase their defence spending?
(9 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Steve Witherden (Montgomeryshire and Glyndŵr) (Lab)
The Foreign Secretary made clear at his Kew lecture that the climate must be at the heart of all that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office does. When we have that focus on climate adaptation and mitigation, we see economic growth globally and in our country.
Steve Witherden
The rising death tolls from the wildfires in Los Angeles and the damage to our communities recently caused by Storms Bert and Darragh serve as clear reminders of escalating weather extremes and the urgent need to tackle the climate emergency. Will the Minister explain how the Government are actively driving efforts to cut emissions and champion clean energy, both in the UK and across the globe?
Our thoughts are with all those hit by the dreadful crises that my hon. Friend mentions. At COP29, the UK showed leadership in setting an ambitious nationally determined contribution to cut emissions by 81% by 2035. We are championing clean energy at home and abroad, including through the launch of GB Energy and the global clean power alliance.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
Former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove has warned against the risks of relying on China for Britain’s energy infrastructure. What assessment has the Minister made of the involvement of Chinese supply chains in the Government’s solar plans?
This Government are determined to have a consistent and clear-eyed approach to China and to avoid the oscillation that we saw under previous Governments; as a result, we are conducting a China audit that will look thoroughly at all our relationships with China. We will compete where we must, challenge where we need to and co-operate where that is necessary.
The Government signed up to a $300 billion climate finance package at COP29, with the amount increasing by $50 billion to get a deal. Since then, Ministers have not been able to give details of what our share will be, how much British taxpayers will fund, and what will come from official development assistance and what from private enterprise and investment. Can the Minister provide any of those details, and, if not, will she commit to a timetable for disclosure of that information?
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her question, but she will surely understand that the COP agreement was about the global goal. The precise share for individual countries is worked out through the normal processes. It was her Government—a Conservative Government—who committed to the £11.6 billion climate finance goal. Unlike the previous Government, however, we are determined to fit that within our responsibilities and deliver on it for the sake of our climate and our economy.
Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)
The UK will continue to use all diplomatic avenues to press the warring parties in Sudan into a permanent ceasefire, to enable unrestricted humanitarian access and to protect civilians.
The Liberal Democrats welcome the humanitarian support that the Government are giving to Sudan. We also recognise that greater protections are needed for women, children and ethnic minority groups. In the light of the failure of the United Nations to back safe areas, what is the UK doing to create safe zones for schools and hospitals in Sudan?
I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s support for the measures the UK Government have been taking. Clearly, there are dreadful problems when it comes to civilian protection in Sudan. The UK put forward a resolution to the Security Council, with Sierra Leone, focused on the protection of civilians. It was appalling that Russia vetoed that resolution. We will continue to use every avenue available to us to promote their safety.
Chris Ward
I thank the Minister for her reply and for the focus she has given this important issue. The suffering, famine and displacement in Sudan are only intensifying, so will she outline the practical steps the Government are taking to protect human rights, promote peace and bring an end to this appalling conflict?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning the extreme need to act on what is the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. The UK has doubled its aid to Sudan. We have sought to use the UN Security Council, as I mentioned. We ensured through the Foreign Secretary that there was a Sudan session with G7 and Arab Quint Foreign Ministers, and the UK special representative to Sudan has visited Sudan; that occurred in December for the first time since the conflict.
I welcome what the right hon. Lady said yesterday, but the delivery of aid is clearly being used as a weapon in this conflict. What steps are being taken to ensure that the aid gets through to the people most in need on the ground in Sudan?
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising that. I know he shares our deep concern about the impact of restrictions on aid, which we have particularly seen feeding through into the famine assessment from the IPC—integrated food security phase classification—that came out at the end of last year. There must be, above all, a permanent opening of crossings. We were, of course, pleased to see the Adre crossing open for three months, but it must be opened permanently. We also need to see cross-line availability of aid. We need to have the warring parties focused on humanitarian need, not on pursuing a war that they both appear to think they can win but as a result of which civilians are suffering appallingly.
Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)
Following on from the question from the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), I welcome the Government’s ongoing support for the humanitarian effort in Sudan and the wider region, but does the Minister share my concern that aid risks not reaching those who need it most? Will she continue to put pressure on Sudan for the Adre crossing to be kept open permanently, so that vital aid can get to those who need it most? Could she update the House on what steps she is taking in that area?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for being so clear about the challenges around aid coming into Sudan and then being delivered to those who so desperately need it. We will keep pushing on the need for the Adre crossing to remain open. We will also keep pushing on the need for aid workers to be protected within Sudan and for UN staff to be able to access Sudan. Of course, we will work with those on the ground, particularly the emergency response rooms, which are delivering essential mutual aid.
Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)
The scale of humanitarian suffering in Gaza is catastrophic and unacceptable. The UK condemns Israel’s restrictions on aid in the strongest terms. This is a man-made crisis, and Israel must act immediately to address it.
Danny Beales
The aid agencies I have spoken to are particularly concerned about access to medical facilities and critical shortages of medical supplies in Gaza, particularly northern Gaza. In the light of that, what steps are the Government taking to get additional medical supplies to Gaza for both Palestinians and Israeli hostages in desperate humanitarian situations?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this incredibly important issue. In December, I saw for myself in Jordan how medical aid had been blocked from entering Gaza. As I have said before, the position that the UK Government have articulated at every possible juncture is that restrictions on lifesaving aid must end. The UK continues to provide core healthcare relief items, and has provided 76,000 wound care kits, 1.3 million items of medicine, and critical funding for UK-Med to run its field hospitals in Gaza.
Anna Dixon
I thank the Minister for her response, and I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s efforts to secure a sustainable ceasefire and the release of hostages.
Many of my constituents have expressed concern about the recent raid of Kamal Adwan hospital, which was one of the last healthcare facilities still operating in Gaza. The hospital’s director, Dr Safiya, was detained along with several of his staff during that raid. International law prohibits the detention of medical staff in conflict zones. What is the Minister doing to secure the release of these medical staff so that Gaza’s civilians can continue to access essential medical care?
My hon. Friend is right to raise this critically important issue. We have raised the protection of healthcare facilities and the detention of healthcare workers directly with the Israeli Government. The Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has specifically raised the detention of Dr Hussam Abu Safiya with both Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister and its ambassador to the UK.
The ceasefire that is apparently being progressed is seemingly the same as the one drafted in May, which was deliberately frustrated by members of the Israeli Government. Sadly, since that time, hostages and those falsely imprisoned have remained captive and so many lives have been lost. No doubt the Minister can assure the public that, should the ceasefire be confirmed, every effort will be made to get aid and supplies to the Palestinians, particularly those in northern Gaza. Does she agree that this means that neither Israeli military activity nor Israeli legislation preventing the work of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency can be accepted?
There absolutely must be a surge of aid into Gaza; that will be critical after a ceasefire. However, impediments to aid that remain must also be removed.
The issue of UNRWA has been previously discussed in the House. The UK Government’s position is that UNRWA must be able to continue to operate. It is the only organisation with the scale and depth necessary to get that lifesaving aid to people who need it.
Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)
UAV Engines Ltd, based in Staffordshire, manufactures the engines powering the Hermes 450 drone, which is manufactured by Elbit Systems in the UK and used by the Israeli military in the Gaza strip. Israel regards the Hermes 450 as a critical asset, providing strike capabilities. Will the Minister confirm whether those drones, engines or any other parts for the Hermes 450 drone are still being supplied to Israel from the UK?
The UK has the most robust arms control regime in any global comparison. This Government were determined to ensure that we fulfilled our legal responsibilities and that we assessed, fully and legally, arms exportation licences. I can confirm to the House that since 2 September there have been no extant UK export licences for items to Israel that we assess are for use in military operations in Gaza.
Last week, Hamas fired rockets at the Erez crossing, demonstrating once again the terror group’s intention to disrupt aid delivery and prolong the suffering of Gazans, as well as Israelis. What assistance have the UK Government offered to support repairing that crossing and support Israel as it gets much-needed aid into Gaza?
We remain directly in contact with Israel, with UN agencies and with other partners in the region. That is obviously at ministerial level and also with our special representative for humanitarian issues in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. The issues of crossings and their openness and safety have been raised repeatedly by the special representative and by members of this Government. That also covers attacks by the terrorists Hamas on those crossings.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
While Gaza stands on the verge of absolute annihilation, the Israeli ambassador to the UK has repeatedly expressed opposition to a two-state solution, emphasising that that is not a feasible solution. Given that the UK has consistently expressed support for a two-state solution but does not yet recognise one of the states, will the Minister clarify any discussions she has had with the Israeli ambassador?
Order. This question is about humanitarian aid, but I am sure the Minister will be able to answer.
The UK Government’s position is, indeed, that there must be a two-state solution. The new Government have been determined to do all we can towards that end. That will include advocating for that solution at every juncture, including with embassies and, as would be expected, with the Israeli embassy.
Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the deeply concerning ongoing conflict in eastern DRC and its devastating consequences. Our humanitarian programme, which amounts to £114 million, is delivering lifesaving emergency assistance, and I can reassure her that Lord Collins has met with the leaders of DRC and Rwanda to urge them to engage in good faith in the Luanda process, to bring an end to the horrific fighting.
Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)
The rights of women in Afghanistan have been under systematic assault since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, and women have been all but entirely excluded from public life. They are barred from attending school and university, and in many areas they cannot leave their homes without a male guardian present. What pressure are the UK Government putting on the Taliban to ensure that women and girls can go back to school?
I agree with the hon. Lady. We are deeply concerned by the appalling erosion of the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan, and we are seeking to use every avenue to exert pressure. I remind the House that on 9 January I announced that the UK had formally joined the list of countries pledging political support to the initiative to refer Afghanistan to the International Court of Justice for violations of the convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.
Will Ministers update the House on the implementation of the advisory opinion from the ICJ on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, particularly in relation to the consequences for the UK and other nation states?
The Government are right to continue the all-party approach to the next International Development Association replenishment of the World Bank, which is extremely good value for taxpayer money. Will the Foreign Secretary press the Treasury to match what the former Chancellor, my right hon. Friend the Member for Godalming and Ash (Jeremy Hunt), did in adding £2.5 billion to the 0.5% official development assistance budget, to help defray some of the costs of first-year asylum seekers, which that budget bears? Otherwise, we will be spending more development money in UK postal districts than in Africa.
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising this issue. He understands deeply that under Conservative Governments, we saw those so-called in-donor refugee costs spiralling out of control. The system was not being brought under any kind of coherent plan by previous Governments. Now there is a plan, which is being delivered by the Home Secretary. We are determined to ensure that those costs are brought down.
The Foreign Secretary has rightly imposed widespread sanctions on Russia for its war crimes. Earlier, he responded on the subject of sanctions on Israel by referring to the fact that talk of war crimes is incorrect because of the value of trade and Israel’s historic status as an ally. Surely a war crime is a war crime, whoever commits it. All lives are equal and international law is international law. I invite the Foreign Secretary to explain to the House the difference of approach between war crimes committed by Russia and war crimes committed by Israel.
(11 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe Government are determined to rebuild the UK’s reputation on international development. We have announced a doubling of support for people hit by the humanitarian emergency in Sudan, as well as providing support for people in Gaza, in Lebanon and in other crisis situations.
The Government’s insistence on continuing to implement the Tories’ deep and damaging cuts to the aid budget and unprecedented levels of ODA spending on in-donor refugee costs is resulting in reductions, pauses and cancellations of overseas ODA projects.
I can tell the hon. Gentleman that our programme budget for the FCDO in 2025-26 will actually be at its highest level in recent years. We are able to deliver that because this Government are taking action on the issues that the previous Government did not tackle, in particular the in-donor refugee costs that have eaten into that budget. We just saw gimmicks; we did not see action. Instead, the new Government are taking action.
Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)
The humanitarian crisis in Sudan is horrific, and it is clear that rape is being used as a weapon of war. Recent data from Médecins Sans Frontières highlights that 90% of sexual violence survivors in a hospital in Chad were abused by armed perpetrators, and 50% were attacked in their homes. This is happening in 2024. Can the Foreign Secretary provide details on how the UK’s recent pledges on humanitarian aid for Sudan and the region are being used to support survivors of sexual and gender-based violence?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that incredibly concerning situation. The UK has been determined to do all that it can, particularly in relation to conflict-related sexual violence. In October 2024, it was the UK that led moves to secure the renewal of the mandate of the fact-finding mission at the United Nations Human Rights Council. As was just mentioned, we recently doubled humanitarian aid, and the Foreign Secretary also led efforts at the UN Security Council to take action on the humanitarian emergency in Sudan.
The Government appear to be in a complete tailspin over whether they will release the costs that will fall to the British taxpayer as a result of the rushed deal to give away the British Chagos islands. Given the reported trip to Mauritius by the special envoy, Jonathan Powell, can the Minister at least confirm today which budget the costs will come from, including whether they intend to use the aid budget? Will she tell the House how much it will cost each year and in total, and if the British Chagossians will actually have a genuine say? Would it not make more sense to keep these strategically important islands under the Crown, rather than the secretive deal negotiated? No deal is better than a bad deal.
My understanding is that there were actually 10 rounds of negotiations under the Conservatives, but we did not see the UK reaching the necessary agreements. This is a frankly bizarre argument coming from the Opposition. All the details of the situation are in the public domain, and quite rightly so. This is part of the UK ensuring that we follow international law.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)
David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)
The humanitarian situation in Gaza is catastrophic. The UK’s recent vote for the UN Security Council resolution on Gaza has already been mentioned. It called for a huge scale-up in aid across Gaza. We need that aid access, and restrictions on aid are unacceptable.
Steve Witherden
The International Development Committee heard testimony from Nizam Mamode, a surgeon who has recently returned from the Nasser hospital in Gaza. He described Israeli drones picking off injured children after bombings. His account echoed an October New York Times report, which cited 44 doctors, nurses and paramedics who witnessed numerous cases of pre-pubescent children being shot in the head or chest during the ongoing conflict in Gaza. What steps are the Government taking to prevent a genocide in Gaza?
We have heard a number of deeply concerning reports about developments in Gaza. I know that has also been the case for the Select Committee, as my hon. Friend mentioned. The UK Government’s position could not be clearer: international law, including international humanitarian law, must be held to, and that covers in particular the operations of healthcare workers. We pay tribute to them operating in such difficult circumstances.
David Smith
As we have been hearing, the situation in Gaza—especially northern Gaza—is dire, with the UN anticipating that this year up to 60,000 children under the age of five could be facing acute malnutrition. At the same time, the trucks entering Gaza have reduced by 63% since October 2023. I welcome the leading role that the Government are taking in providing vital humanitarian aid for Gaza, but does the Minister agree that the ongoing Israeli restrictions on the flow of essential aid are completely unacceptable and should be lifted immediately?
Yes. We are seeing a disturbing impact from those restrictions; we have seen it in the famine assessment and in the levels of malnutrition and ill health now prevalent in Gaza. Winter is now upon us, making the situation even worse. The restrictions on aid are unacceptable. They must be lifted immediately.
When the Foreign Secretary was in Baku recently for COP29, did he discuss with his interlocutors across the region the extent to which the global finance goals would impact on humanitarian assistance in the middle east?
Yes, the Foreign Secretary did discuss those matters, including directly with Mia Mottley, the Premier of Barbados, who has been leading many of the small island developing states on these issues. Certainly, the UK is determined to play its part on humanitarian issues as well as globally on climate issues. That is so important for our own country as well as for the rest of the world.
Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)
Some weeks ago, I asked the Foreign Secretary about getting assurances that children receiving polio vaccinations would not be killed after receiving them. Since then, thousands of children have been killed in northern Gaza. Given the ICC’s recent ruling about war crimes, the British public no doubt want to know why the Government are shying away from their legal and moral obligation to ban all arms and all trade.
The UK Government have been determined to use every mechanism to advance international humanitarian law. That includes within the UN Security Council, as we just discussed, but we have also been taking action at every bilateral and multilateral opportunity, including on polio, where the UK led efforts to get vaccination going in the first place.
In October, the Israeli Knesset passed two laws relating to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency: the law for cessation of UNRWA activities in the state of Israel; and the law for cessation of UNRWA activities. They will take effect on 28 January, and the consequence will be preventing aid distribution in Gaza and the prevention of primary care, education and refuse collection in the west bank.
Last week, my Committee was in Palestine and Jordan. There is huge concern that if that legislation takes effect, it will breach numerous international laws and have a catastrophic effect on the humanitarian and security situation in the region. What conversations have Ministers had with their Israeli counterparts to prevent that implementation, and what are they doing with the international community to protect a UN organisation?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that and to her Committee for its work on this important issue. The UK Government have been absolutely clear that UNRWA is the only agency that can deliver aid at the scale and depth required in the middle of this humanitarian emergency.
My hon. Friend asked about representations being made by the UK Government. I have made those representations myself, including at the UN General Assembly. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Hamish Falconer), made those representations yesterday. The Foreign Secretary has made them a number of times, including to his Israeli counterpart. It is clear that the restrictions on the operation of UNRWA must not be implemented by the Israeli Government.
The humanitarian situation in the middle east is made worse by arms supply from within and beyond the region. The Liberal Democrats have a long-standing policy that the UK Government should not be exporting arms to Israel or to the Occupied Palestinian Territories given that they were referred to in the FCDO’s last human rights report. Will the FCDO extend the number of arms export licences denied to Israel by the UK?
I gently encourage the hon. Member to look at the action taken by the UK Government some weeks ago to suspend a number of arms licences. We believe that was important because of the risk towards breaking international humanitarian law. The UK Government take their responsibilities in that regard very seriously indeed.
The root cause of so much of the terrible humanitarian suffering in the middle east today is the regime in Tehran, fuelling the Houthis, Hamas and Hezbollah and brutally repressing its own people while bailing out Putin’s war machine, and even plotting to assassinate individuals based in the UK. Beyond sanctions with Iran—which we all support and successive Governments have put in place over the years—can the Minister tell us, on behalf of the Foreign Secretary, what exactly is the comprehensive plan to start dealing with this repressive regime that is causing so much brutality across the middle east?
We are deeply concerned about the destabilising impact of the Iranian regime within the region and beyond. The right hon. Lady mentioned a number of cases where we can see that impact clearly. I would also underline that the truly devastating humanitarian crisis in Yemen is very much connected to Iranian backing of the Houthis. We have repeatedly raised our concerns about this bilaterally and multilaterally. We are clear that we need a strong voice as a UK Government on these matters, and that is exactly what we are delivering.
Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)
Scotland’s international brand is used to boost our economy throughout the world, selling Scottish products and experiences and boosting our soft power, so can the Foreign Secretary tell us how his Department will be marking St Andrew’s day on Saturday?
I am delighted to be able to take this question, as one of many Scots in the House. We are incredibly proud of brand Scotland, and our Scottish Secretary has been driving that forward and really pushing the case for Scotland’s place in the world, working as part of the UK. We will most certainly be celebrating St Andrew’s day—I certainly will.
Order. I need to get other colleagues in. These are topical questions, and they are meant to be short and punchy.
We recognise the impact of sometimes repeated displacements on the population, with this happening up to nine times in some cases. We have used every opportunity to make clear the essential role of the UN, including UNRWA, in Gaza.
Bradley Thomas (Bromsgrove) (Con)
Does the Minister agree that the ICC’s decision does nothing to help secure the release of hostages, deliver more aid into Gaza or deliver a sustainable end to the war in the middle east?
With World Aids Day approaching, I am sure the whole House will agree on the impact that the Global Fund has had on tackling HIV and AIDS globally. With our replenishment coming next year, will Ministers commit to the UK continuing to make a significant contribution to the Global Fund?
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for his question and for the leadership that he has shown on this issue, along with others across the House. The UK is determined to see successful replenishments for all the health-related funds, and we have announced with the WHO just this week that we are definitely going to do that.
Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)
Innovation plays a key role in tackling hunger. Can the Minister expand on what efforts we are taking to tackle hunger and how we are supporting innovators such as Alora, based at Norwich Research Park, which is using revolutionary technology to create the world’s first ocean agriculture system?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this. We have incredible facilities in Norwich working on agricultural innovation, and they are important not only for global food production but for UK farmers. The research is used intensively by our local farmers as well as by others globally.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
It is ridiculous that Britain should even contemplate taking some of the 61 Sri Lankan asylum seekers on Diego Garcia as part of its agreement with Mauritius. There are serious concerns in Whitehall that some of those Sri Lankans have criminal records, and there are allegations that some of them may be involved in child abuse. I have raised this with the Home Office to no avail. Will Ministers in the Foreign Office make sure that all records are checked in Sri Lanka and in Diego Garcia to ensure that no such criminals or abusers are allowed into Britain?
The civil war in Sudan is estimated to have killed around 150,000 people and displaced 14 million. UNICEF and the UN World Food Programme say that, unless efforts are stepped up, more than 700,000 children are projected to suffer acute malnutrition, so can the Minister tell us what steps the UK is taking as the UN penholder to end this malnutrition and support the Sudanese?
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this. The Foreign Secretary recently co-led a resolution on the protection of civilians in Sudan. Unfortunately, despite 14 votes in favour, Russia vetoed that resolution. We will continue to push on these issues, and we have doubled our aid to Sudan because of the dreadful crisis there.
On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Earlier, my hon. Friend the Member for Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber (Brendan O’Hara) raised the very serious case of the detention of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, a British passport holder whose family are with us in the Gallery today. In his response, the Foreign Secretary said that my hon. Friend has a problem with having a British passport. There are Members of the House who have very different views about the constitutional future of this country, be they from Scotland, Ireland or Wales, so will you, Mr Speaker, reassure me and my colleagues that regardless of our views about the future, everybody who holds a British passport has the right to be stuck up for by their Member of Parliament?