Syria
Debate between Anneliese Dodds and Wendy Morton(4 days, 23 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement.
The House has many serious questions about the decision, announced by the Foreign Secretary to the media rather than to this House, to establish a diplomatic channel with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham. HTS is a proscribed terrorist organisation, but the Foreign Secretary says that the UK is none the less able to have diplomatic contact. Can the Minister clarify the specific legal basis on which she has established contact? Is HTS the only such organisation operating in Syria that now has a diplomatic channel?
We are now aware that Ann Snow, the UK special representative for Syria, and another senior FCDO diplomat, have met the leader of HTS. Can the Minister tell us who else has made contact? Has contact with HTS leaders only been made via official channels, rather than at ministerial level? I know the Minister will be aware that there is a big difference between the two.
The Foreign Secretary also said that the FCDO is engaging with HTS because it wants a representative and inclusive Government, and an end to violence in Syria. Has the UK conveyed to HTS a clear expectation of what should happen to bring that about? If so, will the Minister now take this opportunity to share that road map with the House? Does she believe, based on those conversations, that HTS will lead a peaceful transfer of power to a genuine civilian Government which protects minority groups?
The Government need to be extremely careful, because by dealing with HTS and publicly doing so, there is a risk of legitimisation of the organisation and its position in Syria. At this stage, does the Minister not agree that that would be premature? These are very early days in the new post-Assad reality, and we need to judge HTS by its actions, not its words.
Now that the Government have embarked on this path, can we expect an unequivocal statement that there is no read-across to other proscribed groups? The integrity of the proscription system is absolutely paramount, and the Government must exercise extreme care not to undermine it in any way. Is it still the case that those who left Britain to support the murderous Daesh regime have no place in the UK, and will the Minister commit herself to ruling out any return of Shamima Begum and others to the UK? We note her comments about chemical weapons; can she provide any further detail on how the UK will push for their destruction?
Let me now turn to the humanitarian aspect of this conflict. We are aware of the Government’s latest aid package to Syria. Two weeks ago, when pressed on aid delivery in Syria, the Minister for the Middle East said he was concerned that practical access for aid agencies would be difficult to maintain, and work was needed to maintain access through established humanitarian corridors. It would be helpful to hear the Government's latest assessment of the situation. The UK has funded more than £4 billion of aid over the past decade and more, but with a terrorist group in control of significant territory, can the Minister assure the House that the only beneficiaries of British aid, including food, water and sanitation, are innocent civilians? British aid must not end up in the wrong hands, so what assurances can she give that the way in which aid is being delivered has taken account of the new operating environment?
There is real concern about what Iran’s next step in Syria might be. There are reports that the regime in Tehran has been in contact with rebel groups, and we need to be very alive to the risk that it may try to re-establish a foothold for its hostile and malign operations in the region. We should be very clear about the fact that would be an awful outcome. We and our allies need to be pulling every diplomatic lever to blunt Iran’s ability to launch a resurgence in Syria, and the House would welcome an update from the Minister on her work on that front.
We all want a stable, peaceful Government in Syria who will protect all groups and minorities, free from the influence of Iran and Russia. That is easy to say, but bringing it about is far more difficult—as will be avoiding an incredibly dangerous power vacuum that could fuel extremism, cause a further breakdown of law and order and bring about a proliferation of criminal activities, including the weapons smuggling and drug production. We need to see a clear plan from the Government that protects British interests at home and abroad, and supports those who sincerely want to protect the innocent Syrian civilians who have suffered so much.
Anneliese Dodds
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her comments. She has raised a number of issues, with which I will deal in turn. First, she asked about the UK’s engagement with HTS. I did talk about that in my statement, but I can provide additional information. It is clear that the fact that HTS is a proscribed terrorist group does not prevent the UK from engaging with it in our efforts to help secure a political settlement, or from engaging with any future transitional Government in Syria that includes HTS. Its proscription will not inhibit the pursuit of our foreign policy objectives in Syria, and the UK will be guided by a set of core principles for any diplomatic interaction with the interim Syria authorities, with inclusion and the protection of human rights as key considerations. That has been the case until now, and it most definitely will be the case into the future. The right hon. Lady asked about engagement with other bodies at official level. There has been engagement with Türkiye and with the SDF, and that will continue. We are seeking to do all that we can, above all, to ensure that the interests of Syrians themselves are put at the forefront in this very difficult situation.
The right hon. Lady asked about the representations being made by the UK to the HTS. I covered that in my statement, but let me repeat that we have been crystal clear about the fact that any subsequent arrangements must be comprehensive, representative, inclusive and, above all, determined by Syrians. She asked whether this would have any impact on the integrity of the proscription regime; no, and it must not, because that is an incredibly important regime and there will be no linkage. She asked what would happen with those who chose to leave our country to promote and support terrorism by seeking to fight for Daesh; of course those people will not be able to come to the UK. She talked about the use of chemical weapons; I covered that in my statement as well, but, again, the UK will seek to play as much of a part as it possibly can in ensuring that those stockpiles are destroyed after they were used so appallingly against the Syrian people.
The right hon. Lady asked about the use of aid. I have discussed this matter myself, as have many of my officials, with a number of multilateral bodies and with a number of our bilateral partners as well. We are determined to work together to ensure that aid does not fall into the wrong hands and is not diverted. Of course that must not happen, because it is desperately needed by many Syrians. A great many people have already been displaced from Syria to neighbouring countries, but large population movements now seem to be taking place, and it really is important that the aid goes where it is needed. We are, of course, monitoring that in detail.
The right hon. Lady asked about the situation with Iran. The UK has condemned Iran’s reckless and destabilising activity, including its support for militant groups. We have been very clear about that, as the new Government. Finally, the right hon. Lady talked about the need to ensure that we do not see an increase in the developments that have been so concerning, involving the smuggling of weapons and drugs. The UK will focus on that later with the new Government, because we see the damage that has already been caused in that regard.
UK Leadership on Sudan
Debate between Anneliese Dodds and Wendy Morton(3 weeks, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
I thank the Minister for advance sight of her statement.
I welcome this statement not least because it provides an opportunity to highlight what is a humanitarian catastrophe. Yesterday, I was fortunate to meet representatives of the World Food Programme. From speaking to them and to others in the sector, I know how crucial it is that we continue to raise the importance of this issue and to keep the situation in our minds.
This war, which is driven by a man-made power struggle, has already resulted in the world’s worst hunger and displacement crisis. It is, as I said earlier, a humanitarian catastrophe. Any further deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Sudan will have dire consequences. There are already 25 million people—half the entire population of Sudan—in urgent need of assistance. Eleven million people have had to flee from their homes, and 7 million need urgent food assistance. There are reports of systematic human rights abuses, including sexual violence, torture and mass civilian casualties. What has been happening in Darfur is also incredibly disturbing.
The situation in Sudan is unconscionable. Red lines are being crossed in the prosecution of this conflict that countries such as the UK—the penholder on Sudan at the UN Security Council—cannot allow to stand. It is also firmly in the region’s interest for the conflict to come to an end and the humanitarian crisis to be addressed. Further destabilisation in the region caused by this conflict must be avoided. Sadly, we are all well aware of the knock-on effect in the surrounding countries. The UK has already invested a great deal of diplomatic energy into trying to bring about a cessation of hostilities and to press for unhindered, safe humanitarian access to Sudan.
The previous Government also invested heavily in aid to Sudan to alleviate the suffering. I would like to take a second to pay tribute to my constituency neighbour, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell), who is not in his place today, for the leadership that he has shown in response to this crisis and for his commitment in government to the people of Sudan.
We understand that the new Government have announced further aid measures, which of course is welcome, but I would be grateful if the Minister could provide further details to the House on which trusted organisations she has partnered with for her emergency aid package. We note that she has said that the package will provide food, water, shelter and healthcare where it is most needed, but can she provide specific examples of the aid items she hopes it will deliver and at which areas of Sudan she envisages it being targeted?
The Minister will no doubt be fully seized of the problem of getting aid into Sudan in the first place, let alone the challenges of distribution. Can she assure the House that everything possible is being done to ensure that this aid can be genuinely effectively distributed? What recent conversations has she had with partners to encourage other countries to provide support to the humanitarian response?
Turning to the warring parties, our position remains that there must be an immediate cessation of hostilities. We understand that the resolution the Government introduced at the UN Security Council with Sierra Leone was thwarted by Russia. However, we would welcome a further update on other avenues the Government are actively pursuing, including backing the Jeddah process. The Government and our allies need to be working around the clock to press the warring parties into a ceasefire and to exert whatever pressure they can to see the lifting of arbitrary obstacles to humanitarian aid delivery.
In conclusion, I am sure the Minister will agree that the status quo in Sudan is not sustainable and that it must change. The UK has a leadership role here. We must use it to its fullest extent.
Anneliese Dodds
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her remarks and her clear concern about the situation. I hope that a loud and clear message has been sent that there is cross-party concern about what is going on. I was very encouraged by how she described the situation and the need for the UK leadership that we are determined to deliver.
I was very encouraged to hear that the right hon. Lady has met representatives of the World Food Programme to discuss these matters. I, too, met a number of its operatives when I was in South Sudan. They are working incredibly hard to get in the support that is needed. In fact, there was some coverage of this on the BBC this morning—very welcome coverage, given that there has not been a huge amount of media coverage of the situation—including interviews with some of the operatives.
The right hon. Lady talked about the growing body of evidence of serious atrocities and violations of human rights. The UK Government are extremely concerned about that. We were determined to ensure that we had a renewal of the mandate for the fact-finding mission. We were pleased that it was renewed, this time with increased support from African nations. It is important to get a picture of what is really happening, so that there is no impunity.
The right hon. Lady rightly referred to the regional impact. We have seen the impact on South Sudan, Chad and a number of other countries, including countries that were already in difficult situations in terms of food security. She talked about the work of the previous Government, for which I am grateful. As I said, this is a cross-party issue. We are determined to intensify that work, given the deteriorating situation, and to work with other partners to push this forward. We have seen leadership right across the UK on this issue, including from Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Edinburgh on her visit to Chad, which followed that of the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell).
The right hon. Lady asked about the package for delivery of aid. We are working with UN agencies and Education Cannot Wait on targeted support for vulnerable children. She mentioned the need for specific forms of support. We have ensured that our aid, including water and sanitation support, is being delivered in a way that recognises the prevalence of violence against women and girls. Disturbingly, many people in internally displaced persons camps, and in refugee situations, have been subject to that violence, so we have ensured that our support is tailored and effective.
The right hon. Lady asked about other countries we are seeking to work with. We have taken the matter up repeatedly with the African Union and worked to ensure that there is that engagement. The African Union is keen to work with us on this issue, and I have raised it in a number of bilateral engagements, as have many other UK Ministers.
The right hon. Lady talked about the Jeddah process. It has been extremely frustrating that we have not seen all parties to the conflict engaging in those attempts to broker peace. We have been clear that they must participate. Their failure to engage with a number of processes is effectively leading to a humanitarian emergency in Sudan. There has been forum shopping, and that must end.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Anneliese Dodds and Wendy Morton(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Minister for Women and Equalities (Anneliese Dodds)
Absolutely not, and my hon. Friend is right to mention the fact that that kind of assessment flies in the face of not only common sense, but all the economic evidence. When we support women to return to work and to progress at work, while being able to spend time with their families, we grow our economy—something that this Government are determined to do.
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
Universal Credit Roll-out
Debate between Anneliese Dodds and Wendy Morton(7 years, 1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)
This Standing Order No. 24 debate follows last week’s Opposition day debate on universal credit—a debate in which I also spoke, and one in which we heard a number of contributions from both sides of the House offering contrasting views. That debate provided an opportunity for Members on both sides to come to the Chamber and contribute, and they did so. The Opposition motion was debated and heard, and the Minister responded. I know that today’s motion is on the pausing of the full-service roll-out of universal credit, but I am left a little confused about where we are with this. Are we wanting to pause and fix? Are we wanting to pause? Or is it simply a case of the Opposition wanting to stop this really transformational piece of legislation, full stop?
My hon. and learned Friend the Member for South East Cambridgeshire (Lucy Frazer) hit the nail on the head earlier. Welfare matters, especially when someone relies on it, but improving the system matters, too. We have to ensure that work always pays, so that things are better and fairer for those who need it and for those who pay for it. The old system simply was not working. It was bizarre that it was not worth working more than 16 hours a week. There was no real incentive to work. The system needed change. Evidence shows that universal credit is helping people into work faster and is helping them to stay in work longer.
I do not want to repeat everything I said last week or what was said in many of the contributions today—that is on the record and I do not have much time—but I just want to touch on the issue of pausing, because the Opposition’s intention is not to pause the roll-out but to stop it. Universal credit has the potential to change people’s lives. To stop a benefit that prepares people for work and helps them get on in work would be wrong. This nine-year programme is designed to enable a gradual move towards universal credit. It is worth remembering that coverage is currently at 8%. Over the next four months, the roll-out will increase coverage from 8% to 10%—just two percentage points by my reckoning. [Interruption.] I am coming to a close now, Mr Speaker; I can sense you speeding me along.
Universal credit is a response to the overcomplicated system that we inherited from the previous Labour Government. Despite what the Opposition say, recent data show that universal credit is transforming the prospects of those who use it. It is important to continue with the programme, and my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Kevin Hollinrake) gave us some helpful insight into his constituency, where, yes, there are challenges, but there are positive stories, too.