(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberToday, a hugely significant report from Amnesty International finds that Israel has perpetrated three acts against Palestinians in Gaza that are prohibited under the genocide convention. The Government have repeatedly said that it is for judicial bodies to determine whether genocide is taking place, but that utterly fails to take account of the obligation to prevent under the convention. If the Government have a duty to prevent, they cannot wait until a court has made a determination before taking action to—again, I emphasise—prevent. In the light of Amnesty’s report, would the Government be prepared to make time to debate this matter, which goes to the heart of UK compliance with international law?
The hon. Lady raises an important issue, and I think the whole House will join in saying that we want an immediate ceasefire. Far too many civilians have died in this conflict, and it is time it came to an urgent end. What we need is a long-term path to a two-state solution with a fully recognised state of Palestine alongside a safe and secure Israel, and that is what this Government will continue to work towards. I will ensure that there is time to consider some of the issues she has raised.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberWe are delighted that that huge Bill will be introduced today. I put on the record my thanks to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Business and Trade and all their officials, who have worked at pace to introduce this huge and important Bill within 100 days of the election. As my hon. Friend says, it will do many things. I will not go into them now, but it is an important reminder that in 1997, when the previous Labour Government introduced the Bill that became the National Minimum Wage Act 1998, it was resoundingly opposed by Conservative Members, as they are seemingly opposing today’s Employment Rights Bill. I am sure that that will be a matter of much debate in the coming weeks as we discuss the Bill.
Many happy returns to the Leader of the House. This week, questions have been raised about whether Lord Walney is to be sacked as the Government’s anti-extremism adviser, amid concerns about his independence. I understand that a formal complaint will be lodged next week about paid roles that he held advising lobbyists for clients including fossil fuel and arms companies at the same time as he advised the Government that some peaceful climate protesters and anti-war protesters should be considered extremists. May we have a debate on whether we need to revisit the rules around when a Government adviser is formally described as independent, especially when the Government have said that they want to raise standards?
The hon. Member raises an important matter about a public appointment, the specifics of which I will not get into now, as to do so would not be appropriate. Home Office questions will be on 21 October, but I will ensure that she gets a response from a Minister long before then.