(1 week, 2 days 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 look forward to serving under your chairmanship, Sir Jeremy, for what I think is the first time in Westminster Hall. I am really grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley) for securing this important debate. It has been a really good debate, with lots of consensus across all parts of the Chamber, and I will do my best to respond to the points raised. As we are not at the exact moment of decision making, I am sure that if there are further representations to be made or particular points that remain unanswered, we will have a further opportunity to fine-tune those in the coming weeks.
Few institutions command the respect and admiration that the BBC World Service does, and I have seen that up close. I have had the privilege of visiting the World Service both as an Opposition MP and in my current role; and when I was a student in China, it was my constant friend, as my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) said. The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) described how it was a very big part of his life as well. Each time, I have come away not just more fond of the BBC World Service, but struck by its professionalism, reach and impact. That impact is rooted in its independence, which is key to its success and one of the reasons it is the world’s most trusted global broadcaster.
That is why the BBC World Service is a vital part of the UK’s soft power, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Irene Campbell) said so eloquently in her speech. It does not just reflect the UK to the world; it builds trust in our values through high-quality, impartial journalism. I was very pleased to hear the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) and my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) really supporting the role of journalists, who do such a difficult job and are so brave. I was aware three or four years ago of the journalists in the Persian service, who are under tremendous pressure. The right hon. Member for Maldon told us of an awful example of transnational repression on the streets of London, and that is just appalling. I know that from this House we all want to thank the journalists who do that important work day by day, even though their livelihoods, their lives and the lives of their families are at risk.
As the Minister responsible for the Indo-Pacific, I was particularly moved by the World Service’s response to the devastating earthquake in Myanmar. In a country with exceptionally low media freedom, the BBC scaled up its output and dramatically increased its reach. It provided accurate, timely information in a moment of crisis. That is the BBC at its best and it is not the only example. Let us take BBC Persian, which was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead and by my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow South West (Dr Ahmed), who, by the way, represents the home of BBC Scotland. BBC Persian has been operating for over 80 years, with more people than ever relying on it in a time of uncertainty. Some of you may have heard just this morning on the “Today” programme Lyse Doucet’s report, in which she mentioned the different restrictions that there are today on reporting on the important elements of conflict that are ongoing in Iran. She mentioned the particular restrictions that there always are on the BBC. I thought that was a very timely mention, given today’s debate.
There is also the work of BBC Verify, which works in partnership with the World Service. As the Opposition spokesman, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), said, there are so many competing channels now, which is why BBC Verify plays such an important role. I saw that at first hand on my recent visit to Broadcasting House. Due to the widespread use of mobile phones throughout the world, we see so many different videos all at the same time and sometimes with conflicting messages. That is why it is so important that we have the work of BBC Verify and the journalists who do it. During recent tensions between India and Pakistan, the BBC exposed viral videos as old footage, cutting through misinformation when that mattered most.
There are not just international audiences. Here in the UK, 500,000 people tune in to the BBC’s Urdu service. There are also the emergency, pop-up services. In Syria, the BBC launched a service just five days after the fall of Assad. That speaks to the issue of the Arabic service, which many have mentioned this afternoon. I think what we saw there was the closing of a licence and other providers stepping in. That represents a very important message for decision makers, as we approach funding over the next few years, about how we ensure that something like that does not reoccur, but that we protect the vital ecosystems of the BBC World Service and do not allow other providers to come in on top.
The Gaza service reaches 700,000 people each week, also in an environment where it is very difficult for journalists to enter, and, in Sudan, the Lifeline radio service reopened in March, responding to humanitarian need. These services are often the only way for people to gain access to accurate information in times of crisis. That is why this Government value the BBC World Service and are helping it to deliver strongly on its goals.
Despite a tight fiscal context, the FCDO provided a funding uplift of £32.6 million this financial year. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger) for recognising that increase, and recognising the difference that a new Government can make—the window that one has to really make a difference. That uplift takes the FCDO’s total contribution to £137 million, enabling the BBC to modernise and innovate.
Just this week, the BBC launched its newest service, an AI-driven pilot in Polish, with our beloved Tomasz Schafernaker, the meteorologist we all listen to in order to hear whether we can leave our washing out, or need to water the pot plants before we come to Westminster for a few days. Here he was, both in Polish and in English, doing the news. This is what we have with the BBC’s Polish service: the first new language service since 2017, delivering news in text and video across digital platforms, including Facebook and Instagram—a vision of modernity.
Audience surveys consistently show that the World Service is the most trusted international news broadcaster. That trust is built by relentlessly exercising accuracy, impartiality and fairness. My hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tom Rutland) emphasised that point, particularly in relation to BBC Arabic and how difficult it is to replicate it after it was defunded by the former Government.
We recognise the concerns raised about future funding. The World Service’s grant in aid funding for the next three years will be decided through the FCDO’s budget process up to 2028-29, but our focus is not just on the short term. My hon. Friend the Member for Harlow made the important point about multi-year funding, which allows an organisation to modernise and innovate because it can see through to the medium-to-long term.
We believe that the upcoming BBC charter review is the right moment to look at potential future World Service funding mechanisms for the longer term, and potentially bring in some of the other funding suggestions that have been made in this debate but are not formal yet. That will ensure that the BBC can continue to reflect the UK’s culture and values—so eloquently described by the Opposition spokesman—to the world, through high-quality, trusted journalism.
The BBC World Service is not just a broadcaster; it boosts UK soft power, promotes the UK and our values, exposes disinformation, supports our creative industries and provides critical safety and security information in conflict zones. It is trusted, agile and essential. The Government are very proud to support it, and we will continue to do so.
(1 week, 4 days ago)
Written StatementsFCDO Services operates as a trading fund of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. I have set the following performance targets for 2025-26:
An in-year surplus before interest, tax and dividend;
Achievement of the return on capital employed of at least 6.5% (weighted average);
A productivity ratio of at least 82%, measuring actual billable hours versus available billable hours;
An in-year customer satisfaction rating average of at least 82;
An average civil service people survey score for “employee engagement” of at least 61%; and
An average civil service people survey score for “my manager” of at least 65%.
FCDO Services will report to Parliament on its success against these targets through its annual report and accounts for 2025-26.
FCDO Services is an Executive agency and trading fund of the FCDO. It provides a range of integrated, secure services worldwide to the FCDO and other UK Government Departments, supporting the delivery of Government agendas. Services include protective security, estates and construction, cloud computing, communications and monitoring, logistics, translation and interpreting. This is combined with a portfolio of global maintenance work. FCDO Services also manages the UK National Authority for Counter Eavesdropping, helping protect UK assets from physical, electronic and cyber-attack.
[HCWS734]
(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberWe are steadfast in our support for women and girls; the appointment of Baroness Harman as special envoy underscores that commitment. We are focusing much of our effort on the most marginalised women and girls, who are disproportionately affected by ongoing conflicts and crises—for example, through food assistance to 800,000 displaced people on the Chad-Sudan border, almost 90% of whom are women and children.
Yesterday, we welcomed an ambitious and much-needed industrial strategy, which will rely on bold trade deals with countries around the world. Britain has a strong tradition of promoting human rights in its work around the world. How is the FCDO ensuring that we uphold our commitment to rights for girls and women as we develop trade deals with other countries?
We are using our influence to unlock the full potential of women to participate in the economy—that includes working to include gender provisions in newly negotiated free trade agreements—and we are supporting women-led businesses to realise the benefits of trade. The developing countries trading scheme provides for 0% tariffs, which disproportionately supports smaller, women-led businesses in low-income countries.
I should like to know what steps the Foreign Office is taking to protect women and girls in this country. There can be no better candidates for deportation than non-UK nationals who have violently raped children here. After the Casey report into the gangs scandal last week, Ministers promised that they would do everything they could to deport the men involved. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that he has already told Pakistan that British aid and diplomatic visas will be withdrawn if convicted rapists are not taken back?
It is probably a question for the Home Office, but we in the Foreign Office will do anything we can to support victims and bring people to justice.
Education is a basic right, and ensuring quality education for every girl is essential to building a more equitable world. In 2023, the Conservative Government launched the women and girls strategy to deliver on the three Es: education, empowering women and girls, and ending violence. Does the Minister stand by the commitment to ensure that at least 50% of aid reaches women and girls? Most importantly, will she confirm the 2025-26 official development assistance spending for global education following the spending review?
We are committed to supporting women in all that we do. We are supporting, for example, 200,000 displaced children with education interventions in Sudan and reaching Sudanese refugee populations in six countries through £14 million of funding for Education Cannot Wait, which the right hon. Member may know from her time as a Minister—was that one of the programmes she cut? UK support through the international finance facility for education will unlock up to $1 billion in additional and affordable education. Our equality impact assessment will be published shortly so that she can analyse the exact pounds and pence.
I thank my hon. Friend for his hard work for his constituents. I met Simone’s family on 14 May and, as he is aware, I met the Minister responsible in Vientiane. I will raise my hon. Friend’s point today, as a result of this question.
We recently agreed the successful UK-India trade deal, but FCDO co-ordination with India on crisis diplomacy has never been more important, particularly following the recent terrorist attack, the Air India plane crash and human rights concerns, including about the case of Jagtar Singh Johal. Can the Secretary of State explain how security co-operation and consular support are being pursued in the light of the trade deal?
May I first say how deeply shocked and saddened we all were by the devastating plane crash in Ahmedabad? The Foreign Secretary visited India in his first month in office, and since then, we have agreed the groundbreaking technology security initiative and the free trade agreement, as my hon. Friend said. On human rights issues and the case of Jagtar Singh Johal, I will meet my hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Douglas McAllister), who represents the family, hopefully this week or next, when our diaries can align.
What does it say to Britain’s allies, and to our enemies, when neither the Foreign Secretary nor the Prime Minister can bring themselves to say that the strikes again Iran were right and legal?
(3 weeks, 4 days 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 serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse, and to have heard such excellent speeches from the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew), my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) and others who have direct experience in this important field.
To repeat the words of the Minister for Development in the other place, this is a very difficult time for the development sector. The world is changing and the post-world war two consensus is under significant strain. We face increasingly complex, interconnected and politically charged global issues. As we have heard, cuts to USAID, combined with funding decisions by other donors, including the UK, will have significant implications for tackling global development challenges. We are working closely with partners to understand the impact and provide support.
The right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton) mentioned that she has asked lots of questions, which is, of course, part of her job as spokesperson. However, she might want to cast her mind back to the period between February 2020 and December 2021, when she was the Minister and got the axe out so quickly that there were in-year funding cuts, job losses and an enormous tremor across the sector. I remember many people coming to see me, as the Opposition spokesperson, and saying, “Could the Government not at least take a considered view over time, not rush to do these things and try to have some respect for the sector?”
In my comments, I was appreciative of the challenges that any Government faces in such circumstances. However, I gently remind the Minister that this is now happening on her Government’s watch and, as she rightly acknowledges, my job as the shadow development Minister is to keep asking those questions. What the sector needs is certainty, and the Government clearly have not learned that.
On the tone of the speech by the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), we should also remember the 2010 to 2015 period, when cut after cut in public funding inflicted quite a deal of pain on the recipients of that public funding.
Does the Minister agree, though, that after receiving a note from the Labour Government saying there was no more money left, the coalition Government increased the aid budget to 0.7%? In fact, 0.7% of gross national income has been in the Lib Dem manifesto since 1970. When we were in government, we delivered it; when we left government, it was cut.
I think the hon. Lady may have a good debating point in this Chamber, but the result of the 2015 election says it all.
I want to add to what the Minister is saying. The point is that, yes, the coalition Government did protect the aid budget, but by cutting public services in this country to the core, they undermined public trust in Government. That meant that lots of people faced need, and it led to increasing calls of, “Charity begins at home; why are we spending this money abroad?” If we had kept the settlement that we had under the last Labour Government, whereby we invested in public services at home and abroad, we would not have ended up in this mess.
I think we are all making the important point that since the 2008 global crash, our economy has never really been the same and we have struggled to make progress, whether on wages and living conditions at home or on completely fulfilling our responsibilities abroad. As one says, we are where we are. General reductions in public spending are part of a broader set of pressures facing the international development system.
Support for multilateralism has been wavering for some time, as my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (David Taylor) said, amid shifting geopolitical priorities. Many of our partners feel that the current system no longer responds to their needs. The combined impact of these two factors is significant, and let me briefly expand on them.
First, on the disbanding of USAID, it is inevitable that significant cuts will have lasting implications for how we tackle global development challenges. I cannot say how pleased I am that the International Development Committee will go to the USA to have face-to-face dialogue with friends about how we can save the most important elements of our programmes. Given the knowledge base of the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), who is well known for his work on global health, HIV/AIDS, Gavi, Unitaid and the Global Fund, he will be able to make pertinent arguments with friends there. I would also ask the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), with his connections in the faith sector, to impress on all the different faith-based charities the need to continue their important work where they can and to have many people doubling their tithe.
I have suggested this in the past, because there is a real possibility of doing good things together: those organisations would be keen to work alongside Government through their NGOs, if that was possible. I think I have asked the Minister this before, but I am interested in whether she would by sympathetic to that idea.
I will certainly pass that idea back to the Minister with responsibility for development, because we always end up having good ideas in Westminster Hall debates.
The US is a key partner, but this is a matter for them. It is their budget. We have a strong relationship with the US that is founded on shared interests and common approaches. Together with our G7 and G20 allies, we carry strong global influence, and we must never stand back from that. That is why we are committed to working with the US and other countries on our shared priorities. We are in regular touch with US counterparts to share advice as they shape their development plans. As in any diplomatic relationship, we will not always align with the US, and we may want to focus on other things. That is normal. We will engage in a pragmatic way to understand concerns and find a way forward.
Many Members have mentioned the multilateral system. No single country can solve the global development challenges alone, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North for pointing that out as well as the importance of working with international financial institutions, which she learned through her experience before coming to this place. This is where we have to be much more innovative. We cannot just sit around the table and nod through reports; we have to put some life back into those systems so that we can enable the finance and the technical aid, which the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale also mentioned. Through technical assistance and international financial organisations, we are not powerless —we can use them. There is an opportunity to rebuild trust, rebalance power and design a more effective, inclusive, co-operative and future-proof architecture.
The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton, mentioned the 1970s. We must not forget, at a moment like this, what the development sector has done. So many more people lived in abject poverty before, and there is now a growing middle class, and much of that is down to really bright people, employed by NGOs in those countries, who are leading movements and improving the economy. Under 10% of people are now living at the poorest level, which used to be on $1 a day. The development Minister will know the statistic, but it has reduced to 9%. This debate, as well as lots of other evidence, is going into the spending review so that decisions can be made. We know that a preponderance of those people live in sub-Saharan Africa, and that is being taken into account.
The other concentration of people living in extreme poverty is in conflict-affected states. As much as this is about providing humanitarian aid once disaster happens, we also have to invest in prevention in the first place. Would the Minister reflect on the importance of conflict prevention in our aid efforts?
Indeed. This is about not just aid, but the women, peace and security programme, which I spoke at in Manila a couple of months back, and the important work that we do in Colombia, Mindanao in the Philippines and other places to ensure that women have a voice. I am very aware that many Members in this Chamber understand the importance of empowering women to solve the difficulties relating to how communities live abroad in very poor or conflict-affected areas. The Government will continue their commitment to supporting women and girls by being a champion for them across the world—by showing up and making our voice heard. Quite a few international partners have mentioned to me at conferences that I am the first UK Minister they have seen for years. This is partly about our diplomatic presence, including at ministerial level, so that we can be confident champions of women and girls in our multilateral work, and improve the quality of mainstreaming in our growth, climate, health and humanitarian programmes.
Can the Minister confirm that the Government are still committed to ensuring that half our development budget goes to women and girls?
It would be unwise of me, the day before the spending review, to give an exact figure. However, I reassure the right hon. Member that we will give extra-special attention to working with women’s organisations, particularly local organisations in crisis and climate-affected contexts, which I know are close to the heart of my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North. We will mainstream gender equality to put women and girls at the heart of everything we do.
We now have a champion for women, Baroness Harman. Some Members may remember her from this House, and she is not to be taken lightly. She will go over our proposals with a fine-toothed comb and support the work we do to help women political and economic leaders, like her, and activists in their home countries—those who have real legitimacy with their populations—to ensure that development and humanitarian programmes integrate women’s perspectives and needs, and address the barriers that they face. That is as relevant in conflict and peacebuilding as it is in education.
I will make some further brief points on global health. We will continue to invest in multilateral funds such as Gavi and the Global Fund. I know many here are champions of that work. There was an emphasis in this debate on child nutrition, which is paramount.
Moving on to the question of climate and nature, we will tackle climate change by backing investments that help countries to grow green and resilient economies. When we consider the COP meetings abroad, we see, following disasters and emergencies, that there is so much poverty and so much aid has to be spent. We must work harder through our financial institutions to bring forward prevention schemes for very climate-affected areas. Pakistan and the speech that Sherry Rehman made at COP two years ago come to mind, as do the Pacific islands—an area that my brief covers—which are literally under threat of sinking. Those are the sorts of areas where climate interventions are crucial and where climate will continue to be a very important point.
Members have mentioned some of the real hotspots we are looking at at the moment, including Yemen, Lebanon, Afghanistan and Myanmar, and I will briefly emphasise the importance of our humanitarian response. Colleagues will remember that following the dreadful earthquake in Sagaing in Myanmar, through support from the UK public together with the Disasters Emergency Committee match-funding UK citizens’ contributions, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office was able to provide £25 million in total, equivalent to China, to those who were suffering. The International Development Committee has heard from Dr Sasa and others from outside Myanmar who are championing proper political reform, so that less aid will eventually be required once the political system gets up and running there.
Afghanistan has been mentioned as a crucial area, particularly for women and girls. I want briefly to talk up the importance of the BBC World Service and its Bitesize learning modules, through which women can listen to the radio and learn English and other basic subjects. That came out of covid, and it is an example of excellence. When a young mother with perhaps eight or nine children is washing their clothes, she can listen to English and hope one day to be able to use that to empower her and her family, and also hopefully to have an improved future. Those sorts of interventions are incredibly important.
The UK remains committed to playing a leading role in international development. We will work with our partners, including the US and the global south. I thank all the Members who have spoken in this debate. Although my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) did sound very evangelical in his speech, I liked it. I think it is important that we do have a moral heart in a lot of the work we do. We know that working with the US and the global south to reimagine a development system that meets our shared priorities, builds new partnerships, and harnesses the power of trade, AI, technology and private capital will not be quick or easy. But by working together, we can build a system that is inclusive, effective and gives voice to all who have a stake in it.
(1 month, 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
It is a delight to serve under your chairmanship, Mrs Harris, and it was wonderful to hear the debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Jim Dickson). I thank him for securing it. I know that he has been active in supporting his constituents all along. I also pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon), my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham North (Vicky Foxcroft), the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr Morrison) and my hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Tom Rutland), who have all been active in assisting with educating Members of Parliament—who have so much to do with their young constituents—and were active in a parliamentary lobby just last month. All these approaches will hopefully lead to a proper prevention strategy.
I also pay tribute to Sue White, Neil White, Tom Sampson and Amanda Dennis. That family tragically lost their dear daughter Simone White to methanol poisoning in Laos. I want to repeat here what I said when we met last week over in King Charles Street: thank you for your determination to raise the profile of a problem facing so many young travellers. So much fortitude has been shown by the families and other young people, and family members being here today makes this debate even more salient. Our thoughts are with all the families of those who set off with high hopes for their holidays, yet tragically lose their lives.
I am grateful for the contributions from other hon. Members today. I pay tribute in particular to my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds). She is right to raise the situation of the family of her constituent who tragically died. My door is open, and I look forward to meeting the family when they are ready to have a conversation about the tragic loss of their dad.
My right hon. Friend is also right to emphasise the transnational repression element, which sadly seems to be quite prevalent in parts of the Indo-Pacific, for which I am the Minister. I am very pleased that we have this opportunity, because of the strength that it gives me to improve my mandate to take up this issue with like-minded countries. She raised transnational repression, but also the lack of good quality legal advice in country. Often when a family hear of something, they arrive in a country that they do not know anything about, and, particularly in the country that we are talking about here, the system is very different from that in the UK, so this is where we really do need there to be that high quality legal advice.
Laos is a country under significant strain, and that includes its health system. It is a one-party state socialist republic. Culture, history and levels of socioeconomic development inform how open societies can be, and in this particular case, of course, we are dealing with a way of doing government that is very different from our own. Having said that, I was very pleased on a recent visit to Vientiane, the capital of Laos, to be able to raise both the tragic case of the loss of Simone and that of the constituent of my right hon. Friend.
For all of us at the FCDO, supporting British nationals abroad is a priority. I want to underline the fact that, happily, most British people who travel abroad do so without incident or the need for consular assistance. Yet every day our staff here in the UK and in our network around the world work tirelessly to help people facing some of the most distressing events imaginable. They work around the clock, keeping cool heads in all sorts of emergencies and crises, to provide assistance to people on one of the worst days of their lives. When an incident occurs, people rightly want to know whether it was preventable and what steps are being taken to stop such incidents happening, so let me set out some of the ways in which the Government are acting, informed in part by the activism that has come out of such tragic losses.
The FCDO regularly updates travel advice, including recently on the methanol poisoning question. We also seek to underline other risks—for example, the dangers of travelling on motorcycles without helmets. Our embassy in Vientiane regularly engages with the Laos authorities to help to prevent accidents and incidents. In this particular case, the Laos authorities issued an order prohibiting the sale and consumption of Tiger vodka and Tiger whisky because of concerns that they posed a risk to public health. I emphasise to anybody listening to the debate that it is not simply a question of a shot being offered to someone. It is also the fact that what is in bottles in supermarkets, in some cases, will not be what is described on the label.
During my visit to Laos last month, I discussed those priority consular cases with the vice Foreign Minister, and since then our ambassador in Vientiane has met the Ministry of Public Security to receive an update on the ongoing investigation. We cannot prejudice ongoing criminal investigations and potential prosecutions, but we continue to raise with the authorities the need for a swift and transparent inquiry into this tragic case.
I have also had the opportunity to raise the issue with the ambassador to the UK and a delegation of travelling Members of the Laos National Assembly. I emphasise that it is not the exact same situation as an MP, as elections in Laos are very different from those in the UK, but I was able to raise the issue with an audience of a dozen influential Laos National Assembly Members.
In all our efforts, our goal is to help British nationals make better informed decisions about international travel. Safety is always our top priority. Our advice is there to guide people, but obviously not to set rigid rules; people have their own autonomy with their travel plans. Our work considers all the risks proportionately, and draws on local knowledge to offer advice to those travelling overseas. In the wake of Simone’s hospitalisation, we reviewed and updated our travel advice for Laos to reflect the risks of methanol poisoning.
We now include warnings about the risks of methanol poisoning or counterfeit alcohol in the travel advice for Laos, Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Costa Rica, Fiji and Turkey. Since then, we have worked with like-minded international partners to review our travel advice globally to ensure that we highlight the risks from methanol poisoning accurately. We have over 30 million individual views of our travel advice every year, so there are a lot of people who follow the Foreign Office as a regular part of their travel planning.
Alongside travel advice, the Government also aim to reduce incidents through our long-standing travel aware campaign. This includes encouraging British nationals to secure appropriate travel insurance, read our travel advice, and sign up for alerts. A dedicated section on the risks of spiking and methanol poisoning now shares practical tips on how to spot and prevent it. We are working in partnership with more than 100 organisations across the travel industry to reach more people and direct them to our travel advice and travel aware pages online. That includes airlines, tour operators, and insurance providers.
We have a targeted youth travel ambassador programme, and we are giving special thought to this summer, so that we can impress upon youngsters travelling to the Laos region what the dangers are. We are working with partners such as Vibe by Jet2holidays and Gap 360 to reach younger audiences with bespoke information and blogs that highlight the dangers of methanol poisoning. All that raises awareness, and we are committed to improving. Indeed, we are updating our travel checklist to ensure it includes advice on the risks of methanol poisoning—and we welcome all feedback.
Finally, I recognise the depth of feeling on this issue. We all want to help Brits abroad to stay safe, and our message to those who find themselves in hot water abroad is: “We’ve got your back.” None of us wants any other family to go through this. The FCDO will consider any future proposals carefully. We will explore more ways to inform British travellers about the risks of methanol—for instance, through channels online—and work with others to get the message out.
I thank all MPs who were able to speak in the debate. This debate can also play a role. We will continue to provide clear, accessible, and up-to-date travel advice, and keep it under constant review. We will also work with Governments around the world to reduce the risks, wherever we can—including in Laos.
Question put and agreed to.
(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberThe UK is a principled humanitarian donor. We prioritise giving humanitarian assistance to people in greatest need, which includes protecting the most vulnerable by supporting access to education in emergencies and crises. Decisions on future budgets are subject to the ongoing spending review and resource allocation processes.
According to the Education and Development Forum, planned cuts to the official development assistance budget could slash UK aid for education by more than 70% by 2027 compared with 2019 levels. In Gaza, where 95% of schools are damaged and 650,000 children go without formal education, UK-backed programmes will be vital in restoring hope, providing stability and equipping children with the skills to rebuild. Does the Minister agree that education aid must be protected, particularly in crisis responses such as in Gaza?
As the Prime Minister set out, the UK will continue to play a leading humanitarian role, including in Gaza, where children must be allowed to return to school in safety. Through our global funding, the UK enables thousands of children to gain access to essential education services, supporting recovery from the trauma of war and building skills and hope for the future.
In the past, the Minister has spoken very positively about education. What assessment has been made of the potential progress that could be made in reducing youth radicalisation by allocating aid to education programmes, as we have witnessed over the years a number of young people being brainwashed online by extremist groups?
We have an excellent programme called Education Cannot Wait, which in 2024 provided £12 million in first emergency response grants covering not just the educational needs but the psychosocial needs of those affected by conflict and trauma.
We know that education can make a real difference to a girl’s life chances, which is why the last Conservative Government committed to ensuring that every girl has access to quality education. However, we will now be spending less on development, so can the Minister give clarity on the commitments that the Government are making to support women and girls over the next few years? Which programmes will be kept and which will be cut, and how much will be invested in those programmes?
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s humanitarian framework sets out our long-term approach through three policy priorities: providing humanitarian assistance for those in greatest need; protecting people at risk in conflict and crises; and preventing and anticipating future shocks and building resilience. When it comes to building resilience, the people most at risk are often women and young girls who fail to have access to education. The indices of educational attainment will be the basis on which many of these decisions are made.
As the Foreign Secretary said in his Kew lecture, we are completely committed to ratifying the marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction agreement. Primary legislation is required to give effect to our obligations under the agreement, and legislation to implement the agreement will be introduced as soon as the legislative timetable allows.
The UK has led world-class conservation efforts, and this Government have rightly committed to the landmark high seas treaty, but we must act now, as without ratification the UK risks losing its place in shaping this vital treaty’s implementation and future direction. Can the Minister confirm when legislation to ratify the agreement will be introduced, or provide a clear timetable? If we want to stay at the table, we must claim our seat.
My hon. Friend is quite right to push the Government on this issue, and the FCDO will redouble our efforts in this place to make sure that we do the necessary work to conclude the legal process.
The UK is a world leader in protecting marine environments, particularly around the British Overseas Territories, but tragically that reputation will be trashed when Labour surrenders to Mauritius one of the most important marine protected areas around the British Indian Ocean Territory. While Mauritian fisheries Ministers have been pledging to issue fishing and trawler licences for those waters, Labour Ministers have given no assurances about future protections, and have just made vague comments on working with Mauritius on a new MPA. Can the Minister state if the proposed treaty will have any guaranteed protections in place? Will she confirm what was said in a legal letter to British Chagossians—that their right of return is not guaranteed? Surely that would be a total betrayal.
I thank the shadow Minister for his question. Following the trip that he and I did together when we were both on the Foreign Affairs Committee, I am sure he is aware that the marine protected area will continue and that the environment has been at the heart of the negotiations. Indeed, he must remember that, because when he was the chair of the Chagos Islands all-party parliamentary group, he began the debate with the Mauritians, so I am sure he is in a very good position to ask any further questions that he may like to ask of the Mauritians.
We cannot address the urgency of the climate and nature crisis without co-ordinated global action. We are supporting nature restoration and resilience in many important ways, including by protecting and restoring forests, working with indigenous people in the Amazon and Congo basins, and supporting vulnerable coastal communities and ecosystems.
Last week marked the 99th birthday of Sir David Attenborough and the release of his powerful new film, “Ocean”. I encourage all Members to watch it. It makes a compelling case for ocean protection as essential to tackling climate change and restoring nature. With the 2025 UN ocean conference in France fast approaching, will my hon. Friend ensure the UK arrives in the strongest position for that conference by ratifying the high seas treaty and delivering our domestic nature restoration goals through measures, including ending bottom trawling in marine protected areas?
Let me wish a belated happy birthday to Sir David. His advocacy for the natural world is truly inspirational. We are committed to ratifying the agreement, and we will introduce legislation to implement it as soon as the legislative timetable allows.
The UN ocean conference is an important moment for protecting the ocean and progress towards UN sustainable development goal 14, “Life Below Water”. The UK is attending and actively involved in negotiating the political declaration for the conference.
Sir David Attenborough’s latest film, “Ocean” revealed the shocking devastation caused by bottom trawling and asked the Government to take action at the UN conference in just four weeks. Will the Government use the conference to announce a ban on all bottom trawling in marine protected areas? Why has the Minister still not set out when we will ratify the ocean treaty, which will keep our small island developing states and overseas territories safe?
The climate and ocean adaptation and sustainable transition programme is improving vulnerable coastal communities’ resilience to climate change, including: protecting and restoring coastal habitats; supporting nature-based solutions; improving small-scale fisheries management; and, the issue my hon. Friend raises, the use of bottom-towed gear over rock and reef habitats in 13 Marine Management Organisation areas.
The British Council has no greater champions than Labour Ministers on the Front Bench. It does a fantastic job to promote the UK abroad. Across this House, we love the British Council.
We will redouble our efforts to get into the legislative queue and do all that is necessary to maintain our leadership in this important area.
Today we welcome the release of Edan Alexander, the latest hostage freed by Hamas, after over 500 days in captivity. The fact that they still have people in captivity is disgraceful and barbaric and puts into perspective the fact that the group Kneecap are being platformed in Croydon, after they shouted support for Hamas from a stage. What pressure are the Government putting on the Palestinian authorities to ensure that the remaining hostages are returned to their families as they should be? They should never have been taken in the first place.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberIt is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Madam Deputy Speaker, and to respond to Members in what has been a fascinating debate. I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing it, and I am very grateful for the contributions of other hon. Members. I will try to respond to all the points raised.
The Government stand in solidarity with those who are in prison solely because of their religious or other beliefs, and we call on Governments to ensure that the right to freedom of religion or belief is protected and promoted for all people everywhere. Societies that respect and uphold human rights, including freedom of religion or belief, are generally stronger, more stable and prosperous.
As many in the Chamber have articulated so eloquently, the scale of freedom of religion or belief abuses and violations globally is of grave concern. Article 18 of the universal declaration of human rights states that
“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion”.
However, the reality faced by many—including the Baha’i community in Yemen and Iran, the Ahmadis in Pakistan, the church members in Nicaragua who have been harassed and arbitrarily detained, and non-Muslims caught up in Sudan’s civil war—is far removed from that principle. Persecution, harassment, discrimination and arbitrary detention are sadly part of daily life for many.
My hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) and the spokesperson for His Majesty’s Opposition, the hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell), both mentioned the current issue of Armenians in detention following the recent conflict with Azerbaijan. Annette Moskofian has had a few mentions, because she is such an ardent believer in freedom of religion or belief, and is the constituent of my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing Central and Acton.
For those reasons, we are working hard to highlight and address the scale and severity of freedom of religion or belief abuses and violations, including by lobbying for the release of prisoners of conscience. I shall set out some examples. Lorenzo Rosales Fajardo, a pastor and leader of an independent church in Cuba, was imprisoned for participating in peaceful protests in that country. The Foreign Secretary wrote to him in December last year to express solidarity and called on the Cuban authorities to release him. We were delighted to hear that he was released in January. As the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) said, this must not be a counsel of despair; occasionally, we get good news in these cases.
Mubarak Bala has also been mentioned in this debate. A Nigerian atheist and president of the Humanist Association of Nigeria, he was sentenced to 24 years for his belief. We regularly lobbied the Nigerian Government, including through letters to the Kano state governor and calls by Ministers for his release, and we were pleased to hear that he was also freed in January. Of course, there are many other examples, and I will try to set out what we are doing to support them.
The UK is determined to use its extensive diplomatic network to champion freedom of religion or belief on the international stage. As Members have mentioned, our human rights approach is being refreshed by the Minister for human rights in the other place, Lord Collins. He will come to Parliament in the usual way to set out that work when it is completed. I was very pleased to meet my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) earlier this week to discuss his role as the UK special envoy for freedom of religion or belief. To address the Bill proposing that we make that role statutory, while we recognise the benefits of the position, we do not believe that its value would be enhanced by making it statutory. As such, we will continue with the approach taken by the last Government under the excellent Fiona Bruce, maintaining the role as an office within the Foreign Office, but with a strong sense of challenge.
I welcome the tone in which this debate is being conducted. Given that the Minister will not make the special envoy’s role statutory, will she state very clearly that she will not make something else statutory—that she will not reintroduce a blasphemy law in the United Kingdom? She will recognise that the abolition of the blasphemy laws in the 1980s and 1990s meant that people could express whatever belief they happened to hold in a completely free way. That ended a level of oppression that had been possible, although not exercised for many years.
Will the Minister make absolutely clear that in no way will this Government support a blasphemy law, and that they will not allow police to introduce one through the back door by criminalising acts that would otherwise be covered by freedom of expression? Will she make absolutely clear that His Majesty’s Government stand for freedom of religion and non-belief, not just belief, and that that means the freedom to change one’s religion, to reject a previous religion, and to criticise any religion? Does she agree with that?
Of course I agree that freedom of religion or belief, or the right to have no belief at all, is critical and paramount. I know that organisations such as Index on Censorship, which the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy) is part of, are very robust in that regard. It is crucial that we have the right to freedom of expression. On the finer points of the right hon. Gentleman’s question, if he would like to write to me, I will be very happy to write back using the particular language that he would prefer.
I was pleased by the Minister’s answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Tonbridge (Tom Tugendhat). If we are talking about freedom of expression internationally, we have to be incredibly careful about freedom of expression in our own country. While Ministers often say that they oppose blasphemy laws, we have seen section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986 used to prosecute people for acts of protest, including damaging the Koran. Is this not, in reality, the development of a back-door blasphemy law?
I reiterate my position that we uphold freedoms. On the specific point that the hon. Gentleman would like me to fall into a trap on, if he would write to me so that I can get exactly the right language, I would be pleased to write back.
I want to pursue my point about the importance of this not being a counsel of despair, as the right hon. Member for New Forest West said. A couple of Members have mentioned the country of Vietnam this afternoon, and while there are a number of concerns—including some that I raised with Vietnam’s deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs on her recent visit to the UK, in the context of discussions on matters of bilateral interest— I was very pleased to read that there has been an 83% acceptance rate for the universal periodic review recommendations. I hope that Vietnam will be able to develop a national masterplan that specifies concrete, measurable and time-bound actions to follow up on those recommendations. We offer the expertise that we have within the Foreign Office, and stand ready to share our experience as we go on that journey together.
As I mentioned, the UK is determined to use its extensive diplomatic network, and the priorities of my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland will become clear as he meets with each of the Ministers to lay out his concerns. With his background at the Bible Society, I know that he will have a lot in common with the hon. Member for Strangford, and I am sure that they will bring more debates to this House in future, continuing to challenge Ministers on these important matters.
To give another example, last week my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland and the Minister for the middle east and north Africa, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), met the former prisoner of conscience Dr Nader al-Sakkaf, who was arbitrarily detained by the Houthis in 2016 for his association with the Office of the Public Affairs of the Baha’is of Yemen. They heard about his experience in Yemen, and discussed ways in which the Government could support him and other cases of this sort.
I also want to highlight the vital work of human rights defenders in addressing freedom of religion or belief abuses and violations, including arrests and arbitrary detention. As the Foreign Secretary said in his Human Rights Day speech in December last year,
“Human rights defenders around the world risk their liberty—and often their lives—for their belief in upholding fundamental human rights for all, through protesting, documenting human rights abuses, supporting political prisoners and standing up for democracy and justice.”
Without human rights defenders, we would not know the full scale of abuses and violations. I think of the tragic story this week of Viktoriia Roshchyna, a journalist whose body was returned without organs to her family following detention in Russia. I know that that will be of interest to the hon. Member for West Suffolk, given his association with the Index on Censorship—it is an absolutely tragic case. The UK is pleased to support important flexible funds such as Lifeline, which has provided almost 100 grants to civil society organisations under threat in over 30 countries since July 2024.
Turning to our bilateral engagements, the Government do not shy away from challenging countries that are not meeting their obligations. We continue to highlight our concerns, both publicly and in private. To give just one example, it is a central part of our work in Pakistan. My hon. Friend the Minister for the middle east and north Africa visited Pakistan in November last year, and was able to advocate for freedom of religion or belief with Government Ministers and business and religious leaders. High commission officials, including our political counsellor, regularly meet representatives from the Ahmadi, Christian, Hindu and Sikh communities.
We have followed the same approach with the Nigerian Government, including during Nigeria’s universal periodic review last year. We are investing £38 million through our strengthening peace and resilience programme in Nigeria to help address the root causes of conflict in the middle belt and beyond. That, in turn, builds the capacity of the country’s security forces to tackle violence against all civilian communities, including those of different religious backgrounds and beliefs.
On Syria, which is very much in the news this week, we have made it clear that the Government must ensure the protection of all civilians, set out a clear path to transitional justice and make progress towards an inclusive political transition. We will judge them by their actions. The shadow Minister asked how conditional our support was in trying to push for better human rights. I can guarantee that in the discussions about lifting sanctions in recent months following the ceasefire, we have discussed our vision for more freedoms for all the different groups in Syria.
Moving on to our multilateral work, at the UN we regularly participate in interactive dialogues with the special rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief. In March, our special envoy was in Geneva to engage in a session on the intersection between freedom of religion or belief and torture. Last October, we participated in the interactive dialogue in New York on the link between freedom of religion and peace. We frequently raise FORB during the UN’s universal periodic review process, such as in our statements on Bhutan, Nicaragua and Qatar last November. In the case of Nicaragua, we noted our increasing alarm at the deteriorating human rights situation. That includes the harassment and arbitrary detention of members of the Church and the closure of organisations affiliated with it. We continue to work closely with the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe as well. It provides a valuable platform for us to discuss and consider freedom of religion or belief and related issues.
Many Members have mentioned article 18, from which the Article 18 Alliance takes its name. It is a coalition of 43 countries formed to defend and advance religious freedom globally. The hon. Member for Strangford is involved in that alliance. The UK is an active member and works closely to combat discrimination and persecution based on religion or belief. That includes highlighting specific cases of prisoners of conscience and co-sponsoring statements and campaigning for their release, such as the chair’s statement on Tibetan religious prisoners of conscience and Gedhun Choekyi Nyima. Linked to those important campaigns, we have worked closely with the Article 18 Alliance on statements that condemn FORB violations and promote mutual respect between different religions and belief groups. For example, in November last year, we joined an important statement that condemned anti-Muslim hatred and urged countries to uphold the right to freedom of religion or belief.
Before I conclude, there are a couple of points that I have not covered. The hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary) talked about China, and I reassure him that we raise our concerns at the highest level. A number of people have mentioned one of our most high-profile prisoners of conscience, Jimmy Lai. Just this week, I met Sebastien Lai, and I discuss Jimmy’s progress and how he is getting on regularly with Sebastien’s constituency MP, who sits on our Benches. Our staff in Hong Kong attend the court regularly to watch every single element of that procedure. We are working hard to continue to keep that at the highest level, whether that is Prime Minister to President, Foreign Secretary to Foreign Minister, or me at ministerial level when I can.
The hon. Member also asked about the China audit, which I can confirm we will be bringing forward soon. Within that process, I have met Rahima Mahmut on the Uyghur situation. The hon. Gentleman will be well aware that there is ongoing concern about that, and I reassure him and others watching this debate that we have definitely looked at that subject and how it impacts on our day-to-day lives and business practices here in the UK.
Briefly on Iran, we know that Christians in Iran are persecuted. That includes the ethnic Armenian and Assyrian Christians who face political, economic and social barriers. They are entitled to freedoms as a formally protected minority, but they are often unable to practise their religion and are banned from preaching to other Iranians. Persian Christians and converts from Islam are considered apostates and face severe harassment, detention and lengthy prison sentences. Christians often face propaganda charges as a result of their religious activity. The UK is on the core group for the recurring Iran resolution led by Canada, which always includes language relating to freedom of religious belief and Christians. We are looking forward to the next UN 3C resolution, which will be tabled in November 2025.
We have had a very good debate, and I thank the House for its patience. To conclude, this Government remain committed to addressing the issues of prisoners of conscience and freedom of religion or belief. No one should suffer for their beliefs, and we will continue to promote and protect freedom of religion or belief at every opportunity.
(2 months ago)
Commons ChamberIt is a pleasure to see you in the Chair for this important debate, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Chi Onwurah) for securing it; she is an active campaigner on this topic and on a number of other foreign policy matters. I also thank her for the thoughtful way in which she put the debate in context. Of course, tomorrow is Yom Ha’atzmaut, which is a national holiday in Israel, and my hon. Friend also emphasised the suffering from the dreadful attacks in October 2023—the horrific terror attacks—and her support for the people of Israel following that terrible moment. She is quite right to ask how she can support the situation in the middle east, quoting her constituents assiduously, and to ask how she can respond to their compassion and concern.
The Minister for the Middle East, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), would usually have been at the Dispatch Box for this debate. He will watch it later on, and will be very happy to reply to any bits that I miss out, or any questions that are only half-answered—as the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, I might occasionally answer only half the question, rather than give the full answer that the Minister for the Middle East could provide. I am also grateful to the hon. Members for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss), for Hammersmith and Chiswick (Andy Slaughter) and for Burnley (Oliver Ryan), and I will attempt to answer some of the questions raised and respond to some of the points made.
The Government are steadfast in our friendship with, and support for, the Palestinian people. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West asked what support we can provide and what more we can do. Several Members have mentioned the visit of Palestinian Prime Minister Mustafa to London yesterday for high-level meetings with both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, and I reassure my hon. Friends the Members for Hammersmith and Chiswick and for Wolverhampton West that we support the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to self-determination, including to an independent state. Yesterday, the Foreign Secretary and Prime Minister signed a memorandum of understanding with Prime Minister Mustafa, enshrining the UK’s commitment to advancing Palestinian statehood as part of a two-state solution. That memorandum of understanding also underscored the commitment of the Palestinian Authority to deliver its reform agenda as a matter of priority.
I now turn to the UK’s support for Gaza, and the main question that my hon. Friend’s constituents in Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West want an answer to: is the UK doing all it possibly can to alleviate the humanitarian situation in Gaza? In the last financial year, the UK provided £129 million in funding to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, or OPTs. This week, the UK announced a £101 million package of funding for this financial year, which will include substantial funding for the humanitarian response in Gaza, as well as support for Palestinian economic development and strengthening the Palestinian Authority’s governance and reform—they have to be ready. Our support is making a real difference to those who need it most. To date, the UK’s support has provided essential healthcare to over 430,000 people, food to almost 650,000 people, and improved access to water, sanitation and hygiene services to close to 380,000 people.
I thank the Minister for her comments and the context she is giving. I just want to be clear about something: is the humanitarian aid we are providing to Gaza getting through into Gaza right now?
My hon. Friend is right to say that funding is one thing and access is another. That is why it is crucial that we have been pressing the Government of Israel to ensure that vital aid can reach Gaza and that our humanitarian partners, including the United Nations, can deliver their work effectively. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Burnley for reminding the House that UNRWA funding was reintroduced under this Government, and for emphasising that UNRWA has been at the centre of things since July last year. Given the infrastructure that it has on the ground, it is critical to the provision of assistance.
In addition, UK funding to UK-Med has helped to sustain its field hospital operations. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West asked which organisations can be trusted to deliver. UK-Med has facilitated more than 405,000 consultations in Gaza since January 2024, so that patients can receive critical life and limb-saving surgery. We are also providing funding to the World Health Organisation Egypt to ensure vital medical supplies reach evacuated Gazans being treated there.
My hon. Friend asks who can help. Our Government, through the international groups such as the World Health Organisation that public funding goes towards, are providing this vital treatment. The experts in development aid always say it is best to work through those big funding organisations, because they do that enormously helpful work. For example, there is the delivery of the polio vaccination campaigns. My hon. Friend mentioned communicable diseases and the risk of further illness, but that polio vaccination campaign protected more than 600,000 vulnerable children across Gaza through funding to the global polio eradication initiative. We know that the scale of the crisis means that more support is crucial. That is why we continue to support UNRWA’s vital work. That includes providing essential services, education and healthcare to civilians in Gaza and the west bank and to Palestinian refugees across the region.
I apologise that I could not be here for the beginning, because I was in Westminster Hall—the times were all out of kilter. The hon. Member for Macclesfield (Tim Roca) and I were both there, and we have just arrived.
All the things that the Minister has outlined about the medical help that can be given are important, but what is also important, particularly for young children, is education. Can she perhaps give us some more information about education? It is not just about what they are missing out on, but the opportunities that can change their lives.
I thank the hon. Member for mentioning education, because it is so crucial. We do not want children to go uneducated and then, perhaps through a sense of the well of suffering, recreate in the next generation less education and less understanding of the world. Some Members who spoke earlier mentioned the destruction of schools. That is why it is so important that UNRWA can gain access to Gaza and the Occupied Palestinian Territories, so that schools can be rebuilt and classrooms can be re-provided. That is not just in terms of education, but that important psychosocial help that so many traumatised families need now.
People may ask, as indeed have Members, “What are the Government doing? Can’t we do more?” The Foreign Secretary has intervened time and again. Most recently, he spoke to Israeli Foreign Minister Sa’ar on 15 April, where he raised urgent concerns about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza and the urgent need to restore the flow of aid. The UK issued a joint statement last week with France and Germany calling on the Government of Israel to restart immediately the rapid and unimpeded flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza. We have repeatedly raised our concerns at the UN Security Council, including on the safety of aid workers. The Minister with responsibility for the United Nations intervened at the Security Council just this week, expressing outrage at recent attacks, including the killing of Palestinian Red Crescent workers and the strike on a United Nations compound on 19 March.
Can my hon. Friend give any indication of what response we have received suggesting that Israel might change its course of action?
As my hon. Friend will, I think, appreciate, many Israelis say that people outside the region simply do not understand their desire for security. Equally, Palestinian communities say that those outside the region cannot possibly understand the extent of their suffering. That, in a nutshell, is the depth of what we are facing, and that is why we must redouble our efforts not just to make the case to the senior people involved and the decision-makers in this conflict, but to impress on them the importance for our constituents that their reply must be true and must come with some action attached.
Let me return briefly to the subject of the strike on the UN compound on 19 March. Israel has admitted that it was caused by one of its tanks, despite the compound being known to the IDF as a UN humanitarian facility. That is inexcusable, and we urge Israel to ensure that accurate public statements are made about such grave incidents. It must conduct full and transparent investigations of these incidents, hold those responsible to account, and reinstate an effective deconfliction system to prevent such terrible tragedies from reoccurring.
Members have mentioned the International Court of Justice. Let me remind them of what has been said in the past by both the Foreign Secretary and the Minister for the Middle East:
“The UK is fully committed to international law and respects the independence of the International Court of Justice. We continue to consider the Court’s Advisory Opinion carefully, with the seriousness and rigour it deserves.”
Let me reassure Members on both sides of the House that we are committed to a two-state solution, and that commitment is unwavering. The statement continued:
“We are of the clear view that Israel should bring an end to its presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories as rapidly as possible, but it must be done in a way that creates the conditions for negotiations towards a two-state solution.”
That, I know, is an issue that my hon. Friend the Member for Hammersmith and Chiswick has raised on a number of occasions in his cross-party work on this important subject.
The hon. Member for Burnley mentioned settlements and settler violence. The UK Government’s position is that Israeli settlements in the west bank are illegal under international law, and harm prospects for a two-state solution. Settlements do not offer security to either Israel or Palestinians. Settlement expansion and settler violence have reached record levels. The Israeli Government seized more of the west bank in 2024 than in the past 20 years, and that is completely unacceptable. The Foreign Secretary met Palestinian community members in the west bank, where he heard how communities—not just Palestinian communities, but other local groups—are affected, and made it clear to Israeli Ministers that the Israeli Government must clamp down on settler violence and end settlement expansion.
I thank the hon. Member for Burnley for mentioning the hostages. This is, of course, a situation about which we feel very strongly, because of the involvement of the British hostages and people who have family members still stuck with the terrible terrorist group Hamas. Let me respond briefly to the hon. Gentleman’s point. The UK Government welcomed the announcement of an agreement last January to end the fighting in Gaza and release the 38 hostages, including the British national Emily Damari and the UK-linked Eli Sharabi. Securing an immediate ceasefire and the safe release of all hostages has been a priority for the Government since the start of the conflict, and we will not stop until they are all back at home. The death of Oded Lifshitz, who had strong UK links and was tragically held hostage by terrorists in Gaza, is absolutely heartbreaking This is a crucial time for the region, and we thank Qatar, Egypt and the United States for their support in bringing the horrific ordeal of those individuals and their families to an end. The hostages have endured unimaginable suffering, and the situation in Gaza has continued to worsen. The ceasefire needs to get back on track.
I want to briefly mention the Bibas family—our thoughts are with them. They are going through intolerable anguish over Shiri and her young children Kfir and Ariel. As the Prime Minister said, we want to see all remaining hostages released and the ceasefire restarted. The Government remain committed to working with international partners to end the suffering and secure long-term peace in the middle east.
I am sure the Minister will join me in expressing our pleasure at seeing the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) in his place. I would not have felt that I had really had an Adjournment debate had I not heard his voice, for which I am very grateful.
I thank the Minister for her comments. She mentioned that the settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are illegal. One of the questions I put to her was about distinguishing between goods from illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and goods from Israel so that my constituents can make decisions about what they purchase.
With my hon. Friend’s permission, I will write to her on that point or ask the Minister for the Middle East to write to her. With Israel being a close friend of the UK, we have a trading relationship with it. On her specific point about whether there are particular products that could be purchased to support the situation at the moment—for example, specific products that may have been made by particular groups that she wishes to support, such as traditional handicrafts and so forth—I will seek the guidance of officials so that I can write to her with confidence. More generally, we are keen to maintain our trading relationship, which gives us another way of talking to Israel about this important question.
I thank the Minister greatly for her generosity. As the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, she did a fantastic job of setting out the complex issues in response to Members’ contributions. I will take her up on her offer to write to me on these issues, and I will make sure that the Minister for the Middle East has both the Hansard record and a copy of all the questions I have set out.
I think my hon. Friend came into the House with me in 2015, and we have learned some very nice manners over the years. It is very important in these potentially heartfelt debates that we have the tone that we have had this afternoon.
The Government are steadfast in our friendship with, and support for, the Palestinian people—my hon. Friend can reassure her constituents about that. Our support for the Palestinian Authority continues to provide essential services, and promotes reform and state building. Our support for the humanitarian response in Gaza provides food and medical assistance to those who most need it, and we will keep pressing for access. Our consistent support for Palestinian statehood through a two-state solution aims to ensure a political horizon and future in which Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace and security. In the end, that is the only solution that can bring stability and prosperity to the entire region.
Question put and agreed to.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Written CorrectionsIf he will amend the memorandum of understanding between Indonesia and the UK on a strategic partnership on critical minerals, published on 29 November 2024, to include conditions on the protection of human rights in West Papua.
The memorandum of understanding—as you are aware, Madam Deputy Speaker, having signed off on it in 2024—is an agreement to create a policy framework that promotes good environmental, social and governance practices in critical minerals, mining and processing. I was able to visit Indonesia in January specifically to raise concerns about human rights in Papua with the senior Minister for human rights.
[Official Report, 1 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 144.]
Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Hornsey and Friern Barnet (Catherine West):
The memorandum of understanding, which was signed off in 2024, is an agreement to create a policy framework that promotes good environmental, social and governance practices in critical minerals, mining and processing. I was able to visit Indonesia in January specifically to raise concerns about human rights in Papua with the senior Minister for human rights.
In 2018, President Joko Widodo promised the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that he would be allowed to visit West Papua. No visit has yet been facilitated by Indonesia, although two High Commissioners have been and gone. Without such a visit, it is impossible to assess the real human rights situation. Will the Minister ensure that the UK does not engage in critical minerals extraction in West Papua before such a visit takes place?
The UK continues to support the visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and, through initiatives such as the voluntary principles on security and human rights, and the UK-Indonesia critical minerals MOU—signed off by you, Madam Deputy Speaker—the Government promote best practice on sustainability and respect for human rights.
[Official Report, 1 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 144.]
Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs:
The UK continues to support the visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and, through initiatives such as the voluntary principles on security and human rights, and the UK-Indonesia critical minerals MOU—signed off by the former Minister for Development, my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds)—the Government promote best practice on sustainability and respect for human rights.
(3 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe UK’s diplomatic estate directly supports the delivery of this Government’s missions. Maintenance of the diplomatic estate, with an emphasis on safety and security for staff and visitors, has been a core priority for the Department during ongoing discussions with the Treasury about the spending review.
The maintenance and upkeep of the 6,000 properties that constitute the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s overseas estate is estimated to cost £250 million a year. In recent years, that has been funded through the sale of assets. Drawdown on the receipts of those sales is due to run out either this year or next, and the Department has previously made it clear that there is no more family silver to sell. My question to the Minister is this: what conversations have been had with the Treasury about a long-term sustainable funding model for the estate, and if the Treasury is not forthcoming with the money, what cuts does the Department intend to make?
After the fire sale of assets by the former Government in 2010, the FCDO has been focusing on how to make good its estate. Now that that money is exhausted, the FCDO has developed a new estates prioritisation tool to ensure that finite resources are targeted at places of greatest need and weighted towards mitigating health and safety and security risks.
The memorandum of understanding—as you are aware, Madam Deputy Speaker, having signed off on it in 2024—is an agreement to create a policy framework that promotes good environmental, social and governance practices in critical minerals, mining and processing. I was able to visit Indonesia in January specifically to raise concerns about human rights in Papua with the senior Minister for human rights.
In 2018, President Joko Widodo promised the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that he would be allowed to visit West Papua. No visit has yet been facilitated by Indonesia, although two High Commissioners have been and gone. Without such a visit, it is impossible to assess the real human rights situation. Will the Minister ensure that the UK does not engage in critical minerals extraction in West Papua before such a visit takes place?
The UK continues to support the visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and, through initiatives such as the voluntary principles on security and human rights, and the UK-Indonesia critical minerals MOU—signed off by you, Madam Deputy Speaker—the Government promote best practice on sustainability and respect for human rights.
I am delighted to hear that the Minister has been raising human rights concerns with the Government of Indonesia about critical minerals. Would she perhaps have a word with her colleague the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero about the human rights concerns over other critical minerals conversions in China? It is going into a green energy economy that is supposed to have environmental, social and governance accords, yet somehow or other it fails on all of those: it fails because of its coal-powered production, it fails because its products are made by socially undesirable slave labour—I hope she agrees about that—and it fails on governance because there is no oversight. Will she have those same conversations within her own Government?
The right hon. Gentleman is quite right to raise those pressing concerns, and all will be revealed when the China audit comes forward with the specifics on his question.
Our strong knowledge economy is one of our best exports, and each Minister on the Front Bench makes sure to promote learning in the UK and learning in people’s home cities, when our universities have a presence, and we will continue to do so.
More than half the countries that have submitted UN biodiversity plans have not yet released plans for how they will protect 30% of land and sea for nature, despite agreeing to do so at COP15. What steps are the Government taking to ensure more countries develop plans to protect at least 30% of land and sea?
The Government remain strongly committed to tackling the international climate and nature crises. The UK played a key role at the COP16 biodiversity conference, and we are working closely with a wide range of partners to build global ambition on nature ahead of London Climate Action Week in June and COP30 in Brazil.
In February, the Foreign Secretary rightly criticised America’s aid cuts. Two weeks later, he was humiliated by his own Prime Minister when his departmental budget was smashed to bits. What is he doing to re-establish his and his Department’s credibility on the world stage, so we can once again have genuine influence internationally?