Sudan
Debate between Chris Elmore and Andrew Rosindell(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Chris Elmore
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There are significant pressures on near neighbours, particularly Chad. We have offered funding over the past year to bring about more support for refugees travelling into Chad. We continue that dialogue; the Foreign Secretary has visited the region—as have many colleagues—fairly recently and seen at first hand the scale of migration. We keep support for other countries under regular review.
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)
There is a consensus across the House that the horrific occurrences in Sudan are worthy of global attention and action well beyond what has been done so far. We spend a lot of time talking about Gaza in this Chamber, but very little time talking about Sudan, which is a far greater humanitarian crisis. Will the Minister consider the implications for the Christian community in Sudan? It is a small community, but they have been particularly harmed by the conflict, with many churches being demolished and many vulnerable Christians persecuted. Will he take that matter up with the international authorities?
Chris Elmore
The hon. Member is right to raise that issue. We have an excellent envoy for freedom of religion or belief in my hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), who leads a lot of this work. I will continue to challenge what is happening to Christians and people of other faith in Sudan and internationally. He is right to highlight that Christians are often targeted specifically because of their faith. That cannot be allowed to continue, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that we will continue to raise it.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Chris Elmore and Andrew Rosindell(9 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Con)
Last week, Labour voted against our amendment, which would have given the House of Commons a say on the Government’s reckless decision to surrender £35 billion of taxpayers’ hard-earned money to Mauritius for the privilege of giving away our own sovereign territory, but we still have no certainty from the Government about the fate of the vital Diego Garcia base after the 99-year period. What is stopping Mauritius demanding billions more if the UK wishes to extend the use of Diego Garcia for another 40 years? Would it not be more sensible to save the money, ditch the surrender deal and the keep the Chagos islands British?
Chris Elmore
As the hon. Gentleman knows from the many questions that I have answered on this issue, and indeed the debate we had in this place that secured the Bill’s Third Reading, the cost of the agreement in today’s money is £101 million, and the net present value over 99 years is £3.4 billion. However much he comes up with other fantasy figures, they are simply incorrect; these are verified by the Government Actuary’s Department. If he wants to talk about spending and value, I will not apologise for spending on our national security and keeping this country and our allies safe. For comparison, he might like to reflect on the fact that the annual payment is 20% less than the cost of the festival of Brexit.