Chris Evans debates involving the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office during the 2024 Parliament

Armed Conflict: Children

Chris Evans Excerpts
Wednesday 4th February 2026

(6 days, 12 hours ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster 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

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans (Caerphilly) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) on securing such an important debate. The effects of war on children are devastating, as often seen in the media, but we must look beyond what we see. We see humanitarian disasters; we do not see the recruitment of child soldiers beforehand, the mental trauma and the loss of education. What we do see we must take seriously, as it reflects a sad reality that many children live in. That should never be overlooked.

That is why the Government must invest in conflict prevention and peacebuilding strategies. We need to address the root causes that make children vulnerable, such as poverty and lack of support within the community. We need to lead the way in preventing humanitarian crises. The UK humanitarian framework is committed to doing that, but I ask the Minister whether the Government are introducing or considering any new strategies. We need to act early and take precautionary and preventive measures. There needs to be investment in the way that children can report grave violations, and the stigma associated with them must be addressed. I ask the Minister to liaise with other leaders in the UK and internationally on how that can be done. In developing these strategies, we must find a way to give children a voice to express what they need, for they are very often the silent victims. I therefore ask the Minister: how are the Government giving children a voice in a safe, supported way, and will they liaise with charities such as Save the Children, which has conducted a vast amount of research on this topic and how to improve this?

The UK, as a member of the UN Security Council, donated £450,000 to UNICEF’s monitoring and reporting mechanism in 2025. Do the Government intend to increase that donation, given that, in 2024, less than 2% of global security funds went towards peacebuilding and peacekeeping? That is a small sum compared with the weapons of war that are produced every day. The way to combat issues such as displacement, child soldier recruitment and denial of humanitarian aid is not to decrease spending on peacebuilding. Only recently, The Independent stated that nearly 23 million additional deaths are expected by 2030 as a result of cuts in overseas aid. Many of those will be children. They will be denied a future. What could they provide if they were allowed to live, and not live in these warzones? That is the tragedy of these cases.

There needs to be more long-term investment to minimise the life-changing effects on children living in armed conflict. Just because war ends, it does not mean that the effects do. Children are left with mental trauma, with a lack of support, infrastructure and community, and, tragically, a lost education. We need to use our leadership and diplomacy to find new ways to protect children. The grave violations against them are rising, and it is imperative that our framework keeps up with that. This is not a political question; it is a moral one, and we should not be found wanting.

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Stringer. I thank the hon. Member for Hyndburn (Sarah Smith) for setting the scene incredibly well and for all the work she has done on the issue over the years and in her time in Parliament. She has championed the protection of children in armed conflict in the past and has done well to set the scene today.

We must confront a deeply troubling reality. Children are not only being drawn into armed conflict; they are increasingly becoming its direct victims. According to a 2023 United Nations report on the recruitment and use of child soldiers, tens of thousands of boys and girls worldwide, some as young as eight or nine, are recruited and exploited by armed forces and armed groups, with their roles ranging from combatants and cooks to spies and messengers and, most disturbingly, victims of sexual slavery. Of growing concern is the use of children to plant explosive devices, which reflects the brutal evolution of modern warfare. As conflict continues to escalate across the globe, we must ask ourselves, “What more can we do?” What more can the Government do to protect children from lives that no child should ever be forced to endure?

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

The hon. Gentleman speaks from experience, himself knowing conflict, and he knows that Belfast is now a vibrant European city, with education on the rise. Can he give some advice on what can be done to address the matter of children who grew up in that conflict and how they have adapted to modern life?

Jim Shannon Portrait Jim Shannon
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I was talking to the Liberal Democrat Northern Ireland spokesperson, the hon. Member for Wimbledon (Mr Kohler), last night, and he asked me a similar question. We have the urban and the rural: in the urban areas—Belfast, Londonderry and the big cities—the influence on people is perhaps more direct and harder to get away from. If people are living in the smaller towns or villages, as I have, there is not the same direct influence. Government collectively are trying to work to ensure that we can deliver a better life. Some of that involves such things as Catholics and Protestants playing together, going to school together, and playing football and other games together. Lots of things are being done, but there is more to do, and we have to influence that. There is a role for churches to play as well. I thank the hon. Member for Caerphilly (Chris Evans) Gentleman for that intervention.

I draw the House’s attention to the particularly harrowing context of Nigeria. Boko Haram’s sustained campaign of violence, particularly against religious minorities, has devastated countless lives. Children have been forcibly recruited into armed groups, while many more have lost parents, families, access to education and even their own childhoods. Some girls have borne children while still children themselves, as a direct result of captivity and abuse.

In 2024, the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, which I chair, and our secretariat, the Freedom of Religion or Belief Foundation, had the privilege of leading a parliamentary delegation to Nigeria, alongside other hon. Members and Julie Jones, the director of the foundation. We worked with the Gideon and Funmi Para-Mallam Peace Foundation, and met women and girls who had survived Boko Haram captivity. The Gideon and Funmi Para-Mallam Peace Foundation continues to work tirelessly to secure the release of those still held by the group, often at great personal risk.

One of those children is Leah Sharibu. I pray for that wee girl every day. Leah is now in her eighth year of captivity, having been the only student not released following the abduction of 110 Dapchi schoolchildren by Boko Haram on 19 February 2018.

Budget Resolutions

Chris Evans Excerpts
Wednesday 26th November 2025

(2 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans (Caerphilly) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

The two groups in society most affected by poverty are the young and the old. I think that that speaks to Labour party values. Harold Wilson once said that our party and our movement is

“a moral crusade or it is nothing.”

That is what separates us from the Opposition parties. The simple fact is that I do not buy the Liberal Democrats’ reinvention as the cuddly leaders of social mobility, especially when their leader sat in the coalition Government that oversaw austerity. Equally, I do not believe that the Tories yet understand what they did to the economy, and in particular to the people they plunged into poverty. That is the real legacy of the Tory Government.

I think the important thing is that we are supporting young people. It is amazing today that we are allowed to say that 450,000 children will be lifted out of poverty. That is an achievement in itself, but we are also with them on their journey. We are ensuring a youth placement for the long-term unemployed aged between 18 and 21, and ensuring that small businesses can give them apprenticeships. Those are important achievements. Furthermore, it is amazing that we have been able to raise the state pension limit for so many pensioners, who for so long froze under the Tory Government and had to make a choice between heating and eating. We are not talking about these things in the abstract; they are actually happening in constituencies such as mine.

However, I think this is our proudest achievement, and the one thing the Chancellor should be remembered for. Last September, I chaired a meeting in Caerphilly of all the pensioners affected by the British Coal staff superannuation scheme, and I wrote to the Chancellor to ask for the £2.3 billion in its investment fund to be transferred to them immediately. I am proud to be standing here today while a Labour Government are bringing about that legacy—for these people worked underground and kept the country moving; they knew intolerable suffering from the industrial diseases they had after they finished work. These are the people who made Britain great, and we should honour them.

We have heard all sorts of blame today for the problems we have, but it comes down to one thing: for 40 years, we have been in the grip of a failed economic theory, and we see it still today. We hear all the time that we can cut taxes and keep public services at the same level or improve them, and that there are no consequences of that, but there is only one outcome: more borrowing. That went on under previous Governments over and over again, but eventually we have to pay the piper. [Interruption.] I hear Opposition Members chuntering from a sedentary position, so I give way.

Lincoln Jopp Portrait Lincoln Jopp
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way. What is his message to the people who have been made unemployed since the Labour party came to power?

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

If the hon. Gentleman asks me a specific question, I will answer it. What does he mean? This is what I am talking about—this is the reason we are where we are. We are sitting on a debt mountain and we have to pay the piper. [Interruption.] He says that unemployment is rising. In what specific sector? Give me a sector. No; so we are just talking in the abstract.

Mike Wood Portrait Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The number of jobs lost in hospitality since last year’s Budget, just over a year ago, exceeds 110,000 as a result of the Chancellor’s choices.

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

To be honest, it is a bit rich for the Conservatives to talk about job losses. In the 1970s—[Interruption.] Let me give the hon. Gentleman a history lesson. In the 1970s, they said that unemployment would never reach 1 million. Under the Tories, in the golden years of Thatcher and Major, unemployment reached 3 million—3 million people unemployed. Let us not forget that they also moved most of those unemployed people on to incapacity benefit. If we are talking about the benefit bill, it actually rests at the door of the party opposite—that is the truth. More people claimed incapacity benefit under the Tory Government. They failed to bring about an economic plan. Those people lost their jobs because of heavy industry leaving. They did not plan for that or bring anything about; they just put people on the scrapheap. That is why we have the problems we have today.

The fact is—[Interruption.] Sorry, I did not catch what the hon. Member for Spelthorne (Lincoln Jopp) said. Does want to make an intervention? I do not mind. It is the third one I have taken.

Lincoln Jopp Portrait Lincoln Jopp
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way a second time. The Chancellor said on Sky News, “It’s on me now.” I would be grateful if he could set a date for when this Government are going to take responsibility for the country. I have plenty of things I could be doing in Spelthorne, so I will go away and come back when he is prepared to be accountable and take responsibility for the state of the nation under this Government.

--- Later in debate ---
Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

When I was elected in 2010, all I ever had whenever I spoke was people saying, “Apologise.” Why do the Tories not apologise for the mess we find ourselves in now? Let us be fair and start from there. We have had 14 months; the party opposite had 14 years.

Lincoln Jopp Portrait Lincoln Jopp
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

You’re in charge.

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

Yes, we are in charge and we are taking the action we need to take. I do not understand what the hon. Gentleman wants us to do. Does he expect us to stand there and do nothing, or to walk away? Is that what he wants? At the end of the day, this is going nowhere. What we need to talk about are the fundamental problems.

We have heard a lot of analysis from the Opposition Benches about what is wrong, but what are we to do? We have to grasp the nettle. The fact is that net zero is here. We hear a lot of Members on the Opposition Benches saying, “Net zero is causing us problems.” The simple fact is that it is here and there are countries that are way ahead of us. We have an opportunity to be a green superpower. We can invest in nuclear energy. We can invest in tidal power. We can invest in renewables and carbon capture technology. These are the waves of the future, along with AI. This is where the jobs will come from. This is where the growth will come from. We have to pick winners, but we have to have the political will as well.

I have visited a number of companies in my constituency and the issue they have is energy bills. Captiva is a very successful spa and Team Rees Gym is also very successful. Both have talked to me about energy bills. I welcome the reduction in energy bills of £150 on average and £300 for the most impoverished, but I would like to see some sort of deal on energy for businesses to ensure that their costs come down and they can carry on competing. I welcome the increase in the minimum wage, but I also ask the Chancellor for some help for small and medium-sized businesses, so that they can carry on employing people and producing apprenticeships.

Matt Rodda Portrait Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech, and I wholeheartedly agree about the appalling damage done by the Conservatives to our economy over 14 years. I wonder whether he would also mention the significant benefit to both employers and employees of the freezing of rail fares, which will make an enormous difference in my community. We have a net input of people commuting into Reading, but like Caerphilly we also have many people who commute to London and other destinations on the railway line. Many residents will benefit, and many employers will also benefit through the increased labour mobility.

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans
- Hansard - -

I absolutely agree, and I wish the Conservatives would apologise. It is quite simple: freezing rail fares mean that people can get work easier and can commute from places like Reading; it will bring money to the shops, restaurants and everywhere else. It is a really important move for social mobility, and will allow more people to travel from Reading to London, too.

I would say one thing in caution. I still do not understand why we have a Budget in November. I ask that the Treasury move the Budget to April, at the end of the financial year, so that businesses can plan from there and we do not have the speculation we have seen over the past couple of months.

In conclusion, I support the Budget and I support what we are doing. I am sure that in years to come, we will look back on this Budget as one of the more significant.

UK-US Bilateral Relationship

Chris Evans Excerpts
Tuesday 4th February 2025

(1 year ago)

Westminster Hall
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts

Westminster 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

Chris Evans Portrait Chris Evans (Caerphilly) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - -

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I congratulate the hon. Member for Dumfries and Galloway (John Cooper) on his eloquent and passionate speech although, as he would expect, I do not agree with much of what he said.

I am pleased to follow the man whom YouGov called the 31st most famous person in Britain in 2024. I am sure that in 2025 he will be looking to move up the charts as quickly as possible.

When I have thought about what has happened over the past couple of days, my mind has often drifted back to a very wet holiday in Cornwall a couple of years ago, when I read “The Art of the Deal”. If anybody wants to see President Trump’s thinking, they just need to read that book. He says that the worst thing a person can do when he wants to make a deal is to look too desperate, and the most important thing, he says, is to have leverage in that deal. There has been a lot of talk since November about how we want to be friends with President Trump, and a lot of people have taken back what they have said about him, but the truth is that we have to look at the deal and the leverage that we have.

We will always be strategically important to the US. Our relationship has deep roots in defence, security and intelligence, and our armed forces have always fought alongside each other. The United States can access UK intelligence networks in states where it lacks its own. It gets to work through British counterparts in the Commonwealth and many places where we hold more significant historical ties. The UK also gets a good deal; we have great bilateral intelligence-sharing agreements, and UK diplomats in the US have a particularly strong relationship with key policymakers.

My worry going into this debate was that we would make this about personality, and we would start talking about the personality of Donald Trump or the Prime Minister. Presidents and Prime Ministers come and go. In four years’ time, Donald Trump will not be President any more—the US constitution says so. For too long, when we have talked about the special relationship, we have reduced it down to personality. That may go back to Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan, but let us not forget that they fell out over the Falklands when Reagan tried to intervene.

Whether we support Trump or not, and whatever we think of him personally, the fact is that we have to be a critical friend. We cannot blindly obey or expect obedience from each other; that is not how it works. I recall many years ago, when I was working for Lord Touhig, he gave a speech on the UK-US involvement in Iraq. He said then:

“True friends tell each other the truth, no matter how difficult and painful that might be from time to time. It is up to this Government to be honest and plain-speaking with our American friends.”—[Official Report, 22 November 2006; Vol. 453, c. 570.]

He said that the relationship

“must be a true partnership, in which we do not always hitch our wagon to America’s star on foreign and defence policy.”—[Official Report, 22 November 2006; Vol. 453, c. 568.]

This has been done before. In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson desperately wanted this country to get involved in the debacle of Vietnam. The national security adviser McGeorge Bundy advised the President:

“We want to make very sure that the British get it into their heads that it makes no sense for us to rescue the pound while there is no British flag in Vietnam.”

Wilson offered Johnson other reassurances—generally those that aligned with his own view on the right course of action, including that British bases at Suez would be maintained—but he did not give in on the matter of Vietnam. I have to say with all candour that I wish we had had the same attitude in the early 2000s when we were approaching the situation in Afghanistan.

Deals will have to be made with America, but we have to remember that whether it be President Trump, Biden or Kennedy, the American President is elected with one aim in mind: to make sure that he gets the best deal for America. Otherwise, what is the point in electing him? It is the same for us in this country. We expect the British Prime Minister to get the best possible deal, but, in an uncertain time, that does not mean that we forgo our principles. We do not have to be selective in our battles. We can make our views clear and remain strong, but our priority must always be this country and putting our priorities first. That is the only way we can continue to make this relationship special.