Conflict in Gaza

David Lammy Excerpts

Thursday 20th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With the permission of the House, I shall make a statement about the conflict in Gaza. In January, I outlined to the House the deal agreed between Israel and Hamas. It was a moment of huge hope and relief. In the weeks that followed, hostages cruelly detained by Hamas were reunited with their families, and aid blocked by Israel finally flooded into Gaza. A path out of this horrendous conflict appeared open. It is therefore a matter of deep regret that I have to update the House today on a breakdown of the ceasefire and yet more bloodshed in Gaza.

On the night of 18 March, Israel launched airstrikes across Gaza. A number of Hamas figures were reportedly killed, but it has been reported that over 400 Palestinians were killed in missile strikes and artillery barrages. The majority of them were women and children. This appears to have been the deadliest single day for Palestinians since the war began. This is an appalling loss of life, and we mourn the loss of every civilian.

Yesterday morning, a UN compound in Gaza was hit. I can confirm to the House that a British national was among the wounded. Our priority is supporting them and their family at this time. Gaza has been the most dangerous place in the world to be an aid worker, and I share the outrage of the UN Secretary-General Guterres at this incident. The Government call for a transparent investigation, and for those responsible to be held to account.

The UK is working closely with partners, such as France and Germany, to send a clear message. We strongly oppose Israel’s resumption of hostilities. We urgently want to see a return to a ceasefire. More bloodshed is in no one’s interest. Hamas must release all the hostages, and negotiations must resume. Diplomacy is the one way to achieve security for both Israelis and Palestinians. The House will know that the ceasefire in Gaza had lasted for almost two months—the result of dogged efforts by Egypt, Qatar and the United States. The deal reached in January saw the nightmare of captivity for 30 hostages end, and the bodies of eight further victims of Hamas returned to their loved ones. We all remember the joy of seeing Emily Damari reunited with her mother and family. Desperately needed aid began to flow back into Gaza—food, medicines, fuel and tents. Children in Gaza had respite from relentless fear. The severely injured could cross the border again for treatment. Palestinians had begun to return to their homes, and to consider how to rebuild their lives.

In the first days of the ceasefire, the UK moved swiftly to invest in the peace. We released £17 million in additional emergency humanitarian funding for the promised surge in aid. We brought our total support this year for Palestinians across the region to £129 million. We accelerated work on the pathway to reconstruction, supporting our Arab partners’ very welcome recent initiative. We worked at every level to support negotiations for a permanent ceasefire and the return of every single hostage in a backed extension to phase one of the current deal.

But negotiations have been gridlocked for several weeks. Hamas has been resisting calls for the release of further hostages in return for a longer truce. Israeli forces did not begin to withdraw from the Philadelphi corridor as agreed, and on 2 March, the Israeli Government announced that they were blocking all further aid deliveries until Hamas agreed to their terms. For weeks now, supplies of basic goods and electricity have been blocked, leaving over half a million civilians once again cut off from clean drinking water and sparking a 200% surge in the price of some basic foodstuffs—a boon to those criminals who use violence to control supplies.

As I told the House on Monday, this is appalling and unacceptable. Ultimately, of course, these are matters for the courts, not Governments, to determine, but it is difficult to see how denying humanitarian assistance to a civilian population can be compatible with international humanitarian law. Although it is important to say that I could have been a little clearer in the House on Monday, our position remains that Israel’s actions in Gaza are a clear risk of breaching international humanitarian law.

The consequences of the ceasefire’s breakdown are catastrophic. For the families and friends of the remaining 59 hostages, including Avinatan Or, the agony goes on. Hamas’s kidnapping of those people and treatment of them in captivity, the cruel theatre of their release, depriving them of food and basic rights—those are acts of despicable cruelty. Hamas must release them all now.

Palestinian civilians, who have already endured so much, now must fear a re-run and a return to days of death, deprivation and destruction. Civilians have once again been issued with evacuation orders by Israel. Only 4% of the United Nations flash appeal is funded—not even enough to get through to the end of this month. Health centres have had to close, even as the devastated Gazan health service has to treat another surge of those wounded in strikes.

Hamas can have no role in Gaza’s future, but a collapsed ceasefire will not bring the hostages home to their families, an endless conflict will not bring long-term security to Israel, and a deepening war will only set back the course of regional normalisation and risk further instability, shortly after the Houthis resumed their unacceptable threats to shipping in the Red sea.

Since the renewed outbreak of hostilities, I have spoken to Secretary Rubio, to EU High Representative Kallas and to UN emergency co-ordinator Tom Fletcher, and I will shortly speak to my Israeli counterpart Gideon Sa’ar and Palestinian Prime Minister Mustafa. We and our partners need to persuade the parties that this conflict cannot be resolved by military means. We want Israel and Hamas to re-engage with negotiations. We continue to condemn Hamas, of course, for their actions on 7 October, their refusal to release the hostages, and their ongoing threat to Israel, but we are also resolute in calling on Israel to abide by international law, lift the unacceptable restrictions on aid and demand the protection of civilians.

Many months ago, only weeks into office, I concluded that there was a clear risk of Israel breaching international humanitarian law in Gaza. It was that risk, which I first set out in the House back in September, that meant that the Government suspended relevant export licences for items for use by the Israel Defence Forces in military operations in Gaza. The actions of last week only reinforced that conclusion. In the days and weeks ahead, we will redouble our efforts to restore a ceasefire, but we will also continue to work with our partners on the security, governance and reconstruction arrangements. Those issues are not going away. There remains no military solution to this conflict. A two-state solution remains the only path to a just and lasting peace.

At this Dispatch Box in January I called the ceasefire deal

“a glimmer of light in the darkness”.—[Official Report, 16 January 2025; Vol. 760, c. 511.]

It feels like the darkness has returned. Former British hostage Emily Damari said that the resumption of fighting left her heartbroken, crushed and disappointed. I am sure that she speaks for the whole House. But we must preserve hope for the sake of the remaining hostages and their loved ones, for the people of Gaza, and for the future of two peoples who have suffered so much for so long. We will keep striving for a return to the path to peace. I commend the statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady, and let me make clear regarding the charity worker who was injured, that of course our ambassador and the Foreign Office are in touch with his family. As she would expect, we have made representations to the Israeli Government, and I will be speaking to the Israeli Foreign Minister in the coming hours.

The right hon. Lady talks about Hamas, and I have said at this Dispatch Box that the scenes of those young men in balaclavas with Kalashnikovs parading hostages are obscene, and I condemn them. I said in January that we would continue to stand with the hostage families, and we will. There are still dozens of families waiting, hoping, praying that their loved ones can return, but the right hon. Lady will also have seen overnight that many of those families are saying that this is not the way to bring them home. They fear that as a consequence of this resumed action, their loved ones will perish, and I thought that the tone of some of her remarks did not sit with what I see coming out of Israel at this time. No one could not be absolutely touched and affected by the gaunt and malnourished hostages paraded around in a sick propaganda exercise. We all condemn Hamas.

The right hon. Lady asks what we are doing. What we are doing, and what the previous Government did, is supporting the Palestinian Authority with reform. There has to be an alternative to Hamas, and that alternative is the Palestinian Authority. We must work with it; we have to give people hope and prospect that is not about terrorism, and that is about supporting Prime minister Mustafa in all his efforts. That is what we have been doing, and why we have been working particularly with the Arab Quint. She asked about how we are working with partners in the area, and there was to be a conference, a gathering, in Egypt this weekend. It has been postponed, but it will be important that we attend that gathering, and work with our Arab partners. I put on record our support for Egypt and Qatar in their conversations with Hamas. She knows that we do not talk to Hamas, but we do work with those partners who can.

The right hon. Lady asked about future operations in the Red sea, and she knows well that I would never comment from the Dispatch Box on operational issues in the Red sea. She asked me if there is any moral equivalence between Hamas and the Israeli Government. Of course there is no moral equivalence between Hamas and the Israeli Government, and none of us has ever suggested that that is the case. She asked, rightly, about the role of Iran. She is right about the malign affect of Iran in the region, and we will act to ensure that it does not get the nuclear capability that it is seeking to secure —I discussed that issue with Secretary of State Rubio and my counterparts in France and Germany.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his passionate and articulate plea for peace from the Dispatch Box. In doing so he speaks for us all, and I know that he has witnessed the suffering and feels it very deeply, as we all do. The renewed bombing in Gaza cannot be justified, the renewed siege of Gaza cannot be justified, and it is difficult to see how either of those things are compatible with international law. It will be for a court to decide, and there will be a reckoning.

The question, however, is what is going to happen now, because whatever it is that the British Government are doing in the region, it is clearly not working. What is plan B? Now that the Israeli Government have abandoned the fragile course of peace, what is plan B for the west bank, which still faces the threat of annexation? Following reports that the strikes may have American endorsement, what is plan B when it comes to uniting our international allies, to make sense of this senseless violation of the peace process? We must ensure that this is met not just with words, no matter how passionate or articulate. We have to do something internationally and with our allies. It is time to stop talking about it, and to do something.

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend, and I know that she was in the region recently, discussing these very same issues at the Knesset. I understand that the US envoy, Steve Witkoff, is flying into the region as we speak, and I hold out hope that we can once more get a ceasefire that gets us to the plan, which was to the end of the Passover period—I cannot give up hope on that. She says that we must have more than words, and she knows, as I do, that the business of diplomacy is words, conversations, and using our influence to bring this about. That is why we are working closely with the United States, with our Arab partners and, of course, with our E3 partners, in particular, and the European Union at this time, and I will do everything I can to get us back to that ceasefire.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Israel’s resumption of its military campaign in Gaza is heartbreaking for all Palestinians, for the remaining hostages and their families, and for the world. For two months, the fragile ceasefire provided space for the release of hostages and, until early March, the flooding of Gaza with vital aid to alleviate the suffering of Palestinians. The resumption of fighting now threatens the lives of Israeli hostages still held in captivity by Hamas, and of Palestinians, who have already seen their homes and communities devasted by 15 months of war. A new ceasefire must be secured as soon as possible. To that end, what discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with the Israeli Government on rapidly recommitting to a ceasefire?

Even before the resumption of military operations, the Israeli Government had cut aid routes into Gaza, as well as the supply of electricity. That was illegal and wrong, contravening Israel’s obligations under international law. In this House on Monday, and today, the Foreign Secretary stated that Israel’s aid blockade was a breach of international law. Will he outline what action he is taking to ensure that there are consequences to breaching international law? Hamas must now immediately and unconditionally release the remaining hostages, the treatment of whom while in captivity has been despicable. We are also deeply concerned by reports that a British bomb disposal expert has been injured in an explosion at a UN facility in the strip, and our thoughts are with their family. Will the Foreign Secretary update the House on his safety and condition?

Arab states have a vital role to play in supporting the transition back to a state of ceasefire. Their plans for the reconstruction of Gaza also provide a pragmatic proposal for rebuilding the strip, particularly when compared with the reckless proposals put forward by Trump, who described his intention to remove Palestinians from Gaza. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that he has engaged closely with Arab partners in the region around their plans for reconstruction? As conflict returns to Gaza, we must also give Palestinians hope, and show them that we support their right to statehood. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the UK must now move to officially recognise a state of Palestine, as a vital part of a two-state solution that offers dignity and security to Palestinians and Israelis?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady. I can assure her that, since the outbreak of renewed hostilities, I have spoken to Secretary of State Rubio and to EU High Representative Kaja Kallas, and we are closely co-ordinating. Just last Friday I met the emergency relief co-ordinator, Tom Fletcher, in New York, where we discussed the issues in Gaza. Of course, I expect to speak to my counterpart Gideon Sa’ar, and to Palestinian Prime Minister Mustafa shortly. We are working particularly closely with our E3 partners, and the hon. Lady will have seen that there was a closed meeting of the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, at which we made strong representations. She will also be aware that these issues were discussed, and she will have seen the communiqué that flowed from the G7 Foreign Ministers meeting last week in Canada.

As I have now said on 10 occasions since September, Israel’s actions in Gaza are at clear risk of breaching international humanitarian law. The Government have been clear all along that we are not an international court, and we could not make a judgment as to whether Israel has breached international humanitarian law, but I made a decision back in September, based on whether there was a clear risk, and for that reason we have suspended those sales to Gaza, and they will continue to be suspended.

On the British charity worker who has been wounded, we are of course in contact with his family and I intend to keep the House updated.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for all the work that he and his team are doing behind the scenes on this horrific issue. It is quite shocking that the shadow Foreign Secretary appears unable to say the word “Palestinian”. As someone who used to be an international aid worker and was in Gaza, let me say that the lives of Palestinian aid workers are every bit as valuable as the lives of international aid workers. More than 170 Palestinian children have been killed this week alone, and yesterday the Israeli Defence Minister threatened the ethnic cleansing of Gaza—[Interruption.]

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

Humanitarian aid should never be used as a political tool and Isreal must restart the aid immediately. A lot of diplomatic activity is going on at this time. As I said, Steve Witkoff, the US special envoy to the middle east, has flown into the area and we are in touch with the US. I am working closely with the E3 and the EU. In fact, I will be speaking very shortly to my French counterpart. We have not given up hope. I sense that there has been a loss of hope that we can get back to the ceasefire from hon. Members in the Chamber, but I tell them now: this Foreign Secretary has not given up hope that we can get back to the ceasefire. It is my job to try and do the best to deliver that, and that is what I intend to do in the coming hours.

[Priti Patel]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

I agree with everything the Foreign Secretary has said, in particular that we have to give hope to the Palestinian people. To be fair to the Israeli Government position, Hamas could solve the problem now by releasing the hostages. Having said that, does the Foreign Secretary agree that is quite wrong for any member of the Israeli Government to say that the Gazan people could rise up against Hamas? If they did that, they would be tortured, at best, and probably killed. The people of Gaza are victims of Hamas as much as anybody, and it is quite wrong for the Israeli Government to inflict collective judgment on the people of Gaza: that will bring death, destruction, more radicalism and we will never get the hostages home.

[Mr Lammy]

The Father of the House speaks with tremendous authority. As I have said, none of us stands with Hamas; we all want to see Hamas removed, but an alternative to Hamas has to be provided. It seems to me that the alternative is the Palestinian Authority and working alongside people to undermine Hamas. We also have to see the end of Hamas. There are ways to bring that about—we did it in Northern Ireland, with de-arming —but they are best done through diplomatic and political solutions, not military endeavour.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The double standards and injustice we are witnessing on the international stage are truly appalling. It is obvious that Isreal is breaking international law, as every serious legal expert on international law has pointed out. It is shameful, frankly, that the Government refuse to state that about Isreal but will rightly do so about Russia’s violation in Ukraine. I say to the Foreign Secretary that the concern and outrage that he expresses at the Dispatch Box is not ending the bloodshed. When will we get the scale of sanctions on Isreal that its war crimes demand?

[Mr Lammy]

The conflict has gone on for 526 painful days. I recognise the strength of feeling after more than 49,000 people have been killed in Gaza—a staggering number of people. My hon. Friend would not expect me to comment on any further sanctions from the Dispatch Box, but of course we keen those issues under close review.

[Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)]

It has been estimated that in the opening salvos of this appalling aggression, the Israelis killed 80 Palestinian children in the space of 51 minutes. There have been reports of children going through amputations without anaesthetics because of the blockade, and that leaflets were dropped across Gaza last night threatening extermination. Surely even for the Government, the Israelis have now crossed a monstrous red line. The Foreign Secretary talks about “equivalence”. I am assuming that he believes that the Palestinian civilians and their lives are equivalent to the lives of Israeli citizens, and are also equivalent to the lives of Ukrainian citizens. This morning, Ministers were on the airwaves offering British troops to keep the peace between Ukraine and Russia. What is it about the Palestinian people that means they are less deserving of that kind of protection?

[Mr Lammy]

A whole generation of Gazans are growing up in the most unbearable conditions, and I know that the right hon. Gentleman has been a champion for those children—children who we saw rummaging around in the rubble; children who are now orphaned; and the many thousands of children in Gaza who are out of school. It is absolutely right that he brings their plight to the attention of the House. But the way forward that we were shown back at the beginning of January was through a ceasefire, negotiations to get into phases 2 and 3 of that ceasefire, and a horizon for a two-state solution. That is what I will continue to fight for.

[Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I think we all share the Foreign Secretary’s shock, anger and frustration at the breakdown of the ceasefire and the deaths that we are seeing in Gaza. As today’s debate shows, words matter. I want to follow up on the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward), given that we are now hearing reports of ground activities in Gaza, led by Israeli forces. Israel Katz, the Defence Minister, claimed that the “evacuation” of Gaza would resume and he is threatening “total devastation”. Those are not the actions of a Government who want peace; they are the actions of an increasingly authoritarian Government who are more interested in their own political survival than in the survival of any innocent civilian, be they Palestinian or Israeli. This is not what the hostage families want to see, and we should speak for them as much as for the innocent civilians in Gaza and the Palestinians whose lives are being lost. For the avoidance of doubt, will the Foreign Secretary be clear that we do not agree with but condemn the words of Isreal Katz, as they are not going to bring forward the ceasefire or uphold international law if they are left unchallenged?

[Mr Lammy]

I do condemn those words and I would ask Minister Katz, who is very experienced, to withdraw them.

[Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) (LD)]

The language that we use in this conflict matters. We know what has happened and the Foreign Secretary has reminded us today: for weeks, supplies of basic goods and electricity have been blocked. To say that Isreal “risks” breaching international law for having done that is to say that this country does not see those acts as a prima facie breach of international law—that is how it will be heard in Tel Aviv. Is that really the Government’s position?

[Mr Lammy]

The Government’s position is based on the law that was set out in our export licensing regime, which the right hon. Gentleman supported in the last Parliament. The language of that legislation, if he looks at it closely, states that I, as a Minister and on behalf of the Government, have to make an assessment of clear risk. That is the language that I have used 10 times in this House since September. I stand by it, and so should he.

[Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for his absolute commitment to the end of the fighting in Gaza, the return of the hostages and, ultimately, a two-state solution. I am contacted by constituents of all backgrounds, and of all faiths and none; they stop me in the street. They see the mutilated bodies of babies and the consequences of the blockade on humanitarian aid, and they say to me, “What are this Government doing about it? What are you doing about it?” Will he say to my constituents now what action the British Government will take in response to Israel’s actions in Gaza and the west bank?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me make it clear that when my hon. Friend talks about the horrors in Gaza, she should reassure her constituents that the United Kingdom announced £129 million of funding for the occupied territories just in the last year, which included £41 million for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency; that we are very clear that humanitarian aid should not be used as a tool; and that UK support has meant that more than half a million people have received essential healthcare, 647,000 people have received food, and 284,000 people have improved access to water, sanitation and hygiene as a result of the British taxpayer.

In terms of what we are doing, I have been in this House for 25 years. My hon. Friend knows that this is about diplomacy. I wish that I could switch this off from this Dispatch Box. She knows full well that I cannot do that, but what I can do is engage in the issues in detail. It is a hard grind. I know that this is hard for many in this House, but that is how we bring about a ceasefire.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

The shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel), mentioned the all-party parliamentary group’s report on the atrocities committed on 7 October 2023, which was brilliantly researched by Lord Roberts and a whole series of different individuals. The document is almost 500 pages long and contains the evidence of what happened not only on that day, but subsequently. I commend it to the Foreign Secretary to read, because in future it will be the definitive history of what happened on 7 October. Will he therefore look at the fact that 59 hostages are still in captivity? It is understood that only 24 of them are alive—probably only barely alive—and 35 are dead. The reality is that there is an opportunity for the deal, as proposed by the United States, for a ceasefire to continue, for the release of the hostages and for Hamas to lay down their arms. That is still open to the terrorists in Hamas to take up. If they do so, we can then all unite across the House and call for the end of death and destruction.

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for mentioning those hostages. The question now is: how do we get those remaining hostages home, and is the action that we have seen in the last two to three days likely to bring them home or to see more of them perish? I want to stand with the many hostage families who say, “Can we give the talks a chance to succeed?”, because I think military action is unlikely to bring them home.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

We have all been absolutely horrified to see the devastating impact of Israel’s military airstrikes. The Foreign Secretary rightly said that this is an appalling and unacceptable loss of life and that our Labour Government oppose the resumption of hostilities. Does he agree that there is no military solution to this conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me state again: there is no military solution to this conflict. It is a conflict that has gone on for 17 months—had there been a military solution, it would have been found by now. The way forward is a political process and getting back to those ceasefire negotiations.

[Brendan O'Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

The inhumanity and depravity that we witnessed on Tuesday defies belief, but it shows that after 17 months, Israel understands fully what impunity is, because Netanyahu shattered that fragile ceasefire, killing 400 civilians sheltering in tents—mostly babies and toddlers—knowing that there would be absolutely no consequence for his action. Can the Foreign Secretary think of any other conflict at any other point in history when the UK would have accepted one of its closest allies and military partners designating babies and toddlers as legitimate military targets?

[Mr Lammy]

The whole House will have heard the hon. Gentleman’s language. I think the whole House also understands that this is one of the most complex of atrocities. There are atrocities on both sides of this conflict; I just remind him of the scenes of those murdered horrendously on 7 October. What we need now is more light and less heat.

[Matthew Patrick (Wirral West) (Lab)]

This ceasefire must be desperately salvaged for the 59 hostages—they and their families have lived through hell for 530 days now—and for the innocent people of Gaza, who need aid, safety and security and have themselves lived through hell in that time. I worry that Hamas state that they want to repeat the actions of 7 October. They are committed only to endless war. What can this Government do to ensure that they have no role in the future of Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

Reports have come in that Hamas have now started firing rockets into Israel and sirens are at this time sounding in Tel Aviv. I condemn Hamas’s rocket attacks. I want to reiterate that the only way through this is to get back to a ceasefire. It is unacceptable that Israeli civilians are running for cover and that Palestinian civilians are finding that the casualties are rising. There can be no place for Hamas in the future of Gaza, which is why we are doing everything to help the reform of the Palestinian Authority; we believe that they must play a role in Gaza’s governance in the months and years ahead.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

Despite a huge investment in our relationship with Israel over so many years, we appear to be reduced to the position of spectators on a touchline, shouting at the players and being largely ignored. To what extent does the Secretary of State believe that our lack of leverage—if any—is a consequence of policy decisions taken in Washington?

[Mr Lammy]

I think it is clear that the efforts of US envoy Steve Witkoff and President Trump brought us to a place where we had a ceasefire. Sometimes it can feel futile; diplomacy can feel very hard. The words of parliamentarians can feel like they have no effect, but everything that every single one of us as Members of Parliament did in those 17 months also led to that ceasefire in January. We wish that we could have brought it about sooner, and now we must act to get back to that ceasefire as quickly as possible.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

It is obvious that saying that we strongly oppose hostilities and that we are appalled by Israel’s action is having absolutely no effect on Netanyahu, who said of the death of 400 Palestinians—most of whom were women and children—that it was “only the beginning”. It is not right that the ordinary people of Palestine should suffer because of the actions of Hamas. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we now need to send a stronger message to Israel and go further, perhaps by suspending all arms licences to Israel and recognising the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

We are three days into a resumption of fighting. That is three days too long, and I have lamented the loss of life numerous times already in the Chamber, including in my statement. However, three days means that there is more diplomacy that we can deploy to get that ceasefire back, and that is what I intend to do over the coming hours and days.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. It is never easy to come to the Chamber and make a statement on an issue as complex as this one. We all watched with horror as Israeli prisoners were released—not released in a sombre, dignified way, but paraded about as an example of the control that Hamas had. As far as Hamas were concerned, those prisoners were not human beings; instead, they were trophies of abuse and hate. Those scenes were etched into the minds of people across the world. Will the Secretary of State confirm that, now as much as ever, Israel must show her strength and her friends, and show Hamas to be the murderous scum that they are? Will he reaffirm his pledge to support those who stand against the evil personified by the Hamas terrorists?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful for what the hon. Gentleman has said. Once again from this Dispatch Box, I condemn Hamas, condemn their activities, and condemn them for not releasing those hostages. That is the way out of this: release the hostages, let us get back to a political process and a ceasefire, and stop firing rockets into Israel.

[Nesil Caliskan (Barking) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary and his team for what I know are personal diplomatic efforts to play the UK Government’s part in making sure that we can return to a ceasefire. However, in the past few days, hundreds more women and children have been killed in Gaza. We have now had confirmation from the Foreign Secretary that a British national UN aid worker has been wounded, and aid continues to be blocked. For Palestinians, hope is moving far away. Will the Foreign Secretary further reiterate his commitment to the Government’s diplomatic efforts, and will he also give us a sense of what the UK Government are doing at this moment—in which there is such darkness for the Palestinian people when they think about what may be coming in the coming days—so that we can quickly return, not only to a ceasefire, but to longer-term hope for that region?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend asks what we are doing. I refer her to the communiqué that my G7 partners and I released, which contained a lengthy section on the situation in Gaza, discussing it with seven of our closest partners. I then flew to New York to meet Tom Fletcher to discuss the situation on the ground. I met our colleague in the European Union, Kaja Kallas, just this week to discuss these very issues, and I know that she intends to be in the region to discuss those issues face to face with Israeli counterparts. My hon. Friend will have seen the work of our UN ambassador, Barbara Woodward; there was a closed session at the UN, during which these very same issues were of course discussed with intensity. I want to reassure my hon. Friend that all efforts are being made, and of course we are supporting the reform of the Palestinian Authority. That is why I will be speaking to Prime Minister Mustafa a little later today.

[Martin Vickers (Brigg and Immingham) (Con)]

It is a tragic fact that wherever they occur, military conflicts result in the death of innocent civilians, among them many children—we witness this day in, day out on our TV screens. Israel has an absolute right to take action to recover the hostages, but I agree with the Foreign Secretary that the continuing bombardment of Gaza will not achieve that of itself. Does he agree that one thing it does achieve is to risk radicalising the younger generation to become the Hamas supporters of the future?

[Mr Lammy]

That is a huge concern, because we want to provide hope for those people, and we want to provide an alternative to Hamas. I repeat that there have been 17 months of bombardment, and if that was going to work, it would have worked. It has not worked, and going back to that means—as night follows day—that at the end of any military exercise, Hamas will still be there and we will still come back to a political process. Let us continue with the political process and the ceasefire talks now; let us extend phase 1 to the end of the Ramadan-Passover season, and let us work hard to get to phase 2.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

As the Foreign Secretary mentioned, the ceasefire provided a glimmer of hope for the innocent civilians fleeing the constant bombardment and bloodshed, and for the innocent hostages waiting desperately to be reunited with their families. For Israel to breach that ceasefire is indefensible—the targeting of civilians and civilian infrastructure should not be justified under any circumstances. I thank the Foreign Secretary for the work he is doing and the personal efforts he is leading behind the scenes, including on the recent statement by the UK, German and French Foreign Ministers. As he knows, leadership requires honesty with our friends and telling things how they are. Will he commit to the UK showing leadership in providing international clarity to end this cycle of violence, and clarity on the really serious issue of international law breaches?

[Mr Lammy]

I commend my hon. Friend for bringing her moral clarity to the Chamber this afternoon. Of course I can confirm that we will continue to do all we can, and we stand by the judgments that we made back in September when we assessed that there was a clear risk of a breach of humanitarian law.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza—blocking the entry of humanitarian aid, cutting electricity that is essential for drinking water, the forced displacement of civilians, and now indiscriminate bombing that is killing and maiming many, many children. Those are not just clear risks of a breach of humanitarian law; they are clear breaches, and it is just not enough to say that we do not like it. I want to ask the Secretary of State a very specific question: has he explicitly asked the Israeli Government whether any UK-made arms or arms components were used in the mass air strikes in recent days that broke the ceasefire and have caused untold suffering to civilians?

[Mr Lammy]

In making our assessment of a clear risk of a breach of humanitarian law, we suspended arms sales to Israel, and I stand by that decision.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

Of the 170 children killed in Israel’s deadly day of bombing in Gaza on Tuesday, three of them were brothers. They were sons of Karam Tafeek Hameid: Hassan, who was nine, Mohammad, who was eight, and Aziz, who was just five. Their father told the BBC:

“They used to play around, have fun…They wanted to be doctors, teachers.”

I am also the father of three sons, and it disgusts me that Israel’s actions seem to treat Palestinian children’s lives as somehow more expendable or less precious than those of Israeli children. Is it not time that we had a diplomatic coalition of the willing—maybe starting with the E3 countries of the UK, France and Germany—to call out Israel’s appalling crimes in Gaza, not just through words but through actions?

[Mr Lammy]

As the father of an adopted child, I feel personally the plight of the many, many children in Gaza who have been orphaned, and who are subject to exploitation as a result of the fact that they now have no parents. It breaks my heart that more horrors could have been deployed against those who are now injured or bereft—who have lost their parents—so I understand the strength of my hon. Friend’s feeling. That is why I am doing all I can, particularly with E3 partners, to try to halt this behaviour.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

Have the Government received any indication or formed any view about what the current Israeli Government would do if—admittedly against all expectation—Hamas were to release all the hostages forthwith?

[Mr Lammy]

That is a very good question, and it is certainly a matter I have discussed with the United States envoy, Steve Witkoff. Indeed, I have discussed it with the Israeli Government. The right hon. Gentleman will know that there is a lot of politics in Israel, and it is my sincere hope that these judgments are not being guided by political calculation when they cut to the core of human life. I say to those in Israel: listen to the hostages’ families and listen to the way out of this. Let us get back to a ceasefire, because I am quite sure that at the end of any military exercise, the risk is that fewer hostages will be alive. Either way, the Israeli Government will have to get back to negotiation, because military endeavour will not see the end of Hamas.

[Naushabah Khan (Gillingham and Rainham) (Lab)]

I think we have all been shocked and horrified to see the escalation in Gaza over the past few days. I thank the Foreign Secretary for his words today. What work is he doing with the international community and directly with the Israeli Government to lift the blockade on aid and ensure that it can get to the Palestinian people, particularly given the escalations we have seen in recent days?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right. We have to lift the blockade on aid in particular, and that is why we have increased our funding at this time. We will be working closely with partners in the region to get that aid in. Let me also take this opportunity to say that I remember meeting the families of three British workers killed in the World Central Kitchen attack: John Chapman, James Kirby and James Henderson. It is nearly a year since that attack, and their families want and deserve justice. There are many other families and many Palestinians who have lost loved ones, with more than 350 aid workers killed in this conflict. We cannot see the continued killing of aid workers in any conflict, and we condemn it in this House.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

I begin with a quote:

“Annihilate, smash, eradicate, erase, crush, shatter, burn, be cruel, punish, ruin, crush. Annihilate!”

That is the genocidal voice of the Israeli Government as posted on X only last night by Itamar Ben-Gvir as he was reappointed as a Cabinet Minister. The Foreign Secretary recognised this week that Israel is in breach of international law. What further evidence does the Prime Minister need to recognise that, and for the UK Government to end their complicity in these crimes by stopping support for the Israeli Government committing atrocities against the Palestinian people?

[Mr Lammy]

If those are the words that were used last night, and I have not seen them all, then I condemn them categorically from this Dispatch Box.

[Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his update. What we are seeing is clearly appalling. The signals coming from Defence Minister Katz are absolutely clear: the Israeli Government seek the total destruction of Gaza and they see the occupation of west bank as their objective. The leverage over Netanyahu’s Government is from Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, so my question is simple. Other than once again reviewing all the arms licences, and perhaps withdrawing them, and putting in place sanctions against Israel, what leverage do the UK Government have over Israel in this circumstance?

[Mr Lammy]

I cannot comment on future sanctions designations, but I refer my hon. Friend to the sanctions I announced back in October raising concerns in particular about settlements and settler violence, particularly in the west bank. I condemn the expansion. We have seen more expansion this year than in any other year. I want to reassure him that we keep sanctions closely under review.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

Millions around the world saw in real time last night the destruction of life, the loss of children’s lives, more destruction and the Israeli attempt to annex northern Gaza, if not the whole of Gaza. That is clearly what the whole agenda is about. Israel continues to commit war crimes through the denial of food, water and electricity to the people of Gaza. Will the British Government confirm that they are in breach of international law? Secondly, will we cease all military co-operation with Israel, including arms supplies and the use of RAF Akrotiri as a staging point for the delivery of weapons?

[Mr Lammy]

I condemn any attempts to annex Gaza or the west bank. I know that the right hon. Gentleman has raised this issue in the past. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on operational military matters, but I have been absolutely clear about our assessment. Under the legislation that he and I supported when it was put through this House under the last Government, the assessment is about there being “a clear risk” of a breach of international humanitarian law. I remind the House gently, as a lawyer, that that assessment of a clear risk is a low standard, but on the assessments that I have seen and continue to see, that is my assessment. I therefore think the right hon. Gentleman should be comforted that we are not assisting in what we are seeing in Gaza.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

May I correct my right hon. Friend when he uses the words “both sides”, since neither the Israeli Government nor Hamas represent the interests of the Palestinian people? We need to recognise that they do not have the voice necessary to bring them the protection that they need. However, I want to raise the definition of genocide. Many times, my right hon. Friend has rightly said from the Dispatch Box that it is for the courts to determine whether or not a genocide has been committed. Can he say what efforts he has made to ask the courts to make such a ruling?

[Mr Lammy]

As my hon. Friend probably knows, I meet from time to time with those who lead our international humanitarian law architecture, including the International Criminal Court in particular and the International Court of Justice. These are constitutional matters for them, and we must stand by the separation of powers, and therefore it is right that they get on and do their proper work. We as politicians make our judgments, but we are not courts. We cannot pronounce that from this Dispatch Box—certainly not on behalf of a Government. In a free democracy, Back Benchers are of course free to say whatever they feel in this House, and that is proper, but speaking on behalf of a Government, it must be right that courts make these determinations.

[Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin) (PC)]

The latest scenes coming out of Gaza are truly horrifying. UNICEF says that the reported killing earlier this week of more than 130 children would be the largest single-day child death toll in the past year. As a mam and a mamgu—and just as a human being, actually—I find that truly abhorrent. Is the Minister comfortable with the possibility of UK arms being used by Israel against children and, if not, will he end, not postpone, all arms sales immediately?

[Mr Lammy]

I refer the hon. Lady to what I have already said, to my statement back in September and to my reassurance that we are absolutely not in the business at the moment of selling arms that could be used in Gaza under our licensing decisions—save, of course, for the decision we made on F-35s. That is because, in looking at the supply chain and recognising risks and conflicts in other parts of the world, including in the Euro-Atlantic, we had to make some serious judgments.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Failing to act in the face of Israel breaking the ceasefire in such a violent manner has consequences: it undercuts moderate voices in Israel, damages the UK’s reputation internationally, and compromises our support for international law and the rule of law. Will the Foreign Secretary look again at Government policy on recognition, sanctions, trade and arms supply while the atrocities continue against Palestinian civilians?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the issue of recognition, which I know is dear to him and others in this House. It is a serious issue. He knows that recognition, in and of itself, does not deliver a two-state solution. He knows that we want a two-state solution and the recognition of a Palestinian state, but that is best done as part of a process that actually gets us to two states. He will recognise that the decision by other partners to move to recognition has not alleviated the suffering before our eyes, which is why there must be a careful balance. I recognise that different Governments and Members will come to different judgments, but I am holding out for two states—including an actual state for the Palestinian people, which is a just cause—and not just for a symbolic act.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Along with a billion Muslims around the world, I began my fast on Tuesday morning, having taken some food and water, with the screams of 400 innocent men, women and children ringing in my ears, as they were burned alive in their makeshift tents. I object to the resumption of the conflict and the cessation of the peace deal. The Israelis have continued to kill hundreds of people, including freezing babies, and to proceed with the Gazafication of the west bank through the removal of 40,000 people.

The Minister will be aware of the peace deal that was available in May 2024. According to President Biden, the hostages are not a priority for the Israelis—a sentiment that was echoed just the other day by the Hostages and Missing Families Forum, which accused Mr Netanyahu of “complete deception”, and said that

“the Israeli Government has chosen to abandon the hostages.”

The fact is that the Foreign Secretary is aware of all this, as we continue to provide Israel with military support and the use of our air base in Cyprus, and to give it moral, economic and political support. I hope that he takes my sincere question as it is meant. He has spoken passionately about his heritage and his ancestors, who were shackled in the chains of slavery. To unshackle his own chains, will he immediately cease all arms licences? Despite the £6.1 billion-worth of economic ties between Israel and the UK, will he impose economic sanctions, and put in place a viable process for recognising the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman brings powerful rhetoric to the House this afternoon. Notwithstanding the horrors of the conflict that has begun, we are three days into it. In the end, it is the ceasefire that will alleviate the suffering. It is my job to use all endeavours to get back to that ceasefire. That is my job, and that is what I intend to do.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

In recent weeks, I have heard my constituents express their relief, but also their fear that this exact moment would come. I thank the Foreign Secretary for all the work that he has been doing to secure a lasting peace, and I am glad to hear him speak of the need to send a clear message to Israel that the resumption of airstrikes is unacceptable, but I worry that this message will be heard only if it is conveyed through both words and actions. Can he reassure my constituents that he is looking at what further actions may be needed, including on sanctions, to get back on the path to peace?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her remarks. I cannot comment from the Dispatch Box on further actions or sanctions; I just pray in aid what I have already said about diplomatic efforts. I hope we can see the resumption of a ceasefire as soon as possible. All power to US envoy Steve Witkoff in the coming days, as he seeks to use US influence to bring that to pass.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for having made time to meet me, so that I could share some of the concerns outlined by many people in Newcastle-under-Lyme. Nobody has a monopoly on decency and compassion; some Members of this House ought to keep that in mind.

The scenes from Gaza on our TV screens have been beyond horrifying. The breaking of the ceasefire has seen more innocent people killed. Without question, we need all hostages to be released, and we need this war to end now. What specific discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with his counterparts in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the rest about the noble aim of saving the lives of innocent people, and delivering the long overdue two-state solution that we desperately need?

[Mr Lammy]

I met many partners at the G20 a few weeks ago, and as my hon. Friend will know, I have also spoken to many partners, particularly from the Arab Quint, on the phone. I suspect that I will be in the region in the coming weeks as a consequence of what we are now seeing.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

This destruction and killing during the holy month of Ramadan is horrific and inhumane. Yesterday, with colleagues from this House, I met Palestinian students studying in the UK. One did not know if her family members were alive. Another could not attend because she had just heard that her father had been killed the night before. We must ensure that the international community works together to outline the consequences of the attacks for the Israeli Government. Can the Secretary of State confirm that the UK Government will abide by any International Court of Justice rulings regarding breaches of international humanitarian law in the region?

[Mr Lammy]

I reassure my hon. Friend that, yes, we will.

[Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)]

Over 400 people have been killed, the majority of whom were children. Aid supplies have been blocked and aid workers killed, and the rhetoric from Israeli Ministers is getting worse. All this has happened under a ceasefire. I know these matters are complex, but at what point do we change our posture towards the Israeli Government?

[Mr Lammy]

When we are talking about Israel, we should remember that we stand alongside the Israeli people at this time, and we think of the many hostages who are underground and in desperate conditions in Gaza. Israel is a democracy, which is why we see people taking to the streets and making their voices heard. We see a heated debate in Israel as the best way forward.

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

Yesterday, the International Development Committee returned from Geneva following our inquiry into international humanitarian law. The message was very clear: the IHL framework is robust, but we are failing on adherence and compliance. Under IHL, aid workers should be protected. I welcome what the Foreign Secretary has said so far, but the death toll continues to rise in Gaza, and most of the aid workers are locals. Can the Foreign Secretary expand on what we will do to protect aid workers, including through the ministerial group for the protection of humanitarian personnel? We met representatives of that group yesterday.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this issue. We continue to work with UN colleagues to ensure that aid workers are protected, just as we continue to work with our EU colleagues on that. We condemn the tremendous loss of life in the worst conflict for aid workers, and we continue to call for justice, particularly for those killed in the World Central Kitchen, and for a proper investigatory process in Israel that sees accountability for such acts.

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for today’s statement, and for all the work that he and his team have been doing over so many months to try to find a resolution. The actions of Hamas are both brutal and unacceptable, but for a democratically elected Government to bombard innocent civilians, and to deprive them of food, water and medical supplies, is totally reprehensible. The Foreign Secretary is quite right to say that words are the language of diplomacy, but sometimes symbols matter too. Given the fear that Israel’s ground invasion is an attempt to separate the north from the south, leading to annexation, is it not time to recognise the state of Palestine and show that we stand with the people of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend, and I recognise the strength of feeling in the House about wanting to see, alongside Israel, a home for the Palestinian people that is safe and secure. However, as I have said to her before, we keep this issue under review, and we work with close allies such as France on these issues. My own judgment is that the moment will be right when there is a process that actually leads to two states. I had hoped that, as a result of the ceasefire back in January and our getting to phases 2 and 3, we were getting close to that process, and I will do everything I can to get us back to that place in the coming days.

[Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)]

Like many, I was horrified to see the resumption of airstrikes in Gaza and the loss of so many innocent lives this week. Civilians in Gaza and the remaining Israeli hostages, who were abducted in the appalling Hamas terror attacks of 7 October, desperately need a ceasefire back in place, and the hostages must be released. Will the Foreign Secretary join me in condemning comments from the Israeli Defence Minister, who threatened the total destruction of Gaza? Will he also be clear that the terrorists of Hamas can have no role in the future of Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes, I will.

[Kirsteen Sullivan (Bathgate and Linlithgow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement, and for his relentless efforts to bring all parties back to the negotiating table. I think we have all been horrified by the scenes we have seen on TV, the resumption of the violence that has seen the loss of hundreds of innocent lives, and the blockade of lifesaving aid. We must never forget the hostages, who are waiting to come home, and their families, who are waiting for them, as well as the horrors they have experienced. Given the emails of concern that I have received from my constituents, I must say that people are now asking: what next? They are doing so because, despite all these efforts, we have reached a point of utter desperation and hopelessness. Can he give assurances that arms licences will continue to be under regular review, and that sanctions will be actively considered? I hope that both those measures will bring people back to the peace table.

[Mr Lammy]

Arms licences are of course continually reviewed, and as my hon. Friend would expect, we always keep sanctions under review.

[Sarah Smith (Hyndburn) (Lab)]

In recent days, nearly 1,000 Palestinians have been killed or injured, and once again, many more are being displaced. The humanitarian situation is getting worse in Gaza, as Israel refuses to let through the aid trucks. The crossings have been closed for 18 continuous days, which is surely a breach of international law. More than 1 million people have been left without food parcels, and one in five pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers are malnourished. We need a return to the ceasefire and the return of the hostages, but the actions of the last week demand that the UK Government take further action. Israel continues to breach the terms of the ceasefire. We should not do a trade deal with Israel while the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians is a real possibility. I urge the Foreign Secretary to consider sanctions against some of the key Israeli actors. What further actions will he take in the light of these recent escalations?

[Mr Lammy]

I have dealt at the Dispatch Box with much of what my hon. Friend raises, but let me say that although the UK has differences with the Israeli Government, we do not have differences with the Israeli people. The Secretary of State for Business and Trade has taken the decision to restart negotiations on a free trade arrangement with Israel. There have not been any ministerial meetings, but it is important that we do not act against the people of Israel, many of whom are taking to the streets at this very time.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

Bombing civilians and preventing access to basic humanitarian supplies as a tactic of war is a war crime. I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, and for his tireless diplomacy. A call for a full, transparent investigation is welcome, as is a call to return to a ceasefire. However, given our strong opposition to the return of hostilities, and the bombing by the Israelis, we must now go beyond persuasion. Their actions are incompatible with international law. Is it not time to make a direct response beyond persuasion? What stronger options do the Government have, which would assist diplomacy? I know he cannot speak about specifics, but can he confirm that these options are being considered, so that we can send a clear message now, and help stop the bloodshed?

[Mr Lammy]

As one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, we of course have an arsenal of diplomatic tools, which we deploy as appropriate and keep under review. I want to reassure my hon. Friend that we are doing everything we can to get back to that ceasefire.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Many of my constituents have been in touch in recent days to express their horror and their devastation at the loss of life in Gaza after Israel resumed the bombing. The Foreign Secretary is absolutely right to say that diplomacy is the only way to end the bloodshed, but can I push him on the resumption of humanitarian aid? It is unacceptable that we have a continued blockade. What levers do we have to get Israel to end the blockade on aid, and what is the likelihood of aid going in in the coming days?

[Mr Lammy]

I know my hon. Friend’s constituency well, and I can imagine that her constituents are reacting with real horror to what they are seeing at this time.

There was a lot of comment about humanitarian aid —the inability to get aid in and the barriers to getting aid in—that I heard from some colleagues in Israel, but when we got that ceasefire, the number of trucks crossing exceeded expectations and the aid suddenly got in. It has now been, I think, 16 or 17 days since the aid stopped, and there will be tremendous suffering as a result. Aid should never be used as a tool in any conflict, and that is why we want to see the resumption of aid. We now know how many trucks can get in, so let us get back to those numbers.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

I would like to commend my right hon. Friend for all the hard work he has been doing to secure a ceasefire in Gaza, and indeed for maintaining accountability to this House, as he has done today, in so much detail. It is devastating that Israel has resumed the indiscriminate bombing of Palestinian civilians. While the ceasefire held, there were comments from those on the Treasury Bench about the possibility of a trade deal between the UK and Israel. Does the Foreign Secretary agree—surely he does—that a trade deal between the UK and Israel must be completely out of the question now that the ceasefire is over?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has made her views known. There have not been any ministerial meetings on any such trade deal. I always want to keep in mind the Israeli people—such a deal is not, as it were, for the Government; it would be done on behalf of the people of Israel—but Ministers will have heard, and the whole House will have heard, her remarks this afternoon.

G7

David Lammy Excerpts

Monday 17th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With permission, I shall make a statement about last week’s meeting of G7 Foreign Ministers. We met at a pivotal moment. Some Members of this House may have doubted that we could find common ground, and some of our global competitors may have hoped that we would fail, but after 36 hours of talks, we were united. Britain united with our allies to make our citizens more secure. National security is a foundation of this Government’s plan for change, and we are leading from the front.

The overriding priority was, of course, Ukraine. Last week in Jeddah, the United States and Ukraine reached a common position. A ceasefire offer is now on the table, and American weapons and intelligence are flowing once again. This demonstrated what this House has always known to be true: under President Zelensky’s leadership, Ukraine is serious about peace, sincere in its efforts to pursue a just and lasting end to this appalling war, and unrelenting in its determination to ensure that Ukraine remains democratic, free, strong and prosperous.

At the G7, the UK and our allies were united in our unwavering support for Ukraine’s defence of its freedoms; united in support for Ukraine’s pursuit for peace; and united on what is required to make that happen. Now it is Putin who stands in the spotlight, Putin who must answer, and Putin who must choose. Are you serious, Mr Putin, about peace? Will you stop the fighting, or will you drag your feet and play games, and pay lip service to a ceasefire while still pummelling Ukraine? My warning to Mr Putin is this: if you are serious, prove it, with a full and unconditional ceasefire now.

On whether Putin will deliver, I must tell the House that I see no sign yet that he will. The G7 meeting helped us ready the tools to get Russia to negotiate seriously. We are not waiting for the Kremlin. If it rejects a ceasefire, we have more cards that we can play. We can all see the impact that the G7’s unprecedented sanctions have had on Russia’s faltering economy—social spending is down, and inflation and interest rates are sky high. There can be no let-up in our efforts. In Canada, we discussed where we can go further to target Russia’s energy and defence sectors, further squeeze its oil revenues and use frozen Russian assets.

At the same time, we will keep up our support to Ukraine; Europeans clearly need to shoulder our share of this responsibility. We in the UK are stepping up on drones, munitions and training, sending more than 400 different capabilities to Ukraine and training more than 50,000 recruits. We have also announced the biggest increase in UK defence spending since the end of the cold war. We are urging our allies to do the same so that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position now and in any peace that follows. Tomorrow, I will be hosting EU High Representative Kallas—the first such visit since we left the European Union. In this moment, Ukraine’s friends should be working hand in glove, and that requires a new era in UK-EU security co-operation.

Finally, we are taking steps to ensure that Russia does not come back for more. We know the history—Budapest, Minsk and paper promises betrayed by Putin. Together with France, we are establishing a coalition willing to deter Russia from invading again. To be credible, it will need US support, but Britain and our allies recognise that we need to step up, and this Government are leading the effort on multiple fronts. In the past week, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister convened the biggest gathering yet of those willing to play their part in ensuring Ukraine’s future security. That followed my visit to Canada and the trip of the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rawmarsh and Conisbrough (John Healey), to Paris. This week, military planners from allies will gather for further discussions in the UK, which will be co-chaired with France.

Ukraine was our top priority, but our unity extended beyond Ukraine. The G7 united in support for the fragile ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages and unhindered humanitarian aid into Gaza. Let me be clear to this House about what I said to the G7: Hamas must release the hostages. For Israel to be secure, these terrorists can have no role in Gaza’s future, but the complete blocking of aid in Gaza is appalling and unacceptable. Humanitarian aid should never be used as a political tool, and we urge the Israeli Government to change course. The G7 also discussed the Arab reconstruction plan for Gaza—an important signal on which we should build.

The G7 also united behind an inclusive political transition in Syria. Stability in Syria bolsters UK security at home and abroad. We condemned the recent violence in Syria’s coastal regions and called for those responsible to be held accountable, and we were united in increasing the pressure on Iran. Tehran is producing highly enriched uranium at a rate that makes a mockery of the limits set in the joint comprehensive plan of action. Iran can never be allowed to develop or acquire a nuclear weapon. President Trump has written to the Supreme Leader, and this weekend the United States has responded strongly to the Houthi resumption of unacceptable attacks on international shipping. Iran must now change course, de-escalate and choose diplomacy.

The G7 also kept the spotlight on the conflicts in Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. We denounced the atrocities in Sudan. The warring parties must protect civilians, cease hostilities and ensure unhindered humanitarian access. There was strong support for the conference that I will host on Sudan next month, which is an important opportunity to get a political process moving. We also condemned the Rwanda-backed offensive in the eastern DRC, which is a flagrant breach of the DRC’s territorial integrity. The M23 and Rwanda Defence Force must withdraw. All parties should support African-led mediation processes.

The G7 also reiterated our call for the restoration of Venezuelan democracy and reaffirmed our strong support for Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. As the G7 met, Armenia and Azerbaijan concluded negotiations on an historic peace agreement. We warmly welcome that achievement and encourage both sides to move to signature as soon as possible.

It was a pleasure to be back in Canada. It is a proud, sovereign nation, in which I have family who I have visited since childhood, and with which we share a long history and a royal family. Its new leader, Prime Minister Carney, is in London today, and I am sure that the whole House will congratulate him on his appointment. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear.”] My fellow G7 Ministers and I received a warm welcome to Quebec, home of my good friend Minister Mélanie Joly. We united behind a new Canadian-led initiative on maritime security, an example of Canada’s strong leadership. With growing threats from the Red sea to the South China sea—trade routes on which growth and all our economies rely—a strong collective response from the G7 matters to us all.

Fifty years ago, a small group of western leaders met just outside Paris—the origins of the G7. They did not agree on everything; they were from different political sides, with three from the left and three from the right. It was a time of upheaval, with war in the middle east, an oil crisis, a recession, and the Bretton Woods system falling away. Many, then as now, were pessimistic about the ability of democracies to navigate the turbulence, but that generation rose to the challenge. With the G7, they tried something different—its format allowed leaders to be honest with each other, and so find common ground. Today, we must rise to these new challenges. In that same spirit of honesty and common purpose, Britain and our partners are stronger when we stand together. We are standing together right now.

I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement.

In the light of the vast global challenges that we are all witnessing, there is much ground to cover in this statement. First, we continue to support Ukraine in this fight, and to support the freedoms and values it is defending —democracy, liberty, and the rule of law. It is very welcome that US military aid and intelligence sharing has resumed, and it is vital that the US and Ukraine continue to work together in the face of this appalling conflict. What discussions did the Foreign Secretary hold with US counterparts about the impact of the suspension of intelligence and military support, and what is his assessment of its consequences?

While we await further details of the proposed 30-day ceasefire, Russia’s response shows exactly why the Euro-Atlantic community must be resolute in the face of Putin’s aggression, and that Putin will seek to pursue long-held strategic objectives that he has not achieved on the battlefield through hypothetical negotiations. That means that we must be robust: Britain must apply maximum pressure on the Kremlin, boost defence production, and maintain our support for Ukraine’s battlefield efforts. We must also use our convening role to work with allies who have other types of equipment that could plug capability gaps and to broker extra support packages.

In the G7 Foreign Ministers’ statement, there is a commitment to use

“extraordinary revenues stemming from immobilized Russian Sovereign Assets”.

Can the Foreign Secretary confirm whether this means that the UK will go further than the £2.26 billion loan already announced off the back of the profits from sanctioned assets, and can he give an update on when proceeds from the sale of Chelsea football club will be in the hands of those most in need?

Over the weekend, we heard the Prime Minister say that his planning for his potential peacekeeping initiative is now moving into an “operational phase”. Is the Foreign Secretary able to explain what this means in practice, especially for our armed forces? What planning is under way? What will our contribution to peacekeeping consist of? Over what timeframe would deployment be launched, and how will our armed forces be supported? Which allies in this coalition of the willing have expressed interest, what will they offer, and what discussions are under way with the US on deterrence and security guarantees to ensure that an invasion like this can never happen again?

Turning to the middle east, we are absolutely united on the position that the Iran-backed terrorists Hamas can have no role in Gaza’s future, but what have the Government done to pursue an end to that brutal regime, and what discussions has the Foreign Secretary held with middle eastern counterparts on their proposed plan for the future of Gaza? Now is the time for maximum pressure on Hamas from the international community. They must release every single hostage. Is the UK directly involved in discussions to drive action in a positive direction?

On Syria, was there discussion about the ongoing status of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham as a proscribed terrorist group? Following the Government’s lifting of 24 sanctions on entities linked to the deposed Assad regime, does the recent violence change the Government’s assessment of the merits of lifting these kinds of sanctions?

We understand from the BBC that the UK did not directly participate in the US airstrikes on Houthi targets at the weekend, but that our armed forces provided routine refuelling support to the US. Can the Foreign Secretary share with the House what the precise nature of the UK support was, particularly given that the UK conducted multiple joint airstrikes with the US last year against Houthi militant targets to degrade their ability to threaten freedom of navigation? Can he explain why on this occasion it was decided that we would not deploy our own strike capabilities? Does he assess that there has been an increase in threats to freedom of navigation in the Red sea and to British vessels and personnel? If so, what is the Government’s overall approach to this threat and to the Houthis? Are hard power options still on the table, as they were last year? Will the Government ramp up sanctions and pressure on the Houthis and importantly on Iran, the malign force in the region that continues to back them? What steps are the Government taking to interdict weapons flowing from Iran to the Houthis? What discussions has the Foreign Secretary had with his American counterparts on the US approach to Iran more broadly, and where does the UK fit into that?

The G7 statement also made reference to the range of challenges posed by China. Our key partners are alert to the threat China poses, but this Government seem oblivious to it. As China threatens global security and our national interests and puts bounties on the heads of Hongkongers living here, we have seen the Energy Secretary following the kowtowing of the Chancellor and the Foreign Secretary to the Chinese Communist party, and the Foreign Secretary and the Home Secretary, who are responsible for national security, are now the cheerleaders for the Chinese super-embassy planning application. Will the Foreign Secretary disclose in full all contacts and communications between his Department, Downing Street, the Chinese authority and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government about this matter? Does he recognise the anxiety that this planning application is causing to the groups threatened by China? Will he accept that the threats and risks mean that China must join Iran on the enhanced tiers of the foreign influence registration scheme?

Finally, was the Chagos surrender deal discussed with the Foreign Secretary’s US counterparts? Will he commit to present a draft treaty to the House before it is signed? How can he justify handing over billions of pounds of British taxpayers’ money to Mauritius, instead of defending our sovereignty?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful in particular for the cross-party nature of what the Secretary of State for the Opposition said—I am sorry, Mr Speaker; I am a little jetlagged. I got off a plane at 6 am, and I hope the House will forgive me. I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for the manner of her remarks, particularly on Ukraine. There were a number of questions, which I will seek to deal with.

The right hon. Lady is right that Zelensky has made it absolutely clear that he is committed to peace. She asked me about the US decision on a pause in military aid and intelligence aid. I am pleased to say that our assessment is that that pause, as she will know, was for a short period, not an extended period. It therefore has not had a material effect, but we were pleased to see that aid resume. We were pleased to see what flowed from Jeddah: the United States, European allies and President Zelensky and Ukraine absolutely square with the need for that ceasefire. It is for Putin to accept unconditionally that ceasefire: the ball is in his court. I was pleased to be able to discuss these matters with Secretary Rubio over the course of the three days at the G7, and with Vice-President Vance yesterday morning at his residence in Washington.

The right hon. Lady rightly asks about Russian assets. Let me make it clear that Russia must pay for the damage it is causing Ukraine. I am delighted that the first £752 million of the UK’s £2.26 billion loan—to be repaid by the profits generated on Russian sanctioned assets— has been paid, but she knows that there is rightfully a discussion about moving from freezing to seizing. If we were to move in that direction, it would be important for there to be unanimity among the G7, and a way forward within the European Union for the most exposed countries. As the right hon. Lady would expect, we are discussing those very issues apace.

The right hon. Lady asked about UK troops on the ground. At stake is not only the future of Ukraine, but the collective security of our continent and, therefore, Britain’s direct national interest. That is why the Prime Minister has said that Europe needs to step up, and the UK is, of course, prepared to consider committing British troops on the ground; but there must be a US backstop. There will be a further meeting in London this week to continue to get into the operational detail.

The Prime Minister and I are pleased, alongside the Defence Secretary, that the coalition of the willing is growing. It is right that we consider carefully what would be required on the ground, but the right hon. Lady will know, too, that the exercise of monitoring what is put in place is very important. No doubt she, like me, will have seen the operation that was run by the OSCE. I saw it in January 2022, just before the fighting began in the February. That would not be adequate this time round, so, rightly and properly, we must get into the granular detail of what would be required—as the European family, of course, but also involving nations such as Canada. I received a commitment from Minister Mélanie Joly that Canada was willing to step up to be part of that coalition, but there will be others in that coalition of the willing, and we will look at these issues in detail over the coming days.

The right hon. Lady mentioned the situation in Gaza and the middle east. Let me make it absolutely clear that we were all united in saying that there could be no role for Hamas. We welcome the work that has been done by the Arab Quint as a direction of travel. The United Kingdom wants to continue to work with the Quint on strengthening that proposal, particularly on the security guarantees that the Israelis would rightfully need—their assurance that 7 October can never, ever happen again.

The right hon. Lady raised the situation in Syria. The awful clashes during the weekend of 8 and 9 March led to the deaths of more than 1,000 people. We condemned the violence at the time, and the Minister for the Middle East, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), updated the House on 10 March. It is critical for the interim Administration in Syria to respect and protect all Syria’s minorities, which is why it was heartening to see the agreement last week between the interim Administration and the Syrian Democratic Forces, particularly in north-east Syria. This was obviously a topic of much discussion.

The right hon. Lady rightly mentioned the strikes by the US. Since 19 November 2023, the Houthis have targeted international commercial shipping in the Red sea and the gulf of Aden and attacked British and American warships. That cannot go unchecked. It is totally unacceptable, and it must be dealt with. We do not, of course, comment on other nations’ military operations, but I can confirm that, while we did not take part in the strikes over the weekend, we are in close touch with our US friends on the need to act in respect of the Houthis and what they are doing in the Red sea.

The right hon. Lady talked about the Government’s approach to China. I can assure her that there will not be seven different approaches to China from this Government, which is what we experienced under the last Government, who were ping-ponging about over the course of those 14 years. As for the calamity of a United Kingdom Prime Minister having a beer with the leader of the Chinese Communist party, I can give her a guarantee that that will not happen under this Government. Quite properly, as the right hon. Lady knows, I and the Home Secretary made representations to the planning process about the security issues that must be kept in mind as the proper procedures are followed for China’s application. She also knows that we, too, have concerns about our embassy in China and its proper operation.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

I am so pleased to see the Foreign Secretary continuing to lead our allies in support of Ukraine, and equally pleased to see that he has expressed his support for moving from freezing to seizing Russian assets—we have £18 billion-worth of them held in the UK. However, if we are serious about doing that, we need to start getting on with it. What moves is his Department making—for example, putting legislation on the books to allow us to seize those assets when the right time comes? I am glad to hear that there are discussions on that, but has pressure been put on our G7 and EU allies, who still sit on the remaining £300 billion-worth of assets, which perhaps need to be seized at this stage? Has he considered putting forward a UN General Assembly resolution to provide the legal basis for co-ordinated asset seizures?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for her question and, of course, for her leadership of the Foreign Affairs Committee. I reassure her that we continue to work closely with our allies on this issue, including through the lengthy discussions that we had at the G7, but let me emphasise that it is important in this particular area that any way forward involves a pooling of that exercise. I do not believe that it would be right for the UK to act unilaterally in this instance; therefore, this is a multilateral endeavour and discussion. She is right to emphasise that we should work at pace, and I reassure her that we are doing so.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Like him, I will focus on Ukraine.

Last week, President Zelensky announced his willingness to accept an immediate ceasefire. In response, Vladimir Putin intensified his attacks on Ukraine. This gives the lie to Putin’s cheap talk about agreeing with the idea of a ceasefire. His goals remain the same: to destroy Ukraine’s sovereignty and turn it into a satellite state of Russia.

The only way to achieve a just and lasting peace is by strengthening Ukraine in the face of Putin’s brutality, so I was slightly alarmed to hear the Foreign Secretary say that we can seize Russian assets only if we progress by unanimity. If the US refuses to seize Russian assets, will the Foreign Secretary take a lead with European partners so that the support can flow? Can he also say what is stopping him unlocking the £2.5 billion generated from the sale of Chelsea football club, which is held here in the UK and should have already been used to provide humanitarian aid to Ukraine?

The Foreign Secretary referred to the work that Ministers have been doing to build a coalition of the willing to support any final peace agreement in Ukraine, which my party strongly supports, but can he be more specific? What levels of support have other countries committed, and what progress has he made in securing a backstop security guarantee from the United States?

The Liberal Democrats have warned repeatedly that Donald Trump’s actions are emboldening Putin. Last month, Trump said that Russia should rejoin the G7 if a peace settlement is agreed. That would be unjust and wrong. Did the Foreign Secretary make it clear to his G7 counterparts that the UK would oppose Russia rejoining the G7?

Given that Donald Trump is not a reliable ally, the Liberal Democrats have argued that the UK must lead in Europe to reduce the continent’s reliance on the United States. We support the creation of a pan-European rearmament bank so that Europe’s defences can be rapidly rebuilt, yet last week we saw proposals from the European Commission for EU structures that could leave the UK out. Will the Foreign Secretary use his meeting with High Representative Kallas tomorrow to make sure that the UK plays a full part in European efforts, to the benefit of our security and our defence industry?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for continuing the cross-party unity. He is usually pretty on top of the details, but I just say to him that it is not the United States that has raised consistent concerns about sovereign assets. It is not the United States in this instance that is more exposed than others; it is actually in Europe. Belgian colleagues have found themselves more exposed, and German colleagues have previously been resistant on this issue, but there is of course a change of Administration coming in Germany, so we will see what their assessment is.

On those funds from Abramovich, which of course we want to use, I just say—and I should have said this to the right hon. Member for Witham (Priti Patel)—that we inherited this matter from the last Government. In two and a half years, no progress was made. I am frustrated with that lack of progress, and I am doing everything I can to reach a resolution. If we do not, I will have to consider all the tools available to Government. However, what I want at this stage is to be able to act quickly, given that the hon. Gentleman knows, I know and we all know that Ukraine needs those funds now. Therefore, working with other colleagues and Mr Abramovich’s lawyers, we urge action now.

I say to the hon. Gentleman that there was no discussion of Russia joining the G7—no discussion whatsoever. The G7 is a family of democratic nations committed to the rule of law. Russia under Putin has put itself way outside that club and that necessary partnership. I see no basis at the moment on which Russia could enter the G7, and indeed there would be other candidates way ahead of Russia were that to be the case.

I am delighted that the Lib Dems have a proposal for a rearmament bank, but I would just say to them that Ursula von der Leyen got there before them.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)]

I welcome my right hon. Friend’s strong statement that blockading all aid into Gaza, including UK aid, is “appalling and unacceptable”. What discussions did he have with G7 colleagues about what can be done about this provocative action during Ramadan, and what consequences are there for what people are saying is a breach of international law?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right: this is a breach of international law. Israel, quite rightly, must defend its own security, but we find the lack of aid—and it has now been 15 days since aid got into Gaza—unacceptable, hugely alarming and very worrying. We urge Israel to get back to the number of trucks we were seeing going in—way beyond 600—so that Palestinians can get the necessary humanitarian support they need at this time.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and all his hard work in travelling all around the world trying to make us all safer. He mentioned the OSCE, and while the previous model in Ukraine may not be fit for the future, I hope he recognises the important role that the OSCE will play in future elections in Ukraine, perhaps with a new model alongside a security force.

May I bring the Foreign Secretary’s attention to the joint statement from Canada? It highlights that

“Iran is the principal source of regional instability”,

and some would argue of global instability and insecurity. In his statement today, he said:

“Tehran is producing highly enriched uranium at a rate that makes a mockery of the limits set in the joint comprehensive plan of action.”

If Israel, with or without US support, takes direct action to make the world a safer place and to stop Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, will the UK Government support that action?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for raising the issue of Iran’s desire to have nuclear capability. We stand in the way of that. Working with the Germans and the French, we are determined to use all diplomatic efforts to bring about a conclusion to that desire. I of course discussed that with Secretary of State Rubio, alongside my French and German counterparts, at the G7. But we also discussed maximum pressure, and we discussed that nothing is off the table as we discuss these issues with Iran. We are running out of time to reach a resolution to this issue.

[Blair McDougall (East Renfrewshire) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s uncompromising message to Vladimir Putin. I wonder whether he would add to that a clear message that there can be no peace while tens of thousands of Ukrainian children, who have been stolen from their parents and scattered across Russia, are not returned? Does he share my concern at reports that Yale University’s humanitarian research lab has been defunded by Elon Musk while it was tracking hundreds of those abducted children? Will he work with international allies to ensure that that data is not lost and that it contributes to getting those children back to their anguished families?

[Mr Lammy]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on his question about the horrors of what the Russian regime has done to those children. He will be pleased to know, as will the whole House, that we have, through our official development assistance budget, supported efforts to retrieve and work alongside those children. I was so pleased to spend time, alongside Madam Zelensky, with some of those children on my last visit to Ukraine, but also on a previous visit. We keep the issue absolutely in our sights. It cannot be a negotiating tool in any future discussions with Mr Putin.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs rightly set out, very well and in detail, the broad range of challenges that were discussed at the G7. One area he touched on was the threat of the Houthis, who of course are being supported by al-Shabaab in Somalia. The Republic of Somaliland is the only democratic country in the area that is valiantly trying to fight the terrorist threats. Will he commit to his Department working with the Government of the Republic of Somaliland to deal with the threats it faces, and which we also face?

[Mr Lammy]

I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that that, too, was raised in discussions with G7 colleagues. He is absolutely right: al-Shabaab is a deep concern, and the terrorism that emanates from its activities is something that we closely monitor and work on with partners. Yes, of course I can give him that assurance.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

Happy St Patrick’s day to you, Madam Deputy Speaker. And happy birthday to my dad, who is no doubt watching—he likes to keep an eye on me. [Interruption.] A lot of time in front of the TV.

The Secretary of State will know that there are a number of Sudanese British people in Newcastle-under-Lyme, as I have raised some of their cases with him. They remain devastated by what they see on television and in the media about what their family members are going through, so I thank him and his team for the support they have given me and my constituents so far. In advance of the conference to which he has just referred, may I urge him to engage with the African Union, the Commonwealth and the Arab League to ensure that the political process to which he referred in his statement is fit for purpose?

[Mr Lammy]

I wish my hon. Friend’s father all good wishes on his birthday, and I thank my hon. Friend for the way he has continued to raise in the Chamber these issues of conflict in Africa. He will be pleased to know that I met the African Union at the G20 a few weeks ago. We will work with it for the conference on 15 April. We expect it to attend alongside other African nations. It is hugely important that we make some breakthrough, not just on the humanitarian side but on the political side, to bring this conflict to an end.

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

The Foreign Secretary is clearly a busy man, so I understand why we have not seen him since the Prime Minister announced a 40% cut to the overseas development budget on 25 February. Can I ask him now, then, whether the consequences of slashing overseas aid were discussed at the G7, and how he explained to our partners that withdrawing lifesaving aid to the poorest people on the planet, thereby making them even more dependent on Russia and China, would, in the long run, make us all safer and more secure?

[Mr Lammy]

May I just say to the hon. Gentleman that he is, occasionally, wrong? [Laughter.] Very occasionally. The Prime Minister made a statement about defence spending, which was applauded right across the European families, and certainly in the United States. It was essential. He came back the following week and made another statement on leading efforts within Europe, and I was sitting right next to him. I will just say to the hon. Gentleman that he needs to get his eyes tested.

On development aid, which is an important issue, we have not made an ideological decision. We do not want cliff edges. It is important that the hon. Gentleman knows that foreign policy, diplomatic efforts, development efforts and, of course, hard power are part of a family of tools. He should never forget that war in Ukraine has cost the African continent $7 billion. That is why it is right that we develop our defences and continue to spend aid in Ukraine.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

My constituency neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for East Renfrewshire (Blair McDougall), must have been reading my notes earlier. I will raise the same issue again, though, because I do not believe we can say enough about the 19,546 children stolen from Ukraine. The humanitarian research lab at Yale University, which has just had its funding cut by the United States, was not only trying to reunite those children with their families, but documenting some of the war crimes taking place. Will my right hon. Friend say a little more about how we will ensure that that work is not lost, and will he also say what we are doing to support the families reunited with children who will be so severely traumatised?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for her question. I want to reassure her that the UK continues to track Russia’s deportation of Ukrainian children, which is a clear violation of international law. I met Madam Zelensky in Kyiv back in February on this issue. The UK was very pleased to see another group of children returned via Qatari mediation in September 2024. We consistently raise awareness of child deportations in our comms and across multilateral forums such as the OSCE. Of course, we are ensuring that in any changes that we make to development spend, our commitments to humanitarian efforts are made to Ukraine. This is an area where my hon. Friend could expect to see the UK continue to fund support.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

It is good to hear that the G7 believes that Iran should not be allowed to build a nuclear bomb, which is a statement of the obvious. It is also good to hear that President Trump has sent a strongly worded letter to the Supreme Leader. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the JCPOA was dead in the water the minute that President Trump pulled out in 2018? He talks of what we might do now, and says that nothing is off the table—would the Foreign Secretary confirm that that includes military action?

[Mr Lammy]

I must let Mr Trump speak for himself when he says that nothing is off the table in dealing with Iran. I am pleased that, in working alongside the Americans, they recognise the important role that we, the French and the Germans play. And that maximum pressure is essential. We have made it clear to the Iranians that that snapback and the sanctions that would follow, squeezing the Iranian economy at a time when everyone accepts that Iran is weak, is not what they want. They need to get serious about their nuclear ambitions. We will work on all tracks. The right hon. Gentleman will have read, as I have, that military endeavour is an option—one that our Israeli colleagues remind us about on a pretty regular basis.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

I draw the House’s attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and thank him for the leadership that he has shown over the past few weeks, in particular on Ukraine. He mentioned his discussions with his Canadian counterpart; following the G7 meeting that he attended, can he share what further progress he has made in building the much needed coalition of the willing in order to guarantee Ukraine’s security?

[Mr Lammy]

A number of nations are stepping up and coming forward alongside the United Kingdom and France, and Canada is one of them. I do not want to give a running commentary because there are further meetings this week. My hon. Friend will understand that, when talking about committing troops, different countries have different requirements for going to their own Parliaments and speaking to their own nations about these matters. It is right that I leave them to do that and do not make announcements from the Dispatch Box.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

On 25 February, the Foreign Secretary told me in this Chamber that he was minded to

“move from freezing assets to seizing assets.”—[Official Report, 25 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 626.]

I note that he has used that phrase again this afternoon. Given the increasingly mercurial nature of our American allies’ support of Ukraine, what progress has been made? What is the Foreign Secretary’s best estimate of when our Ukrainian friends will be able to benefit from those frozen assets?

[Mr Lammy]

I understand why the hon. Lady raises her question. As I said to the Liberal Democrat spokesman, the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller), this is not an issue where the US is a blocker. There are nations within Europe that are more exposed than others. As I said to the Chair of the Select Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), it is best that we act multilaterally. That is the issue, but we are working at pace.

[Fred Thomas (Plymouth Moor View) (Lab)]

It was a big weekend for the Foreign Secretary in Canada representing our country, and a big weekend for the Royal Navy in Plymouth. The Foreign Secretary alluded to increased co-operation with our EU NATO allies in defence activity. In Plymouth this weekend the deputy French ambassador was down to unveil Ariadne—a new capability that the French and British Navies now hold. It is an unmanned, uncrewed, completely autonomous end-to-end, 12-metre-long underwater mine countermeasure vessel—a remarkable feat of technology. Will he join me in celebrating this feat of co-operation?

[Mr Lammy]

First, I thank my hon. Friend for his service. He will be pleased that maritime security was such a big discussion point at the G7, and I thank Canada for that. We are a great maritime nation working with our colleagues, and I assure him that there will be more on this issue in the strategic defence review, which is to follow.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. It seems to me that Putin views the failure to seize the frozen assets as a sign of western weakness. If there are some reluctant countries, given that the Prime Minister is rightly leading a coalition of the willing, would he and the Government lead a coalition of the willing nations who will seize those frozen assets?

[Mr Lammy]

As right across Europe we see a cost of living crisis, it is right and proper that we pool our efforts, and that respective Treasury Departments and Finance Ministers are satisfied that seizing those assets would not have a detrimental effect on the global economy. Those necessary discussions are being held. The hon. Gentleman knows my emphasis, but I assure him that Europe is more united on these issues than Reform is currently.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. Last week, I hosted a Westminster Hall debate on the international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace. Was the Foreign Secretary able to raise that matter at the G7 Foreign Ministers’ meeting? Might he commit to a further meeting with MPs to discuss the UK’s commitment to that fund?

[Mr Lammy]

We were able to discuss Gaza and to link that to a broader discussion on development spend and our commitment to Gaza. My hon Friend will know that the United Kingdom supports the Palestinian Authority and the necessary reforms that they need to make. I assure him that I, or indeed the Minister for the Middle East, will meet and discuss these issues further.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

The Foreign Secretary described the blocking of aid to Gaza in his statement as “appalling” and “unacceptable”. Why does he not also confirm that it is illegal and in breach of international law, as is the continued bombardment of Gaza and the bombardment of the west bank? When will the British Government finally say to Israel, “We will no longer supply weapons to you and we will no longer continue security co-operation while you continue to illegally occupy territory and commit war crimes in both Gaza and the west bank”?

[Mr Lammy]

I did say in my contribution that Israel is in breach of international humanitarian law. Of course, we have spoken to the Israelis about those concerns. Indeed, the right hon. Gentleman will recall the decision that I made back in September to suspend arms sales, which was largely because of that breach.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

Earlier today in Parliament, I chaired an event to remember the victims of the appalling chemical weapons attack at Halabja on 16 March 1988 carried out by the vicious Saddam Hussein regime. They thank the UK for our help and friendship over the years. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that and current crises show the need for a strong UK? What I mean by that is: strong armed forces; strong diplomacy through our superb diplomats; soft power with the World Service and the British Council; and our alliances in Africa, in the Gulf and in Europe. Those are vital to preserve and protect the international rules-based system that we all rely on.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend put his remarks incredibly well. May I associate myself with his remarks about that appalling atrocity? I make it crystal clear that it is hugely important that the United Kingdom, as a P-5 member, continues to support our armed services and hard power, but our soft power, our diplomatic efforts and our development spend—we will still be the sixth biggest development spender in the world—are hugely important.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

Last spring, the UK joined the United States in conducting five combined joint naval and airstrikes against the Houthis. This weekend, the US conducted airstrikes without participation from the RAF except routine refuelling support. Why the change? What does that signal about British foreign policy? Does the Foreign Secretary consider that getting US involvement in a backstop in Ukraine is more challenging when the US has to operate alone against the Houthis?

[Mr Lammy]

The United Kingdom was involved to the extent of supporting US efforts on refuelling. I do not think that it would be right for me to comment on the detail of any military exercise, but I reassure the hon. Member that we continue to work closely with our friends in the United States. As he would expect, I was briefed on these issues alongside the Prime Minister and others.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and his strong words, which are much appreciated. I welcome the reaffirmation of support for Ukraine contained in the statement as well as the continuation of support for a peaceful resolution in Israel and Gaza. However, peace cannot come at the price of appeasement of Russia or of the Hamas terrorist murderers that they are. How will the Secretary of State ensure that peace will have at its foundation respect rather than threat? What more can be done in the interim to ensure that children on both sides of the Israel-Gaza border and in Ukraine can have food, medicine, clothing and an education while these complex things are sorted out?

[Mr Lammy]

I am sure the whole House is hugely grateful for the humanity that the hon. Gentleman has shown once again on the issue of children on both sides of this conflict. It is horrendous, when one looks at the scenes of those hostages coming out, that among those hooded young men with Kalashnikovs there are children. That cannot be right or proper, but at the same time, it cannot be right to starve children of the humanitarian aid and medical supplies that they need while we seek to deal with the problems of Hamas and getting those hostages out. I always hold up the prospect of a two-state solution as a way through this most complex and difficult challenge. I am grateful for the way in which the hon. Gentleman has made his remarks in the House today.

Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Programme) (No. 2)

Ordered,

That the Order of 8 January 2025 (Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill: Programme) be varied as follows:

(1) Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Order shall be omitted.

(2) Proceedings on Consideration and Third Reading shall be taken in two days in accordance with the following provisions of this Order.

(3) Proceedings on Consideration—

(a) shall be taken on each of those days in the order shown in the first column of the following Table, and

(b) shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion at the times specified in the second column of the Table.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

1. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of President Trump’s proposal to move Palestinians from Gaza to neighbouring Arab states.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

We do not support forced displacement of Palestinians or any reduction in the territory of the Gaza strip. Palestinians must be able to live and prosper in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. That is why it is essential that we work together to ensure that all aspects of the ceasefire are implemented and that it becomes permanent.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan]

It is very sad that the past month has marked a new and horrifying phase in the long history of attempts to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian people from their homeland. President Trump’s recent comments calling for Palestinians to be expelled from their homes in Gaza, in order for the US to take over the land, along with his failure to rule out Israeli annexation of the west bank, constitute the most explicit denial of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination by any US Administration to date. Will the Foreign Secretary therefore condemn President Trump’s remarks and set out what action the UK Government are taking to prevent further forced displacement of the Palestinian people?

[Mr Lammy]

This House has watched with horror the loss of life in the Gaza strip particularly and the plight of the hostages held in bunkers under Gaza. The US played a pivotal role, and all credit should go to President Trump for brokering that negotiated ceasefire agreement. I am thankful for the role that the Israeli Government, Qatar and Egypt played in getting to that ceasefire. It is our belief, and this is a cross-party belief, that there should be a negotiated two-state solution: a sovereign Palestinian state, which includes, of course, the west bank and Gaza, alongside a safe and secure Israel.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

I have just been out in the middle east with the Conservative Friends of Israel—I put that on the record before I ask my question.

Given Emily Damari’s personal testimony to the Prime Minister that she was held at United Nations Relief and Works Agency facilities in Gaza during the conflict, and that her captors refused her access to medical treatment, does the Foreign Secretary stand by the Government’s decision to restart sending UK taxpayers’ money to UNRWA when Hamas terrorists were holding British hostages at its facilities, and when it has been crystal clear for months that UNRWA had many members of Hamas in its ranks, including people involved in the 7 October terrorist attacks, who have held hostages ever since?

[Mr Lammy]

I think we were all pleased to see Emily Damari emerge; of course, we have been in touch with the Damari family. As the right hon. Gentleman would expect, we have also been in touch with UNRWA —the Minister for Development raised this issue with Mr Lazzarini directly—which has instigated an investigation.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

The Israeli forces are now using the same tactics in the west bank as they used in Gaza: the forced displacement of communities and the use of heavy weapons against civilians. What is the Government’s response, both to Israel and to the UN? Is it not time that we responded to the advisory opinion?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend raises a serious issue. As I have said repeatedly from the Dispatch Box, I condemn the expansion and the violence that we have seen over the last period, and I reject the calls for the annexation of the west bank. I met Tom Fletcher of the UN recently to discuss these very same issues, and renewed our commitment to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs—that humanitarian work is important. Of course, at this time I have been in touch with the Israelis and with Prime Minister Mustafa as we discuss these issues together.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Back on 17 October 2023, when the first hospital in Palestine was bombed, the al-Ahli Arab hospital, much conversation was had about who could have committed such a heinous crime. Since then, the Israeli army has destroyed all medical facilities in Gaza, and now we have a President of the United States using gangster-style intimidation to forcibly remove Palestinian people from their land. Will the Foreign Secretary—who has repeatedly refused to call out the Israeli Government for the war crimes they are committing, refused to ban all arms sales, refused to acknowledge that a genocide is happening and refused even to consider economic sanctions, because £6.1 billion is too high a price to pay—accept the reality of the situation and accept that Trump and Netanyahu’s plan proposes ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people in Gaza?

[Mr Speaker]

We are well under time, but I just need to get other Members in.

[Mr Lammy]

We are in the first phase of a ceasefire that we want to hold and go to phase 2. That is the issue I was discussing with Arab leaders last week at the Munich security conference. The Quint group are working with President Trump to get to that third phase and the governance issues that will be so important, with the Palestinian Authority involved in Gaza.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

My thoughts continue to be with the hostages held in Gaza and the appalling suffering they and their families are facing. The world has seen the brutality inflicted by the Iranian-sponsored terrorists, Hamas, who are a major obstacle to bringing about a sustainable and just peace in the middle east. The Foreign Secretary has previously agreed that there cannot be any future whatsoever for Hamas controlling Gaza. Can he provide an update on the actions he has undertaken to put an end to Hamas control and ensure we get to the third phase of the ceasefire? Will he discuss this issue when he goes to America with the Prime Minister to meet the President of the United States?

[Mr Lammy]

I can confirm that I discussed this issue with Ron Dermer from the Israeli Government last week. I discussed this issue with Arab leaders—the so-called Quint—the week before. In the end, we cannot have a Gaza run by Hamas. All roads lead back to Hamas. I think the world has looked with horror at the scenes of armed men wearing bandanas, seeming to glorify murder and hostages who have been held. Of course, we will act with international colleagues to make sure that Hamas have no role to play in the future of Gaza.

[Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)]

2. What progress his Department has made on tackling HIV and AIDS globally.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lloyd Hatton (South Dorset) (Lab)]

3. What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of steps taken by the British Virgin Islands to tackle illicit finance.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

The overseas territories, including the British Virgin Islands, work to uphold international standards on tax transparency and illicit finance and enforce UK sanctions. The overseas territories agreed to implement corporate registers that are accessible at least to those with legitimate interest by June 2025. We are aware of BVI’s public consultation on its register and are working with it to improve its proposal.

[Lloyd Hatton]

The BVI will soon close the consultation on its proposal to grant only limited access to a register of beneficial ownership. That proposal means that it will be virtually impossible for even a select few to trace those using the BVI as a place to secretly stash their cash, and this comes some five years after the first deadline to set up a register was missed. I know that the Secretary of State agrees that sunlight is the best disinfectant when it comes to combating illicit finance, so what steps is he taking to ensure that the BVI establishes a genuine and fully transparent register of beneficial ownership?

[Mr Lammy]

The BVI committed at the Joint Ministerial Council to improving access to its corporate register by June. I met BVI representatives just after that time at the end of last year, and my hon. Friend the Minister of State will meet the BVI again in the coming weeks. It is important that that public consultation on the proposed register will close this Friday, and we are working with the BVI to improve its proposal.

[Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)]

The Foreign Secretary will be aware that under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, the British Virgin Islands is obliged to introduce open registers of beneficial ownership by the end of 2020, or be subject to an Order in Council. It has not done so, it is in contempt of Parliament, so when will the Foreign Secretary issue the Order in Council?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that if the agreed requirements are not met we will carefully consider what further steps to take. Our expectation remains clear: those registers will ultimately be public, and my hon. Friend the Minister of State will meet the BVI to make clear our expectations.

--- Later in debate ---

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

11. What steps he is taking with his international counterparts to help de-escalate the conflict in Sudan.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

Ending the conflict in Sudan is a personal priority for me. I recently visited the Adré border with the Chadian Foreign Minister to increase international attention on Sudan, and to meet Sudanese civilians who are bearing the brunt of this crisis. I am happy to announce that I will convene Foreign Ministers in London in April, around the second anniversary of the outbreak of the civil war in Sudan, to foster international consensus on a path to ending the conflict.

[Rachael Maskell]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for all that he is doing. As in so many conflicts, the discourse about this brutal Sudanese war is being fuelled by external actors with economic and mineral interests in Sudan, and with interests in wider geopolitical agitation, such as Russia; Egypt, with its support for the Sudanese Armed Forces; and the UAE, with its support for the Rapid Support Forces. There is also the wider user of mercenaries. What further steps can the Foreign Secretary take to use our leverage, not least our trading leverage, to ensure that actors are not fuelling this horrendous war and humanitarian crisis?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend will be pleased to hear that I raised these issues in my contribution at the G20. I had a lengthy discussion with Amina Mohammed of the United Nations, with the Foreign Minister of Angola, and with President Ramaphosa on the situation in Sudan. I am looking forward to convening this conference in London, and working with the French and the African Union. We continue to emphasise, with all international partners, the importance of refraining from actions that prolong the conflict.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

The Foreign Secretary indicated that he would engage in further discussions, along with the African Union. Given that there are about 9 million displaced people in one of the most significant, if not the most significant, humanitarian catastrophes that the world faces today, will he impress on the African Union and partners the need for urgent action to try to resolve this situation?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman is right to ask that question. I went to the Adré crossing not just to spend time with the overwhelming number of women and children who are fleeing the conflict, but to announce £20 million in additional support for refugees and, in particular, for access to reproductive and sexual health services on that border. The situation is grim; it is horrific, and has been given too little attention, and I intend to ensure that we do all we can to bring it to an end.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

12. What steps he is taking to help tackle the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

As I set out in the House yesterday, securing a lasting peace that safeguards Ukraine’s sovereignty for the long term is essential. To achieve this, Europe and the United States must provide the support Ukraine needs to stay strong, and Ukraine must be at the heart of any talks. The UK is playing a leading role on assistance to Ukraine, on pressure on Russia and on keeping our allies united.

[Alison Bennett]

Will the Government bring forward emergency legislation to seize frozen Russian assets and ensure they are repurposed to support Ukraine in the wake of Trump’s talks with Putin? If not, can the Foreign Secretary explain why?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Lady raises an important issue. It is not something on which any Government can act alone; we must act with European allies. It was a topic of conversation at the G7 and at the Weimar group. Of course, Europe has to act quickly, and I believe we should move from freezing assets to seizing assets.

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

T2. The Gaza ceasefire deal remains fragile and, as we enter the final week of its first phase, it is crucial that both the Israeli and Palestinian Governments continue to uphold the agreement and reunite families with dignity. Will the Minister assure me that this Government will continue to support the ceasefire deal into its remaining stages and work with international partners such as Jordan and Egypt to secure a lasting peace?

--- Later in debate ---

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

This House stands united with the people of Ukraine. In the light of Putin’s brutality towards the people of Ukraine, what discussions will the Foreign Secretary be having with allies, including his American counterpart, on the international effort to prosecute Russia for the invasion of Ukraine and the sheer barbarism it has inflicted on the people of Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for raising the issue of justice and accountability. As she knows, this work was begun under the previous Government, when we led the world in ensuring there were sufficient funds in Ukraine. The Foreign Office supports lawyers working in Ukraine to gather evidence; I will never forget the scenes that I saw in Bucha and the victims I stood with. The UK will not let up on justice. When it comes to accountability, Putin should pay—not the British and European people.

[Priti Patel]

Russia, Iran and China all pose threats to Britain, and they go out of their way to do us harm. Can the Foreign Secretary explain why the Government have yet to implement the foreign influence registration scheme, which the previous Government legislated for, and can he confirm when it will come in and whether China will be on the enhanced tier?

[Mr Lammy]

Again, the right hon. Lady raises an important issue. We inherited a process that was not quite working; she knows of the issues. We will come forward shortly with our plans for the foreign influence registration scheme.

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

T3.   The International Court of Justice delivered its advisory opinion last July, in which it made crystal clear that the illegal settlements at that time were just that—unlawful. Yet we have seen threats to displace Gazans and tanks on the west bank. When will the Government deliver their response to the advisory opinion? Will it be before the conference in Switzerland in a few weeks?

--- Later in debate ---

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

T6. President Trump and Elon Musk slashing US aid was a great day for Russia and China. Will the Foreign Secretary avoid giving them another great day by committing to protect the UK’s development budget, even as we raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP? As he knows, preventing wars is cheaper than fighting them.

[Mr Lammy]

I am proud of the work that the UK has done over many decades in relation to development: the work that I have seen in Ukraine, in Gaza and in Sudan. All of that work will, of course, continue.

[Fred Thomas (Plymouth Moor View) (Lab)]

T5. The security of Europe is absolutely paramount. What new steps is the Secretary of State taking to deter Russia from further invading European borders given that we are now in a new situation of ongoing negotiations?

[Mr Lammy]

I was very pleased yesterday to announce one of this country’s biggest ever sanctions packages, which will bear down further on Russia’s shadow fleet. I remind my hon. Friend that interest rates are running at 21% in Russia and inflation is running at 9%. We are doing a lot to take off the table money that Putin uses to fund his war machine.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

In January, a Minister in the Foreign Office said that they would challenge the Northern Ireland Executive to be more robust in their reporting of international affairs and meetings. At the start of this month, the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister met again with the Chinese consul, but still no details of that meeting or previous meetings have been reported or shared. Has that challenge been made, and what was the response?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

As I am sure those on the Treasury Bench know, soft power and diplomacy are most effective when they are backed up by hard power. When will the Government commit to spending 3% of GDP on defence, to make sure that we have a real voice at the international table to encourage European countries to increase their defence spending?

[Mr Lammy]

Why did the right hon. Gentleman not decide to do that? The Conservatives left it to this Government to get back to 2.5%, which we last had under a Labour Government. The right hon. Gentleman should have done it, and we are going to do it.

[Sadik Al-Hassan (North Somerset) (Lab)]

I look forward to seeing relations between the UK and Iraq blossom in the years to come under this Labour Government. Will the Minister share the recent conversations that he has had with Iraqi counterparts on reducing barriers to trade, such as diverging trade regimes?

Ukraine

David Lammy Excerpts

Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on Ukraine.

In January 2022, I visited the Wall of Remembrance of the Fallen in Kyiv with my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary. Seeing the faces of all those who had lost their lives since 2014 brought home the human cost of Kremlin imperialism—and of the Ukrainian determination to stand up to it. Indeed, some weeks later, just as British and American intelligence services had warned, we awoke to news of Putin’s full-scale invasion, launched to shatter the sovereign state of Ukraine.

Today, we mark three years of Ukrainian courage in resisting that brutal, illegal and unprovoked invasion. I have witnessed their fortitude at first hand in three visits to Kyiv over the past year—their defiant blitz spirit as Russian missiles and drones rain down night after night after night. On this grim anniversary, amid all the talk about talks, we must not forget that Russia’s barbaric war goes on, that the Ukrainian people are suffering, and that, beyond Europe, the conflict is piling pressure on the world’s poorest, too.

This debate takes place against the backdrop of intense diplomatic efforts, responding of course to President Trump’s call to bring this war to a swift end. At the G20 in South Africa last week, I listened to Sergey Lavrov. Once again, he shamelessly played the victim, rehashing the same old lies. I will say to the House what I said in response: if Russia is serious about a lasting peace that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty, Ukraine’s independence and the United Nations charter; guarantees Ukraine’s security against future aggression; and rejects imperialism, then Britain will listen. No one wants that more than Ukraine.

At the Munich security conference, I underlined that Ukraine must be at the heart of any talks about Ukraine’s future, and I said that the west must learn from our history. Vladimir Putin and his war are no historical aberration. He draws on a tsarist tradition—the imperialism and authoritarianism of Peter the Great or Nicholas I—and a Soviet tradition: he is, after all, a KGB agent who operates by deception. It was an American diplomat, George Kennan, whose “long telegram” in 1946 warned of a deep continuity in Kremlin thinking. He argued that the Kremlin would respond only to strength. That was the basis for the policy of containment, as part of which Britain contributed tens of thousands of troops to the British Army of the Rhine. It was that strength, not paper promises, that deterred Moscow from further advances west.

Today, let us look at the Kremlin’s recent record. The Helsinki Final Act of 1975—betrayed. The Budapest memorandum of 1994—betrayed. The NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997—betrayed. The Minsk agreements of 2014 and 2015—betrayed. This is foreign policy by lies. We must respond by being true to ourselves and provide the support Ukraine needs to stay strong, because that is what is needed to secure a lasting peace and shape our collective security so that Putin never invades again.

The UK has a unique role in helping to make that happen. My right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister was in Paris last week talking to our European allies about how we step up support for Ukraine, accelerate work on security guarantees and take more responsibility for the security of our continent. In Munich, I spoke to Vice-President Vance and Secretary of State Rubio. In Brussels, my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary chaired the Ukraine defence contact group, where US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed that, like us, the US wants to see a sovereign, prosperous Ukraine.

Europe must shoulder its share of the burden. With the United States and its unique capabilities, we can deter Putin from attacking Ukraine again and from escalating hybrid Russian attacks in Europe into some form of direct confrontation, so this week the Prime Minister and I will be travelling to Washington DC to meet President Trump. Ukraine needs friends and allies on both sides of the Atlantic working together to achieve “peace through strength”. Both President Trump and President Zelensky have spoken of their desire to achieve that, and the Prime Minister will reaffirm to Zelensky in a call today that it is Britain’s goal as well.

That must include European countries investing more in our own defence and capabilities. Already, the UK has stepped up and sped up military assistance. We have committed £3 billion in military aid a year—every year, for as long it takes. Over the next two years, we will provide an additional £2.26 billion earmarked for military spending, via our share of the $50 billion G7 loan backed by frozen Russian assets.

In addition, as the Prime Minister has made clear, we know our Kremlin history, and that is why we are ready to contribute to future security guarantees for Ukraine in the context of a US backstop, including by putting our own troops on the ground if necessary. That would not be an easy decision—anyone in this House who has taken responsibility for the lives of British servicemen and women can attest to that—but I know the whole House recognises that Ukraine’s security is our security.

The UK also continues to set the pace on ratcheting up the economic pressure on the Kremlin. Together with our international partners, we have already denied Russia access to $400 billion. Its war economy is increasingly unsustainable. Inflation is 9.9% and rising, and that is just the official figure. Interest rates are running at 21%. This year, Russia will spend almost 41% of its budget on defence and security.

Today, we are announcing our biggest package of sanctions since the early days of the war: over 100 targets, including 40 oil tankers—our largest set of ship specifications in a single sanctions package yet—as well as third-country enablers that are pouring money into Putin’s war chest. New legislation imposes additional trade sanctions on Russia, too. That will deny Russia access to the world-leading expertise needed to maintain its war.

Today, the UK is also solidifying our historic 100-year partnership with Ukraine, which was signed by the Prime Minister and President Zelensky in Kyiv in January. In February, I saw for myself how much that partnership means to Ukraine, and how much potential there is for our collective growth and security. Together, we lay that agreement in Parliament for scrutiny, and I look forward to it entering into force when the process is complete—a clear sign of our confidence in Ukraine’s future.

Mr Speaker, this is a critical moment. I want to acknowledge how colleagues have stood united over these past three years, including hon. Members from all parties as well as noble Lords in the other place, the shadow Foreign Secretary, and several predecessors as Foreign Secretary. I am proud of that unity, which is a tribute to our country, proud of this country’s unwavering support for our Ukrainian friends, and proud that the United Kingdom is rightly taking on the responsibility of bringing our allies together. That is how we confront a foreign policy based on lies, and how we secure Ukraine’s future, secure Europe’s future, and face down a Kremlin dictator once again. Slava Ukraini. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

I begin by thanking the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for advance sight of it. The House stands united with Ukraine on this grim milestone. Three years on from Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, we all think of the innocent lives caught up in this terrible conflict: the civilians mercilessly killed in towns such as Bucha and Irpin and in the east, the young Ukrainian children forcibly deported to Russia, the families of brave troops who have not returned alive from the frontline, all those with life-changing injuries, and those who have lost their homes and possessions.

When the war started, the UK led global efforts to back Ukraine and, rightly, to punish Putin. From training tens of thousands of Ukrainian recruits on British soil and donating Challenger 2 battle tanks and Storm Shadow missiles, to being part of an unprecedented international sanctions response that has deprived Putin’s regime of $400 billion and one of the first countries to provide Ukraine with that multibillion-pound, multi-year funding pledge in military aid, the UK has led the way for Ukraine. Our support has made a material difference to Ukraine’s ability to hold the line.

We must never forget that the cost of this war to Putin has been catastrophic. Russia’s Black sea fleet has been pummelled, and it is likely that by summer Russia will have incurred 1 million casualties, with Putin desperately turning to North Korea for troops and to Iran for weapons. Meanwhile, as we have heard, Russia’s economy is in dire straits. There have been uprisings against Putin’s regime, and the central pitch of his leadership—that he was the great restorer of Russia’s stability—lies in ruins.

The British public continue rightly to stand resolutely with Ukraine, and they expect us as politicians across the House to do so. I thank again the many thousands who have so generously opened up their homes to Ukrainians fleeing the war, including through the Homes for Ukraine scheme. They have genuinely showed the best of our country, the best of Britain.

Although there has been much debate about the course of the conflict in recent days, the war continues to rage. I urge the Government to continue giving Ukraine everything it needs—all the hardware it needs and the diplomatic support to strengthen its hand. I am sure that the Foreign Secretary, with the Prime Minister, will do that in Washington this week. There must be no let-up whatsoever.

We welcome today’s announcement on new sanctions. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that there are no plans to lift sanctions in the future? If he discusses the use of sanctions when he goes to Washington this week, and the role of the United States in that policy, will he assure us that he will update Members on whether we should expect to see any new resources and support, in either military aid or humanitarian support, in the coming weeks?

As the Foreign Secretary has said, now is the time for Britain to lead, as we did from day one, and ensure that Ukraine is in the best possible position to decide its own future. We should be very clear that it remains ultimately for Ukraine, as a proud and sovereign nation that has sacrificed so much to defend itself, to decide its own future, and that is peace through strength.

We want this terrible war to be brought to an end and, like President Zelensky, we want a lasting, reliable and just peace. However, the Euro-Atlantic community must continue to be intensely robust in the face of Putin’s aggression, because the lesson of the past 20 years is clear: he only comes back for more. We must ensure that an illegal invasion like this can never happen again. We need a stronger deterrent. We recognise that the Prime Minister has commented on the options and the security guarantees in recent days, and I can assure the House that His Majesty’s Opposition stand ready to engage with the Government at every single level.

We must lead our NATO allies in Europe. In the long-term, collective defence and planning must be co-ordinated to back Ukraine in its fight for freedom. As the Government know, there is already a fully-funded plan to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence by 2030, as set out by the previous Government. I strongly urge the Government to at least look at a minimum plan to match that commitment. We will work with them on how that is delivered, to set a new benchmark for other NATO countries to follow and to fire up everything we can on defence production.

The US knows that the UK has an influential role in NATO, and I am sure the Foreign Secretary will be discussing that this week. The target to spend 2.5% of GDP is not a goal in itself, but an important step on the journey to increase the strength of our defence spending. Given the threats that our nation faces, I urge the Government and the Foreign Secretary—because the issue is within his purview and Department—to review and repurpose some of the 0.5% currently spent on official development assistance to further our national defence, safety and security.

Finally, the moral and economic case for mobilising sovereign assets of Russia to support Ukraine is very clear. The Foreign Secretary has spoken about that already, but I urge the Government to do more. Mr Speaker, we stand united as one House. Slava Ukraini.

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the right hon. Lady for the unity she demonstrates once again in the Chamber on the subject. I confirm for her that, of course, all hardware and military support, all diplomatic support and all humanitarian support continue. We continue to discuss those issues with our European partners, particularly at meetings at the Munich security conference and subsequentially, and we will continue to do that, to ensure that we put Ukraine in the strongest possible position.

The right hon. Lady rightly mentioned the British casualties during the last few years. Some 17 British nationals who served as members of the armed forces of Ukraine have been killed in action, and we remember them on this day.

The right hon. Lady also rightly mentioned our continued solidarity with Ukraine. We continue to discuss sanctions with our European partners. Just as we have announced a sanctions package today, the EU, following its meeting with the Foreign Affairs Council, has announced a sanctions package too, which will all bear down on Putin’s war machine. I can confirm that we continue to support Ukraine with a medical aid package for its men and women on the frontline. I am grateful to the Defence Secretary for making further funds available in relation to that.

The right hon. Lady rightly comments on defence spending. We are grateful for the unity that the official Opposition are demonstrating on the issue. As we have said, it is very clear to all that Europe must pay a bigger part of the burden. In capitals across the continent, leaders are considering these issues. We have said that we will come forward with our plans shortly, and we will. In that context, as we have seen from the Secretary-General, NATO has been very clear about the burden-sharing and burden-shifting environment that we are now in.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Defence Committee.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

In my role as Chair of the Defence Committee, I get the opportunity to meet many ambassadors, Defence Ministers, attachés and other stakeholders, both here in London and at events and gatherings such as the Munich security conference. There is considerable consternation and anxiety among them about whether long-established and hard-earned alliances, rather than a short-term transactional approach, can still be relied on.

Given the reduced American presence, and as we mark the third anniversary of Putin’s full-scale illegal invasion of Ukraine, people are looking for leadership. I feel that this is our time as a nation to take that lead on defence and security matters in our continent. Does my right hon. Friend agree that it can be our Prime Minister who takes that lead in our continent while pulling together our transatlantic, NATO and other allies in the process?

[Mr Lammy]

The UK has been ironclad in its support for Ukraine. We have been forward-leaning as Ukraine’s primary friend in Europe and across the world, under successive Governments. It is also the case that we have a special relationship with the United States, underpinned by a lot of military and defence capability and support over many, many years and, of course, a very close intelligence relationship. We bring all of that to bear in ensuring that we get a resolution to this terrible conflict, but a resolution that means we have an enduring peace in which Ukraine is at the centre of discussions. My hon. Friend should be absolutely sure that the UK intends to play its part, which is why we will meet with Donald Trump this week. The Prime Minister has also been at the centre of much shuttle diplomacy over this last period.

--- Later in debate ---

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. Today marks three years since Putin launched his barbaric full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Many people, including Putin, expected Russian tanks to capture Kyiv in days, yet Putin failed to consider the resolve of the Ukrainian people. Three years on, Ukrainians bravely continue the fight against Putin’s imperialism in defence of their sovereignty.

The UK and this House have stood together with Ukraine throughout these darkest hours. Across the country, people opened their homes to Ukrainian guests and demonstrated their opposition to Putin’s war. We must continue to support Ukrainians living in the UK, including by providing urgent clarity on what permanent options to remain the Government will introduce for them.

However, the past week has exposed the fragility of the west’s support for Ukraine. In parroting the Kremlin’s false claims that Ukraine started this war and that President Zelensky is a dictator, President Trump has shown that the US cannot be trusted to support Ukraine’s defence. That is why the UK, working with our continental allies, must step up to lead in Europe. That must include the UK committing to spend 2.5% of GDP on defence as soon as possible, and all parties working together to build a consensus on reaching 3%.

The Liberal Democrats support the Government’s suggestion that British troops could join a reassurance mission in Ukraine if a just settlement is reached. That would depend on parliamentary approval for such military deployment. We also support the Government’s announcement today of new sanctions targeting Russian kleptocrats. I urge the Foreign Secretary to add to that list the pro-Russian founder of Georgian Dream, Bidzina Ivanishvili.

The Government should also now move to seize the frozen Russian assets totalling £40 billion across the UK and Europe and channel those funds into Ukraine’s defence. As a start, can the Foreign Secretary update the House on what is delaying the release of the £2.5 billion promised to Ukraine from the sale of Chelsea football club?

This week in Washington, the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary must make clear that the UK will continue to stand side by side with Ukraine for as long as it takes to preserve Ukrainian sovereignty. Slava Ukraini.

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. On his comments, we share President Trump’s desire to bring this barbaric war to an end. We know that Russia could do that by withdrawing its troops tomorrow, and President Trump agrees with us that it is important that Ukraine is at the table. When I spoke to Secretary Rubio, he was absolutely clear that there can be no peace without Ukraine. He was also clear that because of the burden of UK and EU sanctions, there cannot easily be a resolution to this conflict without Europe at the table as well.

The hon. Gentleman asked about sanctions and designations. Combined across both parties, we have now introduced more sanctions for this crime and this terrible conflict than for any other in our parliamentary history. I cannot comment on future designations, but the hon. Gentleman will know—and will have heard in my comments—that our desire is to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position. We know that Putin has turned his economy into a war economy, and there are evasions that we will continue to bear down on.

The hon. Gentleman rightly mentioned Abramovich and the money that has been set aside. We are redoubling our efforts to unlock that money, which could be used on the frontline to support Ukraine over the course of the next few months.

[Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am sure that our Ukrainian allies will listen to the steadfast support in this House and feel heartened, and that they will also notice whose voices are absent from the House at this time. There are press reports that a deal is apparently imminent on Ukrainian mineral deposits for America as the price of continued support, so is there anything more that we and our European partners can do to stop the eventual products—those crucial metals—ending up in the hands of enemy and competitor states? Has that issue been discussed?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend asks a good question. I discussed that issue with President Zelensky when I was in Ukraine a few days ago, in the context of the 100-year partnership that we have just signed with Ukraine. That partnership is a unique document, not only in our history and Ukraine’s history, but in the history of the world, and I believe it sets a pretty good guide for how to strike a relationship across many fronts. Of course, that relationship will bring big wins for British businesses over the years ahead, but it will also bring big wins for Ukrainian businesses—we will learn from their innovation. I look forward to the discussions that Ukraine is having with the United States. It is for Ukraine to make its own judgments, but I think that 100-year partnership could be a good guide.

[Jeremy Hunt (Godalming and Ash) (Con)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for the robust and bipartisan approach he is taking to this crisis. In that spirit, may I say to him that if the Government came forward with plans to reduce the number of adult welfare recipients just to 2019 levels, that would save £40 billion a year? It would mean that on Thursday he and the Prime Minister could say to President Trump that we are increasing defence spending to 3% of GDP, or even to 3.4% of GDP, which is what the United States itself spends. That would secure not only the future of Ukraine, but the future of NATO, which is one of the most important challenges facing the Government.

[Mr Lammy]

I recognise that the right hon. Gentleman has tremendous experience in these matters. He has put his views on the record, and I am sure that the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be looking very closely at them as part of the detailed conversations that go on across Government.

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

It is clear that the rules-based order established after the second world war is under extreme threat from oppressors and bullies who think that they can just take what they want—and I am not just talking about Putin. A raft of sanctions were introduced in 2022; why does my right hon. Friend think that previous sanctions failed to curb Russia, and what more do we need to do to organisations that use different measures to circumvent sanctions?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend refers to the rules-based order. That order was set up not just for its own sake, but because of the tremendous bloodshed and loss of life, including the many men and women from our own country and from the United States and other allies who lost their lives across Europe. The order has served us well, and we have to ensure that we continue to protect it. She rightly refers to the evasion that we have seen with the Russian shadow fleet, and that is part of the discussions I have to have with certain states who facilitate it. It is why she will also see in the announcement that I have made more efforts to target the dual-use technology that is finding its way out of countries such as China and being used against Ukrainian men and women.

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

We need to recognise that the environment in which we operate has changed fundamentally, and therefore our response must change fundamentally. I very much echo the calls of my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel) to increase defence spending now, because we have to send a message to our friends and foes alike that we take defence seriously. I urge the Foreign Secretary to remember the commitments we made to the Ukrainian people when this full-scale invasion took place. Our support to them was not contingent on the support of others; it was absolute, and we should make good on that commitment, because we said things that encouraged the Ukrainians to put their sons and daughters in harm’s way. They have stood up their end of the bargain, and we should stand up ours.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman is right: we have been Ukraine’s foremost friend, and we will continue to do that. We have a key role to play, because of our special relationship with the United States. We understand here in Europe that, yes, we want this war to end, but we want an enduring peace. We have got a long memory in relation to the Soviet Union and tsarist history, and that guides us on how we secure that peace.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

This weekend, I joined Rochdale’s proud, long-standing Ukrainian community to mark the third anniversary of Putin’s illegal war and to remember all those who have lost their lives to Russian aggression. Our own Father Ben Lysykanych is today joining the Prime Minister in Downing Street. Does my right hon. Friend agree that President Zelensky is a democrat, not a dictator, and that the Ukrainian people can never again have their fate decided by other countries carving up their land, as has happened far too often in the past?

[Mr Lammy]

I have met President Zelensky six or seven times over this last period, and he has always struck me as the most courageous and brave of individuals, leading his people to self-determination. That is something that we recognise right across the United Kingdom, and so we stand with him.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

I was at the Munich security conference and it became clear while talking with our European allies that they no longer fully trust the article 5 security guarantee. Put simply, they do not trust the Americans. Conversations naturally turned to what collective defence looks like in Europe without the Americans. Last night, Chancellor-elect Merz said that conversations are happening at the highest levels on precisely that. Will the Foreign Secretary comment on whether the UK is included in those conversations and on their content?

[Mr Lammy]

NATO has stood the test of time as the greatest modern-day alliance that we have ever seen, and has been strengthened further following the joining of Sweden and Finland. Of course there is a debate in Europe—there is a debate about burden sharing, there is a debate about burden shifting, and there are some who think that there is a debate about burden dumping—but NATO is a great alliance, and we work across that alliance. Successive United States Presidents, from Roosevelt to Obama and, of course, President Trump, have rightly said that Europe must do more, and that is what we now have to do.

[Derek Twigg (Widnes and Halewood) (Lab)]

The question of defence spending and GDP has been raised. I think it is clear from recent events that we cannot wait until 2030 to spend 2.5%, and, in fact, we should be exceeding that percentage.

In the lead-up to any negotiations, it is essential for us to ensure that Ukraine is in the strongest possible position, including militarily. It is also essential for us to speed up our help and support as quickly as possible. I understand that the Ukrainian defence industrial base has the capacity to increase the production of weapons and equipment. Can we do more to get funding to it to ensure that that happens? Our current problem is that our own industrial base cannot gear up quickly enough.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has asked an excellent question about Ukraine’s industrial base. Drone technology, for instance, is improving apace around the world, and the country leading that technology is Ukraine. We have much to learn. We have signed the 100-year partnership, and capacity and capability are part of that partnership, which will please my hon. Friend, but he is right to say that we cannot wait; we have to act now. That is what was being discussed when the Defence Secretary was in Ukraine a short time ago, and it is what I was discussing with Ukraine a few weeks ago. So yes, we will accelerate the way in which our industries work together, and will allocate the funds that are necessary.

[Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)]

The whole House will want to wish the right hon. Gentleman, and the Prime Minister, a strong and successful visit later this week. He will be able to agree with the President about the importance of all European members of NATO stepping up and playing their part in the significant increase in defence expenditure that we all now need to see, while of course never forgetting what General Mattis has said about the important part of the mix that development constitutes in national defence. However, I hope there will be no compromise in Washington on the facts of the matter, namely that a P5 member of the United Nations invaded its neighbour in an act that we thought had gone out with the last century, has bombed and destroyed its infrastructure, and has butchered and murdered its citizens.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman has reminded the House of the seriousness, and the responsibilities, that we have as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. That seriousness is underpinned by the UN Charter, which Russia breached, and in doing so it has made a serious hole in the way the Security Council works. Let us get beyond that; but if we are to do so, Russia should withdraw and should come to the table with the central issue of peace and making amends at its heart.

[Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)]

Keeping ourselves safe here means showing Putin that we have the resolve and the resources to defeat him, as indeed we have. In European NATO our combined GDP is about $24.5 trillion, and the GDP of the United States is $27 trillion, while Russia’s is just $2 trillion. We have more resources, and converting them into more fighting forces, tanks, guns and drones is key, but we can go further. Russian central bank assets held by ourselves and our allies amount to more than £200 billion, including £170 billion in Belgium and £26 billion here, and Putin could use those reserves in the future to rebuild his armed forces. Can the Foreign Secretary assure me that he is doing everything he can to convince our allies of the need to seize those assets to keep us safe and to fund Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend asks a good question. If we are serious about the responsibility of burden sharing across Europe and, indeed, across G7 nations at this time, one of the issues on the table is moving from freezing assets to seizing those assets. It is a live discussion. There are other ways to find the funds, and that was a topic of discussion in Munich and at the G7, but we must now move from discussion to action.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

I will resist the temptation to ask the Foreign Secretary if he shares my feeling of disgust at the spectacle of the leader of the free world showering praise and admiration on the killer in the Kremlin. When he speaks to his counterparts, will he try to impress on them that the reason why George Kennan’s containment policy, to which he rightly referred, was so successful in preventing the cold war from turning into the third world war was that contentious territory was not demilitarised and left undefended? It worked in the case of West Germany, and it will have to be the only way that western Ukraine can equally be secured for the future.

[Mr Lammy]

The containment strategy to which the right hon. Gentleman refers ran right through the Reagan years and beyond. In a sense, it is the conventional way to understand peace through strength, and we would do well to keep it at the front of our minds in the days and weeks ahead.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the international community must not allow the sovereign nation of Ukraine to be traded like a chess piece by powerful nations, particularly after its brave defence of freedom and the international rules-based system for itself and the wider world? If we fail, we risk another “peace in our time” moment that would sooner or later endanger other countries and even our own.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right, and we know that Ukrainians felt let down by the Budapest memorandum. They felt brutally let down by the Minsk agreement, and they cannot be let down again. We also know that because of the unbelievable Ukrainian spirit, they would fight on, with guerrilla warfare if need be. These are the most admirable of people fighting for their self-determination, and the United Kingdom will continue to stand with them.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

The Scottish National party has stood alongside the people of Ukraine in solidarity—not just for the last three years but for the last 10 years, following Putin’s invasion of Crimea. I will not invite the Foreign Secretary to agree with me on this in the Chamber, but I am sure he thinks that President Trump’s remarks about Zelensky being a dictator were beyond repulsive. Surely we all know that no deal can be made with Vladimir Putin that he will not break. Does the Foreign Secretary agree?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman has a point. Russia and Putin have been clear about the terms that they want for peace, which have often included the removal of 14 of NATO’s 32 members. That is unacceptable. We have seen Finland and Sweden join recently. The precondition for talks has been that Ukraine should effectively give up the territory now occupied by Russia. It seems to me that such demands show utter contempt for Ukrainian territorial integrity. The Russians will not be serious about discussions until they reconsider the criteria that we heard once again from Lavrov last week.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

A constituent of mine and her son moved to this country under the Homes for Ukraine scheme. She has a very stable job here and her son is doing A-levels at the best maths school in London, but she is worried that her 18-month visa extension will expire in the middle of her son’s exams. What conversations is the Foreign Secretary’s Department having with the Home Office to ensure that young Ukrainians who moved here through no fault of their own do not have their education disrupted, but can build a life for themselves?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for putting on the record the tremendous support the British people have given to Ukrainian refugees. It allows me to say that there is still a war, and there is still a need for those people to seek sanctuary in our country. It is my assessment that Putin is not showing a serious willingness to negotiate, and it may be that negotiations go on for some time. So I want to reassure her constituent that we are of course in close dialogue with my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

Some of us are old enough to remember Hungary in 1956 and some of us are old enough to remember Czechoslovakia in 1968. None of us wants to see Ukraine sacrificed on the same altar of expediency. When the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister go to Washington, they will know that they will carry with them the good wishes of—almost—all of this House. Ukraine is not for sale, and it can never be for sale; this is not a transaction. The United Kingdom will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for reminding us of the history. He will know that, in the 20th century, to the east it was only the Russo-Japanese war that stopped Russia’s imperial ambitions, to the south it was the war in Crimea, and of course to the west it was the containment strategy to which I have referred and NATO. This history is our best adviser as we approach the matter of peace.

[Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

I start by commending the people of Ukraine for resisting the murderous dictator Vladimir Putin for as long as they have. They are heroes. Almost every Member of this House knows that, if we fold in our support of Ukraine now and give Russia what it wants, Vladimir Putin will only come back for more. Our national security is at stake. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that it is in everyone’s interests—Britain’s, Europe’s and America’s—to ensure that any potential peace deal includes Ukraine at the table?

[Mr Lammy]

“Nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” was heard loudly of course from President Zelensky, but all Europeans recognised it. I am pleased that Secretary of State Rubio, in my conversations with him, and indeed General Kellogg have both underlined the importance of Ukraine being at the table.

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

I very warmly welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. Although he perhaps cannot use the language I am about to use, I hope that when the Prime Minister and he meet Putin’s appeaser in the White House later this week, he will remind him that if we have a special relationship—and the Foreign Secretary keeps referring to a special relationship—it has to be based on truth, respect for democracy, respect for justice and respect for international law.

[Mr Lammy]

In the end, the United States is leader of the free world. President Trump had an election in which 77 million people voted for him and he holds both Houses on the Hill, and as we would expect, he is of course buoyed up—as, indeed, was my party—by such a democratic mandate. We will have conversations with him over the coming days on a range of issues. Friends agree and can sometimes disagree, but I think it is definitely the case that we support his desire for bringing this horrendous war to an end. We will now play our part in Europe to ensure that we raise defence spending and that Europe steps up to the necessary burden sharing. President Trump’s analysis of the huge problems in the Indo-Pacific are correct, and we must recognise that successive US Presidents have been clear about their responsibilities in relation to the Indo-Pacific.

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

Despite the astonishing 10 days we have had, and we should be under no illusion that they have been astonishing, there has been reassurance to be found in the Government’s steadfast commitment to Ukraine and the leadership they have been showing. The Foreign Secretary alluded earlier to Vladimir Putin’s penchant for lying: he lied about the invasion; he lied about Ukraine’s territorial integrity; he lied about the rules of war; and he abducted thousands of Ukrainian children. Does my right hon. Friend agree that not only should Ukraine be at the centre of the negotiations, but that we should be clear-eyed about the character of the man we are dealing with?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning the children who have been abducted. On the past two occasions I have been in Ukraine, I have met children who were viciously taken from their homes. There was an attempt to effectively brainwash them from their histories. We are supporting organisations that seek to get those children back and reunite them with their families. I also launched a children in care initiative. I was very pleased to be with Madam Zelensky, when I was last in Ukraine, supporting vulnerable children with their foster families.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the 2.5% of GDP ship has now sailed, and that we and our allies have to find the resources to spend 3% within a recognisable timeframe? When he is in Washington this week, will he discuss with his interlocuters how the billions of pounds he proposes to give Mauritius for taking on the Chagos Islands could be better served by being devoted to building and re-equipping our armed forces?

[Mr Lammy]

Ten years ago, there were just four countries meeting the 2% commitment. Today, that has risen to 23. Right across the alliance, countries are understanding that they have to do more. We will set out how we will do more very, very shortly. As the matter today is Ukraine, the right hon. Gentleman will forgive me but I will not discuss issues to do with the British Indian Ocean Territory. I am sure he will have an occasion to do so at oral questions tomorrow.

[Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

Just over three years ago, I flew the penultimate UK mission into Kyiv to deliver materiel essential to the defence of Ukraine ahead of the illegal full-scale Russian invasion. Since then, Ukraine has been defending European security, the UN charter and liberal democracy against Putin’s assault on those shared interests, and, in the words of the declaration of independence, the “unalienable rights” of

“life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Does the Foreign Secretary agree that to free Ukraine from Putin’s tyranny and imperialist ambition, and to ensure the words of the declaration of independence are realised for all, UK leadership in the co-ordination of European and transatlantic allies is essential?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes, yes, yes, I say to my hon. Friend. I think all of us pay tribute to our armed forces and to his work in our armed forces. It is because of that work over so many years—that sacrifice—that I think the spirit of this country guides us to stand solidly with Ukraine on a cross-party basis. He is right to pray in aid those words that underpin our values, and indeed global values as underpinned in the UN charter. That is what we are fighting for and we will not give up.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

Does the Secretary of State regret recanting the views he originally expressed in assessing Trump? When the time is right—it is certainly not any time now—can I urge him to consider following the example of Archbishop Cranmer by plunging the offending hand first into the flame?

[Mr Lammy]

Er—[Laughter.] This is a serious debate and a serious discussion. As I have said, that is, in a sense, old news; there is so much news before us, and so much history to be forged, which requires diplomacy and friendship and us understanding who the real threats are. Those real threats are the autocracies of the world, which could do tremendous damage over the coming years. I have always recognised that.

[Frank McNally (Coatbridge and Bellshill) (Lab)]

As has been replicated across the country, people in Coatbridge and Bellshill have opened their doors to those forced from their homes by Putin’s illegal attack. Public authorities have also stepped up: North Lanarkshire council has provided homes and supported integration for more than 200 Ukrainian families at the High Coats tower in my constituency, and has been recognised nationally for helping to deliver stability and belonging. As we continue to push for a just peace, and following the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead and Highgate (Tulip Siddiq), will my right hon. Friend commit to working with the Home Secretary, devolved Governments and other key stakeholders to ensure safe harbour for the families so cruelly and viciously targeted by Putin’s barbarism?

[Mr Lammy]

I assure my hon. Friend that that will be the case. I continue to work closely with the Home Secretary. There has been a tremendous outpouring of support across this country, which I recognise, and have seen at work in Scotland, too.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

I welcome the robust statement from the Secretary of State today and the way he has stood by Ukraine and committed the UK to standing by Ukraine. I hope he will convey the same message to President Trump: that by giving into Putin, we jeopardise peace not only in Ukraine but across the whole of Europe.

First, what practical steps can he take, apart from the assurances he has given the House today, to ensure that Ukraine’s interests are reflected in any negotiations? Secondly, given the stretched state of our own armed forces, what long-term security commitments can we give to Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

We have committed £3 billion in support to Ukraine for as long as it lasts. The Ukrainians asked for more munitions, and we supported them; they asked for particular missile capability, and we supported them. We will continue to support them because this war is being waged on the frontline; it is a war of attrition. Notwithstanding any discussions or talks, we need to be there with the Ukrainians, and I guarantee to the right hon. Gentleman that we will continue to do that.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

I was present at the Munich security conference where it felt like the world changed around us, and the consequences could not be more serious. I welcome our Government’s announcement today of fresh sanctions on Russia. Given the absence of some on the Opposition Benches, I am sure the whole House will agree that it is President Putin, and not President Zelensky, who is the dictator. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that this is indeed a once-in-a-generation moment, and that the future of our security in the UK is bound up in Ukraine’s security and in the need to do what it takes to face down the aggression of Putin’s Russia?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: because of the history of Russia and the former Soviet Union, we understand deeply that our own futures are bound up in Putin’s ambitions. We also understand, by the way, that there are many valiant people resisting Putin in Russia; I met Mrs Navalny at the Munich security conference. Our fight is not with the Russian people—it is to support the Russian people. Our fight is with Vladimir Putin.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

When Putin invaded, he thought it would be a matter of weeks. Three years on, Ukraine is still standing. I am proud of how we as a House and as a nation stood up for Ukraine. That includes many of my constituents, for which I commend them. My right hon. Friend the shadow Foreign Secretary asked about sanctions, but I did not hear an answer from the Foreign Secretary, so he perhaps he can shed some light. When the Prime Minister meets President Trump, will he raise the issue of new sanctions, which I would welcome? Will we urge the US to follow suit?

[Mr Lammy]

We continue to discuss sanctions with all our partners. I discussed that with G7 partners, including Secretary of State Rubio. We have imposed sanctions on more than 2,100 individuals and entities—the most wide-ranging sanctions imposed on any major economy. We believe that maximum pressure is required at this time. The United States has indicated that it would be willing to impose further sanctions on Russia. That issue remains under discussion.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

I welcome the important statement from the Foreign Secretary and the comments from the shadow Foreign Secretary. This entire House should be united in our support for Ukraine. As others have said, it is rather a shame that one party has not shown up.

Ukrainians who have come to the UK since the war have made such an important contribution to our country. I met Olha, a Ukrainian Teessider, over the weekend. She shared with me that many Ukrainians face great uncertainty, partly because they are unable to access work and study because of the lack of a Ukrainian GCSE. Will the Foreign Secretary discuss this issue with the Department for Education to ensure that Ukrainians are able to access study and work? Will he recognise at the Dispatch Box the importance of the contribution that Ukrainians have made to our country?

[Mr Lammy]

There has been a history between us and Ukrainians, as they were making a contribution across Europe and in our country long before this war began. My hon. Friend makes a very good point about the Ukrainian language. I have admired many Ukrainians for the way that they have quickly learned the English language. I will take his recommendation to the Education Secretary.

[Ben Lake (Ceredigion Preseli) (PC)]

I join others in commending the Ukrainian people for their bravery in the face of Russian aggression, and the Government’s steadfast support for the nation’s sovereignty. The Foreign Secretary referred in his statement to the need for European nations to contribute more to future security guarantees for the Ukrainian people. Does he envisage more bilateral and multilateral agreements between European allies playing a part in that endeavour, much in the vein of the Lancaster House treaties or, latterly, the Trinity House agreement?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman is right that the UK has sought to forge strong relationships with key partners across Europe. Once the new Government are formed in Germany, we look forward to signing an updated Lancaster House treaty with our German friends. He is right that, bilaterally, that is important. I believe that NATO is the central underpinning of European security, but we need to work together across Europe to increase our industrial defence capability, and we need to find more funds to increase our defence spending right across the European family. He will hear more about that in the coming weeks and months.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

The Foreign Secretary was right that if Russia is serious about a lasting peace, it must respect Ukraine’s sovereignty, but given that it has shown absolutely no sign of doing that, will he reiterate that we will stand shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine no matter what? Will he further reiterate, even for the Members who have not chosen to be here for this statement, that this country does not appease fascists but opposes them?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why, since February 2022, the United Kingdom’s total military, economic and humanitarian support for Ukraine has amounted to £12.8 billion. That is our commitment to Ukraine so far, and that commitment will continue.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I am proud that more than 600 Ukrainians have been hosted in my constituency through the Homes for Ukraine programme. Three years on, my constituents stand with Ukraine. They know that Ukraine has protected Europe’s frontline for three years. They know that Ukraine’s fight is one that affects us all, and that if Ukraine loses, Europe loses, and they know that Ukrainians are fighting for the values of our forebears: the British values of democracy and freedom. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to stand by Ukraine steadfast, even when others do not? In his meetings in Washington tomorrow, will he ensure that he points out the folly and the danger of the US Administration’s new approach to Russia?

[Mr Lammy]

The UK, of course, supports the US-led efforts to get a lasting peace in Ukraine that deters Russia from future aggression and ensures that Ukraine is at the table as we negotiate that peace. That is the issue that we will be discussing with President Trump, just as President Macron is discussing that issue today. I am quite sure that our assessment that Putin is not ready, really, to negotiate on proper terms stands, but I admire the efforts to bring that about. Of course, the US plays a central role in achieving that.

[Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)]

Today, we pay tribute to the people of Ukraine fighting not only for their own freedom but for the freedom of all Europe. The Foreign Secretary said that we must learn from history. Over 80 years ago in Munich, this country and others talked away the future of Czechoslovakia without it being there and stripped it of its vital resources; we all know the tragic consequences. Today, there can be no peace without Ukraine, and there can be no enduring peace without the security that this country and other NATO allies can give to it.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend puts his remarks well. I agree with him.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (Wetherby and Easingwold) (Con)]

I can barely believe that I have got to say this to the Foreign Secretary, but he will be unaware that in past moments the United States has just voted against the UN resolution condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine.

I understand fully the position that the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister are in and the approach that they have got to take in Washington this week, but we know that President Trump listens to the people who last spoke to him. Can I therefore ask the Foreign Secretary to outline two important points? First, European military assets—not NATO assets—are often used to support American operations in the Indo-Pacific, and the American military really appreciates how we put our shoulder to the wheel. It is not the Americans only ever supporting Europe; we also help the Americans.

Secondly, last week, I and several hon. Members and noble Members were at the NATO Parliamentary Assembly in Brussels, where it was made clear that what will be presented at the Hague summit is what is actually needed for European defence rather than just GDP targets. May I also ask the Foreign Secretary to advise the Prime Minister that it will be important that he takes a position with the President of the United States that if those demands add up to more than 2.53% of GDP, our country will set itself on a path, within the time targets, to achieve those?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

Order. Can I remind Members that if we are to get everybody in, shorter questions—and shortish answers, please—would be helpful?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman mentions the Indo-Pacific, and it is important that we remember AUKUS and our critical partnership with Australia and the United States in relation to that. He quite rightly mentioned defence spending, on which much has been said in this Chamber—and much, I am sure, will be said when we go to the United States.

[Chris McDonald (Stockton North) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for a strong statement. He said that Ukraine’s security is our security. Does he agree that this is a fight for democracy where we need to tackle misinformation both at home and abroad, and where we need to maintain our steadfast commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning that, because there is hybrid warfare taking place as we speak. Countries such as Moldova are at the forefront of it, with sabotage and constant attacks on its infrastructure and its internet services. This is hybrid warfare, and of course it is taking place against our own country, so he is absolutely right: this is not just a hard war and a hot war; it is a hybrid war, and we have to be vigilant.

[Adrian Ramsay (Waveney Valley) (Green)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. It is indeed important that we have cross-party support across this House, standing in solidarity with Ukraine and being clear that Ukraine must be front and centre of the peace talks that must take place, but it is deeply disturbing to hear some of the comments from President Trump, including the absurd claim that Zelensky is a dictator and the ridiculous suggestion that Ukraine started the war. Therefore, when the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister go to Washington later this week, will they make it clear to President Trump that Ukraine must be at the centre of these peace talks and that the Ukrainian people have an absolute right to self-determination?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes. There must be no negotiation about Ukraine without Ukraine. As I have said, we have seen very little sign that Putin is abandoning his goal of subjugating Ukraine. Russia has continued to escalate this war, including through deploying Democratic People’s Republic of Korea troops and through daily barbaric attacks on innocent Ukrainian civilians and their infrastructure and energy supplies.

[Josh Dean (Hertford and Stortford) (Lab)]

On Saturday, I joined Ukrainian families and residents in Bishop’s Stortford to remember those who had lost their lives and suffered throughout this conflict, ahead of the third anniversary. This was a reminder that in my constituency and across the country, we stand firmly with the Ukrainian people. As we mark the third anniversary, will the Foreign Secretary reiterate to the Ukrainian families who have found safety in my constituency, and indeed to all Ukrainian people, that this Government will continue to advocate for Ukraine’s sovereignty and for it to be given a seat at the table right at the heart of any future negotiation?

[Mr Lammy]

I know my hon. Friend’s constituency well, and I am very pleased to give his constituents that affirmation.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

No Member of this House should be in any doubt as to who the aggressor is in this situation, who the dictator is, or who started this war. No one should give cover to the dictator who started this war. The Prime Minister has said that, if there is peace, he anticipates a post-peace situation where there will be British troops on the ground in Ukraine, with what he termed “a US backstop”. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the prospect of a US backstop would be greatly enhanced if the European nations began more thoroughly to shoulder the financial burden that has been shirked in recent years?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes, I do. There was complacency in the post-cold war period across the European families, and at this Dispatch Box we have lamented the fact that the United Kingdom has fallen to 2.3% of GDP, so the hon. and learned Gentleman is right. This is the time to step up and to demonstrate peace with strength, and the Baltic nations are very clear about the responsibility at this time.

[Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)]

Like the Foreign Secretary, I am incredibly proud of the role that the UK has played in supporting Ukraine, and especially proud of the role that my constituents have played in welcoming Ukrainians into their homes and into our community, but if we are to stop Putin, Britain must get real on defence. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we must now urgently rearm, well beyond the existing 2.5% target, so that, with our European allies, we can protect our precious democracies?

[Mr Lammy]

As I said, we will set out further defence spending shortly.

[Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)]

NATO countries bordering Russia are understandably stepping up their defences without waiting for others to take action. Will the Foreign Secretary update the House on the discussions he has had with those countries?

[Mr Lammy]

I met the Polish Foreign Minister at the Munich security conference and Baltic colleagues to discuss those issues. The hon. Member is absolutely right that those countries have been aware of the threat for some time. Her question allows me to say that when we talk about security guarantees for Ukraine, it is important to recognise NATO’s eastern flank. When it comes to the effort to get US security guarantees, many countries on that flank would have to know that they were supported. That is why the US backstop is so important.

[Colum Eastwood (Foyle) (SDLP)]

Last week, along with other Members of this House, I met Ukrainian parliamentarians at the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe in Vienna. The opposition MPs from Ukraine made it clear that they do not support Donald Trump’s call for an election in Ukraine while they are defending against Russian aggression. In his conversations with the US Administration this week, will the Foreign Secretary make it clear that there is only one dictator in this conflict, and his name is Vladimir Putin?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes, of course.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

On the third anniversary of Putin’s brutal full-scale invasion of Ukraine, I welcome the United Nations having just passed a resolution condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine. However, in the last 15 minutes—this will shock the House —it was opposed by Russia and the United States. It was said in the press that

“This isn’t appeasement by Trump. It’s a direct stab in the back.”

Will the Foreign Secretary condemn what has just happened in the United Nations, where the United States has joined Russia in not signing up to the resolution condemning Russian aggression in Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

We are proud to have co-sponsored the General Assembly resolution, proposed by Ukraine, in support of a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. It is in line with the UN charter. The UN voted for it, and we will stand forever with Ukraine.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

Yesterday, Ukrainians in Welwyn Hatfield came together in sober recognition of the third anniversary of the Russian invasion. I pay tribute to them for their bravery and resilience, and for how they are going about rebuilding their lives as valuable members of our community. I told them that in this House, I would speak the truth, and stand up for them as best I could. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that we need to say loud and clear from the Dispatch Box that one person was the aggressor, one person is responsible for the death and destruction, and—we should say it emphatically—one person started this war, and his name is Vladimir Putin?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. When I was in Kyiv, I saw that close to President Zelensky’s office is an apartment block that was blown up a few weeks ago. A couple asleep in their bed were killed. That is the awfulness of this war. Of course, my hon. Friend will recall that when the Prime Minister visited, Putin sought to fire missiles into Ukraine. It is grim and unbelievable brutality, and of course we must continue to stand up to it.

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

In response to the right hon. Member for Aberdeen South (Stephen Flynn), the Foreign Secretary said that Russia does not respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine. On his comments on the Ukraine defence contact group, the US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth says that the US wants to see

“a sovereign and prosperous Ukraine”,

but given the news that we have just heard about the UN resolution, how confident is the Foreign Secretary that the US will respect the territorial integrity of Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very pleased that the US has attempted to bring this horrendous war to an end. That does require conversations with Russia. Those are hard conversations, and I am not sure that the Russians are ready to properly negotiate, but I admire the attempt to try. It is important that Ukraine is at the table; it is important that Europe steps up with burden-sharing and increases its defence. Those are issues that we will discuss with President Trump in the coming days.

[Paul Davies (Colne Valley) (Lab)]

Online propaganda from the Kremlin has become a disturbing reality. Social media, especially platforms such as Facebook and X, have been flooded with the claim that Ukraine is solely responsible for the war—it is extraordinary. What measures are being taken to combat the propaganda being spread by Governments to blame the Ukrainian people for the conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

Those are important issues that I know preoccupy my hon. Friends in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. They are looking further at those issues and at what more we can do.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

The Prime Minister said this morning that Russia does not hold all the cards. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s announcement of further sanctions. Will he work at national and international level to ensure that President Putin does not get a new hand that allows him to proceed with bluff, bluster and bullying that could bring the Ukrainian people to their knees—something that we have not seen to date? Will he assure the House that the Government stand resolutely with the people of Ukraine?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman is right. That is why I met G7 Foreign Ministers, and we issued a joint statement on Ukraine 10 days ago. It is why I discussed this issue at the G20 in South Africa last week. I am proud of the work of our diplomats in the UN General Assembly today, where many countries have come together in support of Ukraine, with a resolution that had to be passed.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

Today of all days, we must remember that over 1 million people have been killed or wounded in Ukraine since the illegal invasion. I have just come from talking to a group of individuals who support Ukrainian veterans. Although they welcome the medical expertise that the UK has provided in Ukrainian military hospitals, there are also thousands of civilian casualties, so they ask that the UK provide medical expertise in civilian hospitals as well. Will the Foreign Secretary look into whether the UK can provide that support too?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very pleased about the decisions that I and the Defence Secretary have made to support Ukrainian armed forces at this time with medical support. I am happy to look at the issues facing civilians, which of course we discuss in a pan-European context. The hon. Lady is right to raise those issues.

[Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)]

Surely it cannot be right to leave those with no real care or concern for Europe’s wellbeing the sole voice in negotiating the future of Ukraine—and by extension the future of Europe. Will the Foreign Secretary convey, in his discussions with President Trump, the point that Ukraine must be present at the table when negotiations take place, and will he convey the disgust of this House at the fact that the US voted alongside North Korea and Russia against the Ukrainian resolution at the UN today?

[Mr Lammy]

We have been clear: nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. The Ukrainians must have a seat at the table; it is their destiny that is in the mix in any discussions that take place.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s strong words, commitment, strength and fortitude. I will always welcome the end to war, but I am unable to forget the mass murder of Ukrainian civilians and prisoners of war by Russian armed forces during the fight for and occupation of the city of Bucha three days after the invasion started. To remind the House, girls as young as eight and women as old as 80 were raped; three Baptist church pastors were murdered; and nine children under the age of 18 were murdered. They were all put into a basement, had petrol poured over them and were burned alive. I and the people I represent want any deal to include the accountability of those who committed those dreadful, dreadful war crimes, and so many others that are still unknown.

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for reminding us of the massacre at Bucha. I had the privilege of visiting Bucha and spending time with the community there—with families, victims and loved ones. The massacre was an horrendous act. It was criminal, barbaric and inhumane. He is right that we in this country have led on the issue of justice and accountability, and we will not let that go.

Sudan and Eastern DRC

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement on the situation in Sudan and eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo.

The latest conflict in Sudan has now lasted 21 months. This weekend, the Rapid Support Forces attacked the last functional hospital in the besieged city of El Fasher, in Darfur. The World Health Organisation assesses that some 70 patients and their families were killed. The attack is far from isolated. In recent weeks, the RSF shelled the Zamzam camp where displaced people are trapped outside El Fasher, while there are disturbing reports of extrajudicial killings by militias aligned to the Sudanese armed forces in Wad Madani.

The Government condemn those attacks in the strongest possible terms. They show callous disregard for international humanitarian law and innocent Sudanese civilians. Exact figures for those killed and displaced in Sudan are hard to come by, but we know aid is being blocked from reaching those in need. This is, without a shadow of doubt, one of the biggest humanitarian catastrophes of our lifetime.

I saw that for myself last week in Adré, on the Chad-Sudan border, in the first ever Foreign Secretary visit to Chad. I felt a duty to confront the true horror of what is unfolding, to bear witness and to raise up the voices of those—mainly women—suffering so horrendously. Eighty-eight per cent of the refugees at the Adré crossing are women and children. I met nurses in a clinic fighting to save the lives of starving children. I met a woman who showed me her scars. She had been burned, she had been beaten and she had been raped.

Turning to DRC, conflict has gripped the east for more than 30 years. An M23 rebel offensive at the start of this year had already seized Masisi and Minova. This weekend saw them enter Goma, the region’s major city, which M23 last occupied in 2012. Brave UN peacekeepers from South Africa, Malawi and Uruguay have tragically been killed, and with hundreds of thousands having already fled M23 to Goma, there is potential for a further humanitarian catastrophe.

I have not yet travelled as Foreign Secretary to meet those fleeing eastern DRC, but the reports speak for themselves. This is one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a woman or a girl. Children as young as nine are being attacked and mutilated by machete-wielding militias. Around a quarter of the DRC’s population are facing acute food insecurity, and there is frequent bombardment of the makeshift camps that shelter those who have fled their homes.

I regret to say that Foreign Secretaries updating the House on conflicts in Africa is something of a rarity. As I discussed yesterday with African ambassadors and high commissioners, the surge in global conflict includes the number in Africa almost doubling in the past decade. This is causing untold damage and holding back economic growth—the bedrock of our future partnership with African countries. But where is the outrage? Again and again in Adré, I was asked, “What is the world doing to help us?” The truth is that if we were witnessing the horrors of El Fasher and Goma on any other continent or, for that matter, seeing the extremist violence in the Sahel and Somalia anywhere else in the world, there would be far more attention across the western world. Indeed, one recent survey of armed conflict in 2024 contained spotlights on Europe, Eurasia, Asia and the Americas, but none on Africa. There should be no hierarchy of conflicts, but there is one. Every human life is of equal worth.

The impact of these wars is clear for all to see. We have only to be willing to look. I could not face atrocities such as these and shrug my shoulders. However, the House will also recognise the UK’s national interest in addressing these conflicts. Irregular migration from Sudan to Britain alone increased by 16% last year. Unscrupulous smuggling gangs are looking to profit from the misery in places such as Sudan and the DRC. The longer these wars last, the greater their ripple effects. Neighbours such as Chad are working hard to manage this crisis alongside others nearby, but further escalation only increases instability and the risks of conflict elsewhere. With Sudan sitting along the major trade routes of the Red sea and eastern DRC, one of the most resource-rich regions in the world, this is something that we cannot tolerate.

This Government, therefore, refuse to let these conflicts be forgotten. Working with Sierra Leone, the UK prepared a UN Security Council resolution on Sudan to address the humanitarian crisis. Shockingly, despite the support of every other member, including China, Russia wielded its veto, but Russian cynicism will not deter us. We will continue to use our Security Council seat to shine a light on what is happening and work with our African partners on broader UN reform.

We have also doubled UK aid to Sudan, supporting more than 1 million displaced people. I saw our impact at the Adré crossing and announced a further £20 million to support food production and sexual and reproductive services. The UK is the third largest donor in the crisis, having offered almost £250 million in support this financial year.

We have been redoubling our diplomatic efforts as well. In the spring, I am looking to gather Ministers in the UK to galvanise international support for peace. We need to see three things: first, the RSF and the Sudanese armed forces committing to a permanent ceasefire and the protection of civilians; secondly, unrestricted humanitarian access into and within Sudan and a permanent UN presence; and finally, an international commitment to a sustained and meaningful political process. Instead of new and even more deadly weapons entering the conflict, we want consistent calls for all political parties to unite behind a common vision of a peaceful Sudan. We will engage with all those willing to work to bring the conflict to an end.

On the DRC as well, the UK has reacted quickly to the current crisis. We now advise British nationals not to travel to the Rubavu district in western Rwanda, on the border with Goma. We are continuing our humanitarian assistance, having provided £62 million this financial year. This enables lifesaving assistance such as clean drinking water, treatment for malnourished children and support for victims of sexual violence.

Ultimately, however, we need a political solution. We know that M23 rebels could not have taken Goma without material support from Rwandan defence forces. My noble friend Lord Collins of Highbury and I have been urging all sides to engage in good faith in African-led processes. Lord Collins spoke to the Rwandan and Angolan Foreign Ministers last week, and in the past few days I have spoken to Rwandan President Kagame and South African Foreign Minister Lamola. For all the complexities of such a long-running conflict, we must find a way to stop the killing.

Civilians in Sudan and eastern DRC must feel so powerless. Power seems gripped by those waging war around them. The Government and our partners cannot simply will a ceasefire into being, but that is not a licence for inaction. As with Gaza, it can take hundreds of days of diplomatic failure to reach even the most fragile of ceasefires. So for our part, the UK will keep doing all in our power to focus the world on these conflicts and somehow bring them to an end. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement and for the way he has spoken about Sudan and the DRC. Both conflicts are truly shocking, and are resulting in an ongoing displacement crisis, with millions of innocent people having to flee their homes. As he has highlighted in his statement and in his discussions with the African nations and their diplomats, armed conflict in Africa continues to cause immense human suffering and, of course, greater pressure on United Nations peacekeeping. The scale of food insecurity is enormous. The most horrific crimes are being committed against civilians: systematic human rights abuses; sexual violence; torture; and mass civilian casualties.

We are deeply concerned by the intensification of the fighting in eastern DRC and its humanitarian consequences. We continue to urge all parties to deliver on their commitments, which were agreed through the regional peace process. We welcome the mediation efforts facilitated by the Angolan-led Luanda peace process and continue to urge all parties to commit to further political dialogue.

In government, my party was committed to the protection of civilians in and around Goma. The Foreign Secretary will be deeply aware of the long-standing work that took place there, including through the three-year humanitarian programme for the east of DRC, which sought to deliver lifesaving emergency assistance to more than 1.1 million people and to protect and build resilience for the most vulnerable. Despite all of that, it is important that we learn more and understand what the root causes are and how we can bring greater stability and peace to the DRC.

What is happening in Darfur must also not be tolerated. The conflict in Sudan has put pressure on neighbouring countries, which are already under immense strain, and is creating a level of human misery that is totally unconscionable. Our main overreaching objective is clear, and we both agree that we need an immediate ceasefire and an end to all hostilities in Sudan.

The UK Government, working with international partners, must leave no stone unturned as they try to press the warring parties into a ceasefire. The Government must also do everything within their power to hold those responsible for the atrocities to account, because red lines have been crossed in this conflict and we cannot stand by.

The Foreign Secretary will know that the Conservative Government applied a range of sanctions in the past on those supporting the activities of the Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese armed forces. As the penholder on Sudan at the United Nations Security Council, will the Foreign Secretary update the House on what actions are likely to follow at the UNSC? The world can and should be doing much more, as the Foreign Secretary has rightly said, so what recent discussions has he had with other countries that could be doing much more to leverage their own influence? That also applies to the neighbouring regions. Will he provide an update on the work of Saudi Arabia and others helping with the important Jeddah process and whether that is on track?

On sanctions, does the Foreign Secretary intend to go further, perhaps following the US’s lead? Did he discuss the matter in his call with Secretary Rubio, because Sudan was not in the read-out and was not referenced at all? Will he speak more about the United Nations reform that he has just touched on? The US Administration are also reviewing all their aid programmes, so was that discussed in his call with Secretary Rubio? Beyond sanctions, is he working to identify other hard-hitting ways to put pressure on the leadership of the RSF and the SAF and those supporting those awful war machines?

While the conflict continues to rage, we need a laser-like focus on the humanitarian assistance, and I do not just mean on the type or volume—important, though, that is. If British aid is being sent and is getting through, we must ensure that it gets over the border and is distributed to the people it is intended to help. Will the Foreign Secretary share his latest assessment of the state of the border crossing in Sudan? How much aid is getting through each day and from which crossing points? When the aid gets inside Sudan, are the safeguards there to ensure that it gets to the people who need it, and does he have the mechanisms in place to measure the impact?

On the subject of aid, this might be premature, but will the Foreign Secretary speak about the Government’s plans for the future of aid funding given the forthcoming spending review? While this dreadful war persists, what is he doing to increase efforts to collect evidence of the crimes committed so that those responsible can be held accountable and face justice?

The Foreign Secretary has spoken in recent days about the vile people smuggling gangs. He mentioned the matter not just in this statement, but in his previous written statements. Will further comprehensive action be taken to target those miserable, vile and evil criminal gangs? What more will the Government do to put this whole issue to an end and ensure that this destruction and displacement across these two countries comes to an end?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady. Of course, I know that she too draws some heritage from the African continent and so will take these issues very seriously. I also know the work of the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell) before coming to office. He did a lot on the humanitarian aid side, particularly in relation to Sudan.

The conflict in Sudan has created, as I said, the world’s largest humanitarian crisis. Thirty million people—half of Sudan’s population—are now in urgent need. To make it clear to the House, that is more than Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Gaza and Mali combined. That is how bad the situation currently is. That is why I raised this issue with Secretary of State Rubio when I spoke to him yesterday—although, because of all the issues in front of us, it was a brief conversation, we both said we would return to the issue, and we discussed the fact that I am keen to convene a group of nations, including regional partners on this very same issue.

On sanctions, since the 2023 conflict the UK has frozen the assets of nine commercial entities linked to the parties involved in the conflict. We obviously do not talk about what more we might be considering, but of course we keep that under review.

The right hon. Lady rightly asked about UN reform. I am pleased to see that the United States recently made statements—under the last Administration, but I am sure that that is a cross-party position—that Africa should be represented on the UN Security Council. That has been our long-standing view over here.

My assessment of the Adré crossing is real concern that the Government in Sudan are saying that that crossing should be closed on 15 February. We disagree with them; it should remain open. There are real issues about access, and one of the things I am pressing for with international colleagues is that the UN should be represented. Its agencies and bodies should be able to work unfettered in Sudan, and civilians must be protected. Recent events at El Fasher are very worrying indeed, but I hope that with regional partners and those internationally engaged, we can at least come to an agreement that the UN should be present and that civilians should be protected, particularly when they are overwhelmingly women and children.

I did also raise the position in the DRC with Secretary of State Rubio when I spoke to him yesterday—in fact, he raised that issue with me, and his real concerns about it. I was clear with President Kagame on Sunday that Rwanda must act to de-escalate this conflict and return to dialogue. I said that an attack on Goma would provoke a strong response from the international community, and from speaking to other nations, my sense is that that is what Rwanda can expect. Rwanda receives over $1 billion of global aid every year, including around £32 million of bilateral UK assistance. All of that is under threat when you attack your neighbours, and we in this House are clear that we cannot have countries challenging the territorial integrity of other countries. Just as we will not tolerate it in the continent of Europe, we cannot tolerate it wherever in the world it happens. We have to be clear about that.

The UK has sanctioned M23 and other armed groups through the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018. There are currently 56 individuals and nine entities listed under UN sanctions, and again, we keep that list under review. The shadow Foreign Secretary has rightly talked about the work of the last Government in relation to humanitarian assistance, and I put on record the work that they led on both sides of this horrendous conflict. We are providing £62 million this year for programmes in eastern DRC.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his updates, and for his clear and deeply felt commitment to Sudan. It is the largest humanitarian crisis on record, yet both of the warring parties are choking humanitarian access. The SAF have blocked the UN from reaching areas controlled by the RSF, while the RSF is increasingly imposing bureaucratic obstacles to delay and block aid. What measures is the Foreign Secretary taking to ensure that both of the warring parties and their international backers are allowing vital aid to get in?

[Mr Lammy]

There have been efforts in the past. The US tried to lead efforts, and all regional partners—the Egyptians and the Chadians—want to see those efforts bear fruit. However, the truth is that the people I met are suffering horrendously. When you are at a crossing meeting those fleeing for their lives, you are always aware that you are often meeting those closest to the border and those with the means to arrange for smugglers to get them out. Despite the millions who have left and are now displaced, tens of millions more are still stuck in Sudan, unable to leave. For all those reasons, we have to be crystal clear about the access issues—not just the fact of aid, but the fact that we want the aid to get through and reach the people who it needs to reach.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, and thank him for advance sight of it. He is right to say that the crisis in Sudan will go down in history as one of the biggest humanitarian catastrophes of our lifetimes. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s visit to this region and his personal engagement with it, and for updating this House on conflicts in Africa. My party agrees with him that our level of concern for those affected by conflicts overseas should never be influenced by their location.

The Foreign Secretary is also right to draw the House’s attention to the escalation of violence by M23 in Goma. M23’s pursuit of mineral resources reminds us of the DRC’s tragedy of having such riches that trigger such violence. The announcement of increased UK aid to Sudan in November was welcome, as is the further £20 million deployed at the weekend. The Foreign Secretary is right to say that the UK’s aid budget not only reduces suffering, but reduces the pressure on refugees to make hazardous journeys in search of sanctuary elsewhere.

Yet the UK’s ability to respond to humanitarian and conflict situations is reduced by the Government’s failure to commit to the 0.7% target for official development assistance. Will the Foreign Secretary explain to the House why it was reported yesterday that £117 million has been cut from the integrated security fund, which would likely mean less money for conflict reduction work? Can he say what assessment he has made of the impact of the Trump Administration’s instruction that all US aid programmes are suspended?

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s plans to convene Foreign Ministers to galvanise international efforts to seek a ceasefire, but can he say by when this meeting will take place and how he plans to leverage the UK’s position as the Security Council penholder on Sudan? Can he confirm that the Government will not prematurely recognise any alleged authority Government in Sudan when the country is so divided, and how does he propose to reduce the interference of external powers, including Russia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and now China, in the conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman. On what is happening in Rwanda and the DRC, many years ago in this place—22 years—an all-party parliamentary group on the African great lakes region was set up. I was a member of it, and the then MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, Oona King, chaired it for a while. That is when I first went to the region, in the wake of the awful, horrendous ethnic cleansing—[Hon. Members: “Genocide.”]—and genocide we saw in Rwanda back in that period, and that is when I became familiar with the issues.

The hon. Gentleman raises the issue of the 0.7% target on development spend. I understand why those feelings are strongly felt about development, but he knows that we have a £22 billion black hole. We want to get there eventually, but it will take us some time. Notwithstanding that, the UK still makes a major contribution in development aid spending at a time when we are seeing, right across the global community, aid spending falling because of the cost of living crisis, with inflation and the effects that it has on western populations.

It is too early to make an assessment of some of the changes we have read about with the Trump Administration. I am told and advised that there is an 85-day process for the new Administration to look at these issues. However, it was interesting to me that Secretary of State Rubio raised the DRC with me before I raised it with him. We head to the Munich conference in a few weeks’ time, where these issues will of course be discussed, and I hope we will be able to convene and come together on the issue of Sudan shortly thereafter.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and the work he is doing to shine a light on the crisis. As he said, this is about not just the amount of aid, but the crucial issue of access. There is, quite clearly, unequal access for the UN in distributing aid in Sudan. Can I ask how we are supporting organisations on the ground in Sudan, particularly Sudanese aid organisations, to deliver aid in the area?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful for that question, because there is a lively civil society still at work in Sudan and NGOs are on the ground in Sudan doing what they can in the absence of UN agencies able to do that work. I was grateful that the World Food Programme facilitated my trip to the Chad border with Sudan, and to see trucks going in with the World Food Programme name emblazoned on them that may bring some alleviation to the suffering. However, I must say that in my conversations with the drivers, they talked about trucks being hijacked, the changes, the barriers and not being able to get as far as they would like. There are still serious issues on the ground.

[Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his kind remarks.

On Sudan, I commend the Foreign Secretary for going to Chad. I visited the same location last year, and he will have seen the clear and horrific evidence that this is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. While he was there, did he make it clear to the President of Chad that the use of his private airport by foreign powers to arm and assist the RSF is completely unacceptable?

On the DRC, as the Foreign Secretary rightly says everyone should draw back and engage with the Luanda process. Does he agree that it would help if the Congolese army did not so clearly make common cause with the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda, who perpetrated the genocide to which he referred, and who pose a serious threat to Rwanda’s security and were responsible for the murder of nearly 1 million Tutsis in 1992?

[Mr Lammy]

My bilateral conversation with the President of Chad was extensive—I was accompanied by the Foreign Minister for most of the 48 hours that I was there—and my concern for the women and children was heartfelt, recognising the huge burden of displaced people that Chad bears as best it can. I underlined the UK’s clear position on the conflict, the action of the parties and the need for regional partners to support a political process to end the bloodshed. On the situation in the DRC, I have spoken to President Kagame. I also spoke to South Africa’s Minister of International Relations and Cooperation following the murder of its peacekeepers, and Lord Collins has spoken to a range of African partners, all of whom have a stake. The Kenyans and the Angolans have been doing a lot to move forward the Luanda process, which I urge Kigali to continue to work on.

[Zarah Sultana (Coventry South) (Ind)]

According to UN experts the UAE has been providing arms and support to the Rapid Support Forces through its networks in Libya, Chad, the Central African Republic, South Sudan and Uganda. Those arms and supplies have reportedly been disguised as humanitarian aid, raising serious concerns about the UAE’s role in exacerbating conflict and suffering in Sudan. The UAE is one of the UK’s largest arms buyers, with billions of pounds worth of defence exports licensed in recent years. Given the gravity of those allegations, and the UK’s obligations under international law, will the Government commit to ending all arms sales to the UAE unless it can be unequivocally verified that they are no longer supplying the RSF?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the hon. Gentleman that we hold—[Interruption.] The hon. Lady—forgive me; I am still suffering from jetlag. We hold regular discussions with all regional partners about the conflict in Sudan, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt and African partners, as she would expect. Any sustainable process for peace in Sudan requires the support of all those in the region and beyond.

[Stephen Gethins (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry) (SNP)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for coming and making this statement. He was right to say that these devastating conflicts in Africa are often overlooked, and I thank him for that as it is something a number of Members have mentioned in the past. Will he review the conflict budgets, as some of the international NGOs are often there when nobody else is and no other attention is being paid? On Sudan in particular, and Secretary Blinken’s remarks around genocide being committed, what implications does that have for UK foreign policy? On the DRC, the Foreign Secretary mentioned the material support from Rwanda, but what action is he taking regarding all those who have facilitated the conflict, and what action and changes in policy will we see from the FCDO?

[Mr Lammy]

On the first point, let me be clear: we have come in as a new Government and we think there is an important role for conflict mediation, building on the historic role that this country has played, including in Northern Ireland. We have real strengths and we want to work with partners such as Norway, and others, on conflicts—I reassure the hon. Gentleman about that. Of course I recognise that there are broader regional issues. That is why I wanted to convene, and the UK will continue to play its role. That is why we brought the UN resolution with Sierra Leone, and why I have been trying to rally support globally. Frankly, that is why I visited, taking the opportunity of a ceasefire in Gaza to draw attention to this issue and galvanise the world.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s visit to a malnutrition clinic on the border of Chad and Sudan and the additional funding for the region. Sudan has one of the highest rates of malnutrition in the world. He says he has had discussions with regional actors, but can he go further and update us on where those discussions are? What processes are under way? Can he give further detail on his assessment of how aid is currently getting in across the Adré border, especially ready-to-use therapeutic food, which is vital in stopping malnutrition and starvation in children?

[Mr Lammy]

The experience of visiting, with Médecins Sans Frontières, a small clinic in Chad with malnourished babies, children and their mothers—knowing I was making a ministerial trip, but also not knowing whether these small babies would survive in the days ahead—was heartrending. I thank Médecins Sans Frontières for all it is doing to keep those children alive and to support those mothers. It is why we are not only doubling our aid to Sudan, but increasing our aid to Chad next door, which is bearing the brunt of all those displaced people who have come. My hon. Friend asks how we are continuing to work on this issue with our partners. I chaired a Sudan session with Foreign Ministers during the G7, plus the Arab Quint. We discussed collective action and how the G7 and the Quint could take the warring parties and push for improved humanitarian access, the protection of civilians and increased aid. I will continue to redouble my efforts in that regard.

[Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)]

The Foreign Secretary is right to come here to express his dismay and frustration, which we all share, but what assessment has he made of the effectiveness of the United Nations in this? It seems that its mission is failing. Even the measured and balanced resolution that he put together with Sierra Leone failed to get through on 18 November. Would it not be better to look instead at underscoring the importance of an African solution to this? In that respect, what discussions has he had with the African Union, notwithstanding that it is crucial that currently suspended members are involved in the process?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman is right to raise the important role of the United Nations. I am hugely disappointed that Russia continues to block progress in the UN Security Council. Notwithstanding the pressures, I applaud the work of the UN agencies in particular and what they are attempting to do. I remind him of the work of the World Food Programme, the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs and others. It is important that there is a UN presence in Sudan and that its agencies can work unfettered there. Clearly, the fact that UNESCO has pledged to withdraw in the DRC is a real issue, given what is happening and therefore what could flow from it ending its period in the country, despite the pressures over the last 20 years.

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. An article in The Lancet this month illustrates an alarming rise in multiple life-threatening infectious diseases, including cholera, dengue fever, malaria, measles and polio, due to the destruction of health and sanitation infrastructures. How is the UK supporting progress in securing humanitarian access to life-saving treatments for these diseases, such as malaria, and does he agree that this support is needed, as these infections have an impact worldwide? If we allow these infections to fester, it will have implications for humanity.

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend for her work in raising these issues from the Back Benches. There has been a worrying outbreak of dengue fever in particular— I met individuals who suffered as a consequence of that —and malaria is rife. We will do all that we can to support that work, but the aid access issues in Sudan in particular make that extremely difficult. That is why we must have a process that allows for unfettered aid to reach those in Sudan who need it.

[Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)]

I join hon. Members in thanking the Foreign Secretary for bringing the statement to the House, given that these matters are so rarely discussed. The United States has often played a key role in ending such conflicts or providing humanitarian support. To support his efforts with Secretary of State Rubio, will he ask for the Prime Minister’s support to ensure that the conflict is on President Trump’s agenda, given the latter’s stated “America first” agenda?

[Mr Lammy]

I listened to Secretary of State Rubio’s first press conference, where he talked about wanting prosperity and, of course, security and safety for the United States. The truth is, the tremendous problems that we are seeing in the horn of Africa, the Sahel and Sudan are deeply worrying not just for us in Europe but for the United States, because failed countries become a haven of jihadist extremist activity that washes back up on our shores; that is the truth of it. When big countries, or indeed more powerful countries, invade small countries—particularly countries with minimal resources—we should be concerned indeed and raise that as a big issue. For all those reasons, I expect that the United States will take a big interest in what is happening.

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and the shadow Foreign Secretary for her response to it. It is important that the House speaks with one voice on these issues. In recent days, I have heard from constituents with family in Sudan, and to say that they are terrified and devastated does not describe it. There is real fear and anguish in the Sudanese diaspora in the United Kingdom.

We have to be seen to be believed, so I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for making his visit to Chad last week and thank him for his leadership on these issues, but I reiterate the point made by the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison). Will he touch on the specific discussions that he has had in recent weeks with the African Union—it has an important role to play—and whether he plans to go to Addis to make that case in person?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for continuing to raise these issues from the Back Benches and pressing me on them whenever he sees me in the Lobby. Let me be clear—I should have made this point—that we are of course working with the African Union. New leadership is about to take up post in the African Union in the coming weeks, and we will continue to push these issues with it. We will work with a range of partners including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, the United States, African and European countries who are taking an interest, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the United Nations and the African Union. I reassure him of that.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

I also thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, for Sudan is indeed the forgotten conflict, despite 8 million internally displaced people and 24.5 million people on the verge of famine. I lend my sentiments and honour the three United Nations peacekeepers from Uruguay, South Africa and Malawi, the country of my birth. In the Foreign Secretary’s statement, he mentioned more deadly weapons entering the conflict. Who is providing those arms and weapons? What vested interests do they have in Sudan—are they in its natural resources, its gold or its port? What leverage are we using with those countries with whom we have good diplomatic relations who may be supplying those weapons?

[Mr Lammy]

I met African ambassadors yesterday to discuss those very issues. We talked about the security and resilience of the African continent and of how, after a relatively peaceful period a decade or so ago when most of the discussion was about development, they are now concerned about those who are fighting proxy wars in different ways. That is not to say that regional powers will not have different interests, but when we see the behaviour of mercenaries and we look at the problems of arms sales in Africa and the damage that does to civilian life, we have to hold out for a political solution. We have to get back to dialogue and we have to get back to diplomacy. That is what I am seeking to emphasise in the statement.

[Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op)]

I echo the praise for the Foreign Secretary’s visit last week. It is important that we continue to keep the spotlight on Sudan. Last week, I was able to visit an exhibition called “Children’s drawings”, arranged by Waging Peace and hosted by my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell). It showed a series a pictures painted by young children—powerful images of child survivors of the genocide. One picture showed two army men fighting and an attack by the Janjaweed militia on a hut in a village. Inside the hut, at the bottom of the drawing, a soldier was raping a woman. The 80-page book details the resilience of those survivors, and also the trauma that those young children have gone through.

It is good to see cross-party support in the Chamber on this important issue. The Foreign Secretary is right—where is the outrage and the constant media coverage? There should be no hierarchy of conflicts. Every life is equal. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to the House that he will stand by the victims in Sudan for as long as it takes to get that stability?

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend for her work to press these issues. I repeat again: where is the liberal outrage? Where are the marches? Where are the emails flooding MPs’ inboxes? They are nowhere to be seen. Just a few years ago, the world rallied because of what it saw as horrendous events in Darfur. It is unbelievable that a few years later, the world seems to have forgotten. This is the moment to step up. This House has come together this week to remember those who were massacred in genocide during the Holocaust. These are very serious issues. Just as we have called out horrendous acts against humanity in the past, so we must call this out.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

As an MP representing a Sudanese community in Bristol and as a member of all-party parliamentary group for Sudan and South Sudan, I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and his real care and concern for the innocent civilians in Sudan and the DRC, and for speaking about the need to protect them from the horrors taking place. In his statement, he said that irregular migration from Sudan to Britain has increased 16% in the past year—indeed, the Sudanese were among the top nationalities to cross the channel in 2024. Does he agree that a key part of our response, alongside support on the ground, must be to ensure safe and legal routes for Sudanese refugees to come here? Has he raised that with the Home Secretary?

[Mr Lammy]

Sudan was No. 2 in the list of those coming in December. We are seeing an uptick. That is why we continue to work upstream. I hope to be in Africa to look at more work upstream very shortly. Of course, we work with the UN agencies—we have been in touch with them in the past few days—and those NGOs that work with refugees to discuss these issues.

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Ind)]

The ongoing conflict in Sudan has displaced more than 10 million people, caused widespread famine and fuelling human rights abuses, including sexual violence, with women and girls disproportionately impacted. Will the Foreign Secretary outline the Government’s diplomatic efforts to ensure that all parties are held accountable and adhere to international law and human rights standards? He mentioned that the Government do not want new and even more deadly weapons entering the conflict, so will he ensure that this House receives full and up-to-date information about UK export arms licences with any Government who are alleged to be propping up the RSF or any other military force in this conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for continuing to press these issues. Let me reassure her that the UK continues to pursue all diplomatic avenues to press the parties into a permanent ceasefire, to allow unrestricted humanitarian access to protect civilians and to commit to a sustained, meaningful and peaceful process. We have the most robust export licensing regime in the world. Where there are breaches of international humanitarian law, we suspend licences. She should be reassured that we take that very seriously.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and agree with his point about the way in which global media values pay no attention whatsoever to conflict or life in Africa. He has drawn attention to that today, and I thank him for it. As one who represents constituents from both the DRC and Sudan, I can say that the communities I represent are emailing and talking, and all of them are saying the same thing: why is nobody discussing what is going on in the DRC or Sudan?

I have two quick questions for the Secretary of State. First, what can he do to reduce the flow of arms into Sudan? It is motivated by the countries that want to get hold of the wealth and natural resources of Sudan, and have no concern whatsoever for the lives of the people in that country. Secondly, having been to Goma on a number of occasions in the past, as well as to other parts of the DRC, I am very well aware of the long-term conflict that has gone on over minerals, essentially, where militias are effectively financed by mineral companies to drag out coltan and other riches from the Congo at the expense of the lives of the people there. The role of the Rwandan Government in supporting M23, and now the occupation of Goma, has to be called out and challenged. Surely, the future has to be one of peace and of the democratic engagement of all the people of the DRC in their future.

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. I know he did a lot of work with my predecessor in Tottenham on issues to do with the African continent. He has been raising these issues consistently for the past three or four decades, and we are very grateful to him for that.

I seek to reassure the right hon. Gentleman that when I say that we want to convene and come together with regional partners and those neighbouring Sudan, as well as with the international partners that take a big interest and play a big role, as the UN penholder, we are of course aware of some of the motivations; there is gold, for example, in Sudan. We urge everyone to step back and get to a ceasefire. This cannot go on forever; there has to be a ceasefire. We need that ceasefire now because of the women and children who are suffering. Like the right hon. Gentleman, I have been to Goma. We have been talking about the coltan in our mobile phones for many years. It is why there are so many external actors engaged in the DRC.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. If questions and answers are short, I can squeeze in just a couple more Members.

--- Later in debate ---

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

The Foreign Secretary spoke movingly about his visit to the Chad-Sudan border, and I commend him for bearing witness. There is no substitute for doing that.

Since April 2023, there have been more than 500 attacks on healthcare facilities in Sudan, and more than 100 healthcare workers have been killed. The Foreign Secretary will know that attacks on hospitals and healthcare are a growing and grotesque phenomenon across the world. Does he think we could use our position on the UN Security Council as the lead on the protection of civilians to bring together countries and drive forward action to protect healthcare and health facilities across the world?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend raises an important issue. We cannot live in a world where the rules are disregarded and where aid and peace workers are murdered as they go about their business. This has been the most horrendous period for the loss of life of good people doing good work. I will take up the call for a renewed effort, using our position on the UN to marshal that.

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

The horrendous situation in Sudan, as the Foreign Secretary rightly said, calls for a common vision for a peaceful Sudan. Will he outline what detailed talks he has had with other nations outside of Russia and the UN, in order that that vision of a peaceful Sudan can be realised more quickly than would otherwise be the case?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me reassure the hon. Gentleman that I have spoken to north African countries about this issue. I was in Chad, obviously, but I also raised these issues in Egypt, where I met Sudanese refugees. I talked about the Quint and the G7; we are using all those multilateral mechanisms to raise this issue and galvanise further support. It was deeply worrying that when the UN called for donors last year, it got just 50% of the money that is required.

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. Gender-based violence increased by 300% in the DRC in recent years, with two thirds of it in the three eastern provinces. In Sudan, we have heard of the epidemic of sexual violence in conflict. This year marks 25 years since the agreement of the landmark UN resolution 1325 on women, peace and security, yet across the world we are letting women down. Please can the Foreign Secretary outline, on the broader agenda, how we will make this the year we actually protect women’s rights in conflict and ensure that their voices are heard?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful that that is the subject of the last question. One reason why the world is not paying attention to these crises is that they are in the continent of Africa. The second reason, I fear, is gendered: it is women who are suffering. It is men who are doing the fighting and women who are being left behind. We cannot go backwards. For all those reasons, I urge parliamentarians to secure debates and raise these issues with the colleagues they meet from other parliamentary democracies, so we get attention back on these women and children in both conflicts and across so many others, who are suffering horrendously.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I thank the Foreign Secretary. We got through quite a lot of questions.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

David Lammy Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd January 2025 Written Corrections

[Mr Lammy]

It was important that our Prime Minister was the only G7 Prime Minister to attend COP. My hon. Friend will recall that, last year, the Prime Minister at the time did not attend. It is hugely important that we reach the £300 billion for climate finance, which will help the global south get to clean energy. We hope that our global clean power alliance will be able to work with them, as they now have the money to do it.

[Official Report, 26 November 2024; Vol. 757, c. 627.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the right hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy):

[Mr Lammy]

It was important that our Prime Minister was the only G7 Prime Minister to attend COP. My hon. Friend will recall that, last year, the Prime Minister at the time did not attend the UN General Assembly’s Climate Week. It is hugely important that we reach the £300 billion for climate finance, which will help the global south get to clean energy. We hope that our global clean power alliance will be able to work with them, as they now have the money to do it.

UK-Ukraine 100-year Partnership

David Lammy Excerpts

Monday 20th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With permission, Mr Speaker, before I turn to Ukraine, I want to begin by welcoming the release of Emily Damari. After 471 days of captivity, she has been brought home. It was deeply moving to see the pictures of Emily and her mother Mandy reunited. I pay tribute once again to all those who campaigned so tirelessly for this moment. The Government will continue to work closely with our partners to secure the release of all the hostages, get aid into Gaza and see the deal implemented in full.

With permission, Mr Speaker, I will now make a statement on Ukraine. Last week, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister visited Kyiv. It was his seventh meeting with President Zelensky, but this visit had a special purpose: to sign a historic 100-year partnership with Ukraine. The partnership enshrines both sides’ commitment to a relationship benefiting the whole of our nations: businesses as well as the Government, communities as well as our military. It consists of a legally binding treaty and a political agreement outlining our co-operation in greater detail. We will lay the treaty before this House for scrutiny in the usual way.

The partnership covers the full breadth of our friendship, across nine pillars. In each area, deeper co-operation can enhance our collective security and help us both to build resilient, flourishing economies. On maritime security, through joint exercises and training between the Royal Navy and the Ukrainian navy, we can enhance their effectiveness and learn from their successes in securing the Black sea. On air defence, the supply of 15 Gravehawk missile systems, produced in Yorkshire by BAE Systems, is a direct benefit to our economy and an innovative new capability for Ukraine. On the energy sector, the agreement cements the United Kingdom as Ukraine’s preferred partner, opening up opportunities for us and them in areas such as renewables and green steel.

The Prime Minister saw at first hand what our work together can mean for the people of Ukraine, while visiting a burns unit supported by specialist national health service doctors, helping them to treat victims of indiscriminate Russian attacks and joining a Ukrainian class speaking to a primary school in Liverpool. It is these young people who will reap the rewards of the efforts we are making today.

A partnership lasting 100 years, beyond the lifetime of even the youngest Members of this House, is unprecedented, but it reflects the unique nature of our friendship—a friendship that Members on all sides did so much to strengthen. I pay particular tribute to the work of my predecessors the right hon. Member for Braintree (Mr Cleverly), the noble Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton and the former Member for Welwyn Hatfield for their work under the previous Government in supporting this partnership.

This cross-party unity is a source of strength for our country and a source of strength for Ukraine. It is a unity that goes well beyond this House. Members will have witnessed it in their constituencies, from the more than 200,000 Ukrainians who have found refuge in our homes to the countless Ukrainian flags flying proudly outside churches and town halls across the country.

This Government have shown strong support for Ukraine since our first day in office. For my part, I have called out Putin’s modern-day imperialism in the United Nations Security Council, I have been using the full force of our sanctions against Putin’s war machine, with the UK having led the way in sanctioning Putin’s shadow fleet, and I announced over £600 million in humanitarian and fiscal support during my own visit to Kyiv in September. My ministerial colleagues have been playing their full part as well. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence has accelerated the delivery of military aid, extended our training of Ukrainian soldiers to at least the end of the year and signed a defence industrial treaty with Ukraine, allowing it to draw on £3.5 billion of UK export finance to acquire military equipment. This month, legislation introduced by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor came into force, enabling a loan of over £2 billion more to Ukraine, all of it repaid through the use of profits from frozen Russian assets. That funding comes on top of the Government’s commitment, made by the Prime Minister in our first week in office, to provide £3 billion a year in military aid in every year that it is needed. We do not know for how long it will be needed; it is for Ukraine to decide at what point and in what way to have any form of talks with Russia, and Ukraine will continue to need support from its friends even after Putin’s barbaric, illegal war comes to an end. We have always said that we want to see a just and lasting peace, but our priority right now, together with our allies, is to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position to achieve that.

Three things are clear. First, Ukrainians want to live at peace with their neighbour. They did not provoke this war, whatever the false claims of the Kremlin or its army of bots online, but now that Putin’s mafia state is preying on them, they are fighting back courageously. Their cause is just: quite simply, the freedom to choose their own future. Secondly, Putin shows no sign of wanting peace. He could end this war tomorrow by withdrawing from Ukraine, yet he insists that the war will not end until he has achieved his objectives—objectives that amount to the subjugation of the Ukrainian people. That is no basis for meaningful dialogue, and Putin’s actions speak far louder than his twisted words: inhuman strikes on civilians on Christmas Day, dispatching North Korean troops to the frontline, and wave after wave of attacks on the brave people of Ukraine.

Finally, Putin’s position is not one of strength. The invasion has been a monumental strategic failure, and pressure is mounting. Russia’s casualty rate is staggering, the highest number of military casualties that the country has suffered since the second world war, and Russia is more insecure than it was before the war—and for what? Russia gained some territory last year, yes: fields and small settlements, left barren by relentless bombardment, and taken at a rate so slow that the Russians would need a century to conquer all of Ukraine. Meanwhile, their economy struggles increasingly to sustain the war through this year alone. Spiralling inflation is making basic goods such as butter unaffordable, welfare cuts are hitting the most vulnerable, and interest rates have been hiked to a record 21%. We are approaching the third anniversary of this conflict, and, as the Prime Minister said in Kyiv, we must not let up now. Putin hopes that the world lacks his resolve, and we need to call his bluff to prove him wrong.

This is not simply a moral necessity, although I know that the whole House has moral clarity on the righteousness of supporting Ukraine. It is also a strategic necessity for Britain and our allies. If Putin wins in Ukraine, the post-war order founded in great part by my predecessor Ernie Bevin, which has kept us all safe for more than eight decades, will be seriously undermined. Foundational principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity will be shaken, and a more dangerous world will result. That is why the Government will not falter, it is why the Prime Minister travelled to Kyiv, and it is why we stand firmly with Ukraine, today, tomorrow, and for generations to come. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Wendy Morton (Aldridge-Brownhills) (Con)]

May I start by joining the Foreign Secretary in welcoming the release of Emily Damari yesterday? Our thoughts are with her, with her family and with all the hostages at this time. I associate those on this side of the House with the Foreign Secretary’s comments.

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for providing advance sight of his statement. For nearly three years the House has stood united and steadfast in our support of the people of Ukraine. We admire their determination, courage and bravery in the face of such horror, terror and brutality being inflicted on them, and our hearts bleed for the pain, the loss and the suffering that Putin has caused through his illegal war and invasion of a sovereign country.

From day one—in fact, since before Russian troops started the latest wave of aggression in 2022—the British Government have backed President Zelensky in defence of Ukraine’s freedom. We recognise the threats posed since the invasion of Crimea in 2014, and the ongoing incursions in the east. We quickly provided the Ukrainians with military equipment, aid and finance. We set up bespoke routes to provide safety in the UK for those needing to leave Ukraine, and the British people opened their homes. Through Boris Johnson and Ben Wallace, we led global diplomatic efforts to rally the world in support of Ukraine and to isolate Russia. That included one of the most comprehensive packages of sanctions ever imposed on a country, members of its ruling regime, and businesses with links to Putin and the war.

When we were in government, our commitment to Ukraine was solid, and we were grateful for the support of the then Opposition. In three years, we have provided £12.8 billion-worth of support for Ukraine, including £7.8 billion in military assistance, and we welcome the ongoing commitment to provide at least £3 billion a year in military aid for as long as it is needed.

As the Foreign Secretary will know, my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), my hon. Friend the Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge) and my noble Friend Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton were instrumental in laying the foundations for this partnership. The partnership reached commitments to a long-standing and deep relationship between our two countries. At this time of uncertainty for Ukraine, the prospect of future stability and our ongoing friendship and support will be welcome.

Can the Foreign Secretary provide more details about the following elements of the partnership? First, on security and defence, referenced in articles 2 and 3, can he give an update on when he expects the proposed maritime partnership to be concluded, and on how any such partnership can be impacted in the future? The partnership also enshrines our support for Ukraine becoming a future NATO ally, so can the Foreign Secretary give an update on his discussions with the incoming US Administration on their plans, and on how we can ensure that there is consistency in this partnership? On defence alliances, can he give an update on the progress being made towards spending 2.5% of gross domestic product on defence?

Secondly, the partnership commits to increasing economic and trade co-operation, partnership working on energy, and work on science, technology and innovation. Will the Foreign Secretary elaborate on the levels of investment that he expects to be made, and on what work is under way within Government and with the private sector to facilitate that? What discussions are under way with our international partners to boost the contributions that they are making?

Thirdly, can the Foreign Secretary give an update on the further steps being taken to isolate and undermine Putin and Russia, including responses to the use of North Korean troops fighting for Russia? Does he expect to announce further sanctions and activities to mobilise assets, to fund the rebuilding of Ukraine?

Fourthly, the partnership refers to commitments to

“combatting foreign information manipulation and interference”

in article 7. Will the Foreign Secretary give an update on how that will work in practical terms, and on the steps being taken to prevent and combat Russian interference in other countries, including Moldova, Romania and Georgia?

There will continue to be difficult days ahead for the people of Ukraine, but their fight for freedom is a just cause, because they are not only fighting to free their country from Putin’s aggression; they are fighting for our values and freedoms, too. That is why we must continue to stand by them, and to make sure that this partnership is a success and gives Ukraine hope for a brighter future. Slava Ukraini!

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her words, which underline the bipartisan support in this House. It was very useful for me to be in Washington DC with the Defence Secretary last May, when we underlined to colleagues across Capitol Hill that here in the United Kingdom this remains a bipartisan issue. It is a great indication of what we can achieve in this Parliament on matters of the greatest concern.

On the right hon. Lady’s last point, she will understand that today is inauguration day and it would have been a bit pre-emptive to have had discussions with the incoming Administration on the security guarantees and on Ukraine’s path to NATO. She knows that we set out an irreversible pathway to membership at the NATO conference when we came into office, and that remains the position. She also asked me about the security pillar, and that is important. Helping Ukraine to reach NATO’s standards, particularly across its military structures, to support Ukraine’s irreversible path to NATO membership, is something that we in this country take very seriously.

Ukraine has defended itself resolutely in cyber-space in the face of Russian aggression, and the UK has been proud to support that defence, both in Ukraine and also in the next-door country. The right hon. Lady mentioned cyber. I was in Moldova seeing the work that we fund, which began before we came into power. It is good, hugely important work, and when we see the interference across the region in Romania and Georgia, the importance of this work is underlined even further.

The right hon. Lady rightly talked about the maritime context and strengthening our maritime capabilities. Working with Ukraine to protect Black sea security is essential to its future security and prosperity. Some 49% of Ukraine’s pre-war trade went through the Black sea, and I might say that that is why, for a substantial period of history, Russia has wanted total control of much of the Black sea. Through the agreement, we will work together to ensure the safety of trade in the Black and Azov seas through joint naval tasking and de-mining activity, which will be hugely important once this war comes to an end.

More broadly, it is important for me to be absolutely clear on the issue of third-party support. I raised concerns with my Chinese counterpart when I was in China on 18 October about the supply of equipment to Russia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s relationship with Russia. The right hon. Lady knows that I went on to designate companies that we saw dealing with that dual-use technology. The direct participation of DPRK troops in combat operations is another dangerous expansion of Putin’s illegal war against Ukraine and further proof that he has no interest in peace. We have also imposed sanctions on a number of Iranian individuals, on 10 September and again on 18 November, including Iran Air, in response to Iran’s transfer of ballistic missiles to Russia.

[Alex Sobel (Leeds Central and Headingley) (Lab/Co-op)]

I want once again to thank the Foreign Secretary, the Defence Secretary and the Prime Minister for willing this partnership into life. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on Ukraine, I fully support all nine pillars of the agreement, as I am sure all members of the all-party group do. Pillar 4 deals with the economy and trade, and there are many things we can do now to deepen and strengthen our trade relations with Ukraine, one of which involves joint ventures. What work will be done to remove insurance barriers and trade barriers, for instance, to give access to kindred or joint venture partnerships between UK and Ukrainian companies in all areas, including defence?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all his work on the all-party group. He will be pleased that there are active conversations on this very issue at this time. He will know, too, that because of some of the changes that my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary has made on procurement, we are doing all we can to assist trade in Ukraine, as complicated as that is at this moment.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I remind the Front Benches of the set times that they are meant to stick to. Can they please look at this and make sure they get it right next time?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for his questions and their bipartisan spirit. We welcome the bipartisan support that we eventually got from the United States after a lot of lobbying, including from my predecessor. It should not be forgotten that it was a £61 billion package to support Ukraine, notwithstanding the work that Europe is currently doing.

It is also important to say that Europe now shoulders two thirds of all aid to Ukraine, including over half of all military aid. In President Trump, we find someone who has been consistent in urging those colleagues across Europe who are still not spending 2% of GDP on defence. Since Roosevelt, successive US Presidents have raised this. When President Trump first came to office, just six countries were meeting their commitment. By the time he left, it was 18. That must be something we can welcome.

I encourage the hon. Gentleman to look at my right hon. Friend the Defence Secretary’s announcements in December in relation to procurement and the assistance we will continue to give to Ukraine, and on the ease with which Ukraine can now use our processes to get the equipment it needs to modernise its systems. The UK will provide £2.26 billion of additional support to Ukraine as part of the G7 extraordinary revenue acceleration loan scheme, which will be repaid using the profits of frozen Russian sovereign assets, and that must be welcome.

The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the JEF, which is hugely important. The support from the Baltic nations is extraordinary. The JEF is a very important partnership, and it has been one of the most proactive groupings in support of Ukraine. All JEF nations have signed their own bilateral security agreements with Ukraine. JEF nations are some of Ukraine’s strongest supporters and will continue to be so.

I also commend to the hon. Gentleman the Interflex training that we are doing with Ukraine, which we have said will continue until the end of this year.

[Tulip Siddiq (Hampstead and Highgate) (Lab)]

I am proud of my constituents in Hampstead and Highgate who opened their doors to Ukrainian refugees, and those at South Hampstead synagogue who offered free history and English lessons. Last year, I met some of those refugees to talk about the enormous cultural contribution they are making to our country. Turning to the pillar 9 of the partnership, what is the Foreign Secretary doing to ensure those who have been forced to flee their homes retain cultural links with their country and preserve their sense of heritage?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to take my hon. Friend’s question and to see her back in her place. She is right to commend the work of her constituents in offering their homes to Ukrainian families, as many of our constituents are doing. Three years into this war, it is important that we commend their efforts. Under pillar 9, which is about the strong people-to-people links that exist across the country, we are working with the Premier League and the British Council to help young people in Ukraine to develop the skills, education and confidence needed for them to be assets in society, and to promote the power of the English language. Over time, I hope we will see the power of the Ukrainian language in our country and our schools.

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

I find myself thanking the right hon. Gentleman for the second time in quick succession for his gracious recognition of the work done by his Conservative predecessors, including me. I am reminded of conversations I have had with President Zelensky and, particularly, Prime Minister Shmyhal about our collective desire that when the scars and pain of the conflict have diminished, the bond of friendship between the UK and Ukraine is maintained. To that end, what can the Government do now to make it easier to de-risk some British-based businesses and potential investors going to Ukraine to start the rebuilding work now, in preparation for that glorious day when Russia is ejected from Ukraine sovereign territory and the Ukrainians can properly start to rebuild their homeland once again?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. As he knows, friendships can exist across the House, and I have greatly valued his over the years. I put on record my thanks for the work he did; I know this partnership was first mentioned in a meeting he had with the former Member for Welwyn Hatfield and I am pleased to be able to take that work forward. The idea he mentions is a good one. He will be pleased that one of the things that flowed from the Prime Minister’s trip to Ukraine is the possibility of such a delegation to Ukraine, perhaps led by a Business Minister, at some point in the future, when it feels safe to make such a visit. That will mean we can assess the opportunities, which go well beyond Kyiv. A huge industrial base existed in Ukraine before the war. There are huge opportunities because it is “the bread basket of Europe” and because of the innovation present in the country, which a lot of people do not realise, that has led to one of the biggest drone industries on the planet.

[Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and his announcement that the UK will continue to do all it can to keep Ukraine in the fight in the face of Putin’s unlawful war of aggression. He mentioned sanctions. Will he update the House about what discussions he has had with international counterparts on seizing and repurposing Russian state sanctions, to the tune of the £300 billion held in G7 countries, to finance Ukraine to keep it in the fight?

[Mr Lammy]

That was a very good question. I reassure my hon. Friend that the subject remains under active discussion with our colleagues, particularly in Europe. We have made progress in relation to interest. We recognise that more funds need to be found to keep Ukraine in the fight. There are differences of opinion about the lawfulness and legality of doing this, and the implication for the markets particularly at this time. Those discussions are live and active, and I was with the Weimar group of not just Foreign Ministers, because Prime Minister Meloni and Chancellor Scholz were there as well, discussing these very issues just before the Christmas break.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

It is welcome to hear that this partnership agreement is a binding treaty. As such, it contrasts with the Budapest memorandum, which was non-binding and not worth the paper it was written on. There is a lot of talk about how Ukraine is on an irreversible path to NATO membership, but it will be difficult to get a consensus for that anytime soon among the 32 NATO members. In lieu of NATO membership, what security guarantees might the UK seek to develop for Ukraine with European allies?

[Mr Lammy]

This is a very live issue. As I said in my statement, we do not see Putin ready to halt his aggression and come to the table for serious negotiations, but just as this country has stood by Ukraine throughout, and provided very important intelligence in the run-up to this war, we will recognise our part in working with others on security guarantees.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement on this 100-year partnership with such an important European ally. We absolutely understand how our futures are linked. I want to recognise the Ukrainian community in Milton Keynes, which has established the Sunflower school and held the first Holodomor memorial event. These communities are very worried. They are coming to the renewal of their visas because they never thought that they would be here this long. They have built new businesses, family connections, and friends and community connections. Can we reassure Ukrainians in the UK that they will continue to have our support for the duration of the war, and potentially support afterwards for some of them to continue their lives here?

[Mr Lammy]

I reassure Ukrainians in the strongest terms—I hope that they might see the 100-year partnership as a signal of this—that the UK will stand with them long after none of us are in this Chamber. That is the nature of the partnership. They should be reassured, and remember that war strikes indelible bonds; just as it did between us and the United States after the second world war, it will do so between us and Ukraine.

[Sir Roger Gale (Herne Bay and Sandwich) (Con)]

I am sure that the Foreign Secretary’s statement will be as welcome in Kyiv as it is in this House. He referred to the 200,000 refugees in this country. Further to the point that the hon. Member for Milton Keynes Central (Emily Darlington) made, many of those people would like to return home, but home is a war zone, particularly in the east, and they cannot do so. They therefore have children in school here, and have built lives here. It would reassure them to know that they are safe and secure in the United Kingdom for not just the future but the immediate future, and will be able to be here for as long as it takes.

[Mr Lammy]

None of us knows when the war will complete, but across our constituencies we all recognise communities that continue to be here, coming out of other conflicts. I am thinking of Kosovan communities, for example, which exist right across the country; I can think of a significant community in south London in particular. Many Ukrainians want to return, and we should make it possible for them to do so, but in some areas there will have to be a lot of de-mining, let us face it, in order for them to go back to their homes. Let us see where we get to at the end of the conflict.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for the statement. Exeter’s large and vibrant Ukrainian heritage community will welcome this further strengthening of our cultural, security and economic ties. Going back to sanctions, will he confirm that the UK will continue to keep up the pace and pressure of sanctions on Russia and, indeed, strengthen them where necessary to close the loopholes, in full partnership with our allies?

[Mr Lammy]

I have been very proud of the work I have led on sanctions since coming to office. It is now the strongest sanctions package against Russia anywhere in the world, with more to come.

[Sir Alec Shelbrooke (Wetherby and Easingwold) (Con)]

I welcome the Government’s efforts on the 100-year partnership. President Zelensky has made great strides in cracking down on corruption in his country, but he has a long way to go—he has probably got rid of most of the low-hanging fruit. What extra efforts will the UK Government make in assisting the Ukrainian Government to crack down on corruption, which will aid its ability to get NATO membership? I also push the Foreign Secretary on whether he has further views on how maritime support can work in conjunction with the Montreux convention.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman will be pleased to know that the Minister for Europe, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), met officials from Ukraine on the issue of anti-corruption just a few weeks ago. This is an issue I have spoken about directly with President Zelensky in the past, and it is an issue that the US traditionally has taken a big interest in. I was first in Ukraine looking at those issues in opposition. At that stage, the UK was funding a lot of work with non-governmental organisations. That work must continue to break the corruption—a lot of it a legacy, frankly, of the Soviet Union.

[Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. We have already seen the extensive role of the Russian shadow fleet in the Black sea and across the world, most recently in the Baltics. What further action can the UK Government take to tackle the role of the Russian Black sea fleet in the conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

One of the issues is how third countries, some of them significant countries, are still facilitating the Russian shadow fleet because of the illicit oil that finds its way into various economies. Those are conversations that we and our European partners continue to take forward. If we are serious about tackling Putin’s aggression, we have to be serious about the revenues that finance it.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

This morning, I was struck to hear the Foreign Secretary describe Donald Trump as a man of

“incredible grace, generosity…very funny, very friendly, very warm”

and say that most of the world is glad he is back in power. Yet, as Trump re-enters the White House, there are significant concerns about whether support for Ukraine from the US—so far Ukraine’s biggest backer—will continue. With Trump boasting that he will stop the war in Ukraine in a day, and with his choice for US Secretary of State saying on Wednesday that Ukraine will have to make “concessions” to Russia, does the Foreign Secretary think that Ukraine is as happy as he is to see Trump back in power?

[Mr Lammy]

I encourage the hon. Gentleman to actually read the words of President Zelensky, who said that he welcomed Donald Trump and his approach of “peace through strength”. I encourage him to take all opportunities he gets over the coming years to meet Donald Trump and make up his own mind.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

I welcome the announcement of the new grain verification scheme, which will help track stolen grain from occupied Ukrainian territories. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this is an important UK contribution given Ukraine’s role as a major agricultural producer, which gives it a critical position in global food security?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is exactly right. People forget that before this war, Ukraine was effectively the breadbasket of Europe. This is an issue that I spoke about with Ms McCain of the World Food Programme. It is hugely important that those grain supplies are able to leave the country. It is hugely important that they are not sabotaged. That is one of the reasons why the pillar on the Black sea is important: there must be the means for the grain supplies to leave Ukraine. The work continues.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) (Con)]

I join others in very much welcoming this declaration of solidarity between London and Kyiv on the future of Ukraine, but there is something surreal in these exchanges. Everything is about to change very dramatically; we all know that this is a kind of pre-positioning statement in advance of Mr Trump assuming the presidency. What assessment have the Government made—the Foreign Secretary has given us no idea of this at all—of what President Trump is likely to do and of how they will respond? How ready are they to ensure that we do not falter and that we step up our support for Ukraine along with our European allies—or will President Trump call all the shots?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the hon. Gentleman—in whose question is a seriousness about the cost of war and what it takes to negotiate—that when I met Donald Trump, my sense was that he did understand acutely the importance of this war, and he struck me as a man who is not prepared to be a loser. It is becoming clearer and clearer that Putin shows no sign whatsoever of wanting to negotiate, and we must therefore continue to support Ukraine as strongly as we can. The hon. Gentleman will also have picked up—I read about it in the papers—that there was a sense previously of a rush towards negotiation. That has moved over time somewhat, and that must be right as a new Administration pick up the files and fully grip this, understanding of course that we all want peace.

[Andrew Lewin (Welwyn Hatfield) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome this bold new partnership. I think it is a source of pride for everyone in the House that we have more than 200,000 Ukrainians living among us as our friends and neighbours. Will the Foreign Secretary offer a tribute to the Ukrainian community in Welwyn Garden City, who have set up a thriving Saturday school that I had the pleasure of visiting just before Christmas? I encourage him to look favourably on their ask for us to fast-track Ukrainian as a GCSE and A-level language, because many young people would love to study it but do not currently have the opportunity to do so.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend will be pleased to know that the partnership between schools under pillar 9 is fundamental. It is what gives us the bedrock on which to build both the English language capability in Ukraine and, I hope, the Ukrainian language capability in this country.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

It is to be hoped that, as has been said, President Trump can indeed bring significant additional pressure to bear on the dictator Putin to end this horrific war. Will the Foreign Secretary give additional reassurance to the British people that, although we have invested billions and billions of pounds in supporting Ukraine, we are committed to recovering it from the frozen assets of the Russian state in due course?

[Mr Lammy]

I know that the hon. Gentleman understands history. He will know that after the second world war, we were in quite a lot of debt to the United States as a result of lend-lease, which it took us many years to pay off. Today, no trading relationship of ours is bigger than that with the United States: it totals over $300 billion, with $1.2 trillion invested in each other’s economies, and 1 million British people working in US companies and 1 million Americans working in British companies. This partnership sets up something similar for the next 100 years. It is the result of war, but it has brought our two nations together. He is absolutely right to centre on how we can better use those Russian assets. That is a matter of close discussion across the European family.

[Mr Mark Sewards (Leeds South West and Morley) (Lab)]

I welcome the Government’s commitment to 100 years of friendship with the people of Ukraine. In pillar 4, which talks about economy and trade, there is a commitment to “broaden mutual market access” and raise

“awareness and utilisation of the UK-Ukraine Free Trade Agreement”.

How long will it take for that work come into effect and for both countries to benefit from it?

[Mr Lammy]

I am so glad that my hon. Friend has drawn attention to pillar 4. That allows me to remind the House that the Prime Minister announced £40 million for a new economic recovery programme, which will create opportunities for UK companies by supporting key growth sectors in Ukraine. That is the bedrock of an enhanced trade and investment opportunity, and eventually a trading relationship when Ukraine gets back to the normality that I know it is so keen to achieve.

[Sir Gavin Williamson (Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge) (Con)]

I very much welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. As he will know, in order to have an enduring peace, there will need to be credible deterrence for Ukraine. We have already seen the development of deterrence in eastern nations such as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania through the enhanced forward presence. Is the Foreign Secretary thinking of opening up discussions about how we could do that in Ukraine in the future, establishing an enhanced forward presence to underpin its security?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to the right hon. Member for raising this issue. Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO—allies agreed at the July summit in Washington that that was the rightful place of Ukraine over time. However, he is right that guarantees will be necessary. It is a matter of intense discussion. We have been the European country that has led on our military support for Ukraine, so he is absolutely right that we would expect to play a role in that when the day comes, working with other allies. As President Zelensky has said, the US would have to play a role in that, too.

[Joe Powell (Kensington and Bayswater) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State and the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), for their leadership on sanctions. We know that Putin’s shadow fleet is still a major source of financing for the war, and that cutting it off is vital to bringing him to the negotiating table and, crucially, preventing him from rearming later on. How does the Secretary of State plan to persuade allies and counterparts —including some of our own British overseas territories—to clamp down on sanctions evasion and expand the capture of the shadow fleet to the full extent of that fleet?

[Mr Lammy]

I am so grateful to my hon. Friend for the work he did on these issues prior to coming to Parliament, and for the work that he continues to do. He will be pleased that this is a subject we have raised, particularly with the overseas territories. It is also something I have raised with both the Indians and the Turks, where we have seen some going behind the rules that we have made in order to inadvertently benefit Russia.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

The scores of Ukrainians living in my constituency will be very happy to hear today’s statement, because they are fearful about their future due to the length of time that the war has gone on. I just hope that the Foreign Secretary stands by these promises more so than the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland has done today for the people of Northern Ireland—he has surrendered to the EU, rather than protect Northern Ireland businesses. However, does the Foreign Secretary have any concerns about the effect that either the resolve of EU countries or the attitude of the forthcoming American Administration is likely to have in undermining the message of support to the Ukrainian people and the message of defiance to Putin?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that I am a man of my word, and that I am not as worried as some are. The reason is that while there is this debate—which Donald Trump has continued to push—about our commitment to defence spending, it is important to say that if we let Putin win, defence spending across all of our countries will rocket. During the cold war, defence spending rose to about 7%, so I think all countries need to concentrate their minds on standing by Ukraine.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

The Ukrainian defence and tech sectors have proven themselves resilient and innovative under the harsh pressure of war. Will the Foreign Secretary say a bit more about how, under the new 100-year partnership, the UK defence and tech sectors can support their Ukrainian counterparts? Likewise, how can we learn from the innovations of our Ukrainian friends and allies?

[Mr Lammy]

The Ukrainians recognise our huge strengths in higher education and, as result, innovation, which my hon. Friend will that referenced in the eventual treaty. Prior to the war, there was immense expertise in tech and IT in Ukraine. The innovations in drone technology are extraordinary and, frankly, are changing the nature of warfare, from which we should benefit. For all those reasons, that is an important pillar, from which we will gain as much as Ukraine will over the coming years.

[Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)]

Pillar 2.3 states:

“Throughout the duration of the Declaration, neither Participant will be left alone in the face of an attack or aggression.”

To what extent does that act as a NATO article 5 commitment in lieu of Ukraine joining NATO? Does it, like article 5, facilitate direct UK military action in support of Ukraine should it be attacked again in the future in violation of the UN charter? Are other NATO allies also negotiating similar pacts, and to what extent do they complement this one?

[Mr Lammy]

Unusually, the hon. Gentleman is jumping ahead of himself somewhat. We continue to support Ukraine with every military effort. That is going on now, and in a sense that is the reference he is making. I have indicated an irreversible pathway to NATO, as we agreed back in September. This is not article 5.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

I welcome the statement, and I thank the Foreign Secretary and his colleagues for working on the partnership. As he will know, the House, in its first debate of the year, called on the Government to investigate how we might seize Russian assets. Notwithstanding his statements about the ongoing conversations and the sensitivities, will he update the House on when he will be able to report back to us on that?

[Mr Lammy]

I simply say to the hon. Gentleman that this is the most sensitive of times. We all recognise that this is a critical year for Ukraine, and further funds will need to be found. I am pleased to see that the $50 billion loan through the G7 will eventually be getting into Ukrainian coffers, but there is more to do, and the conversations are live at this point in time.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

It has been reported—indeed, it was mentioned by the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton)—that Putin has deployed North Korean troops in Ukraine. What is the Government’s response to what is now an axis of operations against Ukraine?

[Mr Lammy]

This is incredibly dangerous, as we see the Euro-Atlantic theatre and the Indo-Pacific theatre coalesce. It is important to emphasise that our assessment is that those troops are being used in Kursk. We see that, we recognise it and we will use all means necessary to deal with that issue with the tools we have as best we can in the coming days.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

While the worst of humanity was being demonstrated with Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, our nation was showing the best of humanity, in our rich tradition, by opening our doors to those displaced by war. One of those families is that of my constituent Professor Ivan Waddington, who has adopted a Ukrainian refugee family, whom he sees as his own. He has asked me to ask the Government whether they are planning to continue with the scheme, and will those Ukrainians who have assimilated and are making a positive contribution to our country have the right to remain in this country when the war ends?

[Mr Lammy]

I recognise why hon. Members have raised this issue, but that must rightly be a determination for the Home Secretary at the appropriate time. However, I want to strongly indicate our support for those families in this country, and our recognition, as the war continues and may go on for some time, of the huge contribution they continue to make. I hope that the 100-year partnership that we have signed is an indication of the inextricable link that we think now exists between Ukraine and the United Kingdom.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement. It will give the almost 300 Ukrainian families living in my constituency the encouragement they need. It is our desire and their desire that the war in Ukraine will come to an end shortly, for which I am a known advocate, along with many other Members. Do we still intend to send the £3 billion annual military assistance until 2031 whether the war is being fought or not? What will “no less than £3 billion” mean, and will we be expected to fund the Ukraine defence wholly if allies such as the United States of America do not make the same deals?

[Mr Lammy]

Our commitment is for that £3 billion for as long as it takes. It is a solemn and important commitment to Ukraine, and it underlines the cross-party support in the House and the strength of support among the British people.

Middle East

David Lammy Excerpts

Thursday 16th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

With permission, I will update the House on the deal announced between Israel and Hamas. Last night, US President Biden and Qatari Prime Minister Al Thani confirmed that negotiators had reached an agreement. While we await political approval for the text, the agreement is expected to come into force shortly after midday Israel time on Sunday 19 January.

After months of despair, there is now hope; a glimmer of light in the darkness; a darkness that had seemed all-consuming since Hamas’s barbaric terrorist attack on 7 October 2023. I am sure that the whole House remembers the agony as we learned the full horror of what had unfolded and the grief as we mourned those who were lost. For the hostage families, the agony has gone on and on. Members across the House will have met many of them, including the relatives of British citizen Emily Damari, and Eli Sharabi, Oded Lifschitz and Avinatan Or. I know that we have families with us in the Public Gallery. I pay tribute once again to them for their bravery, humanity and commitment to bringing the hostages home.

I invite the House to join me in remembering those murdered in captivity, including Nadav Popplewell and Yossi Sharabi. May their memories be a blessing.

I say to all those now waiting anxiously to see what this deal means for them: we are with you in the days and weeks ahead. In Gaza today, civilians will be waiting anxiously to see what this deal means for them. I say to them, too: we are with you as you begin to rebuild your lives.

After 15 months of conflict, the level of suffering defies belief. Gazans have truly been trapped in hell on earth—over 46,000 killed, so many children’s lives extinguished, schools, hospitals and homes destroyed, and hunger and disease. Almost 2 million have been forced to flee their homes, with northern Gaza cut off from the rest of the strip. A generation have been scarred by the savagery of war.

Among the victims was Hind Rajab, a five-year-old Palestinian girl killed alongside members of her family and the paramedics who came to rescue her. Among the victims were many journalists dedicated to documenting the horrors around them. Among the victims were aid workers dedicated to serving others, including British citizens John Chapman, James Henderson and James Kirby. I invite the House to join me in remembering them all. We mourn every innocent victim of this appalling war.

Beyond Israel and Gaza, the conflict has brought yet more tensions and conflict into the wider region, with unprecedented Iranian attacks, a renewed conflict in Lebanon and Houthi strikes in the Red sea and into Israel. At times, our own communities—and indeed this House—have been divided by this war. This is a moment of hope for us all, to unite in support of this ceasefire.

The agreement as negotiated has three stages. In the first six-week phase we expect that both parties will stop fighting. Thirty-three of the hostages will be freed: children, women, those over 50 and the wounded. Israel will start to redeploy to the edge of the strip. Palestinians will return to what is left of their homes. The Rafah crossing will reopen. Israel will allow 600 truckloads of aid into Gaza each day. On the 16th day, negotiations will begin on the detail of the second phase. In the second six-week phase, the male hostages under 50 will be released. Israel will complete its withdrawal from Gaza, and there will be a permanent ceasefire. Finally, a third phase will see the return of the bodies of any remaining hostages and the lifting of economic restrictions on Gaza.

As President Biden said, the elements of this deal were endorsed by the United Nations Security Council last May. It has taken tireless efforts to reach the agreement of both sides, with reports of final talks this week lasting an intense 96 hours. I congratulate all those who have contributed to getting to this stage: in particular, His Highness the Emir of Qatar and Prime Minister Al Thani; Egyptian President Sisi and Foreign Minister Abdelatty; and President Biden and Secretary Blinken, as well as President-elect Trump. The UK has been supporting them throughout.

From day one in office, the Government have pressed at every stage for an immediate ceasefire, to free the hostages, to get more aid into Gaza and to open up a path to lasting peace. I visited Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories for the third time as Foreign Secretary just a few days ago, meeting Foreign Minister Sa’ar, President Abbas and hostage families, to press for an end to this war and a plan for the future.

We have also played a leading role in the humanitarian effort, restarting funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, funding field hospitals that have treated more than 300,000 Gazans, and providing more than £100 million in support to the Palestinians this financial year. I pay tribute to Foreign Office Ministers in the last Government for their work to deliver aid to Gaza. Now I am in this role, I know how hard they worked. That intense effort must continue in the days and weeks ahead.

Much remains to be done. It is critical that there is final approval of the agreement. As the Israeli Cabinet meet, I urge them to back this deal. Now is not the time for any backtracking. Both sides must implement each phase of the deal in full and on time. The history of this conflict is littered with missed opportunities. It would be a tragedy to let slip the chance before us—we must grab it with both hands. It is the chance not just for a ceasefire but for a lasting peace, and to break the cycle of violence that has inflicted so much suffering on innocent people on both sides.

The Government are committed to sustaining momentum, however fragile the process at first may be. Every hostage must be released, as set out in the agreement. Every ounce of aid promised to Gaza must reach those in need. I am sending my representative for humanitarian affairs to the region, to work closely with aid agencies, the Israeli Government and our partners to deliver on these promises.

Palestinians must also be free to return to their homes and, crucially, they will need to rebuild: rebuild their homes, rebuild their lives and rebuild their communities. They cannot possibly do that on their own. They need to feel safe and they need the international community to deliver the funds they will require. The UK had already begun to convene partners on the financing and co-ordination of recovery and reconstruction. It is essential that the coming surge of assistance is properly co-ordinated, with the access and security to get to people all that they need.

The Palestinian Authority has a crucial role to play. We want donors to support its plans for recovery, and I discussed that with President Abbas on Monday. We are providing technical and financial assistance to the PA, including to support the urgent recovery of basic services. Working with the Palestinian Authority and civil society will help lay the groundwork for an inclusive Palestinian governance in Gaza. That is the best way to re-establish local order and security. It is therefore a crucial first step in achieving not only better lives for Palestinians but a future for Gaza no longer under the control of Hamas.

Ultimately, it will take time to rebuild Gaza and rebuild trust between the two sides. I must warn the House that there are risks at every turn. But we must try to use the agreement to establish a credible pathway to a two-state solution, with equal measures of security, dignity and justice for Israelis and Palestinians alike. The decades-long conflict between Israelis and Palestinians cannot be managed; it must now be resolved.

We are not yet there and there is much negotiating still to do. As we debate in this House, fighting continues. The agreement awaits full political approval. The hostage families wait for the hostages to come home. Gazans wait for the horrors to be lifted. However, we must still recognise the significance of this moment. It has been long-awaited—frankly, it has taken far too long—and I sincerely hope it is now the basis for progress: progress on bringing the hostages home, progress on bringing relief, reconstruction and hope to long-suffering civilians, and progress towards a two-state solution with Palestinians and Israelis living in peace and security; a better future for all. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

All Members recognise the fragile and sensitive nature of the current situation. There is a long road ahead at one of the most important moments for the middle east, which we all hope will usher in a sustainable end to the dreadful conflict in Gaza. It is a conflict that we should never forget was triggered by the horrific Hamas terror attacks of 7 October 2023—the worst terror attack in Israel’s history and the most murderous pogrom against the Jewish people since the Holocaust.

We have in our thoughts today the victims of that appalling massacre: those who lost their lives, including the hostages murdered in captivity, and those whose lives have been changed forever. Every single hostage must be returned safely home and reunited with family and friends after 15 months of the most unimaginable cruelty at the hands of Hamas. Even in the midst of that unimaginable pain and anxiety, the families of those held hostage have kept the torch burning for their loved ones, with publicity highlighting their plight with such resilience and tremendous bravery.

We are joined in the House today by the families of hostages who we know will not be eligible for immediate release. I recently met Emily Damari’s mother Mandy and Dani Miran, whose son Omri is also in captivity. We all pay tribute to them all for their unceasing campaign to secure the release of their loved ones and all those in captivity. This will, of course, be a time of great emotions for them—mixed emotions—and in the coming weeks, we must continue to wrap our arms around those hostage families.

Like the Foreign Secretary, I acknowledge the important role of Qatar, Egypt and the United States in getting us to where we are today in these talks. We will all follow these developments closely in the days ahead, and we will expect the UK Government to be fully engaged and involved in the heavy lifting that is required at this crucial time to make this agreement work and last.

To that end, can the Foreign Secretary to tell the House specifically what role the UK Government have played in these negotiations and about their contribution to reaching this agreement? Can he give assurances that the UK will help Israel in any way possible to support the safe return of the hostages, which will be so critical in ensuring that the agreement endures? Can he inform the House—it may yet be too early—whether any of the Palestinian prisoners being released were responsible for the death or injury of British nationals, and about the steps being put in place to manage the potential risk of dangerous individuals being set free? On the question of humanitarian aid to Gaza, what work has he undertaken to unpick the awful bottlenecks that we have seen over months and months, while we have seen innocent civilians suffer? Will civilians now receive the vital aid that we have been told will get through to bring essential relief to communities across Gaza?

On the future governance of Gaza, we have so far heard little about the “day after” plan, but this is extremely important; I know the Foreign Secretary will come back to this House in due course, but I would welcome his thoughts on the matter. Is it the Foreign Secretary’s position that Hamas must have no role in the future of Gaza? We want to see an end to the brutality with which they have conducted themselves. Does he agree that if the Palestinian Authority do indeed assume responsibility in Gaza, in order to have an enduring and lasting peace, they must undertake the most comprehensive reform in their history, with serious shifts not just in their behaviour but on education and welfare, and that they must bring the course of democracy through to the end that we would like to see? Has he this week delivered that unambiguous message to the Palestinian leadership?

The right people must be involved to ensure that solid foundations are put in place on which Gaza can rebuild and to ensure a lasting, better future so that every generation can live their lives in peace, with the opportunities that have been denied to them for too long. In the days ahead, our focus needs to be on securing the release of the hostages, getting the aid into Gaza and working for that lasting peace.

However, there are some related points that the Foreign Secretary will also need to consider. On Israel, for example, that includes whether the changes to the approach on the International Criminal Court arrest warrants will happen and what should happen from the Government’s position; it also includes the arrangements for the future reconstruction of Gaza. He has just touched on this, but what contribution does he think the United Kingdom should make? His thoughts would be welcome. There are many complexities here. Will he also commit to inserting the UK’s enthusiastic approach to fresh discussions on the Abraham accords and the role that will play in the peace, stability and prosperity in the region?

Finally, we have seen for over a year the world’s only Jewish state being ruthlessly attacked from all sides, from the Hamas terrorists in Gaza to the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, from which Iranian-linked militias in Iraq have been directing their course of action, while Iran and its proxies have used innocent Palestinian civilians as human shields without any care for their welfare or wellbeing. We need to know that this Government will step up when it comes to addressing the root causes, which rest in Tehran. The Government, the international community and all of us will want a robust strategy towards Iran if we are to build a lasting and sustainable peace in the middle east.

[Mr Lammy]

I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her remarks and for her tone. Doing this role, one understands the effort that one’s predecessors have put in, so I want to put on the record once again that the right hon. Members for Braintree (Mr Cleverly) and for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell) and Lord Cameron, before me, made tremendous efforts on behalf of the UK Government to get us to this point. I know that they, like me, will sincerely wish that we could have reached this point sooner. This is indeed a day on which we can be grateful for the UK’s diplomacy in getting us to this point.

The right hon. Lady asks about the role that the UK has played. She will know that it was quite right that Qatar and Egypt, with their proximity to Hamas, should be central in bringing about the ceasefire; and that the United States, with its particular relationship with Israel, should also stand alongside them. But she will know, because of our complex foreign policy relationship with all those parties, the tremendous effort that UK diplomats have put in to get us to this path. Indeed, I was with them in Israel and in the occupied territories on Monday this week.

It was very important to be with British hostage families in particular, to assure them and counsel them that my judgment was that we would get to this point, as fragile as it is—I want to emphasise the fragility—at this time, but also to be in the occupied territories, the west bank and east Jerusalem, to spend time with President Abbas, to discuss with him what now needs to happen in Gaza in terms of its reconstruction and the reform that the right hon. Lady rightly emphasises is essential for the Palestinian Authority.

The right hon. Lady knows that we have Sir Michael Barber working with the Palestinian Authority to lift up that capacity in the reforms that will be necessary to play that role—alongside others, clearly—in Gaza. When I think of others, I think about the international community as well, but alongside them it is important that the UK plays its part. I will come back to the subject of reconstruction in a moment.

The right hon. Lady rightly talks about the humanitarian situation in Gaza. We have provided £112 million in this financial year, including £41 million specifically for UNRWA. We want to see the number of trucks increase and the figure that has been set in the ceasefire agreement met. I will say this, though: the situation will require proper governance in Gaza if we are to achieve that. At the moment, we have gangs. There is a possibility, as the space opens up, that actually we will get an increase in gangs and less aid to the people who need it. This is the first phase of the deal. There will still be hostages left after the first phase and into the second phase, and potentially into the third phase. We know that able men are not part of the first phase. They need humanitarian aid at this time and hostage families press me to ensure that their loved ones are getting access to that humanitarian aid. So this is a fragile moment and the UK is pressing for a political process, because only a political process will get not just the ceasefire, but the long-term stability that means Gazans can truly rebuild their lives.

The right hon. Lady talks about a “day after” plan. The UK is ready to play a leading role in this process, with international and regional partners. It should be predicated on tangible progress, in our view, towards a Palestinian state, with Gaza and the west bank united under one Government. The Palestinian Authority’s role in Gaza must therefore be front and centre. Planning needs to advance security both for Gazans and for Israel, and Israel’s security will be fundamental if we are to bring this to an end. That will take intense negotiation and discussion. There clearly will be an important role for the international community in the coming days but, in this fragile moment of phase 1, if we are to complete phase 3 then we will need that intensity in terms of negotiation. My view is very clear: there cannot be a role for Hamas. The terrorism must come to an end. Trust has to be rebuilt. There cannot be a role for Hamas.

Only with that candle that we keep alight for a two-state solution can we actually reach the normalisation that is at the heart of any building on the Abraham accords and the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Israel that can bring a lot of prosperity for people in the middle east.

The right hon. Lady is right that Iran remains a malign force. This week, British diplomats were discussing with Iran its nuclear programme and what needs to happen if we are not to see the snapback of our sanctions as a consequence of the joint comprehensive plan of action later this year. We will do all that we can diplomatically. This is the moment when the Iranians need to step up and do the right thing, and I know that is acutely in the minds of the incoming US Administration.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Chair of the International Development Committee.

[Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and support every word that he has said.

No one wants a ceasefire more than I do. I cannot describe the tears that I and others in the House have shed for all the innocent civilians who have been murdered and maimed. I cannot think what the families of the hostages are going through, and, to be honest, I do not want to think of what the hostages themselves have endured. But the ceasefire is far from certain, the peace following it is far from certain, and the two-state solution is very far from certain. What is certain is that on 28 January the Knesset’s legislation that effectively bans UNRWA comes into force, and I am unable to see how the aid, the stability, the health systems and the schools can be implemented if that happens. My Committee will publish a report on this subject tomorrow, but can the Foreign Secretary speak now about what he is doing to urge Israel to ensure that that legislation does not come into force and that aid can flood in where it is needed?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all her endeavours on these issues on behalf her Committee, and on behalf of this country. She is right that colleagues in all parts of the House, in this Parliament and the last, have shed tears about this most heartbreaking of conflicts. In my 25 years in the House, I have not seen such emotion from UK parliamentarians in relation to this central challenge.

As for the position of the UK Government, in the midst of this conflict, when there are so many children out of school, so many children orphaned and so many hospitals lying in rubble, when there is disease and famine, we cannot see how there cannot be a role for the central UN agency at this time if this peace is to hold. On Monday, I made that point to the Israeli Government again. Along with my French and German colleagues, I wrote to the Israeli Foreign Minister, making that point and pressing him on the winterisation plan that we believe must be implemented. The clock is ticking down to that Knesset legislation. What we do not want is the undermining of the peace that begins on Sunday by that legislation just a few days into its passing.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement.

This ceasefire is welcomed by all who have watched with horror as the suffering that began on 7 October 2023 has worsened for so many, and I add my thanks to all those who have worked so hard to deliver it. I am thinking today of the Palestinians and Israelis I have met whose lives have been torn apart by this conflict, and to whom this news brings a moment of hope; of the British families of Israeli hostages who continue to live with uncertainty and fear about the fate of their loved ones; and of the Palestinians whose daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, mothers and fathers have lost their lives and homes. The priority must now be ensuring that humanitarian assistance floods into Gaza, and that all possible efforts are made to secure the release of the remaining hostages. I urge the Foreign Secretary to do everything in his power—as he has just said—to persuade Israel not to implement the Knesset’s resolution on UNRWA, which would do so much harm and would undermine the progress that is being made.

I am grateful today for the fact that a deal has been reached, but I am also angry that it has taken so long. In the months of delay, there has been no relief for the hostage families. So many more lives have been lost, and so much more destruction has been visited on people in Gaza, including further deaths even since the ceasefire deal was announced. The blocks to progress have been extremists on both sides, the terrorists in Hamas and the supporters of annexation in the Israeli Cabinet: people who do not want peace, but want to erase another population from the land. So I ask the Foreign Secretary these questions.

Will the UK Government isolate the extremists and empower the majority of Israelis and Palestinians who want peace? Will he commit the UK to working tirelessly for a lasting peace through a two-state solution with a recognised Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders? Will he redouble efforts in diplomacy and through financial measures against the backers and enablers of Hamas to cut off their funds? Will he now proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps? Will he spell out to the Governments of Israel and the United States that settler violence and illegal annexation in the west bank must stop, and will the UK Government now recognise the Palestinian state?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his tone and for raising those issues. He is right about UNRWA. As I have said, this first phase is a critical period, and I believe that withdrawing UNRWA would destabilise it. I would ask Israel to think very carefully about how we can achieve a surge in humanitarian aid if that is the direction of travel.

There are extremists on both sides. The hon. Gentleman is right. This deal was substantially on the table last May, put down by President Biden. It has taken a Herculean effort. It is important that President-elect Trump was there to apply pressure to get the deal over the line, and I think that all of us in the House would applaud the bipartisan spirit of envoys from both the current and future Administrations of the United States in Qatar over the last few days to get it over the line. However, the hon. Gentleman knows that the Israeli Security Cabinet is meeting over the next few hours to decide whether to proceed with this deal. He knows, as a politician, that there are politicians currently in the Government of Israel who are threatening to resign and bring down that Government, so he knows how fragile this moment is—I urge our friends in the Israeli Government to do the right thing and get this deal over the line now—and he knows, too, that we applaud the work of Egypt and Qatar and their mediation with Hamas, but there have been problems between those outside Gaza associated with Hamas and those inside Gaza associated with Hamas, and that makes this first phase delicate as well.

Of course, we want to see a two-state solution. My party is committed to Palestinian recognition at the right point. The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to raise the challenges on the west bank. The unravelling of UNRWA would make the west bank even more fragile than it currently is. I was there on Monday, and security issues, expansion and settler violence all got worse in 2024—it is the worst year on record for violence and expansion. There is much to do.

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement, and I thank everybody who has been involved in getting us to where we are now. I appreciate how fragile it is, but it is still fantastic news. I particularly want to commend the dignity and grace of the Palestinian and Israeli families who have lost loved ones or are waiting for news about them. I wonder what lessons we can learn from them, in terms of their commitment to peace, their recognition of our common humanity and their desire to live alongside each other in peace.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has been on this issue day after day; I cannot think of a colleague who has pressed me more on it. She is right to centre the families on both sides and their dignity and grace, and these historic peoples, all of whom want a home, all of whom want security and all of whom have been horribly affected by this most horrendous of wars. Our responsibility to them is to continue to press for the political process that gets us to the two-state solution that we all know is the only way to achieve lasting peace.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

I think the Foreign Secretary has spoken for the whole House today with his tone. I am sure he would agree that it is possible to be four-square behind the Israeli Government in their right to defend themselves and defeat Hamas and at the same time to care about the suffering of the Palestinian people. Will the Foreign Secretary use his charm or whatever influence he has on the incoming Trump Administration to persuade them to use their power to convince the Israeli Government that these illegal new settlements in the west bank must stop, and the pressure on the Palestinian people in the west bank must stop, because it is fuelling a sense of despair and future extremism?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for bringing his tremendous experience in the House to bear. He is absolutely right. He will be pleased to know that when I discussed these issues with President Abbas on Monday, he was complimentary about the conversation he had had with President-elect Trump on these matters, and of course, he has an existing relationship with President-elect Trump. That left me very hopeful indeed.

The right hon. Gentleman is right: the expansion particularly undermines the 1967 settlement, and it makes it very difficult to achieve the two-state solution. Those who try to thwart the possibility of a two-state solution are saying that their belief is either in no state at all, which is entirely unacceptable, or it is in one state, in which case they had better get on and ensure equality for all.

[Jon Pearce (High Peak) (Lab)]

I am sure the whole House will join me in paying tribute to the incredible bravery of the hostage families. We are joined in the House by the families of Tal Shoham, Nimrod Cohen, Ohad Yahalomi, Omri Miran and Shay Levinson. I met with them this morning. Their suffering continues—the uncertainty, the sleepless nights—while they wait for a final deal and to know whether their loved ones will be coming home. What reassurances can the Foreign Secretary give to them and to the House that the UK will do everything in its power to make sure that their loved ones come home, that all UK-related hostages come home as a matter of priority and that all hostages come home as soon as possible, to end their suffering?

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising the issue of hostages. I pay tribute to the 17 British nationals killed since the abhorrent attack on 7 October. Our hope is that three of the UK and UK-linked hostages will be released in the first phase, as they fall into the criteria for that release, which we anticipate will be agreed later today. Of course, it is our sincere hope that as we get to the second and third phases, all hostages will be released.

We continue to work with all UK-linked hostage families. I was with many on Monday, and our representatives and diplomats have been in touch with them overnight and in the last few days. This is the most difficult of times, as they wait to see the fate of their loved ones. My hon. Friend will recognise that there was fighting yesterday, in which nine Israel Defence Forces soldiers lost their lives, there was fighting this morning, and it is likely that there will be fighting right up to the ceasefire on Sunday. This is the most challenging of moments, as those hostage families wait and, in the coming days and weeks, pray that their loved ones are returned.

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

I would like to put on record my gratitude to the Foreign Secretary for his kind words about the work that was done prior to his party forming a Government. I echo the praise that he has given to the US State Department and the Egyptian and Qatari Foreign Ministers for the work they have done to get this deal over the line, but as he said, it is not there yet, so I want to ask two things. To ensure that the hostages are released promptly, what can we do to make sure this deal gets over the line? Sadly, we have seen too much aid diverted away from the Palestinian people in Gaza and used to facilitate attacks against Israelis, so what will the Department do to ensure as best it can that the aid gets to the people who need it and is not used to murder Israelis?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman centres the important work of the United Kingdom in relation to humanitarian aid in particular at this time. He will know that in order for the aid to get in, we have to have security. He will also know that there is a critical role for the United Nations, which can achieve about 250 trucks. It is my sincere hope that Israel is able to restart the use of commercial organisations to increase that number even further, but he will recognise that this presents a massive challenge, as has been set out by the head of UNRWA and the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

The challenge is that this is taking place against a backdrop of huge displacement of Gazans over this time and of gangs roaming the streets, so there is a worry that they could get access to the aid as the space opens up. There is a lot to do, and how we achieve that security with the Israelis withdrawing and how Gulf states get the confidence to step in and begin reconstruction—they do not want to put money in if it will all be torn down a few weeks or months later—is critical. The UK has said that we are ready to play that role on the day after and in reconstruction. We want to work alongside the region and the United States to co-ordinate and build that. He will also know that while a lot of emphasis was placed on the ceasefire, when it comes to what happens next, there is much, much more to do and negotiate.

[Uma Kumaran (Stratford and Bow) (Lab)]

As the Foreign Secretary said, today there are the first embers of hope after what has felt like perpetual agony for the people of Israel and Palestine. He mentioned that Gazans have been trapped in hell on earth, and it has been a living nightmare for the families of the hostages. I know that the Foreign Secretary and his team will not rest until we see all the hostages released and a ceasefire taking full effect. He spoke of the uncertainty around the path ahead. What more can the UK Government do to play our role in working towards the shared goal of a two-state solution, and when will be the right time for us to recognise a sovereign state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

We hold out that a two-state solution must be the way forward. We believe that normalising relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia is key, and that there must be Palestinian component. We will press to achieve that, and we will work alongside President-elect Trump and his team in the coming days to hopefully bring that about.

[Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)]

May I thank the Foreign Secretary for his kind remarks and applaud his expression of cautious optimism? It is cautious because the agony of the hostages continues and the urgent need for a quantum increase in humanitarian aid remains unrequited. The deal must be implemented in good faith, and I very much welcome his comment that Hamas can never again govern that space. I pay tribute to his diplomats and officials for their extraordinary hard work and effectiveness, and I underline that Britain has a very important role to play in what comes next. Will he bear in mind that abject devastation can lead to unforeseen breakthroughs? Following the Yom Kippur war, we saw Israel make peace with Egypt, and significant progress was made on the Oslo accords following the intifada.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman brings to bear his tremendous experience of these issues, which has been built up over many years and many different roles in Government and beyond. He is right to focus on the fact that Hamas cannot play a role, but he probably agrees with me. I never believed, as some in the Israeli Government did, that they could eradiate Hamas solely by military force. What eradicates extremism is diplomacy, a political solution and a political horizon that pulls the rug from under the terrorists. That is why it is hugely important that the UK now plays its full role in reaching a political solution and a political horizon that brings about peace, not another generation of militant young men with terrorism and pain in their hearts.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. I have dared to feel some hope that this ceasefire could be the beginning of the end of Israel’s 15 months of pain and suffering since the appalling Hamas attacks, and the end of 15 months in which the entire population of Gaza has wondered day in, day out whether they will survive another day of bombing.

The humanitarian situation is dire. Staff at the Al-Awda hospital, the only partially functioning hospital in the north of Gaza, report that they have been entirely cut off from aid supplies. The long-awaited and so far failed flood of aid is absolutely necessary, but the success of aid efforts must be measured not just by how many trucks get in, essential as that is, but by how many lives are ultimately protected and saved. What urgent measures is the Foreign Secretary taking to ensure that that is the case?

[Mr Lammy]

Half a million people in Gaza have received essential healthcare as a result of UK funding, and it was very important to support UK-Med when we came into office. Over 600,000 young people in Gaza have received food as a result of our efforts, but there is a tremendous amount to do, as my hon. Friend knows. The threat to UNRWA could thwart these efforts in the coming days. It is about how we get the number of truckloads up, how we deliver security for the Gazan people and how people can return to their homes, which is now the hope. But she will understand that many of them are returning to rubble. Actually, they are returning to camps in the surrounds of their homes, and they will need aid and support for many, many years, and probably for decades to come.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

As we hope for this ceasefire deal and for the release of the hostages, we continue to mourn all of those who have been killed since the vicious terrorist attack by Hamas on 7 October 2023. In that respect, my mind is very much with the six little babies who did not see this proposal because they froze to death in Gaza just a few short weeks ago. The collective punishment of the Palestinian people will not be forgotten by history, just as all of those who sat silent, and who encouraged and armed extremists in the Israeli Government, will be judged by history. The ceasefire deal is not yet certain; it has been widely reported this morning that the Israeli Cabinet has not yet signed it off. Can the Secretary of State please elaborate on what the consequences would be if either Hamas or, indeed, the Israeli Government reneged on this deal?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that the Labour party has always stressed the seriousness of Israel’s security in the toughest of neighbourhoods, because Iran and its proxies have so much malign intent. But we have always insisted that what it does must be within international humanitarian law, and we have raised our concerns at every turn when we have felt that it is being breached. As the Israeli Cabinet meets to approve the deal at this most serious of moments, it is my sincere hope that they hear what President-elect Trump has said about his expectations of this deal, that they hear the expectations of this united House of Commons, and that they do the right thing.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

The Foreign Secretary rightly says that we must use this agreement to establish a pathway to a two-state solution. Steps along that pathway were set out in the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice that was handed down last July, and they would provide the reassurance and security to allow for reconstruction in Gaza. When will the Government publish their response to that opinion?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for all his work over the last few months to focus on the plight of people in Gaza. I know that he has tremendous legal expertise in these matters, and I assure him that this issue is being studied in depth by the appropriate legal minds in Government. We hope to be able to say more when that process is complete.

[Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)]

Every Friday since 7 October, many people have gathered in Borehamwood, in the heart of my constituency, with a simple message: “Bring them home.” May I urge the Foreign Secretary to use all the diplomatic efforts of His Majesty’s Government to bring that vision to bear? The first thing to do is to secure agreement from the Israeli Cabinet. As he says, the deal could go wrong at each stage of the process. Can we keep a focus on bringing the hostages home? If we have an enduring ceasefire, as we all hope and pray, will he update the House on the role that our friends and allies in the Gulf states can play in rebuilding Gaza? That will be crucial in ensuring that peace endures.

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for bringing the experience of his constituency to bear. We have a family of constituencies in north London where a candle has been lit for the hostages every single Friday, including in the Stamford Hill area of my constituency, which he knows is one of the historical homes of the Jewish community, many having migrated to Borehamwood and Hertfordshire over the years.

The right hon. Gentleman is also right to mention the importance of the Gulf states. They can do so much for the reconstruction and rebuilding of Gaza. They can do so much to support a rehabilitated and reformed Palestinian Authority. They can do so much to support the monitoring and security arrangements that will need to be put in place if Israel is to be assured that it can withdraw and that Hamas will not attack again.

We should remember the rocket fire that Israel has experienced over many, many years, including, of course, the attack on 7 October. There is a key role for the Gulf states, but they will not take up that role unless there is renewed and continued negotiation beyond phase 1, which begins in 16 days’ time. They will need a political horizon, too.

[Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)]

I welcome the ceasefire, after 15 months of relentless bombing of hospitals, schools, refugee camps, and women and children. For the ceasefire to last, it is important that Israel is compelled to recognise that Palestinians have a right to freedom, justice and self-determination.

What steps are being taken to thicken the thin layer of ice on which this ceasefire agreement is skating? Will the Foreign Secretary tell us what steps are being taken to negotiate a two-state solution, which goes to the heart and root cause of this problem, and to ensure that East Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine?

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Mr Lammy]

I am conscious of how many Members are on their feet. I will attempt to go a little quicker.

The Palestinian cause is a just cause. A two-state solution is where we have to be. A political process is necessary. I will play my full part, and I reassured President Abbas that we will do that over the coming days and weeks.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

We live in hope of a ceasefire and the release of the hostages. However, we cannot forget everything that has come before: the mass atrocities on 7 October were followed by 15 months of destruction waged against Gaza’s civilians by the Israeli Government. The Foreign Secretary mentioned how we eradicate extremism. Extremism is also eradicated by justice. Only justice can redress crime. What steps is he taking to support the International Court of Justice and the ICC to hold all perpetrators of war crimes to account? Will he publish the full record of the UK’s political and military involvement in the conflict so far?

[Mr Lammy]

We have always been clear about the importance of international humanitarian law, and we have always been clear about the importance of its being determined by international courts. Let me be crystal clear: many men and women from this country died in the second world war to achieve the settlement that gave us international humanitarian law and the architecture on which we all rely. It is for that reason that the Labour party will never renege on our responsibilities in relation to international humanitarian law.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

The Foreign Secretary rightly mentioned the Houthis and their attacks. We must not forget that peace in the region will come about only if the Yemenis receive the same privilege as the Palestinians. There has to be a peace solution for the Yemenis.

A two-state solution has also been mentioned. My constituents and I believe that these are only warm words. I do not believe that this Government will recognise Palestine as a state in this Parliament. Can the Foreign Secretary prove me wrong?

[Mr Lammy]

The Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), is currently travelling to New York to meet the Yemeni Foreign Minister to discuss these issues. My hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley (Tahir Ali) is absolutely right about the Houthis. Their horrendous behaviour, sabotaging international trade and killing people in the Red sea, is entirely unacceptable.

This will be very interesting. Now that we have this ceasefire, will the Houthis hold to it in the Red sea? We will act where we need to, to deal with the problems we are seeing in the Red sea. This is a moment to have hope for those two states, and to keep that alive. With the incoming Trump Administration’s previous commitment to the Abraham accords, I ask my hon. Friend to be hopeful about achieving that full recognition and those two states.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s tone, content and, above all else, caution. There are clearly concerns that Hamas are trying to resile from the commitments they have made in this deal. In fact, overnight, their leader praised the events of 7 October, vowed to keep repeating them until Israel is eliminated and called upon all his followers to continue the fight.

Equally, the Foreign Secretary has not mentioned that part of this deal, as I understand it, will see the release of Palestinian prisoners who have been convicted of terrorist offences. The risk is that they will return and cause more problems. What can he do to ensure that Hamas are eliminated from government in Gaza, so that the Palestinian Authority can take control and ensure that peace is restored to the region? We look forward to the release of the hostages and, indeed, the cessation of hostilities.

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman is right that, over this period, we could see up to 1,500 prisoners released. It will be weighing very heavily on the hearts of many Israelis that among those prisoners will be people who have committed murder, and it will weigh heavily on their hearts that those people are returning to Gaza.

Our view is that we need a political process if we are to undermine seasoned terrorists who, by necessity, are swapped to get these hostages out. This is a delicate process. There is a process within Israel in which some of the affected families can object, but the hon. Gentleman is right to recognise the balance that has been struck to achieve the hostage deal and the necessary ceasefire over the coming days.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

As a former aid worker, I was in Gaza last April and witnessed the enormity of the horror and destruction for Palestinians there. The scale of the human trauma of the last 15 months is a gaping wound on the conscience of the world—Israeli babies held hostage, some 20,000 Palestinian children killed.

The Foreign Secretary has made it clear that he agrees that it is desperately important that this ceasefire agreement holds and goes ahead, and that the deal is implemented in full, including the reconstruction of Gaza. He is absolutely right. Does he agree that the Palestinians of Gaza, including my friends and former colleagues Mahmoud, Mohammed, Moe, Fikr, Wasim and so many others displaced within and outside Gaza, must have free movement to return to their homes—or what is left of them—and that this must include the reopening of the Rafah crossing?

[Mr Lammy]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend, who, I know, has lost friends and colleagues over the course of the past 15 months. I also pay tribute to her for her work before coming to this place and for her work now. The Rafah crossing with Egypt must open. That is part of this deal, and it will allow 2.3 million displaced civilians to return home on foot via a coastal road. My hon. Friend, I know, recognises the tremendous medical support that is still necessary across the country; there are many, many children without parents. May I say personally that, as a parent of an adopted child, I am particularly concerned about the many orphans and about how we provide for them in the coming days and months.

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

Let me place on record my appreciation and gratitude to all the nations—especially Qatar—that have participated in securing this deal. Last year, I, along with Members from both Houses, was in Qatar during the Doha forum. We all know that there have been many deals and ceasefires that Israel has withdrawn from, and that, as the Minister quite rightly says, this is a fragile deal. Other than urging Israel, what tangible steps will the Government take to ensure that it sticks to the deal, instead of going back to the mass killings of innocent Palestinians?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

I was with the Qatari Foreign Minister on Sunday, and we were in touch overnight. I of course thanked him for his tremendous work to get this deal over the line. I think that, while working together over the past few months, we have become friends. There is much that the UK Government can and will continue to do. As I said on the radio last week, diplomacy is failing until it achieves success. The hon. Member will know from his experience and wisdom that success has many fathers and mothers.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

I welcome the announcement of this long overdue ceasefire today. My thoughts are with all those who have lost loved ones on and since 7 October, the families of hostages anxiously awaiting news, and the tens of thousands of families in Gaza who have suffered bereavement, displacement and destitution. My thoughts are also with all those for whom the announcement is bittersweet; I think particularly of Rachel Goldberg—the mother of Hersh Goldberg-Polin—whom I met in East Jerusalem in February. She has campaigned with such dignity for the release of her son, who was tragically killed in August. I think, too, of the families in Gaza who are losing their loved ones even now as this ceasefire is being announced. But while the war has raged in Gaza, the settlers have dramatically increased their activity in the west bank, taking land that does not belong to them in a systematic attempt to undermine the possibility of a viable Palestinian state.

As our thoughts now turn to the peace process ahead and the aim of a two-state solution, what action is the Foreign Secretary taking to address illegal settlement? Without a more robust approach, a two-state solution simply cannot be achieved.

[Mr Lammy]

May I pay tribute to my hon. Friend? We have worked together over many years. Her constituency, in so many ways, is not dissimilar from mine, and I know how heart-rending this has been for her constituents. I also know the grace, the manner and the fortitude with which she has represented their interests very strongly within the Labour movement.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to centre the west bank, the expansion and the violence that undermines the two-state solution. It was very important for me to be able to discuss these issues with President Abbas. One hugely important role that the UK Government play is in relation to reform and supporting the Palestinian Authority. That work must continue. We stand by the 1967 borders that we think can achieve the two-state solution that is required. We worry about the security situation in the west bank. We worry, too, about the arms and the supplies that are coming in from malign forces, particularly from Iran and some neighbouring states. But we are also in an intense dialogue with the Israeli Government about what we think are breaches of international law in relation to how the area is properly secured and policed. We certainly do not want to see the language, the rhetoric or the behaviour that undermine the possibility of the two-state solution.

[Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)]

The return of hostages and the end of daily massacres of civilians is profoundly to be welcomed. While the Foreign Secretary has attributed much of the work to diplomats, it is obvious that, whatever we think about him, the critical intervention, by all reports, has been that of President-elect Trump. Although he has issued public threats to Hamas, he has quite obviously—again by all reports—outlined a series of consequences and accountabilities to the Israeli Government. Therefore, as we look towards the worsening situation in the west bank, can we find a lesson here for British foreign policy. Talking, as many of us in this House have urged over the past 14 months, does not work. Unless it is followed up with sure and certain consequence and accountability—whether that is bilateral or indeed through international institutions—there will be no movement.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman follows these issues very closely, and has sometimes been a lone voice on his own side. He will know that the Labour Government have had to take very difficult bilateral decisions because of our concerns about breaches of international humanitarian law. My own reflections are that, in some ways, this has been the most challenging of political environments for this conflict, partly because there was an election campaign in the United States for much of 2024. Had we been able to achieve a more bipartisan approach sooner, we might have seen the pressure that was necessary to bring both parties to the deal that we have finally reached. None the less, I am very pleased that the President-elect’s envoy was able to work with Joe Biden’s envoy and bring this deal over the line, but it is fragile and I await the decision that will necessarily come from the Israeli Security Cabinet at this time.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

May I thank the Foreign Secretary, the Minister for Development and the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend, the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), for all the hard work that they have done both in public and in private to secure today’s attempt at a ceasefire, to bring the hostages home, and to get as much humanitarian aid in as possible? Tom Fletcher, the UN under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, has said today that the deal could have been done a year ago, and that the ferocity of the killing by Israel and Hamas has been “a 21st-century atrocity”. Does my right hon. Friend agree that there will be lasting peace in the middle east only if the Israeli Government and the international community treat all lives—a Palestinian child’s life and an Israeli child’s life—as equal?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that he has done on these issues both before coming to this place and within the context of his new constituency. I thank him very much for bringing to mind the role of my dear colleagues, the Minister for Development and the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer). Let me thank also previous colleagues and shadow colleagues with those portfolios. Many of us have played a part to ensure that we get to this end. My hon. Friend is right, too, that there will be time for a lot of reflection on how we got here and why we got here, but the critical thing at this moment is that the ceasefire holds, that we get beyond the first phase to the second phase, and that we get to the third phase. The third phase, it seems to me, can hold only if we have a political process. That is where attention must be paid to bring about a lasting peace.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

I echo those who have thanked the Foreign Secretary for the tone that he has taken, and the way in which he has reflected the relief of the whole House that there is at last some hope for the families of the hostages, members of which are here today, and for the population of Gaza. He spoke of the need for a political process to ensure that the deal succeeds, and of the hope that needs to be part of eradicating extremism in the middle east. Does he agree that this is perhaps the appropriate time that he has talked about for holding out hope of a two-state solution, and that now might be the perfect time for the Government to recognise a state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Lady is right that a two-state solution is the only way to a stable peace. She knows, too, that recognition in itself does not achieve that. It has always been my view, and that of important international partners such as France, that this is an important issue. If we are serious, and achieve that political process, recognition might properly be part of it, to cement the two states that are necessary. This Government, and I suspect previous Governments, fully understand the importance of the UK’s role in applying that at the appropriate moment, precisely because we have the distinguished responsibility of having a seat on the United Nations Security Council.

[Ms Stella Creasy (Walthamstow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I know that for the next couple of days everybody in this House will hold in their hearts my constituent Sharone, whose father Oded is the oldest hostage we are awaiting news on; we hope to hear some this weekend. Oded is 85. I hold out hope for him, because we do not know what has happened to him. Oded spent his life as a peace activist, campaigning for a two-state solution and driving Gazans to hospital. In the spirit of Oded, and the work that he has done, will the Foreign Secretary work with colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to offer young Palestinians who urgently need medical help the support that they need here in the UK?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that she does, and for our friendship over many years. Oded is a retired Israeli journalist who was taken from his home. His wife, Yocheved, was also taken, but she was released in October 2023. Oded’s daughter Sharone is a British national who resides in my hon. Friend’s constituency, and she has tirelessly campaigned for his release. That is what we want to see over the next period. There is a role for our own medical services where appropriate, and I will continue to work with my right hon. Friend the Health Secretary on these issues. My hon. Friend should be reassured that he raised the very same issues with me this week on how we can do more in relation to that matter.

[Paul Holmes (Hamble Valley) (Con)]

The Foreign Secretary is right that both Israel and Hamas must ensure that the deal is successful and stick to the terms that have been outlined, but as the Foreign Secretary came to this House the Israeli Prime Minister said that he wants to delay a vote in Cabinet because there have been last-minute changes to what Hamas are requiring. Has the Foreign Secretary been briefed on what those perceived changes or accusations are, and could he outline some of them to the House, bearing in mind national security implications? Can he tell the House how he will make it clear to both sides that it is this deal or no deal, and that if they do not get the deal through we will enter a further period of grave instability in the region, and more lives will be lost?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me be crystal clear: the UK Government’s position is that the deal is now final and needs to be implemented. I urge colleagues in the Israeli Government to do the right thing in the hours available before Sunday, and get on and sign off the deal.

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Ind)]

Israel denied that it was holding Dr Hussam Abu Safiya, the director of Kamal Adwan hospital, only to confirm that it had in fact detained him. There are reports that he is currently being tortured in prison. The Foreign Secretary mentioned that the history of this conflict is littered with missed opportunities. Can he take this opportunity clearly to condemn Israel’s indefinite incommunicado detention of Palestinians, en masse and without charge or trial? What action are the Government taking, in the light of the ceasefire offer on the table, regarding their close ally’s pattern of deadly attacks on healthcare, which is clearly part of an intention to destroy and degrade Palestinians as a group?

[Mr Lammy]

We have raised those issues with the Israeli Government, and did so through the Christmas period. We recognise that there is pain, and that there are concerns about international humanitarian law, but all of us in this House have a responsibility to do all that we can to bridge the divides if we are to ensure that the deal holds and the people of Gaza get the respite for which I know the hon. Lady has been campaigning for many months.

[Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I warmly welcome this ceasefire agreement, and like colleagues across the House, I fervently hope that the Israeli Cabinet will approve it, but I think we all recognise that, while the ceasefire may bring an end to the current extremes of violence, it will not end the conflict. A number of conditions need to be met for lasting peace, so will the Foreign Secretary set out a timetable for UK recognition of the state of Palestine, and the concrete steps that he will take to end the occupation and ensure that all those who have committed war crimes are held fully accountable?

[Mr Lammy]

I cannot set out a timetable because the UK Government alone cannot be responsible for a timetable that will necessarily involve the Israeli Government, the Palestinian Authority, our friends in the United States, and Arab partners particularly. It will not be possible for me to set out a timetable on these issues, but I ask the hon. Lady to have faith. I sat down with President Abbas this week to discuss these very issues. On the question that she rightly raises of accountability, that must be a necessary matter for our international courts. I have set out from this Dispatch Box why we in this party hold dear the importance of international humanitarian law.

[Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)]

I applaud the Foreign Secretary for today’s very welcome statement. While bricks and mortar are crucial to rebuilding Gaza, what more can he say about investing in the democratic, judicial and security institutions to underpin the movement towards a possible two-state solution?

[Mr Lammy]

The United Kingdom has unique capability and experience in governance issues particularly. We have unique partnerships with not just Israel but the Palestinian Authority and Arab partners, and of course the special relationship with the United States, so we are uniquely positioned for the next phase. I look forward to discussing these issues with the incoming Secretary of State Senator Rubio in the coming months to see what more the United Kingdom can do.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

May I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, and express hope that the ceasefire is agreed and implemented and that the humanitarian aid we want to see follows on from it? In that light, does he share my concern about the evidence that UNRWA has been penetrated by Hamas and that the curriculum in schools run by UNRWA has propagated hate? Does he agree that the job of reform of UNRWA has not yet been finished and needs to be looked at so that UNRWA does not act as a place where terrorists can hide and hate can be promoted?

[Mr Lammy]

I was horrified by the allegations against UNRWA, and it was entirely proper and appropriate that the United Nations got someone of eminence and importance to look at those issues. I know Madame Colonna, and I spoke to her following her review. In re-establishing funding to UNRWA, we gave £1 million to the UN to assist the implementation of her plan. The hon. Member is right that the process is not yet complete, but we heard again this morning from United Nations representatives that they are reassured that the process is under way and that UNRWA cannot and can never be a hiding place for those who commit terrorism.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

May I bring the Foreign Secretary back to the issue of the recognition of the state of Palestine, because I agree we have to maintain momentum of hope for all concerned? Although he cannot give us a timeline today, could he set out the criteria that the Government will use to judge that the time is right for the recognition of the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

My right hon. Friend will know that, in some ways, this is a moment of peril for that political process. On the one hand, we have the potential for Saudi normalisation and two states, for the Palestinian people. On the other hand, some in Israel will never be committed to two states and talk instead of annexation. Those two are opposites, and that is why the next few months are so important. It would be folly for me to stand at this Dispatch Box and give timetables.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

Obviously, we hope that the Israeli Cabinet makes a rapid decision to support this ceasefire agreement, but that is only a ceasefire agreement, and one hopes it will be rapidly followed by the release of all the hostages and prisoners, as agreed. However, there have been some major developments over the past two years, particularly on the legal front, where the International Court of Justice has recognised that acts of a genocidal nature have taken place and has called for Israeli withdrawal from the west bank and an end to the settlement policy. Will the Foreign Secretary commit the British Government to demanding that all the ICJ recommendations are carried out and that Israel has a programme of withdrawal from the west bank and an end to the settlement policy? There cannot be any peace for the Palestinian people while they remain under occupation. They have suffered so much, lost so much and lost so many, and the mental scars of the people of Gaza will now be intergenerational. They will need a lot of support to get through this and, above all, international recognition of the state of Palestine.

[Mr Lammy]

Let me begin by recognising the unique way in which the right hon. Gentleman has raised these issues in the House over a lifetime of work and his commitment to justice and accountability in this era. It is right and proper that international humanitarian law is followed and that the international courts do their work. Let me also be clear that this Government do not believe in illegal occupation and are committed to two states. I repeat again: we cannot tolerate the violence; we cannot tolerate the expansion. We recommit ourselves to continuing to work with civil society on the ground in the west bank and the occupied territories that is documenting these things. Both this Government and the previous Government have continued to support such organisations over many years. Clearly, when we get to that settlement, it will essentially come down to swaps and very serious negotiation over that land, on both sides. We recognise that, and that is why expansion is so thoroughly unacceptable.

[Gordon McKee (Glasgow South) (Lab)]

The ceasefire is good news. It has been welcomed around the world, and it will be welcomed by my constituents. It is a time of relief, but also one of great grief for the many tens of thousands of lives that have been lost. In November, I visited the west bank and met the director of UNRWA, who said he had no idea how aid would get into Gaza if and when the Israeli ban on UNRWA passes. What more can the Government do to ensure that the ban is lifted and aid gets into Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

I, too, met the director of UNRWA in the occupied territories this week. He repeated that to me, and I recognise his assessment. I spoke to the Israeli Government about this issue, and they said—of course, this was prior to the ceasefire being reached—they believed that other UN agencies, non-governmental organisations on the ground and international parties could step into the breach. I reminded them about their legal responsibilities, as an occupying power, about our long-standing concerns anyway about humanitarian aid, and about the prospect of undermining an agreement that I had hoped would be reached when I was with them on Monday. For all those reasons, I do hope that they will reflect and step back from implementing this Knesset legislation.

[Brendan O’Hara (Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber) (SNP)]

The celebrations in Gaza that welcomed the ceasefire were matched only by the relief of the hostages’ families that their loved ones were finally coming home. In the hours that followed, however, scores of Palestinian civilians were killed, and the Israeli Government declared that they will not meet today to ratify this deal in what is an unspeakably cruel blow to those seeking peace and the return of the hostages. My right hon. Friend the Member for Aberdeen South (Stephen Flynn) and the hon. Member for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) have both asked this question, but in the absence of a reply, I will ask it again: if Israel does not agree this deal and continues to prosecute this conflict as it has to date, what will the consequences be for Prime Minister Netanyahu and his Government?

[Mr Lammy]

This is a moment—I say this having met those hostage families, having prayed for the life of Emily Damari in particular, and having met Palestinians with family in Gaza—where I insist from this Dispatch Box that I will hold out for hope and for that deal being implemented on Sunday. I have been really clear about the responsibilities that I believe the Israeli Government need to meet. We are meeting here in this House on a Thursday, so there are days before Sunday. I believe a settlement will be reached. We will continue to work with the current Administration in America and, indeed, the President-elect’s Administration. He has made his views clear. I will not give in to the cynicism that we will not get to that deal on Sunday and that this process will not begin.

[Mohammad Yasin (Bedford) (Lab)]

I trust the Government will do all they can to ensure that the ceasefire leads to a lasting peace—a peace based on a two-state solution that addresses the root causes of the violence and creates a future in which the rights and security of people in the region are respected. Will the Foreign Secretary redouble his efforts in urging his counterparts in Israel to grant full access to humanitarian organisations, such as the UN, that are urgently seeking to deliver aid in Gaza, as well as to ensure that journalists have unfettered access to report on the situation?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right; journalists now need to be able to get in and report on what is happening on the ground. I thank him for giving me a moment to call to mind the many aid workers who have died in this conflict—more than in any other conflict in history—and to thank them for their humanitarian efforts. I repeat again that part of the settlement that came out of the second world war was that there was deconfliction for aid workers working in the most severe of circumstances. That is the expectation of the international community, and we deplore the fact that it has not been met so egregiously in this most horrendous of wars.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for his statement, and I also pay tribute to all those who have helped to bring about this agreement to stop the killing. I pray that Israel accepts and honours the agreement and subsequent stages.

The Foreign Secretary spoke about darkness, and 7 October was indeed a dark day for innocent Israelis and Palestinians, and for humanity. However, it would be unjust not to acknowledge that the Palestinians have been suffering dark days every day for over 75 years, with the UK and the international community turning a blind eye—and many aiding and abetting. We all welcome the announcement of this ceasefire to suspend hostilities in Gaza. Although we hope and pray that the temporary pause will free all hostages on both sides, save Palestinian and Israeli lives, and alleviate some of the unspeakable suffering that the Israeli military has inflicted on Gaza, it marks the beginning, not the end, of efforts to restore health, dignity, justice and freedom to the Palestinian people, who have suffered beyond words.

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the UK will oppose any attempt by Israel to annex or settle parts of Gaza or further parts of the west bank? Will he confirm the UK’s commitment to ending the long-standing root causes of violence and humanitarian need in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, including Israel’s illegal occupation, blockade and widespread violations of international law?

[Mr Lammy]

I suspect that the hon. Gentleman and I might sometimes disagree on matters of politics, but I have always respected him in the short time that he has been in this House. I felt again today the humility and faith that he brings to the strength of his questions. Let me be absolutely clear: we stand opposed to expansion, to the violence that we see, and to any talk of annexation, which would breach international UN resolutions that successive UK Governments have supported. He is right that it was the case for some years—particularly in the period after the Abraham accords—that this House had stopped talking about a two-state solution, but I think Members across the House recognise that that is the only way out of this crisis.

[Damien Egan (Bristol North East) (Lab)]

I, too, thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, particularly his words about how we break out of the cycles of violence, which many of us worry will be replicated in future, and move towards a peaceful future. This is a bitter-sweet deal, in many ways, because the reality is that overnight we have seen Hamas putting their uniforms back on, waving their rifles and celebrating. They are still there. One of their leaders said just this morning that they would do 7 October all over again; the international community must unite to ensure that they cannot, and to free the people of Gaza from Hamas. What steps can the Government take to change the reality for Hamas by stopping weapons from Iran and funding from states such as Qatar, and to promote genuine soul-searching and reflection among international agencies on the ground, to ensure that they are doing everything they can not to repeat mistakes or turn a blind eye to collaboration with Hamas?

[Mr Lammy]

It is important to continue to remember the tremendous trauma in Israel as a result of 7 October—the worst atrocity for the Jewish people since the Holocaust. It is important to remember, in the wake of this deal, which we want to see over the line, that, yes, Hamas fighters have been on the streets firing their rifles and saying that they would do it again, and that does not lead to a context in which the Israeli people feel safe in their own land. My hon. Friend is absolutely right that Iran continues to destabilise the region through its political, financial and military support for Hamas and other partners in the region. Very sadly, if we do not do all we can to come together here in the United Kingdom, play our role internationally and get to that political process, it is my judgment that in 25 years’ time, another generation of politicians, including some younger politicians in this House, will be here again debating the same issue—more violence, more pain, more loss of life, and still no two states.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his sombre tone and for his soft but strong words—we all appreciate them. I very much welcome the fact that a ceasefire is imminent and that the hostages will soon be returned home. Will the Foreign Secretary outline what discussions have taken place with our American allies to ensure that aid gets to where it is needed in a safe and concerted effort, and what does he imagine our role to be in ongoing negotiations to support Israel and find a peaceful way forward?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman, who is always on top of these issues, particularly terrorism, conflict and peace. I have worked very closely with the US Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, and I pay tribute to him—I suspect for the last time—for all his work. I sent him a message last night saying what a pleasure it was to see him standing behind Joe Biden. More than many, I know—as do my predecessors—how much work he put into getting this agreement over the line. I also know how important it was that President-elect Trump and his team stepped up in the last few days. There is a critical role for the UK for the reasons that I have set out, and we will play that role.

[Paula Barker (Liverpool Wavertree) (Lab)]

It has been a long and painful road to get to this point, but today’s welcome news of a ceasefire deal is finally a sliver of hope. It has always been clear that the release of hostages and a ceasefire were necessary steps to pull the middle east from this abyss, which has cruelly taken so many lives. I will touch on the point that the Foreign Secretary just made about another generation of politicians, including younger politicians in this House, debating the two-state solution in 25 years’ time. I have said to him many times that the recognition of a Palestinian state is not a by-product but the route to a resolution. Will he be brave, will he be bold, and will he, so that we are not here in 25 years’ time debating the two state-solution, recognise the state of Palestine much quicker than that?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the way she has championed these issues, pressing them again and again, on behalf of her constituents. There is a real dilemma on Palestinian recognition. There are some who want recognition essentially because they believe that two states is years away and will never be achieved, and they want the UK Government to say, “We will do it now”—to put a marker in the sand, despite the fact that it is years away and will never be achieved. There are others who recognise the importance of the UK’s role in relation to our responsibilities as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and therefore understand that we will do that, but we will do it when we know that it will happen and it is in sight. This is one of those critical moments, and believe me, I will play my part.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Yesterday on the streets of Gaza, mothers came out to celebrate the news of the impending peace deal. Today, many of those mothers were crouching over loved ones, as news came in of a further 73 Palestinians having been killed. That is 73 added on to the thousands and thousands who have already been killed, but when it comes to the number of Palestinians dead, that is all it seems to be—a number. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that no justice and no meaningful peace can be achieved if we continue to allow the cries of the oppressed to go unheard? I ask this not as a political rival, but as a fellow human being. The Palestinian people and, indeed, the families of the hostages have no more time for rhetoric, platitudes and words. What are we going to do to ensure that this peace deal goes ahead and justice is given beyond words, so that no more innocent blood is shed?

[Mr Lammy]

The Palestinian cause is a just cause, which is why we recommit to two states. You can hold in your heart the pain of the Israeli people and the plight of those hostages and their families, and at the same time, you can hold in your heart the awful damage, pain and suffering that this has wrought on Gaza, with well over 45,000 Palestinian people having lost their lives. You can hold those two things at the same time, which of course is what the UK Government attempt to do as they try to bring about conciliation and uphold international humanitarian law. Ultimately, we want to get to a process that brings about genuine peace, where these two countries can live side by side with security and peace.

[Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his statement. The news of a possible deal is very welcome indeed, and I associate myself with the hopes of colleagues across this House that the hostages will be released and returned, and that humanitarian aid will flood into Gaza as soon as possible. We know that the only way to ensure a lasting peace is that two-state solution, so can my right hon. Friend outline what steps the Government will take to support the creation of an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace?

[Mr Lammy]

We absolutely support that, and we will continue to work towards it.

[Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)]

I join in with the sentiments of relief and hope for peace after a horrific 15-month-long ordeal. However, a ceasefire cannot take away from the fact that Israel is on trial for genocide and its leaders have arrest warrants in their names for their crimes committed against the people of Gaza. A ceasefire does not change that fact; justice and accountability must be realised in the face of some of the most horrific war crimes of our times. Will the Minister therefore confirm that the Government will stand by their commitment to treaties under international law and uphold the requirements of the arrest warrants already issued?

[Mr Lammy]

We are signatories to the treaty of Rome, and we will comply with our legal obligations—not just because we should, but because we believe in them.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)]

Will the Foreign Secretary confirm that the Government will not lift the limited ban on arms sales to Israel until he or another Minister has come back to this House and explained why the danger of those arms being abused has receded?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

As my hon. Friend knows, that is a quasi-legal process that is gone through with all sobriety, examining the facts on the ground. The ban is in place at this time; arms are not currently being sent to Israel under export licences, for reasons that have been discussed at the Dispatch Box for many months. I suspect that until we get to a secure and stable Gaza, it is unlikely. The fighting has got to stop.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

I welcome the news of a ceasefire deal after 15 months of devastation, destruction and loss of life. The release of hostages is vital, ensuring their safety and swift return to their families. There has been unimaginable suffering, and the ceasefire must be a turning point. It is imperative that the UK leverages our diplomatic influence to ensure stability while urgently stepping up humanitarian aid in Gaza; food, medicine and fuel must reach those who desperately need them without delay. Can the Secretary of State tell the House what diplomatic contributions the UK will make to ensure the ceasefire’s stability when we move towards the latter and more fragile stages of a multi-stage agreement?

[Mr Lammy]

I pray in aid some of my statements earlier in this session.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Ind)]

We all hope that the ceasefire happens and that it holds, and we all resolve that if it does, never again—never again by anyone. For the most part, that means accountability, which is where the ICC and ICJ come in. Journalists, forensic experts and rescue teams must be guaranteed unrestricted access to investigate mass graves, locate the missing and document the atrocity crimes committed by Israel, so will the Foreign Secretary commit to supporting this? Otherwise impunity, not accountability, will reign, which will prevent us from making sure that what we have seen does not happen again.

[Mr Lammy]

We continue to support non-governmental organisations and to call for journalists to be allowed in. Of course, it is important that the appropriate authorities properly document what has happened and that, where necessary, people can be held accountable.

[Yuan Yang (Earley and Woodley) (Lab)]

The ceasefire deal gives families in Israel and Palestine, as well as their relatives in my constituency, hope for longer-lasting peace and security. However, there can be no security without accountability, and there is no accountability without scrutiny—scrutiny, for example, to ensure that the funding the Government have pledged for UNRWA reaches its intended destination. This war has been the deadliest on record for journalists, so what can the Government do to ensure that all journalists in Palestine, including my former colleagues, can do their job without fear for their lives?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has represented the interests of those journalists very well in her question. I repeat again that I deplore the number of journalists who have lost their lives. It is important that any democracy engaged in conflict of this kind allows journalists to cover what has truly happened. As we head now to this ceasefire and the stability that is required, the time has come, I hope, for journalists from all corners of the globe to be let in.

[Zarah Sultana (Coventry South) (Ind)]

Last November, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity and war crimes, including targeting civilians and using starvation as a weapon of war. The British public deserve clarity, so I will ask again: will the Foreign Secretary confirm that should Benjamin Netanyahu step on British soil, he would be immediately arrested—yes or no?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the hon. Lady, as I think has been said before, that we have a legal process in this country were that to come to pass, and that process is important. Ultimately, it will be a decision for our courts, so it is important that, from this Dispatch Box, I leave that matter for them. However, I have said in terms that we are a signatory to the statute of Rome, not just because we are but because we believe in it. Therefore, as the hon. Lady would expect, this Government will comply with the law if that were to come to pass.

[Oliver Ryan (Burnley) (Lab/Co-op)]

I know that I speak for everyone in my constituency when I say that after so much death and unthinkable horror, this ceasefire—this peace—offers hope for a long-term political solution, security for the people of Gaza and of Israel, a two-state solution and a sustainable peace. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that what we now need is a flood of aid to stop civilians suffering now in Gaza? Also, I know it is very early days, but what hope does he have for a new normalisation deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia going forward?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful for the question. Having spoken to the Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister at length on Sunday and to the Israeli Foreign Minister at length on Sunday as well, it is my sincere hope that we do get that normalisation deal. There are many steps before we get there, but I think this is a critical moment, and I really hope we can achieve it.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

After such unimaginable suffering, I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. However, I recognise the fragility of this moment—not only the fragility of making a decision around this deal, but the fragility of lives in Gaza, where the suffering continues at this moment. Will he ensure that we provide the very best medical support, given that many specialties no longer exist in Gaza, and that we use the expertise in our country to send teams into the region and indeed into Gaza to ensure that people with diseases and infections and those who need urgent surgery have the very best services?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to focus on medical support. We will continue to support UK-Med, and we made a decision to give it more funds when we were just a few days into office. Half a million people have received essential healthcare as a result of that funding, and UK-Med has supported over 300,000 people across Gaza. It is hugely important work, and I suspect we will have more to say in the coming days about what more we can do.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his very measured statement. I have met dozens of constituents in Rushcliffe who I know will wholeheartedly welcome yesterday’s news. However, I have received a lot of emails specifically about the decimation of medical facilities in the northern part of Gaza. Can I ask the Foreign Secretary what steps are likely to be taken to ensure immediate improvements to healthcare access as a result of this week’s announcement?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. For the reasons I have set out, security will be essential if the aid is to get in and if international partners are to be reassured, so that the reconstruction of hospitals can properly begin.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend, and indeed to the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), who has played such an important role in working tirelessly for justice. Following on from the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Wavertree (Paula Barker) about recognition of the state of Palestine, what role will the British Government play in creating the conditions that mean a two-state solution is finally in reach and we could declare that we recognise the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the question. The role that we must play is the critical juncture between phase 2 and then phase 3. We will only really get to phase 3 if there is a proper political solution. I think the United Kingdom has a particular role to play because of our relationship with all the parties, and our unique role on the United Nations Security Council alongside France. She is absolutely right that there must be a process, that we must engage in that process and that recognition is a key part of the process. Ultimately, however, that must lead to a two-state solution.

Let me say, finally, that in my discussions at the weekend in Saudi Arabia, it was very clear to me that we are no longer in a place where Gulf colleagues would satisfy themselves with some promise that feels years and years away, or generations away. We are really talking about the immediate lifetime of many parliamentarians in this House at this time, and this is therefore a very critical issue.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

Now really is the moment when we all do need some hope, as the task of helping people to rebuild their homes and communities is truly daunting. To allow for reconstruction of hospitals, schools and homes to take place, the supply of construction materials into Gaza will need to happen on a huge scale. Can I please ask the Foreign Secretary what discussions are taking place right now to help facilitate that access for important materials?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend asks a very good question. The World Bank has been doing a lot of thinking about that, with a rapid needs assessment of the materials that are now necessary.

[Alice Macdonald (Norwich North) (Lab/Co-op)]

As the Foreign Secretary has said, this is a glimmer of light for the hostages, their families and civilians in Gaza—many of them children living in hell—and all our thoughts are with them. We have spoken a lot about the importance of access for humanitarian aid, but can I ask the Foreign Secretary about volumes? Can he update us on the funding for the UN humanitarian appeals, whether we are considering an uplift in our aid, and what pressure we are putting on other UN member states to make sure they play their role in not only providing that aid, but pushing for access?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to put on record the issue of volume. At the moment, the agreement is for 600 or so trucks. That is ambitious, and the situation on the ground will need to change quite a lot if that is to be achieved. The need is absolutely there. The UN must play its part, but I think some of the decisions that may come on UNRWA would fundamentally undermine that. I think commercial trucks have to come back in, and the security has to be there. Clearly, what we want to see—and it is here in the deal—is Israel being able to draw back, which raises further issues about security. That is why I say that this deal is fragile and that negotiation continues and there is much still to do. She is absolutely right that we have to see the volumes, or I think the people of Gaza will say that there have been lots of fine words, but things have not actually changed very much on the ground.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

Now that there is hope of a ceasefire, will the Secretary of State redouble his efforts to seek justice for the family of my constituent John Chapman, whom he mentioned in his statement, who was murdered by the IDF last April when working for the World Central Kitchen? Will he meet me to discuss what the UK Government can do to hold the Israeli Government to account for their actions?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for asking that question. I raised this issue with the Israeli Foreign Minister at the weekend. We do want to see accountability, and we do want to see a process from the Military Advocate General in Israel. The loss of life breaks our hearts. I have spent time with the families that have suffered so much as a result of the atrocity against World Central Kitchen, when there was a tremendous loss of life. There must be justice, there must be accountability and there must be a process. It is now for the Military Advocate General in Israel to do that, and we will continue to press this issue. Of course, I or the Minister for the middle east will meet him and his constituents.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

We all welcome the announcement of the possible ceasefire and hope that the Israeli Cabinet ratifies the agreement. The toll on civilians has been horrific: over 46,000 Palestinian civilians, including children, have been killed, and 1,200 Israelis were killed on 7 October and many hostage families are hoping that their family members are returned. I, too, pay tribute to British citizens John Chapman, James Henderson and James Kirby, who were killed delivering aid in Gaza. The EU has announced €120 million in new aid for Gaza, so will the UK announce a further package of aid soon? I agree with the Foreign Secretary that Palestinians must be able to return home safely. What role will the UK play in that?

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. We will be making a further assessment of the humanitarian need and what more we can do in the coming weeks, given the changed circumstances. Let us get this deal over the line, and let us assess where the UK can play a particular role alongside other partners. It is important that we co-ordinate, and it was important for me to be in Saudi Arabia with Kaja Kallas, the new High Representative of the EU, because we were able to travel together and to discuss these very same issues.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

In addition to the appalling suffering of civilians due to this conflict, for far too long there has been a sense of hopelessness in the region, which is mirrored by a sense of hopelessness here about what we can all do practically to help secure peace and rebuild Gaza. Does my right hon. Friend agree that British companies, particularly those in construction, and NGOs should be at the vanguard of the Herculean task of rebuilding Gaza? As we get—we hope—towards phase 3 on the future, does he agree that making more information available about the support we can provide in this area will help the peace process, because reconstruction is vital?

[Mr Lammy]

I agree wholeheartedly with my hon. Friend.

[Deirdre Costigan (Ealing Southall) (Lab)]

On behalf of so many of my constituents in Ealing Southall, may I wholeheartedly welcome this news about a potential ceasefire in Gaza and the return of the hostages? I thank the Foreign Secretary and his ministerial team for all their hard work to get us to this moment of hope, but this is only a beginning. Can the Foreign Secretary tell me how he will use our hard-won experience of brokering a lasting peace in Northern Ireland through the Good Friday agreement to help achieve a two-state solution and long-term peace, security and prosperity for the people of both Palestine and Israel?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for mentioning Northern Ireland and the essential role that was played in particular by the last Labour Government. She will no doubt have noticed that the new National Security Adviser is Jonathan Powell, who played such an important role in that. Our National Security Adviser always does a lot behind the scenes on these issues, and I look forward to working with him on this issue.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

The Foreign Secretary is right when he recognises that this ceasefire, although fragile, offers a real glimmer of hope. He is also right to emphasise the need to go further to ensure a two-state solution with a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable sovereign Palestinian state. Will he set out what he sees as the next steps in getting us to the ultimate goal of a lasting peace in the region?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

As has been said, there are two possibilities here. One is a situation in which Israel does not withdraw from Gaza and there is still a lot of fighting. Displaced people would vaguely be able to return to their homes, but we would not see the reconstruction or the international community able to come back in, because there would be no guarantee that the efforts they put in will not be destroyed in another 10 or 20 years’ time. The other possibility is that we get to phase 3 and we see not just a ceasefire, but a political process that brings about stability and ultimately peace, and alongside that we see Saudi normalisation with Israel and the prospect of two states.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

We all welcome the news of the ceasefire deal after 15 months of devastating conflict and suffering in Gaza. The Foreign Secretary knows how important the recognition of Palestine and the two-state solution is to my constituents in Luton South and South Bedfordshire. Does he agree that in our Government’s commitment to a two-state solution, Gaza must form part of a future Palestinian state, with no reduction in the size of its territory, no ongoing occupation of Gaza and no forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful for the work that my hon. Friend has done in her constituency and the manner in which she lobbied hard on these issues when I was shadow Foreign Secretary, which she continues to do now. I can confirm that Gaza must be part of the two states and a home for the Palestinian people.

[Matthew Patrick (Wirral West) (Lab)]

It is with hope and fear that we await news of this ceasefire deal, and that will be felt particularly strongly by the families of the hostages. We have heard of the British hostages—of Emily Damari, Avinatan Or, Oded Lifschitz and Eli Sharabi—and the work of their families. For them, until they are holding their loved ones, this deal will not be real or done. Can the Foreign Secretary please assure them that at each and every stage of this deal, he will be pressing for the hostages’ release, so that we can deliver that for their families, bring this war to an end, and bring the hostages and their families together?

[Mr Lammy]

Emily Damari is a British national. She spent her 28th birthday in captivity. She was taken from her home in the Kfar Aza kibbutz. Emily enjoys watching football and is a Tottenham Hotspur fan. I keep her in my heart every single day. I have a plastic flower from her mother in my office reminding me of her plight. I pray and hope that I see her emerge in the coming days. Oded Lifschitz is a retired Israeli journalist and we hold out a torch for him. Eli Sharabi is a family man, and his wife Lianne, a British citizen, and his daughters Noiya and Yahel were murdered on 7 October. Yossi Sharabi was killed in captivity last year, and we pray for his family at this time. Avinatan Or is a 31-year-old man, and therefore will not be in the first phase of this activity, but we want to see him freed as we get to the second and third phases.

[Dr Allison Gardner (Stoke-on-Trent South) (Lab)]

Human rights organisations such as Gisha, the Association for Civil Rights in Israel and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel have been working hard to get more aid into Gaza since the beginning of the conflict. What steps is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office taking to support human rights groups to help rebuild Gaza and the lives of the Palestinian people?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right to raise human rights and human rights defenders, particularly those on the ground. She should be assured that the UK under this Government continues to fund those important organisations. They are part of the exercise of allowing very vulnerable people to have their rights advocated for and their dignity upheld in the most horrendous of circumstances. Those organisations are also part of the accountability mechanisms we have signed up to and believe in.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

My right hon. Friend is right that this is not a day for celebration; it is a day for prayer—prayer that this deal is seen through and prayer that hostages and ordinary Palestinians get a chance to rebuild their lives after the atrocities and horrors of the past 15 months.

My right hon. Friend is right to say that this peace deal is fragile, but it is also right to say that many in the world, including in my community, think that the world community’s grasp on humanitarian values has been fragile these past 15 months. We have failed the hostages, failed the Palestinians and failed in the quest for peace by taking so long to do that. He will know that this issue is important to the community I represent. Nearly two years ago, the Foreign Secretary had lunch with me and some of my constituents, and we talked about previous crises where we have solved the crisis but given up on the peace. What reassurance can he give us that this time it will be different and the British Government will lead the way, once we get this deal in place, to ensure that there is a two-state solution and that dignity and respect are given to Israel and Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

Eighty years on from the second world war, my hon. Friend is right. He is a dear friend, and I know his constituency well, having spent seven years of my life living in the great city of Peterborough. There is no doubting that when we look back on those 80 years, there are key moments that shook the foundations of the rule of law that men and women in this country fought for. I suspect that people will look back on this war as one of those hugely challenging moments. People who believe in democracy recognise that we are here as parliamentarians in one of the great homes of democracy to fight to keep hope alive. The Palestinian cause is a just cause. The plight of the Jewish people is also a just cause, and a homeland for them I think is right. We have got to achieve that peace. Just as I have for many years campaigned for peace in countries such as Northern Ireland and South Africa, we can get peace in the middle east if we redouble our efforts and the whole of the international community stands true to international humanitarian law.

More than two hours after I started this statement, I am grateful for the opportunity this afternoon.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for a long, two-hour statement.

Royal Assent

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 14th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)]

5. What steps he is taking with international partners to help increase UK economic growth.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

The UK and India’s Prime Ministers have committed to an ambitious refresh of the comprehensive strategic partnership. They announced that the UK-India trade talks will relaunch, which will deliver our joint ambition to take the UK-India relationship to even greater heights, and India is one of a handful of countries that will determine whether we meet the global warming limit of 1.5° C.

[Dr Sandher]

This is indeed an exciting year to help improve our economic growth and our trading relationship with India. We are two nations with an intertwined history and common democratic ideals, and we face the risks of a dangerous world and a warming planet. I co-chair the India all-party parliamentary group, and one of my priorities is to strengthen our economic and strategic relationship. Can the Secretary of State outline what he will do to help get a good UK-India trade deal over the line, including the exchange of green technologies to help prevent and reduce the warming of our planet?

[Mr Lammy]

It was important to get to India just a few weeks into office. I might pray in aid my great-grandmother on my mother’s side, who was from Calcutta. I look forward to inviting Foreign Minister Jaishankar to Britain later in the spring. It is important that we have a strategic partnership going forward. We have relaunched the free trade agreement—we have said that it is a floor, not a ceiling on our ambition—and it was important that a delegation of Indian businessmen met the Chancellor of the Exchequer, me and the Prime Minister just a few weeks before Christmas.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

Among our greatest UK exports are our culture and our creative industries, so I am keen to hear what conversations the Foreign Secretary has had with international counterparts—not only to improve the opportunity for British artists to tour, particularly post Brexit, but to take advantage of the appetite for bilateral cultural agreements, which has been articulated by a number of our overseas counterparts.

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Lady will be pleased that we will very shortly launch our new soft power council, specifically to look in detail at this issue. I was pleased to secure further funding for the BBC World Service in the spending review, which was very important. As we move forward with our reset, we continue to discuss, particularly with European allies, what more we can do for touring artists.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

This weekend, we had the indignity of seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer fleeing the financial mess that she has left at home in the United Kingdom while embracing the Chinese Communist party—Labour’s friends—and the Chinese Government in a desperate attempt to secure money from them. Can the Foreign Secretary explain how this new love-in with one of the biggest threats to our national security and freedom helps our national interests? What message does that send to Jimmy Lai, Hong Kong BNOs facing threats in our country, and others living in fear of China? Is this Government’s reset with China the cause of the delay in implementing the foreign influence registration scheme?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady comes to the Dispatch Box with chutzpah and a brass neck after a period in which we had about seven different China policies from the last Government, who left a huge £22 billion black hole in the economy. I might remind her that President Trump has invited the Chinese President to his inauguration, and that trade between the US and China has grown. We can also protect our national security, just as the United States has done. That is why we will compete with China where we need to and challenge it where we must, but we must co-operate in important areas of trade, because we want to see growth in our economy. We are absolutely minded to move forward with that.

[Jake Richards (Rother Valley) (Lab)]

6. What steps his Department is taking to help secure the release of Emily Damari.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

Ensuring the safe release of all hostages, including British national Emily Damari and three others with strong UK links, is a top priority for this Government. We have continually supported hostage talks, and support the efforts of the American, Egyptian and Qatari negotiators. We are exercising every diplomatic lever to secure the hostages’ immediate and unconditional release, and call on all parties to show flexibility at the negotiation table.

[Jake Richards]

I am grateful to the Foreign Secretary for his answer. Last month I had the privilege of meeting Mandy, Emily’s mother, to discuss her family’s plight and their campaign and efforts to secure Emily’s release. I know that the Foreign Secretary met Mandy yesterday in Israel; I spoke to her afterwards, and she was very grateful for that meeting. What steps are the Government taking to secure humanitarian access to the hostages before release, which Hamas are disgracefully avoiding, and what pressures are being put on Qatar and Egypt in that regard?

[Mr Lammy]

It was important to be with Mandy Damari in Israel yesterday and to speak to the Israelis, and to be in Saudi Arabia just before that, particularly to speak to my Egyptian counterpart and to press these issues. As Joe Biden has said, we may well be on the brink of a deal, and I know that the whole House will want to see that deal emerge in the coming days and to see Emily come home. My hon. Friend can be assured that humanitarian access, for which we have continued to press for the people of Gaza, is hugely important, and it is as important for the hostages. It will take some time for them to come out, and they need that humanitarian access.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

At Easter last year I had the opportunity to meet Amanda Damari in Israel and to speak to some of the families of the hostages who were kidnapped by Hamas on that terrible and unfortunately memorable day, 7 October. The families have had a yo-yo of emotions: will the hostages be freed, or will they not be freed? Now, all of a sudden, there is a possibility. After the rollercoaster of emotion that the families have been on over the last year and a half, how can we ensure that they get the direct help that they need from our Government?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman is right. We want to see Emily Damari free, and all the hostages, particularly the UK-linked hostages. We know from our contact with their families—I am thinking about the moving event that we had in No. 10 on 30 September—that there will be deep psychological scars, and we must commit to doing all we can through our ongoing humanitarian effort to support those hostages in their process of recovery.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

All Members of the House will praise the courage and resilience of the hostage families and have the hostages in their thoughts right now, particularly Emily’s mother Mandy and Emily herself. Reports of the progress being made on the hostage negotiations are truly welcome, including the Foreign Secretary’s discussions during and after his visit to Israel. Can he give an update on what information he has received about the proof of life of those hostages? Importantly, what resources will our Government be providing to support the hostages through the release process over the period of time speculated, and to bring about a sustainable end to this awful conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

First, we do all we can to establish proof of life. The right hon. Lady will understand that this situation is fast moving, and even post any deal it can take some degree of time before the hostages come out. I would therefore not want to be pushed on that issue at the Dispatch Box, but I want to assure her that we are doing all we can to continue to make that necessary assessment. As I say, we are—I hope—on the brink of a deal. It will be the first phase of a deal that will probably last six weeks, and that is important to bear in mind. All of us in this House hope to get to a ceasefire and the necessary rebuilding of Gaza, with Israel safe and secure—that will be very important—so that the middle east can move forward in an atmosphere of peace.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

7. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of Iran’s attacks on Israel on regional stability.

--- Later in debate ---

[Neil Duncan-Jordan (Poole) (Lab)]

9. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the war in Gaza on UK support for Israel.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

The UK remains committed to supporting Israel’s security and wider regional stability in the face of threats from malign actors such as Iran. We are clear that Israel must act in accordance with international humanitarian law and do more to protect civilians, hospitals and those who are in desperate need of their services.

[Neil Duncan-Jordan]

Notwithstanding the hope that we all have of a ceasefire, atrocities continue to take place daily in Gaza, with the killing of children, the bombing of hospitals and the threat of banning aid at the end of the month. Will the Secretary of State explain exactly what the Israeli Government have to do to persuade the UK Government to impose sanctions, ban all arms sales and recognise the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

Since coming into office we have taken significant action: calling, of course, for a ceasefire—we have been calling for a ceasefire since December 2023; suspending relevant arms sales, as has been set out by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Development; and increasing the amount of aid to the Occupied Palestinian Territories. We are also in steadfast support of UNRWA.

Israel remains an important ally. We have an important trading relationship, worth £6.1 billion last year and involving 38,000 British jobs. I am sorry; any discussion of sanctions is just not correct.

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

I invite the Foreign Secretary to welcome the appointment of Nawaf Salam and to comment on its implications for our relationship with Lebanon and Israel and for Iran’s influence in the region. What does he intend to do to ensure that that positive step improves our relationship with Israel, Lebanon and the countries in the eastern Mediterranean?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak about Lebanon. The developments in Lebanon over the past few days could transform the region. The appointment of a new President and a new Prime Minister could provide Lebanon with the opportunity to see Hezbollah’s capability diminished, which the whole international community should grab hold of. As the right hon. Member knows from his time in office, the UK contribution to the Lebanese armed forces is important and one that the Lebanese treasure. We intend to continue with that and to go further over the coming months, which I know he will welcome.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

10. What assessment he has made of the British Council’s financial sustainability.

--- Later in debate ---

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

13. What diplomatic steps he is taking with international partners to help tackle illegal migration to the UK.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

As I made clear in my Locarno speech on 9 January, tackling irregular migration is an FCDO priority. We regularly engage with counterparts in priority countries to strengthen collaboration on tackling organised crime and to secure migrant returns.

[Peter Swallow]

The proposed sanctions on people smugglers are a world first, designed to deter and disrupt those vile criminals and the supply chain that enables them. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this is an important step in smashing the gangs?

[Mr Lammy]

The sanctions are the first of their kind, and we hope that other allies will follow us in going after the enablers of the gangs and with the ability to issue travel bans, freeze assets and do all we can to disrupt this illegal trade. But I emphasise that alongside the sanctions are the new joint unit in the Department; the huge amount of work we have done on returns, which are important and which are up by 23% across the country; and the work we do upstream with the official development assistance funding of £84 million announced as we came into government back in July.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

15. Whether he plans to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

We are strengthening our work abroad on the priorities of the British people to deliver the Government’s plan for change. We are the first country in the world to develop a sanctions regime specifically targeting illegal migration. Our reforms will strengthen the Foreign Office role in attracting investment and securing new business deals. Our tough diplomacy will keep up support for Ukraine and bring stability to the middle east.

[Alex Baker]

I welcome the progress made by COP29 in Baku, and the Government’s leadership on climate change. Nepal is at the sharp end of dealing with climate change—late last year, there were 200 deaths from floods in Kathmandu. What are the Government doing to support that nation, which has been a partner and a friend to the UK over many years?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend will be pleased that we announced a £38.5 million resilience, adaption and inclusion programme so that Nepal could deal with disaster risk. That follows £58.5 million for climate-smart development over an eight-year programme. Our relationship with Nepal, particularly on the climate issue, is essential and very important.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

Can the Foreign Secretary explain why he is surrendering the Chagos Islands and front-loading payments to the Government of Mauritius to lease back a base at Diego Garcia at a cost of £9 billion to UK taxpayers? If that is such a good deal, why is he so secretive about it?

[Mr Lammy]

I know that the shadow Foreign Secretary is new to the job, but I remind her that her Government did 10 rounds of negotiations on this issue and we picked it up, and that the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon believe that it is a good deal, as do the Indian Government.

[Priti Patel]

Following the Foreign Secretary’s meetings in Saudi Arabia and with the new Foreign Minister of Syria over the weekend, what conditions did he stipulate for the removal of sanctions in Syria, and in what kind of timeframe?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady raises an important issue. We will judge the new Syrian Government by their actions, not their words. We are, alongside allies, reviewing sanctions at the moment. I will not comment in detail on that, but we are clear that we want to see an inclusive Government who prosper. We have been pleased with what we have seen so far, but as has already been mentioned, some of what we have seen on the ground has not been good. We will judge them by their actions, not their words, and we will not go faster than she would expect us to.

[David Taylor (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)]

T4. To follow up on the previous question, I am grateful to the Minister for coming to the event that I hosted for the Syrian diaspora yesterday. He will know that they are very keen to support their homeland to rebuild. Will Ministers look at ways to change the sanctions to ensure that ordinary citizens can send back remittances to help rebuild crumbling public services?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)]

The Israeli Government have stated that Israel’s presence in the Golan heights buffer zone is defensive, limited and temporary. Given that the Israeli Cabinet has recently approved a financial package to increase the number of illegal settlements in the Golan heights, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of the veracity of Israel’s statement?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend will be pleased that I raised this issue directly with the Israeli Foreign Minister yesterday. He wanted to emphasise that this is a temporary measure in Israel’s national interests, and I emphasised that the Syrian Foreign Minister had made it clear to me that the Syrians stand by the 1974 commitment and do not want to seek any escalation with their Israeli neighbour.

[Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)]

T8. Tower Hamlets planning officers have rejected China’s application to build a super-embassy there, but rather than put this through the appeals process that anyone else would have to go through, the Foreign Secretary has got the Deputy Prime Minister to call in that application. My question to the Foreign Secretary is: why the special treatment? Does he not realise how dodgy it is going to look if she does finally decide for China?

[Mr Lammy]

I have to say to the hon. Gentleman that all due process has been followed in the normal way. This is the same as any planning application, and the implication of what he has just said in relation to the Deputy Prime Minister is quite unsavoury.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

Will the Foreign Secretary update us on the representations that he and the Prime Minister have made to the President of Egypt to secure the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah? His mother Laila, who is with us in the Gallery today, has gone beyond 100 days on hunger strike, and we are desperate to secure the release of Alaa.

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for raising this issue. The Prime Minister wrote to President Sisi on 26 December and 8 January. The National Security Adviser, Jonathan Powell, was in Egypt on 2 January, and I met the Egyptian Foreign Minister in Saudi Arabia on Sunday. This remains our No. 1 issue. We have raised it on every single occasion, and we continue to press for clemency, for understanding and for Alaa’s release.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

The official readout from “Operation kowtow”, the Chancellor’s mission to Beijing, says that she

“urged China to cease its support for Russia’s defence industrial base, which is enabling Russia to maintain its illegal war against Ukraine.”

Did the Chancellor elicit any such assurances, and if not, what does it mean for the Foreign Secretary’s supposed reset of relations with the people of the Great Hall?

[Mr Lammy]

Can I just remind the hon. Gentleman that it was our last Foreign Secretary who had a pint with President Xi? The Chancellor of the Exchequer, as she is able to outline, was able to raise all the issues—Jimmy Lai, the security law in Hong Kong, Xinjiang and a whole range of others—but we are only able to do that by engagement.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

Friends in Gaza and across the middle east, together with many of us here, are all hoping and praying that a ceasefire will happen this time. Does the Secretary of State agree that the Palestinians of Gaza must be able to move freely to return to their homes, or what is left of them, regardless of whether they are currently in Gaza or have fled elsewhere? In the event of a ceasefire, will the UK convene an international meeting on Gaza’s reconstruction?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for continuing to press these issues. It was very important to be in Israel yesterday to talk about what may come when we get that ceasefire, and about the role that the UK of course wants to play both in ensuring Israel’s security and in working with other partners to ensure reconstruction.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

The rights of women in Afghanistan have been under systematic assault since the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, and women have been all but entirely excluded from public life. They are barred from attending school and university, and in many areas they cannot leave their homes without a male guardian present. What pressure are the UK Government putting on the Taliban to ensure that women and girls can go back to school?

--- Later in debate ---

[Siân Berry (Brighton Pavilion) (Green)]

Following up on the case of Alaa Abd el-Fattah in Egypt, will the Secretary of State say when he expects a substantial response to his engagement with the Egyptian Government? Will he confirm that he will not travel to Egypt unless he is confident that he can return with Alaa?

[Mr Lammy]

Our relationship with Egypt is multifaceted. Today, this House has discussed the hope of a hostage deal, and the hon. Lady will understand the importance that the Egyptians play in that. As I said, I raised this issue on Sunday. I raised it on 20 December. I have pressed for Alaa’s release, and we will continue to do all we can, including the Prime Minister and the National Security Adviser. In the end, this is in the hands of the Egyptians.

[Damien Egan (Bristol North East) (Lab)]

Turkey has increasingly been threatening interventions beyond Syria. It has given shelter to Hamas and has announced a new programme to develop long-range weapons. As a fellow NATO ally, how will the Government work with Ankara to secure peace and stability in the middle east?

[Mr Lammy]

I met my opposite number in Saudi Arabia at the weekend to discuss the issues in north-east Syria. He of course raised his long-standing concerns about Kurdish groups in the north-east, and I made it clear, along with many allies, that we do not want to see further escalation in Syria at this time. We continue to be in dialogue with a very close NATO ally.

[Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)]

The Minister keeps telling the House that negotiations with Mauritius have been going on for two years. Will he explain to the House why he is so reluctant to extend those negotiations by just one week until the Trump Administration take office? They may take a very different view of the negotiations from that of the Biden Administration.

--- Later in debate ---

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Ind)]

The Foreign Secretary has rightly imposed widespread sanctions on Russia for its war crimes. Earlier, he responded on the subject of sanctions on Israel by referring to the fact that talk of war crimes is incorrect because of the value of trade and Israel’s historic status as an ally. Surely a war crime is a war crime, whoever commits it. All lives are equal and international law is international law. I invite the Foreign Secretary to explain to the House the difference of approach between war crimes committed by Russia and war crimes committed by Israel.

[Mr Lammy]

We are on the brink, we hope, of a ceasefire deal. It was important to be in Israel yesterday, and I remind the hon. Gentleman that this is one of the toughest regions in the world. I remind him of the malign effect of Iran, just next door. Hezbollah have been diminished, but they are still there. Hamas have been diminished, but they are still there. I have to say that it is not right to comment on sanctions and proscription, but we are talking about an ally.

[Stephen Gethins (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry) (SNP)]

I welcome the Minister’s earlier comment that the future of Greenland is a matter for the people of Greenland, but will he commit in the way that France and Germany have to defending Greenland’s territorial integrity against any hostile action?

Irregular Migration and Organised Immigration Crime: Sanctions

David Lammy Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr David Lammy)]

Today I am updating the House on my plans to use sanctions to tackle irregular migration and organised immigration crime.

People smuggling is a challenge to global security. Criminal networks are making huge profits exploiting vulnerable people by facilitating irregular migratory movements, including dangerous sea crossings across Europe.

As Foreign Secretary, I will ensure the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office uses every tool at its disposal to tackle the challenges posed by irregular migration as part of the Government’s wider effort to secure our borders.

I am therefore pleased to inform the House that the FCDO will develop legislation for a new sanctions regime targeting irregular migration and organised immigration crime. This shows further UK innovation in mobilising sanctions to tackle evolving threats that matter at home and abroad. The sanctions regime will allow the Government to take further robust action against the people smuggling gangs and their enablers.

The FCDO is also working to deliver more returns arrangements, and more projects and programmes to tackle irregular migration at source.

In this way, the FCDO will use the widest possible toolkit to smash the people smuggling gangs and tackle the challenges posed by irregular migration to deliver the Government’s plan for change.

[HCWS357]