UK-Morocco Partnership and Regional Stability

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Written Statements

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

I should like to update the House on the United Kingdom’s deepening partnership with the Kingdom of Morocco, and our new position towards Western Sahara.

The UK and Morocco are long-standing partners, working together across a range of shared priorities. Our bilateral trade relationship is worth over £4 billion annually. We are strengthening this partnership to advance mutual goals in security, prosperity and sustainable development—delivering tangible benefits for British businesses and supporting the Government’s plan for change to boost economic growth.

On 1 June, during my visit to Morocco, I announced a series of partnership agreements that unlock opportunities for UK businesses across a range of sectors, including access to public procurement markets in Morocco, where opportunities are estimated to be worth approximately £33 billion over the next three years. On behalf of the Department for Business and Trade, I signed a Government-to-Government partnership that strategically positions British businesses to compete for contracts to develop Moroccan infrastructure for the 2030 FIFA world cup. In addition, I announced closer UK-Morocco co-operation on migration and counter-terrorism, and joint action to tackle water scarcity and climate change.

In parallel, the Government are advancing regional security, stability and prosperity by supporting efforts to resolve the long-standing Western Sahara conflict, which has persisted for nearly five decades. The conflict has undermined regional stability and hindered economic development, and particularly affects Sahrawi refugees residing in the Tindouf camps.

Approaching the 50th year of the conflict in November, and with renewed international engagement, there is a window of opportunity to shift the dial on this intractable conflict, and to support the parties and the UN to reach a just, lasting and mutually acceptable solution, based on compromise, which conforms with the purposes and principles of the UN charter, including the principle of respect for self-determination. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is redoubling its efforts to help realise this opportunity.

To this end, while in Morocco, I announced the UK’s endorsement of Morocco’s autonomy proposal as the most credible, viable, and pragmatic basis for a solution to the conflict. In parallel, I welcomed Morocco’s willingness, detailed in our joint communiqué, to engage in good faith with all relevant parties to provide further details on what autonomy could entail, with a view to restarting serious negotiations.

[HCWS675]

Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 20th May 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 Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. This weekend, the Israel Defence Forces started a new, extensive ground operation throughout Gaza: Operation Gideon’s Chariots. Five Israeli divisions now operate there. Prime Minister Netanyahu says that they are going to take control of the strip, letting only minimal amounts of food reach Gazans; to quote Mr Netanyahu,

“just enough to prevent hunger.”

Fewer than 10 trucks entered Gaza yesterday. The UN and the World Health Organisation have issued stark warnings of the threat of starvation hanging over hundreds of thousands of civilians. This is abominable. Civilians in Gaza facing starvation, homelessness and trauma, desperate for this war to end, now confront renewed bombardment, displacement and suffering. The remaining hostages, kept apart from their loved ones by Hamas for almost 600 days, are now at heightened risk from the war around them.

Two months ago the ceasefire collapsed. Since then, the humanitarian catastrophe has rapidly intensified. For 11 weeks, Israeli forces have blockaded Gaza, leaving the World Food Programme without any remaining stocks. Israel has repeatedly struck hospitals, and three more in northern Gaza ceased operations this weekend. Yet more aid workers and medical workers have been killed, after last year proved the deadliest year on record for humanitarian personnel.

The diplomatic deadlock between Israel and Hamas has also hardened. Despite the efforts of the United States, Qatar and Egypt, which we of course support, no ceasefire has emerged. We repeat our demand that Hamas release all the hostages immediately and unconditionally, and reiterate that they cannot continue to run Gaza.

We are now entering a dark new phase in this conflict. Netanyahu’s Government plan to drive Gazans from their homes into a corner of the strip to the south and permit them a fraction of the aid that they need. Yesterday, Minister Smotrich even spoke of Israeli forces “cleansing” Gaza, of “destroying what’s left” and of resident Palestinians being “relocated to third countries”. We must call this what it is: it is extremism, it is dangerous, it is repellent, it is monstrous and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.

Israel suffered a heinous attack on 7 October. The Government have always backed Israel’s right to defend itself. We have condemned Hamas and their abhorrent treatment of the hostages. We have stood with the families and demanded that their loved ones be released. Israel’s plan is morally unjustifiable, wholly disproportionate and utterly counterproductive, and whatever Israeli Ministers claim, it is not the way to bring the hostages safely home. Nearly all the hostages have been freed through negotiations, not military force. That is why hostage families themselves, and many other Israelis, oppose this plan so strongly. It will not eliminate Hamas or make Israel secure either. This war has left a generation orphaned and traumatised, ready for Hamas to recruit. As we learned in Northern Ireland, to defeat terrorists and their warped ideology, we cannot just rely on military might; we have to offer a viable political alternative. Opposing the expansion of a war that has killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas.

Since entering office, we have taken concerted action on Gaza. We have restored funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, supported the independence of international courts, suspended arms export licences, provided food and medical care to hundreds of thousands of Gazans and worked with Arab partners on a plan to ensure a reconstructed Gaza no longer run by Hamas. Since Israel restarted strikes on Gaza, this Government have demanded that Israel change course.

Privately, in my conversations with Foreign Minister Sa’ar and Strategic Affairs Minister Dermer, and publicly, in repeated joint statements with my French and German counterparts, we have made clear that Israel’s actions are intolerable. We have raised our concerns in the UN Security Council and before the International Court of Justice. Yesterday, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister joined leaders from France and Canada in strongly opposing the expansion of Israel’s military operations. The UK also led a further statement with 27 partners criticising Israel’s proposed new aid delivery mechanism and defending the essential humanitarian principles of the international system that the UK did so much to establish in the first place.

Our message is clear. There is a UN plan ready to deliver aid at the scale needed, with mitigations against aid diversion. There are brave humanitarians ready to do their jobs. There are over 9,000 trucks at the border. Prime Minister Netanyahu: end this blockade now and let the aid in.

Regrettably, despite our efforts, this Israeli Government’s egregious actions and rhetoric have continued. They are isolating Israel from its friends and partners around the world, undermining the interests of the Israeli people and damaging the image of the state of Israel in the eyes of the world. I find this deeply painful, as a lifelong friend of Israel and a believer in the values expressed in its declaration of independence. As the Prime Minister and fellow leaders said yesterday, we cannot stand by in the face of this new deterioration. It is incompatible with the principles that underpin our bilateral relationship, it is rejected by Members across this House, and frankly, it is an affront to the values of the British people. Therefore, today I am announcing that we have suspended negotiations with this Israeli Government on a new free trade agreement and we will be reviewing co-operation with them under the 2030 bilateral road map. The Netanyahu Government’s actions have made this necessary.

Today, the Minister for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer) is summoning the Israeli ambassador to the Foreign Office to convey this message. I say now to the people of Israel that we want—I want—a strong friendship with you based on shared values, with flourishing ties between our people and societies. We are unwavering in our commitment to your security and to your future, to countering the very real threat from Iran, the scourge of terrorism and the evils of antisemitism. However, the conduct of the war in Gaza is damaging our relationship with their Government and, as the Prime Minister has said, if Israel pursues this military offensive as it has threatened, failing to ensure the unhindered provision of aid, we will take further action in response.

The UK, will not give up on a two-state solution: Israelis living within secure borders, recognised and at peace with their neighbours, free from the threat of terrorism; and Palestinians living in their own state, in dignity and security, free of occupation. The two-state solution remains the ideal framework; indeed, it is the only framework for a just and lasting peace. Yet as the House knows, its very viability is in peril, endangered not only by the war in Gaza but by the spread of illegal Israeli settlements and outposts across the occupied west bank with the explicit support of this Israeli Government.

There are now weekly meetings to approve new settlement construction. Settlement approval has accelerated while settler violence has soared. Here, too, we have acted: repeatedly pressing for a change in course and direction, sanctioning seven entities in October and signing a landmark agreement to bolster support for the Palestinian Authority when Prime Minister Mustafa visited London last month. But here too, we must do more. Today, we are therefore imposing sanctions on a further three individuals and four entities involved in the settler movement. I have seen for myself the consequences of settler violence, the fear of its victims and the impunity of its perpetrators. Today, we are demonstrating again that we will continue to act against those carrying out heinous abuses of human rights.

Despite the glimmer of hope from January’s ceasefire, the suffering in this conflict has worsened. January showed that another path was possible, and we urge the Netanyahu Government to choose this path. The world is judging. History will judge them. Blocking aid, expanding the war and dismissing the concerns of their friends and partners is indefensible and it must stop. I commend this statement to the House.

--- Later in debate ---

[Priti Patel]

If I can return to my remarks, how does that non-participation help to get aid into Gaza and stop the suffering that is being experienced by everyone? [Interruption.] Members shake their heads, but we should all be focused on securing—[Interruption.] Labour Members should be ashamed of themselves, because the focus of this House should be on getting aid into Gaza. The UK—[Interruption.] I can speak as someone who has supported aid getting into Gaza and other humanitarian crises. The hon. Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) might want to intervene rather than calling me out and saying that my comments are shameful. The UK has consistently been a world leader when it comes to aid delivery. We should be at the forefront of finding practical solutions and supporting the delivery of aid to those in need, so has the Foreign Secretary, in the approach that he has just outlined towards Israel, done all he can to secure an increase in aid? Has the UK’s influence fallen in this aid discussion and in the dialogue with Israel?

Thirdly, on the future of Gaza, the Government have agreed with our position that there can be no future for Hamas—that is completely non-negotiable—so what practical steps are being taken to end their role in Gaza and dismantle the terrorist infrastructure? What co-ordinated international steps are being taken to stem the flow of money, weapons and support bankrolled by Iran? We are still awaiting an Iran strategy from the Government. Can the Foreign Secretary expand upon this?

We had a statement last month from the Foreign Secretary on the memorandum of understanding with the Palestinian Authority. Can he give an update on what steps are being taken to improve the governance of the PA? The MOU posed many questions, but I do not need to go over them again as I have raised them previously. The UK obviously needs to be involved in this process, given our historical role in, for example, the Abraham accords. This may be our best shot when it comes to regional peace, and the Foreign Secretary must convince us that we have influence when it comes to the ceasefire and negotiating a better future in this part of the world. What discussions have taken place with Administration of the United States—one country that does have influence—on peace efforts and getting aid into Gaza?

In conclusion, strong words will do little to resolve the real challenges and the suffering that we are seeing day in, day out—[Interruption.] That is a matter for the Government to address. It should be a cause for concern that we have reached a situation where the statements and actions that have been echoed by the Government today—I am referring to the Prime Minister’s joint statement with France and Canada—have now been supported by Hamas, a terrorist organisation that I proscribed as Home Secretary—[Interruption.] They have actually put out a statement, and I am sure the Foreign Secretary has seen it.

The Foreign Secretary’s decision to tear up trade negotiations with Israel and stop the bilateral road map will not—[Interruption.] It is not shocking. These are important questions. If the Foreign Secretary finds this—[Interruption.] If he cannot answer these questions, that is fine—[Interruption.] Then please do answer the questions, because they are important—[Interruption.] I would if Members did not keep interrupting me. It is quite obvious that the Government do not want to respond to these important questions, but this is important because there is so much human suffering. I understand the Foreign Secretary’s points about the steps he is taking with Israel, but how is this going to help now when it comes to wider security issues and threats from Iran? How do we know that this will not be self-defeating in any way?

[Mr Lammy]

For decades there has been a cross-party commitment to a two-state solution and the pursuit of peace from friends of both Israel and the Palestinian people across this House. It was the Thatcher Government that imposed an arms embargo after Israel’s invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It was David Cameron who first called Gaza a prison camp, and it was Theresa May’s Government that championed UN resolution 2334 on settlements. It was William Hague who worked with John Kerry on the push for peace and condemned the idea of moving the British embassy to Jerusalem. Sadly, today, it seems that the Conservative party, or at least its current Front Bench, is refusing to confront the appalling reality of what is happening in Gaza and what the Netanyahu Government are doing.

The right hon. Lady seems incapable of offering any serious criticism about the egregious actions of the Netanyahu Government, unlike many hon. Members on her own side. The whole House should be able to utterly condemn the Israeli Government’s denial of food to hungry children. It is wrong. It is appalling. Will she condemn it? Well, the whole House has seen her response. Opposing the expansion of a war that has killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas. Opposing the displacement of hundreds of thousands of civilians is not rewarding Hamas. On this side of the House, we are crystal clear that what is happening is morally wrong and unjustifiable, and it needs to stop.

That is why we have taken the actions we have. The right hon. Lady knows hostage families are deeply concerned about what is happening and about their loved ones—she knows that. She knows we oppose the blockade on aid—does she? It was not clear from her statement whether she does oppose the blockade of aid to children. She should note that our diplomats led that call, with 27 countries joining us, to condemn what is happening and stand on the side of truth and history. What a shame she could not bring herself to do so today.

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

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement. Just last week, the UN humanitarian chief Tom Fletcher warned that the Security Council must act “decisively” to prevent genocide. Today, he said that 14,000 babies could be dead in the next 48 hours. The level of destruction we have seen of the Palestinian people and their land is remarkable. Israel has shown that it will not respond to diplomatic appeals. We now need the continuation of a full arms embargo, sanctions, accountability for war crimes, immediate recognition of the state of Palestine, and the return of UNRWA. What additional steps will the Foreign Secretary take to stave off this genocide?

[Mr Lammy]

I draw my hon. Friend’s attention to the announcement I have made today on further sanctions, building on the announcement I made back in October. It is very important that we send a clear message to Israel that it should allow the full resumption of aid into Gaza immediately and should enable the UN and humanitarian organisations to work independently and impartially to save lives, reduce suffering and maintain dignity. She will have noted the co-ordinated statement of 27 countries, including Canada, Denmark, Finland, France and many others, who came together to make their views crystal clear about what we now see happening, what we expect to see happen, and the further action that will have to take place if we do not.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Lib Dem spokesperson.

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

I also thank the Foreign Secretary for advance sight of his statement. I know that he, like me, has been horrified by the scenes coming out of Gaza. Tom Fletcher, the UN’s humanitarian chief, has indeed highlighted and predicted the imminent death of thousands of infants without immediate aid, and said that the amount of aid entering the strip is but “a drop in the ocean”.

Let us be clear that mass starvation will do nothing to remove Hamas or secure the release of the hostages, so I welcome yesterday’s joint statement with Canada and France. In it, the Prime Minister spoke of taking further action if Israel does not fully lift its aid blockade and draw back from its expansion of military activity. Will the Foreign Secretary confirm whether the expanded sanctions list includes extremist Ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, who have advocated illegal actions to dispossess Palestinians across the occupied territories, and if not, why not? Will the Government go beyond reviewing the 2030 bilateral road map and urgently suspend it unless the Government of Israel change path? Will they now finally block the export of all UK arms to Israel?

In response to my letter to the Foreign Secretary last week, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), reaffirmed the Government’s position that they consider that Israel only “risks” breaching international law through its blockade. I ask the Secretary of State what more Israel would have to do to the people of Gaza for its actions to constitute not simply a “risk”, but an actual breach of international law.

The Minister also stated in his reply that the Government would only proceed with recognition of the state of Palestine at

“a time that is most conducive to the peace process”.

Does the Foreign Secretary agree with me and the Liberal Democrats that the time to recognise Palestine is now and that immediate recognition—ideally jointly with France at next month’s summit—would send the strongest possible signal about the UK’s commitment to the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. I have condemned the statements of Ben-Gvir and Smotrich in the past. On 6 May, Israel’s Finance Minister Smotrich said:

“Gaza will be entirely destroyed, civilians will be sent to…the south to a humanitarian zone without Hamas or terrorism, and from there they will start to leave in great numbers to third countries”.

We condemn that language. We condemn the language of Minister Ben-Gvir and, of course, we keep that language under review and continue to discuss these issues with our international partners.

The hon. Gentleman asks about recognition and the work that we see France and Saudi Arabia doing. Of course, we are in close dialogue with our P5 partner of France and with Saudi Arabia, in fact. I touched on these issues with the Saudi Arabian PM in Rome at the weekend. The hon. Gentleman asked about the road map. As I have said, we will review the road map. He will recognise that there are elements of that road map, particularly as they pertain to security issues and the work we do jointly on Iran, that would not be right to suspend, but we are reviewing it—as we should, given the circumstances. I have said time and again that we have suspended arms sales that could be used in Gaza, notwithstanding those we must necessarily retain that particularly pertain to the supply chain on F-35s and their use in warfare in other theatres with which we have an interest.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his strong statement. It feels like it has taken a long time for us to get to this point. When something is intolerable, we stop it from happening some way or another. Will this actually stop what is happening in Gaza, or is it too late? The fact that Netanyahu has said he will let a small amount of aid in means that he understands he has been withholding aid. That is a breach of international law, and we must call it out for what it is. We must insist that the hostages, and also the prisoners held without charge, are returned.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend rightly prays in aid of international humanitarian law. She knows that because we in this country were one of the great architects of that international humanitarian law, we have to stand by it, and when we see it breached, we have to call it out. I began that process less than three months into office back in September when I suspended arms sales to Israel. I am terribly sad that we have had to act in this way to suspend any discussion of a new trade deal with Israel and to review our road map with Israel. It is deeply worrying that three leaders had to come together to put out that statement to make it crystal clear that the actions taking place must now come to an end, or there will be further acts to bring this war to an end. We will do all we can.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, which is the strongest statement I have heard in this House on the issue in recent times. I welcome the actions and sanctions that have been announced today, and I hope the Government will continue to keep those under review and take further measures if necessary. Is it not now increasingly clear that the Israeli Prime Minister has misled the US President over allowing aid back into Gaza? Ten trucks is a perverse and pathetic token. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that the Israeli Prime Minister is in real danger of taking the support of both the American people and the US President for granted?

[Mr Lammy]

I noted reports today of deep frustration in the US Administration in relation to what they are seeing. Certainly, President Trump has said that this war is just going on too long, and I think he said that again last week on his own visits to the middle east. I note the right hon. Gentleman’s tweets and that he has been raising these issues. Is he as concerned as I am about the position of his Front Bench?

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

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement. I agree that January provided a small window and glimmer of hope—hope for the innocent civilians who have continued to be bombed for many months; hope for the innocent hostages, who just want to be reunited with their families; hope that was withered away by the Netanyahu Government, who broke that ceasefire. The Foreign Secretary is right that the world is watching; it is also watching us in the UK Parliament. The UK is legally bound to prevent acts of genocide. Does he agree that there must be clear and tangible consequences for Israel if it continues to have blatant disregard for international law and to use food and aid as weapons of punishment?

[Mr Lammy]

It is because of those very same issues, and my concern that the denial of essential humanitarian assistance to a civilian population is unacceptable and risks breaching international humanitarian law, that I suspended arms back in September. I want us to get back to a ceasefire; I want us to get back to diplomacy. There cannot be a role for Hamas, but there can never be a role for using food as a tool of war.

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

The anger and the outrage of the Foreign Secretary is appreciated by us all, and I sense that it is genuine, but he knows as well as I do that the Israelis could not give a damn about what he says in this Chamber or indeed about the statement. As he will know, since that statement was issued, dozens of Palestinians have been killed and there have been voices of defiance from the Israeli Government.

The statement mentions the taking of concrete action. I am not quite sure what the trigger for that is. Many of us in this Chamber have been trying to spur the Government into action over the past few months. We have tried anger and outrage and got nowhere, and we have tried shaming Ministers into action and got nowhere, so maybe we need to beg. Do those on the Treasury Bench need us to beg for the lives of those Palestinian children before they will trigger that concrete action, whatever it might be? I am urging the Foreign Secretary—I am begging him—to pluck up all his moral authority and courage, stand up in Government against the blockage in Downing Street, and please try to save those children’s lives as soon as possible.

[Mr Lammy]

I listened carefully to what the right hon. Gentleman said, and I take issue with the way he began his question. I think it is wrong to characterise the whole of Israel in the way he did. It is not that the Israelis could not give a fig about what is said from this Front Bench—that is not the case. Our issue today, and the reason I have taken the decisions I have about a new free trade agreement, a review of the road map and the announcement of further sanctions, is the position of the Netanyahu Government and the language from those Ministers. That is why I was so shocked that the Opposition Front Benchers could not stand up and find their own moral authority. I am proud of what we have done since coming into government, right from the beginning. I want to see an end to this war, as the right hon. Gentleman knows. Our diplomats are doing all they can to try to use our lever to bring this war to an end.

[Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s very strong statement and thank him for his work on this matter. He confirmed the words of Minister Smotrich—that Israel’s goal is to destroy everything that is left in the Gaza strip. Smotrich has also said that Israel will carry out the “conquering” and “cleansing” of the Gaza strip. Prime Minister Netanyahu has praised those words, saying that Smotrich was speaking the truth. That is effectively an explicit admission that Israeli officials intend to carry out ethnic cleansing. What are we doing to satisfy our obligations under the Geneva convention to prevent a genocide from taking place, and why are we not sanctioning Minister Smotrich?

[Mr Lammy]

Our obligations were met, under our legislation to ensure that none of us is complicit in any acts that breach international humanitarian law, when I suspended arms back in September. My hon. Friend will remember that, in opposition, many of us were surprised and shocked that the previous Government failed to do that. Our obligations were met, but they were not satisfied because the war still goes on. That is why, working with international partners, I have announced further measures today. It is why we continue to discuss these issues with the Israeli Government. And it is why the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has summoned the Israeli ambassador, to make our position crystal clear.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker—no pressure.

To see the Foreign Secretary finally find some fire in his belly on this issue was certainly most appreciated, but it was long overdue. Ultimately, as has been mentioned, the Government are still a block to action. Would he support this House being given votes on whether we support the work of the ICJ and the ICC, on whether we recognise the state of Palestine, and on ending all arms sales to Israel?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me say to the right hon. Gentleman that I have had fire in my belly since the day I was born in the Whittington hospital in north London—he can be sure of that. This House led the call for the international criminal architecture that we have, and we will continue, as successive Governments have, to support that international architecture.

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

The children of Gaza are being not just starved to death but bombed to death as Israel tries to wipe Palestine itself off the map, so I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, particularly his robust action on the illegal settlements in the west bank and on suspending any free trade agreement talks with Israel. Does he agree that history will judge all Governments around the world, and every Member of this House, not just on what we said but on what we did in the face of this 21st century atrocity?

[Mr Lammy]

I recognise why my hon. Friend puts his remarks in the way he does. What we must do is act in concert. This is deeply frustrating, of course, but he knows history and will recognise that the ability of the UK to act unilaterally or with one other partner was determined in the Suez crisis, when it was crystal clear that we no longer had unilateral influence in the middle east. That is why it is so important that 27 partners came together, and that I continue to discuss these issues with Secretary of State Rubio, and with Vice-President Vance, with whom I discussed them on Sunday.

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

I doubt whether there is a single Member of this House who does not wish to see the 58 remaining hostages returned to their families, whether dead or alive. I think that the Foreign Secretary was right to say that genocide and war crimes—my words, not his—are not the way to get the hostages released. There are parents and grandparents in this House who will stand up for children anywhere in the world—I am prepared to nail my colours to that mast. We have to take action; we cannot stand by and do nothing.

A number of Privy Counsellors—all of us, I think—wrote to the Prime Minister relatively recently, calling for the two-state solution to be imposed immediately. Sadly, that private letter did not receive a response, which is why it was published. Foreign Secretary, please take that message back to the Prime Minister and act.

[Mr Lammy]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for what he said in a cross-party spirit. He brings great authority and experience to these matters. He knows that, as a P5 nation, we are talking to our French counterparts about the way forward as we head to their conference next month. We are also talking to Saudi Arabia, which is jointly hosting that conference. I recognise why he raises these issues, particularly in relation to children, in the manner in which he does.

[Alex Ballinger (Halesowen) (Lab)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement and for these essential actions: the sanctions on extremist settlers and the suspension of our trade negotiations with Israel. It is important that Israel sees that its allies will not stand by while it continues to forcibly displace Palestinians and block aid. Can the Foreign Secretary tell us what further discussions he has had with the EU on suspending the EU-Israel association agreement, so that we can put further pressure on Israel to stop the brutalisation of Palestinians in Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

I can confirm that I was invited to the EU Foreign Ministers’ informal meeting just under two weeks ago, at which these issues were discussed, and I was able to discuss these issues with EU High Representative Kaja Kallas just yesterday.

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

In correspondence to the Business and Trade Committee earlier this year, the Government said that some of the reasoning for not stopping licences for F-35-related components was the need to maintain arms for Ukraine. What practical steps have been taken in the three months since that letter was sent to ensure that weapons manufacture and supply to Ukraine is separated from the supply chains to Israel and the occupied territories?

[Mr Lammy]

I stand by the decisions we have taken to meet our obligations for security around the world and the decisions we have made in relation to the F-35s. I want to make it clear that our decision to suspend arms sales that could be used in Gaza is a serious one, and we are absolutely content that we are meeting all obligations that I set out back in September.

[Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) (Lab)]

Yesterday, Israel admitted that it allowed only five aid trucks into Gaza for over 2 million people—that is more than Northern Ireland’s entire population. This weaponisation of food is morally reprehensible. We must impose an arms embargo and sanctions on the Israeli officials who are responsible for these heinous crimes: Benjamin Netanyahu, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. I welcome the joint Government statement with Canada and France. Given that time is running out with every moment we stand here talking about this issue, can the Secretary of State clarify the conditions and timeframe for the very firmest of action?

[Mr Lammy]

We have made these decisions today. My hon. Friend will recognise that there is an important conference convened by France and Saudi Arabia, where we will work jointly with those partners. I ask her to look carefully at the leaders’ statement and our absolute commitment to take further action if necessary in the coming days and weeks in terms of the course of action that the Netanyahu Government are set to take, of military expansion and the blockade of aid.

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

This Government have consistently maintained that the determination of genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes is a matter for a competent court, yet the lawyers instructed by this Government to defend against a case brought by Al-Haq recently have been unequivocal that it is this Government’s firm position that no genocide is occurring, that we have no legal obligations to the International Court of Justice ruling and that it is a matter for Parliament, not the courts. I ask the Foreign Secretary to clarify: are those lawyers speaking on behalf of this Government, and if that truly is the Government’s position, will he finally explain why he sees military support for Israel as compatible with our obligations under international law, rather than saying it is simply a matter for the courts?

[Mr Lammy]

That is a crude caricature of a very serious issue. I took a decision back in September in relation to international humanitarian law in suspending arms sales that could be used in Gaza because these are very serious issues—I understand the issues that are before the ICC and the ICJ, and they are very serious. It is because votes in this Parliament helped to set up those mechanisms and made us part of them that I leave it to them to make the necessary determinations that they must properly make.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

We have seen the slaughter of innocents going on for far too long, and as others have said, people are dying right now. I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement and the Prime Minister’s statement yesterday with France and Canada. The Foreign Secretary mentioned that he had met Vice-President Vance. To get a breakthrough, because Israel is not listening, America needs to be part of this. Can he tell us about that conversation with Vice-President Vance and whether he has any hope that we can make a statement jointly with the US as well?

[Mr Lammy]

I know that my hon. Friend’s constituents will be deeply concerned about what is happening. We had hoped, and I know Vice-President Vance had hoped, that we would get a breakthrough in the ceasefire that was being brokered by the United States, Qatar and Egypt. She will have seen that the United States has been able to strike direct deals—it got its hostage out last week by going direct to Hamas—and that the breakthrough we had hoped for towards the end of last week has not come through. I do not foresee a ceasefire deal at this stage. That is why the only way forward is through more diplomacy, not less. It is not through military means. We have to be crystal clear that we disagree with the course that the Netanyahu Government are now taking.

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

The House wants to know, and Israel needs to know, exactly what the Foreign Secretary means by “further action”.

[Mr Lammy]

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to consult the Oxford English Dictionary and look at the two words.

[Naz Shah (Bradford West) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and the actions he has taken. I also welcome the Prime Minister’s joint statement yesterday. The word “genocide” is used quite often here, and all indicators point towards that happening. I appreciate the suspension of negotiations on a free trade agreement, but children are still dying every single day, and people are losing their homes. What will it take? What do we have to wait for to call it what it is and act to stop what is happening?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend talks with such integrity, and I know that she has been a consistent ambassador for the Palestinian people in this House. She feels the same as most of our constituents, who want this to stop now. The actions we have taken bilaterally are a diplomatic move by the United Kingdom Government to exert influence to try to make it stop, but she knows history—she knows that we cannot do that unilaterally. I wish I could stand at this Dispatch Box and say that we could. If I were standing here in 1950, that might have been possible, but here we are in 2025. We must work in concert with other partners. That is why the statement from the Foreign Ministers of 27 countries is so important. It is why we have taken the actions we have today, and it is why we have indicated that we will act further if we need to, particularly as we head to this important conference in New York convened by France and Saudi Arabia, working alongside them.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

The UN has warned that 14,000 babies could die in the next 48 hours. Concrete action against Netanyahu’s murderous Government is long overdue. We know that this Government are not prepared to make a determination on genocide, but they have told us that they are making ongoing assessments of the risk. Will they now finally release that risk assessment for this House and the public to see, to prove that this Government take their obligations under international law seriously and mean what they say about concrete action?

[Mr Lammy]

I remind the hon. Lady that last year we gave £129 million in humanitarian support to the people of Gaza and the occupied territories. A lot of that support was for medical aid, which this Government began to provide with vigour as soon as we came back to Parliament in September. Behind her question is a serious point. It falls to me to make serious decisions about the sale of arms where there might be or where there is a clear risk of a breach in humanitarian law. I took that quasi-judicial decision very soberly and seriously in September last year, and that has continued to be the position since.

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

I welcome today’s steps forward, particularly on trade. The fact that we are on the brink of the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is such a collective global failure that it betrays words. Unlike the shadow Foreign Secretary, will the Foreign Secretary confirm the UK’s total opposition to Israeli plans to replace humanitarian non-governmental organisations and the UN with mercenaries? On the important statement by the UK, France and Canada, threatening further important multilateral action if Israel does not stop, what is the red line? We have been here before with the Rafah offensive, when the international community said it would stop Israel but it did not. Gaza is out of time.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

Let me be crystal clear: this Government oppose Israel’s model for aid, which does not respect humanitarian principles and cannot deliver aid effectively at speed or at the scale required. It is wrong and it is dangerous for the humanitarian system.

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

Earlier, the Foreign Secretary used the phrase “morally wrong”. I entirely agree with that, and I am sure we can all agree that the original Hamas massacre is equally morally unacceptable. May I take him back to the issue of recognition? I am one of the Members who has previously supported the recognition of the state of Palestine. If there were a free vote in the House, I think there would be overwhelming support for that, which would give the Government moral authority to take even more robust further action, so may I suggest that they take that course of action?

[Mr Lammy]

UK bilateral recognition is the single most important action that the United Kingdom can take with regard to Palestinian statehood, which is why it is important for us to get the timing right and to work with partners as we consider the issues very closely. I have talked about the international conference in June on the implementation of the two-state solution, which we will of course be attending; we are talking with our partners about it and they will have heard what the hon. Gentleman has said.

[Afzal Khan (Manchester Rusholme) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, and last night’s collective statement. However, repeated strong words without action now ring hollow. Netanyahu’s Government continue with the starvation and killing of innocent Palestinians. Suspending trade negotiations and other steps that the Foreign Secretary has announced today will not stop the killing of innocent Palestinians, because we are dealing with an extremist right-wing Netanyahu Government. Concrete steps to uphold our humanitarian commitments are overdue, so when will the Foreign Secretary impose a full arms embargo on Israel and recognise Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

We have imposed a ban on arms sales for use in Gaza—we did that in September. I know that my hon. Friend’s constituents will care a lot about the war in Ukraine and other conflicts across the world, and therefore he will recognise the decision that we have made, particularly about the F-35 supply chain. The whole House will have heard his points on recognition.

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

I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement. I also pay tribute to the humanitarian workers in Gaza, who are risking their lives to help the Palestinian people. The very powerful words by our own UN humanitarian chief have already been referenced. He said that 14,000 babies need food within the next 48 hours or they will face starvation. He also said that we have not moved fast enough in the past in the face of other war crimes. Starvation is a weapon of war and it is against humanitarian law. The Secretary of State has said that he will not stand by and that, unless aid gets in, the Government will take consequential action—so how quickly will the Government take action to save the lives of those Palestinian babies?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

Four hundred and thirty aid workers have been killed—Gaza is the deadliest place on earth for humanitarians. The hon. Lady is right to recognise those tremendous aid workers. Let me also reference the medical workers and the children who have lost their lives. It is absolutely appalling. We will continue to do all we can to bring this to an end.

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

I am sure that we are all absolutely horrified that the Israeli Government are creating a mass starvation event in Gaza. We are seeing the language of a Gaza plan that talks about the “concentration” of the Palestinian people in the south of Gaza, and even works against its own citizens. Nine Israeli citizens have been arrested—including civil society leader Alon-Lee Green, who I hosted in Parliament only last week—and have not yet been released. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that this is a deliberate and systematic attempt to destroy the Palestinian people in Gaza? Is it not time that, instead of sanctioning those taking orders, we sanction those giving the orders in the Israeli Government?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has consistently raised these issues. The abandonment and displacement of Gazans to that small strip is entirely unacceptable. The idea that we could see this go on right through 2026 is abominable. Tom Fletcher was right to speak out in recent days, and that is why we are seeing this response from international partners. I hope that Netanyahu heeds the words of friends.

[Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)]

It is essential that aid reaches innocent civilians in Gaza, as the shadow Foreign Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel), was equally clear in stating. It is also vital that this war comes to a swift end. However, in searching for that path to peace, is it not equally vital that we reflect on certain realities? It is not Israel that has shut down the ceasefires so far or is rejecting terms in attempts to broker a new one—it is Hamas. It is not Israel holding 58 hostages—it is Hamas. It is not Israel that is misappropriating aid and selling it on at profit—it is Hamas. Is it not a damning indictment of this Government’s foreign policy that it is Hamas who are cheerleading this new stance?

[Mr Lammy]

I do not think that on any of the six occasions when I have made a statement on this subject at this Dispatch Box, I have not condemned Hamas, what they did on 7 October and those who are keeping hostages. Let me be clear: I believe that Hamas are holding hostage the Palestinian people, but just as we can hold to that, we can hold in our heart and mind that it is morally reprehensible to continue this blockade, and to reduce 400 humanitarian aid points to four. That is impossible and intolerable, and the United Kingdom must speak up against it.

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

This statement is welcome, but I believe that the Foreign Secretary has heard the strength of the feeling on the Government Benches that more needs to be done. I believe that he is more in tune with the families of the hostages who were at the border yesterday, protesting against what the Israeli Government are doing; we should show solidarity with them for standing up to Prime Minister Netanyahu. If solidarity matters, let the Foreign Secretary hear Labour Members call for a vote on recognising Palestine; he has heard Members of other parties call for that vote. We held a vote on that in this place in 2014, but it is fair to say that a minority of the people who supported the motion are in the House today. The conference is before him; would not a vote on the issue in the House show that we speak as one in calling for an end to what is happening in Gaza, and in calling for recognition of the Palestinians’ right to exist?

[Mr Lammy]

The British people made a determination when they voted Labour at the last general election. My hon. Friend knows that in our manifesto, we committed to Palestinian recognition in the right circumstances. I have said a lot about the conference that is coming up on a two-state solution, and she will no doubt read a lot about it. Given that we are only days away from it, that is what should concentrate minds at this time.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

Can the Foreign Secretary tell us exactly what arms have been supplied to Israel over the past six months? What arms are being supplied now to Israel? What is RAF Akrotiri being used for? Is it supporting the Israeli war machine? Can he inform the House categorically that no component part of an F-35 jet made in Britain is being supplied to Israel, for it to continue its bombardment of Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Gentleman asked me a similar question a few weeks ago, and I gave him the answer that we suspended arms sales; that was a sober decision we made. They are not being given to Israel for use in Gaza at this time—that is a strict decision under our export licensing regime—save for the carve-out we made for F-35s. I know he disagrees with that, but that is the position, because we are not prepared to disrupt supply chains across the world.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

What we have heard from senior UN officials this morning should frankly send shivers down the spine of every Member in this Chamber. Some 14,000 Palestinian children could die in the next 48 hours because of Israel’s actions. Today we are getting stronger words, but limited action, and the time for it is long, long past. We need further bold and immediate action. We need to end all arms sales to Israel, impose economic sanctions and ban Israeli settlement goods. What are the Government waiting for?

[Mr Lammy]

I set out the position as it stands today, and I ask my hon. Friend to look carefully at the Prime Minister’s statement just this morning, and at what he has indicated. Further action could be taken if we do not see this further expansion, and the restriction of aid, come to an end.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

I welcome today’s statement. I reiterate the calls of my hon. Friend the Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for the recognition of Palestine and the immediate cessation of all arms sales to Israel. As important as those are, given that the UN has said that 14,000 children and babies may die in the next 48 hours, I reiterate what many Members have asked today: what concrete action can be taken against an illegal blockade that is preventing medicine and food from getting to these people? Does it include making air drops of aid with our allies?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman asks what the concrete action is. It is really straightforward: it is that Netanyahu stops—that he halts his course of action. We are taking concrete action with our allies to try to bring this to an end, but the hon. Gentleman knows that in the end, this is in the hands of the Israeli Government. Holding up our hands and expressing disgust is not sufficient—I recognise that—but the Israeli Government will be held to account if they do not act.

[Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)]

I very much welcome the tone and content of the Foreign Secretary’s statement, although I sincerely wish it had come a long time ago. I have to tell him, though, that British arms are still getting through to Israel in vast quantities to wreak havoc. The question is whether what he says will stop the genocide. For months, the Government have claimed that they cannot make an assessment of whether there is a serious risk of genocide as they are waiting for a determination by the courts. The Government told the High Court last week that they had already conducted an assessment under the genocide convention, so which is it? Has a determination been made, and if so, does the Foreign Secretary want to correct the record?

[Mr Lammy]

Arms are not getting to Israel that could be used in Gaza. My hon. Friend will recognise that the United Kingdom is a very small supplier of arms to Israel in percentage terms. I cannot account for other countries, and other countries have not made the decision that we have made. I stand by the assessments I have made that led to me suspending arms.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

The House has debated this issue regularly for many months—in fact, for well over a year. However, we must remind ourselves why we are doing this. It is because brutal terrorists burned, raped, murdered, and tortured innocent citizens and took hostages, and then continued a conflict against Israel. In his expressions of anger today, the Foreign Secretary could have been much more balanced. Instead of talking about attacking hospitals, why is he not condemning the terrorists who use hospitals as bases, knowing the consequences? Instead of talking about the lack of aid, why is he not recognising the aid that is given, and the fact that that aid must not be allowed to be abused by terrorists in Israel, and—[Interruption.]

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

On every occasion on which I have stood at this Dispatch Box and spoken on this matter, I have raised the reprehensible behaviour that took place on 7 October, and the reprehensible behaviour of Hamas. I have done that today, and I will do it again.

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

The atrocities happening in Gaza and on the west bank—and even worse atrocities are threatened—amount to the worst attack on Palestinians since the Nakba 77 years ago. Will the Foreign Secretary give the Netanyahu regime reason to pause by imposing sanctions on its Ministers and banning trade with illegal settlements, and will he give hope to the Palestinian people by recognising the state of Palestine now?

[Mr Lammy]

I will not comment on any future sanctions, except to say that as my hon. Friend knows, we keep these issues under review. He will have seen the Prime Minister’s statement on these matters a few moments ago, and indeed his statement alongside the Canadian and French leaders. I know that my hon. Friend has long campaigned on the second issue that he raised; his views are very well known.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

The Foreign Secretary talks of children orphaned. The prediction is that 14,000 babies will die. If that comes true, it would wipe out an entire generation. We have also seen families burned alive in tents, in events that have shocked the world. Enough is enough. I join the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse) in begging the Foreign Secretary—on my knees, if I need to—to take more action. I accept that more settlers have been sanctioned, but it must be time for the Israeli Government to face sanctions. Please can the Foreign Secretary confirm that that option is actively being explored?

[Mr Lammy]

I have said what I have said from the Dispatch Box, and we have taken further action today. Let us see tomorrow what that yields.

[Zarah Sultana (Coventry South) (Ind)]

Between October and December 2024, the Government approved export licences worth more than £127 million for Israel, exceeding the total approved under the Tories between 2020 and 2023. The equipment funded by those licences, granted after the Government’s so-called temporary suspension, includes components for lethal F-35 fighter jets—jets that Israel is now flying at five times the usual rate, decimating Gaza. Children are starving, families have been wiped out and hospitals have been destroyed, yet the Government claim in court that there is “no evidence” that Israel targets civilians. The Foreign Secretary is personally responsible, and refuses to ban all arms sales to this genocidal state. Like many people throughout Britain, I have to ask the Foreign Secretary: how do you sleep at night?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has raised figures that I do not recognise, and she has raised, once again, the issue of arms sales to Israel. I banned the sale of arms that could be used in Gaza. I know that my hon. Friend is keen on clickbait, but I am not going to be baited at this Dispatch Box.

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

May I repeat the question asked by the hon. Member for Bristol Central (Carla Denyer), which went unanswered? Last week, 65 members of nine political parties in both Houses wrote to the Prime Minister, asking him to publish the most recent genocide assessment—the one that persuaded him to send his lawyers to the High Court to argue that

“no genocide has occurred or is occurring”.

Will the Government now publish that assessment, so we can all understand how on earth they arrived at the conclusion that the horrors we have witnessed, day in, day out, for months in Gaza do not constitute a genocide?

[Mr Lammy]

I answered that question earlier. I made a sober assessment, based on whether there was a clear risk from our export licensing, and I stand by the statements that I have made.

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

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement, but 14,000 babies will die within 48 hours, and since the statement began, hundreds will have died from starvation and famine. The unstated objective of Netanyahu is to displace Palestinians to Jordan and Egypt. One of the concrete actions that the Foreign Secretary can take is to immediately recognise Palestine. Will he do that to stop the genocide that is happening there?

[Mr Lammy]

I think I have now answered that question many times, but the whole House will have heard what my hon. Friend has said.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

I, too, cautiously welcome the Foreign Secretary’s passion and his statement, although they come a little late for 51,000 Palestinians. He has talked of the suspension of negotiations on new trade deals; would not a suspension of existing trade deals be more effective? If the Foreign Secretary does indeed believe that the behaviour of the Israeli Government is abominable, may I ask why a Minister partied with the Israelis just last week, while 370 Gazans were massacred and the world was mourning for them? Does that not undermine trust in the UK’s role in this conflict?

[Mr Lammy]

As I said earlier to the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse), it is important that we make a distinction between the Israeli people and the current direction of the Israeli Government, and I insist that we be precise in our language on that point.

[Jon Trickett (Normanton and Hemsworth) (Lab)]

The situation in Gaza is utterly intolerable, and the Foreign Secretary has convinced the House of his passion, anger and indignation, but he will know that angry rhetoric means nothing if it is not accompanied by forceful actions. I am not one of those people who say that no action has been taken by the Government, because they have taken action, but it has not had the desired effect. Will the Foreign Secretary now say that he will recognise the state of Palestine, will stop any intelligence-sharing with Israel, and will stop the supply of components that might be used in its war machine?

[Mr Lammy]

Again, I have said much on this matter, particularly on the point about recognition. I am glad that my hon. Friend has recognised what the Government have done, because this is the Government who increased humanitarian aid to the Gazans, and who absolutely made clear our position on international humanitarian law—we did not see that under the last Government. We suspended the sale of arms for use in Gaza. We issued further sanctions on settlers. We have issued more sanctions today. We have now suspended a free trade agreement. We have acted collectively with our partners. We led the charge to get those two diplomatic statements this weekend. We are doing all that we can, and it is now for the Israeli Government to act.

[Lisa Smart (Hazel Grove) (LD)]

The Foreign Secretary rightly talks about a two-state solution being the only framework through which we can find a just and lasting peace, and this has long been the case. He also talks about bilateral and multilateral talks at the upcoming conference. If that conference does not achieve the hoped-for success, will the Government consider unilaterally recognising the state of Palestine?

[Mr Lammy]

Our position was set out in the Labour manifesto: we believe in recognition. We have always believed that recognition should be part of the process, and that is what we are discussing with our French, Saudi Arabian and other partners.

[Olivia Blake (Sheffield Hallam) (Lab)]

Starvation is a horrific and entirely preventable way to die. Some 14,000 babies’ lives are at risk in the next 48 hours. To put that in perspective, 15,000 babies are born each and every year in South Yorkshire—nearly all of them would be wiped out in two days if that was the situation here. Will the Secretary of State outline what steps he will take to make sure that that does not happen? What more can be done to ensure that there is access to urgently needed aid to prevent it?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right to bring to mind, as other hon. Members have done, the children, the babies and the words of Tom Fletcher. I reassure her that when the Prime Minister sat in his office with Prime Minister Mustafa of the Palestinian Authority, he raised the children of the occupied territories. We keep that in mind in our actions, and it has guided us today.

[Ben Lake (Ceredigion Preseli) (PC)]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for his statement, and for reiterating the Government’s commitment to take further concrete action in concert with international allies should the Israeli Government fail to cease their military offensive and, indeed, lift restrictions on humanitarian aid. Given the immediacy of the crisis and warnings that up to 14,000 children are at risk of starvation, could the Foreign Secretary please reassure the House that those further concrete steps will be taken at such a time as to prevent the mass starvation of innocent children?

[Mr Lammy]

As I said before, and as the Prime Minister’s statement indicates, we will take further concrete action if necessary. It is my sincere hope that we will not need to take that action because Prime Minister Netanyahu will heed what those within his country and the international community are saying.

[John McDonnell (Hayes and Harlington) (Ind)]

The record of Netanyahu is that he has not heeded the statements made here or elsewhere, and I think the general view of the House is that there is a need for urgent action with regard to the desperate situation. Can we come back to the proposal that has been raised before by a number of us? If the Israelis are not willing to provide aid, others must do so. I agree with the Foreign Secretary that we cannot take unilateral action, but this Government are good at calling for coalitions of the willing, so can we now put on the table a call for a coalition of the willing to set a deadline for the Israeli Government to deliver aid, and failing that we will start taking action by delivering aid by air, sea or whatever other method we can use?

[Mr Lammy]

The 27 partners that we orchestrated—including Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the EU—are a coalition of the willing. Our diplomats did that in the past few days. Yes, we will carry out airdrops if necessary, working particularly with our Jordanian partners, but the right hon. Gentleman knows that airdrops are not the way to feed the people of Gaza at this point—it is by ending the blockade.

[Iqbal Mohamed (Dewsbury and Batley) (Ind)]

I, too, welcome the statement from the Foreign Secretary and the change in tone. However, I am disappointed to note that the actions announced relate to new trade deals. Last week was the 77th anniversary of the Nakba—Arabic for catastrophe—which commemorates the murder of over 15,000 Palestinians and the illegal forced displacement of more than 750,000 Palestinians from their homes during the establishment of the state of Israel. The Nakba was not a one-time historical event. It accelerated a process of dispossession, erasure, violence and ethnic cleansing against the Palestinian people which began under British colonial rule. The current genocide in Gaza is just the latest in that process. Will the Foreign Secretary now take this opportunity, on the 77th anniversary of the Nakba and amid the ongoing starvation of 2 million people today, to end all existing military, economic and diplomatic support for Israel as a matter of legal obligation, to ensure that the UK is no longer complicit in Israel’s great violations of international law?

[Mr Lammy]

As I said before and will say again, the Palestinian cause is a just cause and that is why we are opposed to the further displacement of the Palestinian people, and to those in the Israeli Government who talk about cleansing and driving people out from their land. I repeat that we stand by a two-state solution.

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

I thank my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary and the ministerial team, who have done so much work to get the statement out and other deliverables. Given that 14,000 babies are about to lose their lives in the next 48 hours and hundreds of Palestinians have been slaughtered overnight, what are the red lines and what is the timeframe for action? If babies have only 48 hours, it needs to be of that order.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend will have heard what I said from the Dispatch Box, she will have seen the efforts of the diplomatic community to come together, and she will know that the United Kingdom is not able to act unilaterally and affect decisions in Israel, but we must take the steps we can take with others and we are doing that. She is absolutely right to call to mind those children, particularly those who may lose their lives in the hours ahead.

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

Although it is long overdue, I warmly welcome the sentiment behind the Government’s announcement. The hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam) and I visited Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories last month. What we saw there was absolutely shocking. Others have described it as apartheid; I think it is actually worse than that. The Foreign Secretary said that the question of the recognition of the Palestinian state is one which is stuck in a process, but can he not at least today accept that he can recognise the right of Palestinians to statehood and democracy?

[Mr Lammy]

What we are discussing with France, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, is how we can affect things on the ground. The hon. Gentleman will recognise that others have recognised a Palestinian state, but we would not be having this debate if that had affected things on the ground. That is the seriousness of what we are discussing with France. I have to say, as the country’s chief diplomat, that I stand by the seriousness of making a decision that might bring about change on the ground.

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

The United Nations has stated that 14,000 babies could starve to death if aid does not get in. My right hon. Friend described that as intolerable, but it sometimes feels like we still tolerate it. What will the escalation of diplomatic measures against the Israeli Government look like, so we can stop this atrocity from happening?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend the Minister for the middle east has left the Chamber because he has summoned the Israeli ambassador. He will be discussing the issues I have discussed and the mood of the House, and urging her to watch this debate, because we need to see action on the ground.

[Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)]

Fourteen thousand babies is the number: 14,000 babies will die in Gaza within the next 48 hours if aid is not let in. Minister, I ask you, does your Government honestly believe that what is happening in Gaza is not a genocide? What are your Government doing to stop genocide in Gaza? It seems that you are comfortable in supplying weapons to a state that is equally comfortable in starving children. I finish by asking: what actions are you going to take? Perhaps you could expel the Israeli ambassador.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. “What actions are you going to take”? The hon. Member has been in the House long enough to know that that is not appropriate language. I should not have to repeat myself.

[Mr Lammy]

We took action when we suspended the sale to Israel of arms that could be used in Gaza, which we did back in September. I urge the hon. Gentleman to look at the remarks I made then and to recognise that decision made by me and this Government.

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

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s statement today, the suspension of trade talks with Israel and further sanctions on Israeli settlers. However, in the horror of Gaza, it is clear that the Israeli Government are not listening to the exhortations of the international community and that they are very unlikely to listen to this further action today, so I want to press the Foreign Secretary. The UN has placed a timescale on the lifespan of babies in Gaza—it is not too much to ask that the Government set out a timescale for the meaningful further action that they will take in the event, as seems likely, that the Israeli Government do not change course.

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend has been a champion of the Palestinian people and has raised the issue of this conflict for many months. I refer her to the statements of Yair Golan, the Israeli Opposition leader and former IDF member, who has urged the Netanyahu Government to listen, as he fears that Israel is losing friends and will become “a pariah state”.

[Barry Gardiner (Brent West) (Lab)]

Food is the means of life, and it must not be used as a weapon of war. The Foreign Secretary has rightly condemned its use as morally wrong, but it is also a breach of international humanitarian law. He has condemned as unjustifiable and disproportionate Minister Smotrich’s proposals to cleanse Gaza and displace and destroy all within it. If Mr Smotrich’s plan is carried out in the coming days, does my right hon. Friend agree that he will have to use a different word: genocide? Will he now sanction Minister Smotrich?

[Mr Lammy]

I have heard what my hon. Friend has said. He will know that the Prime Minister has said that there might well have to be further action, but we urge the Israeli Government to step back from what they are doing. Of course, we continue to condemn the extremist language used by the Israeli Government, such as “ethnic cleansing”.

[Jas Athwal (Ilford South) (Lab)]

I welcome the Foreign Secretary’s condemnation of the illegal actions and vile words used by the Israeli Government. It is heartening and humane to hold Israel accountable for its slaughter of innocent Palestinians, the withholding of aid, settler expansion and its shameless plans to “conquer, cleanse and stay” in Gaza. We need action to show that we will not tolerate this indiscriminate violence, which is effectively ethnic cleansing. Does my right hon. Friend agree that our next step should be to recognise the state of Palestine? Will he outline what actions he will take to stop the impending deaths by starvation?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend’s question mirrors what is felt across this House: concern for the children, the issue of recognition and, of course, the action—not, I suspect, just by the United Kingdom—that is necessary from the international community.

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

As others have said, 14,000 babies are at immediate risk of starvation—this could not be a more serious moment. I welcome the suspension of trade negotiations and the expansion of sanctions. However, with other sanctions designations—on human rights and corruption; on Russia, Georgia, Belarus and others—we have taken them to the political level. Will the Foreign Secretary consider extending the sanctions regime to the political decision makers advocating for ethnic cleansing and the takeover of Gaza?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is one of the House’s experts on how our sanctions regime works, and I can reassure him that all that he has outlined is under consideration?

[Dr Lauren Sullivan (Gravesham) (Lab)]

The senseless and deliberate suffering in Gaza must end, and humanitarian aid is crucial to achieve that aim and to help thousands of children. If the Israeli Government continue to politicise humanitarian aid and withhold it with their blockades, what sanctions will this Government consider and then impose?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. She uses the word “politicise”, but I am afraid that this is not just politicisation, but weaponisation of aid and the use of food and medical supplies. That is entirely unacceptable and abominable, which is why I have said very clearly that the UK Government stand against it.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

The impact on children is particularly devastating—15,000 children have been killed and 93% are now at critical risk of famine. Save the Children reports that Palestinian children in Israeli-run prisons are facing things worse that abuse, including physical violence and sexual assault. Some have been forced to strip, held in extreme temperatures and denied contact with their families. Those are not the actions of a democratic state. I urge the Foreign Secretary to act on behalf of those children, and may I ask him what steps he is taking to press for their immediate release?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue. When considering those assessments under international humanitarian law, I pay particularly regard to the way that detainees are treated. There is a clear risk that international humanitarian law has been breached in this area, so she is right to call to mind those children who may be detained, and the human dignity that all children, wherever they are in the world, deserve.

I recognise that I have not been able to answer all the questions in the hour and a half that I have been on my feet, but I hope that our friends in Israel have seen the strength of feeling across the House today.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

David Lammy Excerpts

Thursday 15th May 2025 Written Corrections

[David Reed]

Our United Kingdom and the United States are aligned in the view that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a serious threat to global stability. With nuclear negotiations currently under way between the US and Iran, can the Secretary of State inform the House what outcome his Department would consider to be a success from a British perspective? Crucially, does he have a contingency plan if those talks fail to produce an acceptable result?

[Mr Lammy]

Iran is now producing roughly one significant quantity of highly enriched uranium every six weeks. That is 40 times above the limit in the joint comprehensive plan of action—the deal that we struck with Iran, which I have in front of me.

[Official Report, 13 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 189.]

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

[Mr Lammy]

Iran is now producing roughly one significant quantity of highly enriched uranium every six weeks. Iran’s enriched uranium is 40 times above the limit in the joint comprehensive plan of action—the deal that we struck with Iran, which I have in front of me.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

The regime in Tehran is responsible for so much of the appalling bloodshed and conflict in the middle east. It poses a direct threat to Britain and on British soil, as we have seen from the recent arrests of Iranian nationals in counter-terrorism operations. Has the Foreign Secretary summoned the Iranian ambassador to express concerns and to explain what has been going on on British soil? What discussions have taken place with our allies in addition to the nuclear talks that he has just referred to? What is the position of our partners in the region on the very specific threats that Iran is posing and demonstrating with its dissidents on UK soil? When will the Government come forward with a comprehensive and clear strategy on dealing with Iran?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady is right. On 3 May, counter-terrorism police arrested eight individuals, including seven Iranian nationals, as part of two separate police investigations. Of course the Minister responsible for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has spoken to the Israeli ambassador.

[Official Report, 13 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 190.]

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

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady is right. On 3 May, counter-terrorism police arrested eight individuals, including seven Iranian nationals, as part of two separate police investigations. Of course the Minister responsible for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has spoken to the Iranian ambassador.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr James Frith (Bury North) (Lab)]

2. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the situation in Kashmir.

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

The UK welcomes the commitments made by India and Pakistan to pause any further military action. Given our strong and close relationships with both countries, the UK stands ready to work with both sides to make a lasting ceasefire a reality.

[Mr Frith]

On Saturday, I met constituents in Bury North with deep family roots in Pakistan and Azad Kashmir, including relatives in Mirpur, Kotli, Bhimber, Lahore and Gujrat. There is growing anxiety within this community in Bury about the potential for the conflict to escalate once again. While I praise the efforts of the British Government in securing a ceasefire, given the UK’s historic ties to the region, will the Foreign Secretary assure the House that the Government will continue their diplomatic efforts and dialogue to ensure lasting peace, including the vital protection of water access under the Indus waters treaty, which must not be weaponised in any escalation?

[Mr Lammy]

We do recognise and understand that the situation in India and Pakistan is deeply unsettling for over 3 million British nationals who stem from those two countries, with which we have deep relationships. I have spoken to my Indian and Pakistani counterparts four times since this crisis began, and I stay in close touch with Secretary of State Rubio and my counterparts in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in particular—nations that have relationships with both countries. We will do all we can, and we encourage both India and Pakistan to maintain their commitment to hard-won areas of diplomatic co-operation, such as the Indus waters treaty.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

Following the terrorist attack on 22 April, India and Pakistan engaged in military activity, and India hit nine terrorist bases. Now that there is a fragile peace, which is still being negotiated today, what efforts is the Foreign Secretary making to ensure that the terrorist bases are removed from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me be clear that the horrendous terrorism we saw—26 nationals stripped and shot—was horrific, and we condemn it. We will continue to work with close partners to deal with this terrorist threat. The hon. Gentleman is right: all of us have to lean in and ensure that we are supporting efforts on both sides to deal with horrendous terrorism. That is what, in the end, will maintain an enduring peace.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The reality remains that the international community has failed to act on the plight of the Kashmiris for over seven decades. From the revocation of articles 370 and 35A, stripping Jammu and Kashmir of its special status, to the mass arrests and political repression in one of the most militarised zones in the world, the attacks on Kashmiri human rights and civil liberties are intolerable. If we are serious about human rights and long-term peace and stability in the region, the central issue of Kashmir cannot be ignored any longer and must now get the attention it deserves. Will the Secretary of State today reaffirm our unwavering commitment to the birthright to self-determination of the sons and daughters of Kashmir?

[Mr Lammy]

Let me once again condemn the terrorism we saw that began this crisis and remind the House that since 1947 there have been six conflicts and three wars between these two great countries. The long-standing position of the UK is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir, taking into account of course, as my hon. Friend suggests, the wishes of the Kashmiri people.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

My constituents in Woking, particularly those of Indian and Pakistani descent, welcome the ceasefire. Will the Foreign Secretary urge both countries to accept that the solution to the Kashmir question is self-determination, not further violence?

[Mr Lammy]

As I have said, it is absolutely for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation in Kashmir, and of course it must in the end take into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. But all of us have a responsibility to condemn terrorism wherever it occurs: 26 innocent people being stripped and shot is intolerable and of course we condemn it.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

We all welcome the easing of tensions between India and Pakistan over the weekend, and our thoughts continue to be with those affected by this shocking terrorist atrocity. The House will be aware of the ongoing presence of terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan, and that should be a concern for all of us. Last week at the Dispatch Box, the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), commented that he had held discussions with his Pakistani counterpart on this very issue. What further discussions have taken place to secure commitments from the Pakistani Government that they will dismantle terrorist infrastructure, and what role will Britain play in supporting the removal of terrorist threats within Pakistan, because that is what will improve stability and security in the region?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady, and may I share my reflections over the last few days? We do need proper communication between India and Pakistan, and that must happen not just on military channels but on political channels. She will recognise that on this occasion, those communications are poor. We do need confidence-building measures and to ensure that we are dealing with terrorism where it acts, and of course the United Kingdom will lean in to that. Above all, we need dialogue. The international community can play a role, particularly where countries have relations with both countries. That is why we have been talking to the United States, that is why we have been talking to Saudi, and that is why we are working with the UAE.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

4. What discussions he has had with his US counterpart on the policy of the US Administration on Iran.

[David Reed (Exmouth and Exeter East) (Con)]

10. What discussions he has had with his US counterpart on the policy of the US Administration on Iran.

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

The UK is supportive of US efforts to reach a nuclear deal with Iran. We have encouraged Iran to engage with President Trump’s efforts in good faith and to find a diplomatic solution. Since the beginning of May, I have raised Iran with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the special envoy to the middle east, Steve Witkoff. We have discussed the range of threats that Iran poses to the UK and our partners.

[John Cooper]

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps is the terrorism export wing of the despotic regime in Tehran. Why are we not joining the Americans in proscribing this organisation when we did proscribe the Wagner organisation in Russia? Is it possibly because the Americans are pressuring us to continue our tenuous diplomatic links with Tehran?

[Mr Lammy]

I remind the hon. Gentleman that on 4 March the UK specified Iran under the foreign influence registration scheme, which targets those who undertake malign activity in the UK. Of course we keep proscription under review. We are looking closely at the area of state threats; that is traditionally very different from the sorts of cells and terrorist communities that we do proscribe. That is why the Government continue to look at this area very carefully.

[David Reed]

Our United Kingdom and the United States are aligned in the view that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a serious threat to global stability. With nuclear negotiations currently under way between the US and Iran, can the Secretary of State inform the House what outcome his Department would consider to be a success from a British perspective? Crucially, does he have a contingency plan if those talks fail to produce an acceptable result?

[Mr Lammy]

Iran is now producing roughly one significant quantity of highly enriched uranium every six weeks. That is 40 times above the limit in the joint comprehensive plan of action—the deal that we struck with Iran, which I have in front of me. I am really crystal clear about this. Iran must never develop a nuclear weapon; it must reverse its escalations—we have seen that in its enrichment programme; it must not carry out any critical weaponisation work; and these terms have to be fully verifiable. Unless we get that, we will see a snapback of the sanctions regime that we struck with it 10 years ago.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

The regime in Tehran is responsible for so much of the appalling bloodshed and conflict in the middle east. It poses a direct threat to Britain and on British soil, as we have seen from the recent arrests of Iranian nationals in counter-terrorism operations. Has the Foreign Secretary summoned the Iranian ambassador to express concerns and to explain what has been going on on British soil? What discussions have taken place with our allies in addition to the nuclear talks that he has just referred to? What is the position of our partners in the region on the very specific threats that Iran is posing and demonstrating with its dissidents on UK soil? When will the Government come forward with a comprehensive and clear strategy on dealing with Iran?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady is right. On 3 May, counter-terrorism police arrested eight individuals, including seven Iranian nationals, as part of two separate police investigations. Of course the Minister responsible for the middle east, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), has spoken to the Israeli ambassador. As I said, on 4 March we put Iran on the foreign influence registration scheme. We keep proscription under review. We are fully engaged with our E3 partners, and we are very pleased that Germany now has a Government so that we can work with them together on the JCPOA and snapback, and of course we are speaking to Steve Witkoff.

[Kirith Entwistle (Bolton North East) (Lab)]

5. If he will make an assessment of the potential merits of allocating 10% of humanitarian aid to educational programmes.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

7. What diplomatic steps his Department is taking to support Ukraine.

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

Last week I travelled with European partners to Lviv at the invitation of Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, and yesterday I hosted, for the first time in London, Foreign Ministers from the Weimar+ group of key European allies to discuss our joint efforts to strengthen European security and secure a just and lasting peace in Ukraine.

[John Milne]

Last weekend the Prime Minister said that the UK would do all that it could to support Ukraine. If that is the case, why do the Government continue to prevaricate over seizing billions of pounds in frozen assets held in UK banks, which could be used to build Ukraine defences? The longer we delay, the more likely it is that those funds will become wrapped up in other negotiations and we will lose the chance altogether.

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the issue, but it is not an issue on which the Government should act unilaterally. It is a multilateral issue on which we should act with our G7 partners and our European partners, recognising that some partners in Europe are hugely exposed. The best way in which to move forward is to pool those assets, and discussions on that are ongoing.

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

The Yale University humanitarian research lab was doing incredible work in tracking the 19,546 Ukraine children who have been stolen by Russia, but then became a victim of the cuts being made by the Department of Government Efficiency. Following international outrage, its work was preserved and given a reprieve for six weeks, a period that ended on 8 May. Can my right hon. Friend reassure the House that the data collected by the university has been secured and transferred to Europol, or that its funding is secure for the longer term?

[Mr Lammy]

I thank my hon. Friend for continually raising this matter. We are an active member of the International Coalition for the Return of Ukrainian Children, and we fund the Bring Kids Back UA and Save Ukraine campaigns. We have raised this issue internationally, and I am proud to have worked on it with Mrs Zelensky. I will write to the hon. Lady as soon as I can to update her on the funding.

[Sir James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

The sustainable success of Ukraine and its self-defence hinges very much on the appetite of the President of the United States of America. What steps are the Foreign Secretary, his Ministers and his officials taking to ensure that the President remains committed to defending the territorial integrity of not just his own nation but all nations, and will the Foreign Secretary ensure that the White House understands that allowing an aggressor to prosper in this case will encourage other aggressors to invade their neighbours in the future?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful for the experience and the strength with which the right hon. Gentleman has spoken. He will have noted that the Prime Minister was in Kyiv recently with President Zelensky and other European partners, and that they engaged with President Trump there. We welcome the desire to secure an enduring peace, but it seems to me that engaging in those talks will require a ceasefire. It is Putin who is prevaricating, it is Putin who is obfuscating, and we must call that out with our long experience of scrutinising that particular individual.

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

We all hope the mooted peace talks between Russia and Ukraine on ending Russia’s illegal invasion take place as quickly as possible, to stop the killing and save lives. Accountability is important, so will the Foreign Secretary outline his position on Russian war crimes and on how justice can be done?

[Mr Lammy]

I was very pleased to be with other European Foreign Ministers in Lviv to support the special tribunal and be crystal clear that those who have prosecuted this war must attest and be accountable for their actions.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

Ukrainians continue bravely to resist Russia’s war machine, yet President Trump continues to indulge in the fantasy that Putin is serious about peace. The UK needs to maintain clear leadership in the face of Trump’s unreliability. In the Foreign Secretary’s response to me in March, he said that the UK wanted to pursue the seizure of frozen Russian assets, but that Belgium and Germany were blockers. I listened carefully to the answer he gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne), and he spoke about multilateralism. What conversations on this issue has he had with his counterparts in Belgium and Germany since March, and when will the point come when the UK shows leadership, calls time and leads from the front by seizing Russian assets?

[Mr Lammy]

I have had detailed talks with my Belgian counterpart—not just at Foreign Minister level, but technical talks that have involved our officials. I know that the hon. Gentleman understands multilateralism. He will recognise that the new German Government have only been in power for a matter of days. I was able to discuss this issue yesterday with my German counterpart but, with all grace, I am allowing him to spend some time getting into the detail of the issue.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)]

12. What steps his Department has taken to commemorate Victory in Europe Day.

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

I was honoured to attend the VE Day military procession, reception and service of remembrance alongside the Prime Minister and His Majesty the King last week. The events were a fitting tribute to the hundreds of thousands of men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice during the second world war.

[Jenny Riddell-Carpenter]

Victory in Europe celebrations in Suffolk Coastal last week were a poignant reminder of the need to continue to press for peace today both in Ukraine and in securing an end to the war in Palestine. Does the Foreign Secretary agree with me that the lessons of world war two must not be forgotten as innocent civilians continue to face violence and warfare here in Europe and in the middle east?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. It is important to put on the record that the Commonwealth played a tremendous part in the second world war. Our European partners played an important part, and Europe benefited greatly from the sacrifices made to fight fascism. Wherever we see tyranny, we must continue to stand up for the rights of innocent people, and I was proud to spend the next day in Lviv standing with those who are fighting today.

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

The centenary of the second world war is way into the future, but will the Foreign Secretary ensure that the UK does not repeat the mistakes of the past when we were rather late coming to the party with the international commemoration of the centenary of the great war? Will he say when we will engage with international partners to start preparing for the centenary of the second world war, and will his Department, the Cabinet Office or the Department for Culture, Media and Sport take the lead?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Member asks an important question. Entering my 25th year in Parliament, I am not sure that I will still be in Parliament on that occasion. However, he is right that we commemorate that appropriately, so I will ask the necessary questions in the coming days and update him.

--- Later in debate ---

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (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)]

Through agile diplomacy, the Government are striking new deals in the national interest, with trade agreements with the United States and India, the first ever UK-EU summit next week and intense efforts to deal with conflicts around the world. Yesterday, I hosted the Weimar+ group of European leaders in support of Ukraine. Last week, I pressed for the welcome ceasefire between India and Pakistan. And every day I am striving to stop the killing in Gaza, so we can get the remaining hostages, like Edan Alexander, home and aid to civilians.

[Edward Morello]

The Foreign Affairs Committee recently heard from the Falkland Islands Government about the urgent need for the UK Government to use the EU-UK reset as an opportunity to remove the detrimental post-Brexit tariffs on Falklands exports. What discussions has the Secretary of State had with his Department and European counterparts to address those tariffs for a new trade arrangement for the Falkland Islands?

[Mr Lammy]

I reassure the hon. Gentleman that we are always seeking to reduce tariff burdens for our overseas territories, and we are in ongoing discussions with the European Union in particular.

--- Later in debate ---

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

Can the Foreign Secretary explain specifically what the UK is getting in return from China, having been China’s biggest cheerleader in Europe? Has China committed to stop threatening people on British soil? Has he received any new commitments from China on its adherence to the Sino-British declaration to uphold freedoms in Hong Kong, particularly with all the pernicious and malicious Chinese activities in the United Kingdom?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Lady for her questions. The important starting point on China is to be consistent and not to have four or five different China policies, which is what we had under the previous Government. We have been clear that there are areas where we will co-operate with China, but she knows that we challenge China every time we meet on Hong Kong and on Jimmy Lai. She also knows there are areas where we are absolutely clear that we will compete with China. We will be coming forward with our China audit shortly, and we can have a wider discussion then.

[Priti Patel]

We have hearing about and waiting for the China audit for some time. China has repeatedly failed to take action to stop fuelling Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine—we saw President Xi standing side by side with Putin in Moscow just days ago. Will the Foreign Secretary provide details on the discussions that have taken place with President Zelensky over his forthcoming visit to Turkey, and what direct support is Britain giving for any discussions he will have with Putin to ensure that any peace is secured and won on Ukraine’s terms, in such a way that respects fundamental basic freedoms and the principle that aggressors should never, ever win?

[Mr Lammy]

On 22 April, I raised concerns with my Chinese counterpart on China’s supply of equipment to Russia and on the relationship with the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea—North Korea—and Russia and Iran. The right hon. Lady will know that I sanctioned Chinese entities that were supplying dual-use technology to the Russians, killing Ukrainians.

[Torcuil Crichton (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (Lab)]

T5. I welcome that the UK Government are to convene an urgent session of the UN Security Council this afternoon to discuss the food situation in Gaza. Will Ministers ensure that Dame Barbara Woodward takes a message from my constituents, including Mairi MacKinnon, Ian Stephen, Louise Scullion and Malcolm MacLean, who expressed their disgust and condemnation of the Israeli Government using food as a weapon of war? There are 71,000 children in Gaza. Will he ensure that that message is heard in New York?

--- Later in debate ---

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

T7. The right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) raised a point of order yesterday following the Department’s failure to respond to a letter from a number of hon. Members asking the Secretary of State to come to the House to make a statement on alarming research that shows that the UK continues to send large-scale exports of lethal weaponry to Israel. May I beseech the Secretary of State to make a statement to the House on this matter? If he is not willing to do so, can he confirm that all statements that he has made in this House since September 2024 relating to arms exports to Israel have been completely accurate and fully transparent?

[Mr Lammy]

Yes, I can.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

Will my hon. Friend confirm that this Government are totally opposed to the expansion of Israel’s military operations in Gaza and are four-square behind restoring the ceasefire?

--- Later in debate ---

[Matthew Patrick (Wirral West) (Lab)]

On Sunday, I had the honour of meeting Emily Damari. She told me about her good friends, Ziv and Gali Berman, who remain in captivity. It is so clear to me that no hostage will be free until all hostages are free. Hamas footage at the weekend serves only to deliver more torment to the families. Will the Minister set out, before the 600 day-anniversary later this month of the 7 October attacks, the steps he will be taking to ensure humanitarian access for those hostages?

[Mr Lammy]

I welcome the release of Edan Alexander after an agonising 583 days in captivity, and I thank Qatar and Egypt for their support. We urge all parties to seize this opportunity to re-engage with negotiations and return to a ceasefire. That is what will see the return of those hostages. When I discussed this with Secretary of State Rubio and, indeed, with partners in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, I urged them to raise those issues with the President this week.

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

Is a pattern emerging where the Trump Administration take initially extreme positions on international trade and foreign policy and then quickly re-adjust to more realistic and sensible policies? What opportunities does that give for British diplomacy?

[Mr Lammy]

In many ways, that question is better put to President Trump and I do not want to speak for him. None the less, I am pleased that the United Kingdom was the first country to strike a trade agreement with the United States. Many international partners are now ringing us up to ask us how we did it.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

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

On 15 May we will commemorate the 77th anniversary of the 1948 Nakba, which saw hundreds of thousands of Palestinians displaced from their homes and dispossessed, and it still continues today. I pay tribute to Ministers for the diplomacy they are engaged in and for the recent memorandum of understanding that was agreed with Palestine, but the children of Gaza cannot wait weeks and months. They need food and water now. What more can we do?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for continuing to raise these issues. We have a meeting of the UN Security Council this afternoon. It was important that I spoke to colleagues in Saudi Arabia and the UAE the weekend before last about these issues and with partners in the region, particularly as President Trump visits. I am very concerned following a meeting with my German counterpart about Israeli decisions to reduce the number of distribution points, and we will be making these representations very actively over the coming days.

Point of Order

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving notice of her point of order. The Chair is not responsible for ministerial appearances before Select Committees, but I can see that the Foreign Secretary is keen to respond. No doubt he will have a positive response to her point of order right now.

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

Further to that point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I just remind the House that I appeared before the Foreign Affairs Committee on 4 December and I will be appearing in front of the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee on 30 May. We have made changes to development, as has been discussed in the House this afternoon. My right hon. Friend Baroness Chapman will be appearing before the International Development Committee on 13 May. Of course I will appear again before the Foreign Affairs Committee and in front of my hon. Friend’s Committee in due course. I hope to do that by the end of the summer or in the September recess period.

Oral Answers to Questions

David Lammy Excerpts

Tuesday 1st April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)]

1. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the Syrian constitutional declaration, signed on 13 March 2025.

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

We welcome the provisions made in the constitutional declaration on freedom of expression, freedom of belief and women’s rights. We also welcome the announcement on the formation of the new Syrian Government. The UK stands ready to support an inclusive, stable and prosperous future for the people of Syria. We will continue to encourage inclusive governance and will work with the Syrian Government to that end.

[Fabian Hamilton]

I thank the Foreign Secretary for that reply. The fall of Assad was rightly welcomed by all Members of this House, but reports of mass killings of Christians and Alawites, which have now resulted in more than 1,500 civilian deaths, show that Syria is still a very unstable country. Will the Secretary of State therefore outline what support is being given to the new Syrian Government to prevent further violence and another appalling refugee crisis?

[Mr Lammy]

I can assure my hon. Friend that we are following steps closely. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), will be meeting civil society groups today. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North East (Fabian Hamilton) will know that we have allocated £160 million to support recovery and stability through lifesaving and other such assistance. Clearly, the recent violence was incredibly horrific and alarming. We will continue to work with the new Government as best we can to ensure that we get the inclusive political transition that we all want to see.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

The Foreign Secretary will know that this is a five-year draft constitution. Does he share my concern that the legislative, Executive and judicial separation of powers in it need to be beefed up? The appointment of the new Government appears, prima facie, to be inclusive, but does he agree that the people’s committee also needs to be inclusive given that it will be mostly appointed by the President?

[Mr Lammy]

Clearly, it is welcome that the new Government have moved in this direction. I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we recognise our skills in governance and in working with allies and partners, and we will use that strength to help to support the new Government. We are aware of his concerns and we will work with the new Government to get that better separation that he wants.

[Joe Robertson (Isle of Wight East) (Con)]

2. Whether any costs arising from the proposed treaty with Mauritius on the sovereignty of the Chagos Islands will be met by his Department.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lewis Atkinson (Sunderland Central) (Lab)]

5. What assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of Israeli settlements in the west bank.

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

Israeli settlements are illegal under international law and harm the prospects of a two-state solution. On 21 March, the UN Security Council made clear that we oppose any attempt to expand settlements in the west bank. I have been very clear with Israeli Ministers that they must clamp down on settler violence and end settler expansion.

[Lewis Atkinson]

On Saturday night, the Israeli Government announced the approval of an expanded road network in the E1 corridor of the west bank with the stated aim of supporting the development of illegal Israeli settlements in the area. That area is critical to the territorial integrity of a future Palestinian state. Previously, unified international pressure has restrained the Israeli Government, so can the Foreign Secretary say how the Government are working with their allies to exert maximum influence on Israel in this matter?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his question. I condemn categorically the development of settlements that are illegal under international law. Settlements do not offer security to Israel or to Palestinians. I also condemn calls to annex the west bank, which would lead only to violence and jeopardise prospects for a Palestinian state. I am clear with Israeli counterparts that settlement expansion must stop. We will continue to work with our partners to ensure prospects for a Palestinian state.

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

We have heard Secretary of State after Secretary of State condemn the increase in settlements and settler violence in the west bank over the last 30 or 40 years and it has made not the slightest bit of difference to their expansion. When will the Foreign Secretary accept that the only thing that the Israelis will respond to—we should not forget that these settlements are sponsored by the Israeli state—is action? When can we expect more sanctions, particularly on violent settlers and their organisations? When can we expect a full trade ban on settlement produce? In particular, will the Secretary of State consider proscribing those settler organisations that are perpetrating terrorism on an innocent Palestinian population?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. It is important that there is a cross-party position, and successive Ministers of both political parties have condemned expansion and condemned violence. We continue to work with partners across Europe and beyond on these issues. I do not say that it is easy. He will know that I announced sanctions back in October, and we continue to keep these issues under review, but the culture of impunity for those engaged in violence is intolerable. I remember just a few months ago sitting with Bedouins who had experienced that violence and were being subjected to that expansion—it is horrendous. That is why in both the UN and our dialogue with the Israeli Government we are clear that that harms the prospects of peace and security for Israel; it does not further its ambitions.

[Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (Tooting) (Lab)]

The scenes coming out of Palestine recently have been nothing short of shocking. Hundreds have been killed in settler violence in the west bank, the brutal torture of Palestinians in Israeli custody is commonplace and the collapse of the ceasefire means that the devastation and human suffering in Gaza has simply continued. Will the Secretary of State confirm whether his Department has received any evidence showing that international law has been violated? Will he share such evidence and his assessment openly?

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is right to raise this issue. She will know that, in a sober and measured way, the Government had to make our own decision on the exports licensing regime, which was put in place by the last Government, and we assessed that there was a clear risk of a breach of international humanitarian law. Therefore, we have suspended arms that could be used in Gaza. That is a decision that Ministers have made from this Dispatch Box under different Governments.

[Mr Will Forster (Woking) (LD)]

Earlier this year, I visited the west bank with colleagues in the Chamber as part of a parliamentary delegation, where I saw the awful Israeli illegal violence in Hebron and Susya. We ran into two Israeli settlers who clearly wanted us off the area that they had burned down. Will the Foreign Secretary go further than he has in condemning that violence by agreeing to full sanctions and an embargo on all Israeli illegal settlements? Owing to the position of the City of London, that could have a profound impact and stop the violence.

[Mr Lammy]

I should make it clear that settlement goods do not benefit from any free trade arrangements that we have with Israel. Obviously, on 15 October, I announced new sanctions targeting three illegal settler outposts and four organisations that have supported the sponsored violence against communities in the west bank.

--- Later in debate ---

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

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office is leading international efforts to keep up the pressure on Russia through more than 2,200 sanctions, which have helped to reduce Russia’s oil revenue by 25% between January and November 2024 compared with two years prior. We are of course also working hard to co-ordinate allies. Just yesterday I was in Madrid discussing these issues with European counterparts, and later this week I will be at the NATO Foreign Ministers conference, where the Ukrainians will be as well.

[Andrew Ranger]

I am incredibly proud that, since the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Wrexham has welcomed many Ukrainian families. Among them are Yaroslav and Oksana, who had long dreamed of opening a café in their home town of Chortkiv. Despite the war preventing them from realising that dream at home, they now own a thriving business on Wrexham High Street. How are the Government continuing to support Ukrainian families who play a big part in communities across Britain, as well as those who, at some point in the future, may wish to return to Ukraine when the situation allows?

[Mr Lammy]

I am proud that the British people across our country have opened their homes and their hearts to Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s brutal war. The Homes for Ukraine scheme has helped more than 160,000 Ukrainians to find refuge here, and since 4 February, Ukrainian refugees can apply to remain for an additional 18 months while continuing to receive vital support.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

As the Foreign Secretary knows, we have substantial engagement with, and deployment to, Estonia. Talk of peace in Ukraine is of course welcome and Britain should play its role in supporting that peace, but does he accept that any deployment of British troops to Ukraine increases the risk to the UK and its forces in Estonia?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman should know that the UK’s commitment to the security of Estonia is iron-clad, and made real by our NATO forward land forces deployment. Discussions regarding how our military can support Ukraine’s future security arrangements are ongoing, including with NATO allies and Secretary-General Rutte. Part of the discussion for countries committed to the coalition of the willing is about ensuring that those countries on the frontline are not left without adequate support. The hon. Gentleman raises a very important issue.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady should know that, with EU colleagues yesterday, at the G7 a few weeks ago and, I am sure, with colleagues as I head to NATO, we are discussing an oil cap in particular and how that would limit Putin’s reserves. We continue to discuss not just the freezing of assets but the seizing of assets. We recognise that some European colleagues are more exposed than we in the UK are. Nevertheless, why should we use taxpayers’ money? We should use Russian money that has caused so much damage in Ukraine. Of course, we continue to look at the arsenal of sanctions that we can use, and I am sure that I will have more to say on that in the coming weeks.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

Of all the horrors that Vladimir Putin has inflicted on Ukraine, the abduction of more than 20,000 Ukrainian children is one of the most vile. It threatens to rob Ukraine of its future, which is surely Putin’s ultimate goal. The Prime Minister praised the work of Kyiv’s Bring Kids Back initiative last week. Will the Foreign Secretary now commit to the UK filling the funding gap left by the Trump Administration’s withdrawal of funding for Yale’s humanitarian research lab, so that it can continue to research Russia’s war crimes, especially to track the whereabouts of these children, so that they can be brought back home?

[Mr Lammy]

It was important for me to meet Madam Zelensky to discuss this issue when I was last in Ukraine. The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), also met the relevant Minister in Ukraine to discuss this issue just a few days ago. I can absolutely give an undertaking to continue to support the group. It is not our assessment that we can meet the shortfall left by the withdrawal of USAID—United States Agency for International Development—funding, but we will continue to work with partners across Europe on this important issue, which is very personal to me.

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

11. What diplomatic steps he is taking to help ensure that Israel allows aid into Gaza.

--- Later in debate ---

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

13. What discussions he has had with his Israeli counterpart on that country's military presence in the west bank.

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

We are concerned at the expansion of the Government of Israel’s war aims and operations in the west bank. I made clear my serious concerns on the continuing Israeli operations when I spoke to the Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar on 5 March, as the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), said, but also on 21 March. We are clear that civilians must be protected and the destruction of civilian infrastructure minimised.

[Vikki Slade]

It emerged today that a 17-year-old Palestinian boy who had been taken from the west bank has died in Israeli detention, having been held for 6 months without charge. Israel has been striking inside the west bank, and in doing so emboldening illegal settlers in their own violence. Given that Israel claims that it is targeting Hamas and not the people of Palestine itself, what specific actions is the Foreign Secretary taking to protect Palestinians in the west bank from both settler violence and Israeli forces?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Lady will know that we are giving considerable support to the Palestinian Authority in the west bank. We are in regular contact with President Abbas and Prime Minister Mustafa in relation to the west bank. She has heard our concerns about both the violence and the expansion that is taking place in the west bank. In my conversations with Ministers, I have heard legitimate concerns about security on the Israeli side and the way that Iran, sitting behind the scenes, is equipping some terrorist groups with guns and ammunition. We have to do our best to support Israel in standing up to that.

[Steve Yemm (Mansfield) (Lab)]

The Prime Minister’s commitment to host an international meeting this year in support of an international fund for Israeli-Palestinian peace has never been more timely. Given the upcoming June summit in Paris in support of a two-state solution, can the Foreign Secretary provide for the House an update on progress towards meeting the Prime Minister’s pledge?

[Mr Lammy]

We are very grateful for the work that our French colleagues are doing in this regard, and we are working closely with them. We are putting together a plan, and I hope that the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln, will be able to update the House in the coming weeks.

[Jessica Morden (Newport East) (Lab)]

14. What recent discussions he has had with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts on peace negotiations between those two countries.

--- Later in debate ---

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (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)]

Yesterday in Madrid, I discussed with counterparts strengthening Ukraine’s hand. With Mr Speaker in Kyiv yesterday, the House is united on Ukraine.

One year on from the appalling Israel Defence Forces strike on the World Central Kitchen convoy that killed James Kirby, John Chapman and James Henderson, I am sure that the whole House mourns their loss and calls for accountability. We will keep demanding protection for all civilians and aid workers in Gaza, and will strive to restore the ceasefire, free hostages and end the war.

[Munira Wilson]

Research published by UNICEF shows that last time the overseas aid budget was cut, support for children—for their education and nutrition—was cut the deepest. Will the Foreign Secretary give assurances to this House that this time, children will not bear the brunt of his cuts, and will he commit to protect child-focused development programmes?

[Mr Lammy]

The last time that the development budget was cut, it was cut overnight. The Government abolished the Department for International Development, leading to terrible cliff edges and badly damaging our reputation in the world. We are not throwing the money that we have had to withdraw from development into a black hole, as the last Government did; we are investing in hard power. The hon. Lady will recognise that the war in Ukraine has cost the continent of Africa upwards of £7 billion. For that reason, it is important that we invest in hard power and diplomacy, and that we continue to invest in development. We will still be the sixth biggest development partner.

[Patrick Hurley (Southport) (Lab)]

T3.   The co-operative movement has a long and proud history of helping to rebuild local economies post-conflict. In this UN International Year of Co-Operatives, will the Minister agree to meet me and representatives of the co-operative movement to discuss the ways in which Governments can promote co-operation as a solution on the global stage?

--- Later in debate ---

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

Last month, the Foreign Secretary gave a speech on trade, but could not explain how much growth would follow the measures he announced, if any. What role is the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office actually playing in supporting the trade negotiations with the United States? What discussions has the Foreign Secretary personally undertaken about the trade agreement, and can he confirm that this will be the comprehensive trade deal that the Conservative Government were negotiating?

[Mr Lammy]

No, because the Conservative Government badly failed in their negotiations with the US. We are engaged in intense conversations at this time to strike an economic agreement, and we are also continuing discussions with our Indian counterparts about a trade deal and with the Gulf, picking up from the last Government’s failure to land the trade deals that will deliver growth to this country. In coming into the Foreign Office, it has been essential that I position it as the international delivery arm for growth—all our missions recognise this. I have announced measures that include working much more closely with business—measures that should have been introduced under the last Government.

[Priti Patel]

We know that the Labour Government continue to cosy up to the Chinese Communist party because they are desperately seeking growth. [Interruption.] Labour Members might want to listen. The Government are unwilling to stop solar panels made by Uyghur slave labour coming into the UK; they are unable to stop China putting bounties on the heads of Hongkongers living here; and they are failing to put China on the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme. Can the Foreign Secretary explain how our economic and security interests are being served by the Labour Government’s alleged reset with the CCP Government?

[Mr Lammy]

The right hon. Lady uses the phrase CCP almost as if to suggest that I am some sort of communist. The last Government had 17 different approaches to China. They bounced around so much—there was the Iain Duncan Smith position, the Rishi Sunak position and the Liz Truss position—that we lost count of how many positions they took. We have been clear that there are areas where we will co-operate with China, areas where we will challenge China and areas where we must necessarily compete. It is right that we engage with China. Closing our ears and pretending they are not there is no strategy. That is why the Government have changed from the strategy of the last Government.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order. The Foreign Secretary does not need to be reminded that we reference sitting Members not by their names, but by their constituencies.

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

T5. As has already been mentioned in the Chamber this morning, a year ago today, my constituent, John Chapman, was murdered by the Israel Defence Forces while working for World Central Kitchen, delivering humanitarian aid in Gaza. His family now want to know when the Israeli Government will bring criminal charges against the perpetrators, when the family will be awarded compensation for their tragic loss, and what our Government are doing to ensure that justice prevails.

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for that question. Last month, I pressed Foreign Minister Sa’ar to conclude the Military Advocate General’s consideration of the World Central Kitchen incident, including determining whether criminal proceedings should be initiated. I have met the families of those killed in the attacks and assured them that this Government will continue to support their calls for justice. Gaza is the most dangerous place in the world to be an aid worker, with more than 400 killed since the start of this conflict. We need to see lasting safety improvements for aid workers on the ground, and that would be a fitting legacy for those British individuals who have lost their lives.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

My constituents who work at the BMW Mini plant in Cowley are deeply concerned by the impact of Donald Trump’s global tariff war. The uncertainty the plant faces is made much worse by the red tape that now inhibits integrated car production with suppliers in the EU. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that, in addition to a robust response to the White House, the best step that the Government could take to support British businesses would be to start talks on a bespoke UK-EU customs union without delay?

[Mr Lammy]

We are an open trading nation, as we have been under successive Governments. It is hugely important at this time that we continue the intense conversations we are having with the US Administration on getting an economic agreement. Of course we prepare for the worst—all options remain on the table, as the Prime Minister indicated again just yesterday—but it is also right that the Business Secretary and I, and others across Government, continue to engage with business and industry so that we can give them the best support in what will be a turbulent economic time, not just for our own country, but across much of the world.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

T2. I am a simple soul, so I trust the Foreign Secretary completely. Will he assure me that nothing in the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, which we are debating only this afternoon, will in any way nullify Brexit by limiting our ability to make our own decisions on regulation and to conduct our own free trade deals? Above all, as a great British patriot, will he assure me that nothing in the Bill will allow any Minister to ever abolish that most glorious of British symbols: the great British pint?

[Mr Lammy]

I assure the right hon. Gentleman that the British pint is safe under this Government, but I will write to him about the detail in the coming days.

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

T7.   What discussions are taking place with China about Jingye, the Chinese owner of British Steel, which last week rejected a generous offer from the Government to put the industry on a stable footing? Does the Foreign Secretary agree that, given the importance of this strategic industry, Jingye should return to the table and agree a deal, and that if it will not do so, we ought to step in to ensure that British steel is made in Britain?

[Mr Lammy]

I have regular conversations with the Business Secretary. As the Minister for Industry made clear on Thursday, this Government believe in the UK steel sector. We have prioritised engagement with British Steel, and have made a generous conditional offer of financial support. We remain in negotiations with the company and trade unions to secure the best possible outcome.

[Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)]

T4. What further information did the Foreign Secretary have that led him to make a decision that differed from the detailed objections of the police, the security services and our allies, and to support the new Chinese super-embassy? Will he share that information with the House?

[Mr Lammy]

The hon. Gentleman must have missed the letter that the Home Secretary and I, quite properly, wrote to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, who, acting in her quasi-judicial capacity, has a decision to make. We were clear about the fact that security interests are paramount, and we made our views very plain so that they could be considered.

[Katrina Murray (Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch) (Lab)]

T9.   Last Monday, 24 March, another two journalists were killed in Gaza. More than 200 journalists have been killed there since 7 October 2023. In addition, last week saw the arrests of both BBC and Swedish journalists, as well as many local journalists covering the unrest in Turkey. What are the Government doing to protect the role of journalists—regardless of nationality—who are showcasing what is going on in conflict zones?

--- Later in debate ---

[Katie Lam (Weald of Kent) (Con)]

T8. Fifty-nine Israeli hostages are being held by Hamas in Gaza, having been kidnapped in the Hamas terrorist attack of 7 October 2023. Only 24 are thought to be still alive, and we know from released hostages that they have been starved and tortured, chained in tunnels. They have not seen sunlight for 543 days. What are the UK Government doing to bring them home?

[Mr Lammy]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising this important issue. All those hostages need to come home, which is why we need to get back to the ceasefire and why we must continue to stand with hostage families. Let me reassure the hon. Lady: I spoke to the United States envoy, Steve Witkoff, on Friday evening to obtain an update on the conversations that are taking place, and Egypt and Qatar are playing an important role in getting back to that ceasefire and getting Hamas to do what they should do. It was interesting to see Palestinians taking to the streets to campaign against Hamas and the way in which that they are holding the Palestinian people ransom at this time.

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

HIV/AIDS has killed 40 million people across the world and remains a major threat to public health, but over the weekend the House Foreign Affairs Committee Majority account posted a gloating, sickening tweet including an image of the coffin representing the closure of USAID, which, according to experts, will lead to a tenfold increase in the number of deaths from HIV/AIDS. Will the Minister reaffirm that notwithstanding the recklessness of the Trump Administration, this Government remain committed to working to end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr James Cleverly (Braintree) (Con)]

In February, the Foreign Secretary rightly criticised America’s aid cuts. Two weeks later, he was humiliated by his own Prime Minister when his departmental budget was smashed to bits. What is he doing to re-establish his and his Department’s credibility on the world stage, so we can once again have genuine influence internationally?

[Mr Lammy]

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that this Government have not made an ideological decision to cut aid, and he knows that. There are other Governments around the world making ideological decisions to cut aid. This Government did not make the decision that the last Government made to switch off aid overnight. We are ensuring that there are no cliff edges. He will know—and I know he knows this—that investing in hard power also saves lives and acts as a deterrence in our own country and across much of the world.

[Kate Osamor (Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) (Lab/Co-op)]

Last week, BBC reporter Mark Lowen was arrested and deported from Turkey after covering the ongoing protest movement, as part of a broader crackdown on journalists. This followed the arrest of President Erdoğan’s leading political rival. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to conveying the concerns of this House to his Turkish counterpart at the earliest opportunity?

[Mr Lammy]

The UK is a staunch supporter of democracy, the rule of law and media freedom. The Government have raised recent events in Turkey with our counterparts at a number of levels. Most recently, on 29 March I spoke to my Turkish counterpart, Hakan Fidan, to raise our expectation that Turkey upholds its international commitments and the rule of law, and that it protects the fundamental rights to free speech, peaceful assembly and media freedom, including in the treatment of British journalists reporting there.

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

Are the British Government going to act, as the French and American Governments have done, to support Morocco’s autonomy plan for Western Sahara?

[Mr Lammy]

We continue to have discussions with our Moroccan friends. This is a complex issue. The position remains the position we had under the last Government. Of course, we keep that under review as we continue to discuss these issues in the region.

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

The Foreign Secretary has said repeatedly that the UK should move from freezing to seizing Russian state assets, although I am still waiting to hear what proportion of those are in the UK. Meanwhile, €300 billion sits in the EU. When peace eventually comes, the rebuilding of Ukraine will need to be paid for by the Russians, so those frozen billions will be key. When I was at a security conference in Poland last week, everyone seemed to agree that these assets need to be seized. I ask the Foreign Secretary again: what are the remaining barriers to seizing those assets, and what concrete steps is he taking to ensure that he can bring our allies with us?

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for raising this issue. It is a complex issue, and one on which it is best to act in concert with our closest allies, recognising that allies in Belgium, Germany and other countries in Europe are more exposed than we are. We continue to work at pace with our allies. This was an item I discussed yesterday in Madrid with the Weimar+ group, particularly with our Polish, French and Spanish colleagues, and I am sure it will be an item discussed at the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting later this week.

[Brian Mathew (Melksham and Devizes) (LD)]

In the light of the Prime Minister’s announcement of the impending official development assistance cuts, how will the UK Government be a global leader on water security and climate-affected communities, to adapt and build WASH—water, sanitation and hygiene—systems that are resilient to climate change?

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.