Oral Answers to Questions

David Rutley Excerpts

Tuesday 30th January 2024 Commons Chamber

[Jonathan Edwards (Carmarthen East and Dinefwr) (Ind)]

9. What recent discussions he has had with his international counterparts on the state of relations between Iran and Pakistan.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

The Foreign Secretary has made it clear to his Iranian counterpart that Iran must stop using regional instability as cover to act recklessly. He and Lord Ahmad have also underlined to Pakistan’s Foreign Minister the importance of avoiding further escalation. We welcome Iran and Pakistan’s subsequent commitment to dialogue in a joint statement released on 22 January, confirming that ambassadors will return to post, and we continue to monitor the situation.

[Jonathan Edwards]

As the Minister said, diplomatic efforts have eased tensions following the exchange of missiles earlier this month. However, the Minister will be aware that, over the weekend, Iranian gunmen murdered nine Pakistanis in the Iranian city of Saravan. The fact that both countries have launched air strikes against each other indicates how fragile the situation is in the middle east, and how interconnected acts of war and violence are across the whole region. How will the British Government ensure that their own actions do not escalate tensions?

[David Rutley]

As I said, Iran must stop using regional instability as cover to carry out its reckless acts. We recognise that it bears responsibility for any further escalation, and we are looking at all the tools that we have to bear down on the Iranian regime, including sanctions.

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

10. What recent assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the human rights situation in Eritrea.

--- Later in debate ---

[Anna McMorrin (Cardiff North) (Lab)]

Access to critical minerals is vital as we face a climate and energy crisis, but this Government have repeatedly disregarded Latin America and ignored its potential. Will the Minister commit to working with countries such as Chile, Brazil, Peru and Mexico to deliver these essential supplies for a green energy transition?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

Both sides of the House agree that this is an important issue, and I can assure the hon. Lady that we are working very hard. I have raised the importance of critical minerals on my visits to all those countries, and not least on my recent visit to Bolivia.

[Mr Tobias Ellwood (Bournemouth East) (Con)]

T6.   By any measure our world is becoming more dangerous, not less. I very much welcome Britain’s leadership and rekindled engagement on the international stage, not least in Ukraine and the middle east. Does the Minister agree that our foreign policy, our economy and, indeed, our security are interdependently related? Given the deteriorating threat picture, would he like to see an increase in our defence posture?

--- Later in debate ---

[Janet Daby (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

T9. I am sure that the Minister was as shocked as I was by Venezuela’s actions towards Guyana last year. Will he update the House, and me—I have Guyanese heritage —on what steps the Government are taking to uphold Guyana’s sovereignty?

[David Rutley]

I thank the hon. Member for that question on an important subject close to the heart of several people in the Chamber. I assure her that there is ongoing engagement with, of course, President Ali in Guyana, but also all the regional players. I have personally had conversations with Brazil, Colombia, the Commonwealth and the United States to keep the focus on that area, and Maduro’s plans at bay.

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

What assessment have the Government made of the threat to the future of the Baltic states if Putin is seen to succeed in seizing territory permanently from Ukraine?

Religious Persecution and the World Watch List

David Rutley Excerpts

Thursday 25th January 2024 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

It is an honour to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Vaz. I normally have the joy of being on the receiving end of your powerful speeches, so it is good that you are here to keep order—although you have not had to work particularly hard in this debate, because we have been probably the most unanimously agreed body I have ever heard in Parliament. We had a pretty good debate yesterday on human rights, too, but it is important to highlight that this one has really brought all sides of the House, and each of the nations, together.

I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce)—my well-respected neighbour and dear friend—on securing the debate. I pay huge tribute to her, to echo comments from across the Chamber, for the work that she has undertaken as the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, which she has been doing for over three years now—thank you. I am also grateful to her for her moving speech.

I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for his work as the chair of the APPG for international freedom of religion or belief, which takes him to many parts of the world—he is a strong voice. I know that it is not always customary to pay tribute to people who have not even made a contribution to the debate, but I also recognise the presence of the right hon. Member for East Ham (Sir Stephen Timms)—we have the Members for both East Ham and West Ham in the Chamber today—for his interest in the subject over many years. It is important that he is here, along with everyone else, to highlight the importance of this area. It is obvious from the debate that, through the work of the APPG and Members present, there is a lasting and mutual commitment across the House to protect freedom of religion or belief. The Government, and my noble Friend Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, who has responsibility for freedom of religion or belief and human rights in the FCDO, share that commitment.

Today, the importance of championing freedom of religion or belief is laid bare in the alarming facts and figures regarding Christian persecution described in the Open Doors world watch list for 2024, which was launched last week. I was able to attend part of that reception. The presentations were incredibly clear, worrying and often harrowing. We are clear that no one should be persecuted, abused or intimidated because of their religion or belief. The Government have long been committed to promoting and protecting freedom of religion for all, but sadly, as the world watch list sets out, many Christians are targeted daily purely for their faith, despite the protections of international law. History has shown us that where freedom of religion or belief is under threat, other human rights are also at risk. We must continue to call out human rights violations and abuses.

Sadly, many of the concerning trends and statistics set out in the world watch list are familiar. The report identifies that one in seven Christians are persecuted worldwide. It is in the most oppressive societies that Christians face the harshest persecution. This year, Open Doors again ranked the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea as the place where Christians face the most persecution for their faith. As we have heard today, it is not just the facts and figures that are shocking; it is the personal stories of those who are suffering at the hands of oppressive regimes. My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton highlighted concerns about that country, as did the hon. Member for North Ayrshire and Arran (Patricia Gibson) in her moving speech.

According to that report, attacks on places of worship around the world were up sixfold in 2023 and nearly 5,000 Christians were murdered that year. The need for collective action and unwavering commitment from the international community to protect freedom of religion or belief for all remains imperative. That is why FORB remains a human rights priority for the United Kingdom.

The UK is deeply concerned about the scale and severity of the violations of FORB, whatever the faith or belief. Religious intolerance and persecution, whether targeted at Christians, Muslims, Jews or Buddhists, as the hon. Member for Strangford highlighted, are often at the heart of foreign and development policy challenges. No one should be excluded because of their religion, belief or conscience. Discrimination not only damages societies, but holds back economies by reducing opportunities for all.

Countries cannot fully develop while they oppress members of religious or belief minorities. Communities are stronger when they are fully inclusive—a point that is particularly poignant as we approach Holocaust Memorial Day. My mother was raised in occupied Denmark, and she taught me at a very early age the importance of never forgetting the horrors of the holocaust and the bravery of those who fought against it.

We demonstrated the depth of our commitment to FORB in July 2022 by hosting the international ministerial conference in London, bringing together 800 faith and belief leaders, human rights activists and 100 Government delegations to agree action to promote and protect those fundamental rights. My noble Friend Lord Ahmad, who as I said is Minister for human rights, announced new UK funding to support FORB defenders, including those persecuted because of their activism, as well as funding and developing expertise for countries prepared to make legislative changes to protect FORB.

As a result of the conference, 47 Governments, international organisations and other entities made pledges to take action in support of FORB. I was able to attend one of the regional meetings linked to the conference, hosted in Manchester by my faith, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, where my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton spoke. It was great to see people coming together in common cause, not just here in this House, but across the country, speaking to each other and learning from each other, as we should.

Since the conference, we have built on that momentum in a number of ways. First, we have been working through international bodies to strengthen coalitions of support and to protect freedom of religion or belief for all within the multilateral framework. Secondly, we have been using the strength of our global diplomatic network to encourage states to uphold their human rights and FORB obligations. Thirdly, we have been working to embed FORB considerations across the work of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

My hon. Friend, who I have to say was quite forceful in some of her asks—that is a common theme in the way she works, and quite rightly too—asked important questions around sanctions. I want to respond to her and to the House to say that we use our global human rights sanctions regime as a lever to hold to account those involved in serious human rights violations or abuses around the world, including those carried out against individuals on the basis of their religion or belief. That includes the sanctioning in December 2022—in the wave of sanctions that we put in place, which we talked about in yesterday’s debate—of Mian Abdul Haq, a cleric responsible for the forced conversions of girls and women in Pakistan.

My hon. Friend also talked about SDGs. The UK is firmly committed to achieving those SDGs, as affirmed in the international development strategy. It is vital that the SDGs get back on track, and to achieve that the world must work in partnership to recommit to reform, and to accelerate our work. We are pleased that our commitment to FORB was included in our international development White Paper, published in November, which has been noticed and noted in this debate already. She also asked about mandatory training on FORB for diplomats; they are well briefed on the matter, but I will take that point away and determine how we can do more on it.

It is also right, in the time available, to highlight the multilateral action we are taking through the UN, the G7 and other multilateral fora. We regularly raise situations of concern at the UN Human Rights Council and we hold states accountable—that is another important word that has come out of this debate—on their FORB commitments and obligations through our engagement with the UN’s universal periodic review. For example, the UK was active in its participation in Nigeria’s UPR, published yesterday, and we raised a number of human rights issues, including FORB. At the UN Security Council in June 2023, we led a resolution with the UAE on tolerance, peace and security. That resolution directly addresses for the first time the persecution of religious minorities and other minority groups in conflict settings, which again has been noted in the debate.

Our collective action does bear fruit. Last year, my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton concluded her second consecutive term as the chair of the International Religious Freedom or Belief Alliance. That network of 42 countries, committed to protecting and promoting FORB for all, has published statements on the FORB situation in numerous countries, including Nigeria and Myanmar. As well as statements on specified persecuted religious minorities, with one on Christians published in May 2023, the IRFBA has also conducted advocacy campaigns on individual prisoners of conscience. We have seen several released from prison, no doubt due in part to the work of the alliance. We achieve that success by working together, and I am grateful for the convening role played by my hon. Friend—the role that she enjoys and amplifies so well. She regularly meets with civil society groups and faith leaders, and has been chairing a series of roundtables to bring civil society representatives together with FCDO officials to discuss the FORB situation in individual countries.

Indeed, at the bilateral level, the Minister for human rights, as well as myself, other ministerial colleagues and FCDO officials, do not shy away from challenging those who we believe are not meeting their obligations, both publicly and in private. The UK continues to raise FORB and ongoing insecurity on a regular basis with the Nigerian Government, a point well made by the hon. Member for West Ham (Ms Brown)—she knows more about the situation in Africa than I do, and I am grateful for the comments she made. For example, the high commissioner recently raised reports of serious violence in Plateau state with the Nigerian national security adviser.

My hon. Friend the Member for Congleton raised concerns about the situation in Nicaragua. We welcome the release of Bishop Álvarez and 18 other clergy from unjust detention in Nicaragua, but we absolutely condemn their expulsion from the country, which is something I tweeted about. We know that human rights need to be respected fully, in the round. In my role as Minister for the Americas and the Caribbean, I have been briefed on the situations in Cuba and Nicaragua, and I can assure my hon. Friend that I am committed to making FORB an even greater priority in my work over the months ahead.

The British commission in Islamabad continues to engage with senior Government officials and civil society in Pakistan on the need to ensure the safety of the Christian community at this troubling time, a point that was well made by my friend the hon. Member for Strangford. Representatives from the British high commission in Islamabad visited the Christian community in Jaranwala in December to discuss ongoing support for that community. The hon. Member raised an important point about education; in Pakistan’s universal periodic review in January, the UK formally recommended that Pakistan ensure that school textbooks are inclusive of all religions, and that religious minorities can access suitable alternatives to compulsory Koranic studies.

The hon. Member for Strangford also raised points about India. The British high commission in New Delhi and our deputy high commissions across India regularly meet with religious representatives and official figures. The high commissioner has visited a number of diverse places of worship in India, meeting faith leaders there—including Christian communities, which is important. The Government also show our support to diverse faith communities through hosting iftars to celebrate the important contribution that Indian Muslims and other communities have made in Indian society.

Sudan was also raised by the hon. Member for West Ham. The UK continues to fund and support the office of high commissioner for human rights in Sudan, the UN body that provides a crucial role in monitoring and reporting on human rights violations, including restrictions on freedom of religion or belief. Since 2022, we have provided around £1 million in funding for that office.

We continue to ensure that the changes we made following the Bishop of Truro’s review of the work the Department has done on FORB are embedded, and we look for opportunities to ensure that FORB is central to our wider human rights work. In that regard, I am pleased to say that our work on FORB is included in the international development White Paper, as I said. As in past years, we marked Red Wednesday by lighting up the UK-based FCDO buildings in red on 22 November 2023 to stand in solidarity with persecuted Christians.

I note the private Member’s Bill of my hon. Friend the Member for Congleton on international freedom of religion or belief, which seeks to make the role of special envoy for FORB statutory. I know that is something she feels strongly about, and I also know the Minister for Development and Africa, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell), looks forward to joining the debate on the Bill tomorrow. The Government’s position will be confirmed on Second Reading, as is the usual procedure.

Before I conclude, I would like to thank all those who work tirelessly defending freedom of religion or belief. We have talked about the special envoy and the chair of the APPG, and we all talked about the important work of Open Doors. I would also like to pay tribute to those who work at the local level in all our constituencies to encourage greater interfaith understanding and activity.

In my constituency, I have to shout out the important work of Hope in North East Cheshire and legends, such as Pip Mosscrop, who spend their lives bringing people together from all faiths. They put into practice what we all know: that we should celebrate different beliefs, learn from each other and work in common cause to tackle the challenges of this world. Even if we have different perspectives, that is the antidote to the intolerance and persecution that concern all of us. I speak in tribute to not just that particular organisation, but the many across the country. We stand in awe of that work.

Let me end by saying that the issues outlined in the Open Doors world watch list are of the highest importance to the Government. We continue to work through all available methods to call out persecution and defend the right of freedom of religion for all, just as hon. Members across this Chamber have said today.

Correction to Written Parliamentary Question 182223

David Rutley Excerpts

Thursday 25th January 2024 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

On 2 May 2023, the FCDO responded to WPQ 182223 in relation to how much the FCDO spent on staff training related to diversity and inclusion in 2022.

The figure provided—£25,412.96—was inaccurate and an error. The figure was incorrectly provided as that amount had been charged to the account code relating to training in the team that was responsible for the diversity and inclusion work in 2022. Recent work has identified that none of the transactions put to this account code during this time period were actually diversity and inclusion training, and instead related to the running costs of that team, such as conference attendance.

The FCDO does not have a centrally organised diversity and inclusion training offer; instead, we use courses provided via Civil Service Learning.

Directorates and posts have devolved training budgets, which could have been used on training needs, but information is not collected centrally on whether this spend relates to equality and diversity training.

The FCDO has contributed to the Cabinet Office-led civil service equality, diversity and inclusion expenditure review, which is assessing current spending on EDI activity across the civil service to ensure that spend is providing a return on investment and that activity is being carried out in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

I am apologising for this error and clarifying the position in relation to diversity and inclusion training spend in 2022. We have learned from this situation. There has been a change in budget managers in that team and new financial procedures have been put in place to ensure greater accuracy. The Department continues to take its responsibility for parliamentary accountability very seriously.

[HCWS208]

International Human Rights Abuses: UK Response

David Rutley Excerpts

Wednesday 24th January 2024 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

It is an honour to see you in the Chair, Dame Maria. We have known each other a long time, but I do not think I have had the chance to say “Dame Maria” in public, so that made me feel good.

I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen), and I congratulate her on securing this really important debate. Some who have participated have recognised the important contribution of Tony Lloyd on this subject and many others. His passing is a very sad loss.

I am grateful for the opportunity to respond on behalf of the Government on these very important issues, which have been raised with passion and conviction. That was very clear. I will seek to respond to as many points I can, but I cannot promise to respond to every single one. This is probably one of the most wide-ranging debates I have ever been involved in, for understandable reasons, and that in itself is a concern.

The Government believe, as the House believes, that human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. This was clearly enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights 75 years ago. The UK has long championed its importance, and as we marked its anniversary last month, we renewed our steadfast commitment to protect and promote the rights that it enshrines. We demonstrated the depth of our commitment to that around the world by making five human rights pledges, which we submitted to the United Nations as part of its anniversary celebrations in December. We used the opportunity to highlight our long-standing and ongoing support for human rights defenders, and for equal rights for women and girls, disabled people and LGBT+ persons. We also cemented our commitment to defending freedom of religion or belief, combating modern slavery, and raising the standards of public and private security organisations.

My noble Friend Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon, who is the Minister responsible for human rights, also hosted an event last month to celebrate Human Rights Day, where the Foreign Secretary outlined three ways in which we can help deliver those five pledges. First, the UK will continue to stand up for the rights of all, including by holding human rights abusers and violators to account, offering support and sanctuary to victims, and defending the open international order. Secondly, we will champion the open societies that guarantee those rights in the first place. Thirdly, we will stand together with allies, friends and partners—old and new—to realise the universal declaration of human rights.

As the Foreign Secretary underlined, if we show international strength and unity, there is no reason why we cannot prevail in the fight for human rights around the world. That theme has resonated across both sides of this debate. I heard it from the hon. Members for West Ham (Ms Brown) and for Stirling (Alyn Smith), who both made important contributions to the debate.

As we strive towards that aim, we must overcome horrific global challenges, including humanitarian crises, conflicts and fierce opposition to human rights. They have all been catalogued today. The hon. Member for Glasgow North (Patrick Grady) mentioned Colombia. In my brief, the Americas, I have seen at first hand the devastating impact that human rights abuses and violations can have on individuals, particularly women, in times of conflict, and on communities, democracy and freedom. These cruel injustices serve only to strengthen the UK’s resolve to promote and protect human rights in every corner of the world.

One theme that has come out of this debate loud and clear is freedom of religion or belief. I will not spend a huge amount of time on that because we will cover it in a three-hour debate tomorrow, but I will just highlight the excellent report and presentation last week from Open Doors UK about the plight of Christians in Nigeria and Pakistan, which has been touched on today. We have also heard about the persecution of Muslims, Buddhists, the Baha’is—the list goes on. There must be more tolerance in the world, and we need to work hard for that. The right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) talked about the importance of freedom of expression and a free press. I will not go on; he is no longer in his place, but I think we all understand the importance of that.

The UK will remain one of the most active and influential states on the international stage when it comes to human rights, including within the Council of Europe and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe. At the UN Human Rights Council last October, the UK led resolutions on Sudan—a point that was raised earlier—Somalia, and the importance of girls’ education. We also strongly supported resolutions to renew the mandate of the special rapporteurs on Russia and on Afghanistan.

We have also made important strides on sanctions. In December, linked to the 75th anniversary and the five pledges that I talked about, we announced 46 sanctions, including asset freezes and travel bans, against individuals and entities linked to human rights abuses around the world. We targeted individuals linked to authorities in Belarus, Haiti, Iran and Syria for their repressive activity against civilian populations.

I pay tribute to a brave individual I met in Peru, Quinto Inuma Alvarado, who was tragically murdered after I had the honour of meeting him and other human rights defenders in that country. He talked passionately about his work to protect the Amazon, but he was not allowed to continue taking those views forward, and his life was tragically cut short. My thoughts and prayers continue to be with him and his family. There is too much of this violence in the world.

[Zarah Sultana]

The Minister has yet to come to the topic of what is happening in Gaza, but I repeat the question that I asked: why did Foreign Office Ministers not reveal the fact that their Government had concerns about Israel’s compliance with international law as early as 10 November? I want to hear a response to that specific question.

[David Rutley]

I will come on to Israel and Gaza, and I will not be long. I will get there very quickly.

The issue of Ukraine is important for all of us, and I am grateful for the support across the House on it. We are nearly two years on from the illegal invasion, and Ukraine’s Office of the Prosecutor General has recorded more than 120,000 incidents of alleged war crimes, murder, rape and the deportation of children. Those are matters of international humanitarian law, which is separate and distinct from the legal obligations that regulate armed conflict. We will continue to hold Russia to account. I want also to mention some of the persecution that goes on within Russia, including the imprisonment of Vladimir Kara-Murza for his opposition to Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine. We have constantly called for his release since his initial arrest and will regularly raise his imprisonment with Russian authorities and in multilateral fora.

Gaza is a hot subject, and I am not going to duck the issue. There are strong opinions on both sides. My hon. Friend—I will call her that, but I should probably call her the hon. Member for West Ham—talked about the need for a ceasefire. We want a sustainable ceasefire, and we are working hard towards it.

The hon. Member for Coventry South (Zarah Sultana) raised important points. What I can say at this point—she will probably not be happy with the answer—is that Ministers review the advice they receive carefully and act consistently with that advice. We work hard and continue to call for international humanitarian law to be respected and for civilians to be protected. As the Foreign Secretary outlined, we assess that Israel has the capability and commitment to comply with international humanitarian law, but we are also deeply concerned about the impact on the civilian population in Gaza. Too many civilians have been killed.

[Zarah Sultana]

Will the Minister give way on that point?

[David Rutley]

I will give way one more time on that point.

[Zarah Sultana]

The Minister is being very generous with his time. If there are concerns in the Foreign Office, as per the internal assessment, why did the Foreign Secretary recommend continuing to allow arms sales to Israel? That goes against our current policy, which is that where there is a risk that human rights violations will take place, we should not continue selling arms licences to countries.

[David Rutley]

The Foreign Secretary outlined on 8 January that he has not received advice that Israel has breached international humanitarian law. On export licences, the UK supports Israel’s legitimate right to defend itself and take action against terrorism, provided that it is within the bounds of international humanitarian law. All our export licences are kept under careful and continual review, and we can amend, suspend or revoke extant licences or refuse new licence applications where they are inconsistent with the UK’s strategic export licensing criteria. It is important to note that, as I think hon. Members are aware, the regime is among the most rigorous and transparent in the world.

On the topic of Israel and Gaza, a number of people talked about South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice. The Government believe that this development is not helpful, and we do not support it. As previously stated, we recognise that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hamas, and we do not believe that calling that genocide is the right approach. Ultimately, it is for the courts, not states, to decide on matters of genocide, and of course we will respect the role and independence of the ICJ.

Many other subjects were talked about, including Kashmir. Our long-standing position on Kashmir is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting political resolution to the long-standing and ongoing dispute. The UK recognises that there are human rights concerns in both India-administered Kashmir and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

[Sarah Owen]

The Minister is being generous with his time, but he has been asked a number of specific questions today—I myself asked specific questions about Gaza, Kashmir and China—and I know that with the limit on time, he is unlikely to get through them all. Could he please give a commitment that he will provide written answers to any questions left unanswered today?

[David Rutley]

I will do my best, but the questions that have been asked today are genuinely numerous and very wide-ranging. It is the hon. Member’s debate; if she would like to write separately and pick a number of questions to which she would like further answers, could she please get in touch, or can we talk afterwards and decide how best to take that forward. Would that be all right?

[Sarah Owen]

indicated assent.

[David Rutley]

Let us move on to another important subject. Issues have been raised about Rwanda. The Home Secretary has made it clear that the legislation on Rwanda does not challenge the UK’s relationship with the European convention on human rights. We have a long-standing tradition of ensuring that rights and liberties are protected and of abiding by the rule of law, both domestic and international. We are talking to the European Court about the interim measures issues that have come up, and the Court has proposed reforms to rule 39 that build on our constructive discussions. We look forward to the Court’s adopting amendments to that rule in line with this approach.

We have also talked about China today. Every day, people across China face violations of their human rights, particularly in Xinjiang and Tibet, and rights and freedoms have also been eroded in Hong Kong. We consistently raise these matters at the highest levels with the Chinese authorities. We also conduct independent visits to areas of major concern wherever possible and support NGOs in exposing and responding to violations. We raise the reputational and diplomatic cost to China of its human rights violations regularly on the international stage. We were the first country to lead a joint statement on China’s human rights record in Xinjiang at the UN, and we have sustained pressure on China to change its behaviour.

As the Minister of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Anne-Marie Trevelyan), made clear during yesterday’s debate—it has been a busy week on human rights issues—we urge the Chinese authorities to repeal the national security law in Hong Kong, which has had such a damaging impact on so many individuals and on the city. The Foreign Secretary has also called for Jimmy Lai’s release.

Iran has not come up so much in today’s debate—partly, I think, because there are so many areas to discuss. With one minute remaining, I would just like to highlight that we have witnessed a shocking repression of human rights in Iran, from oppressive hijab laws to the reprisals against women and human rights defenders. We have responded to these acts by sanctioning 94 individuals and entities for human rights violations. At the 78th UN General Assembly, we co-sponsored the Iran human rights resolution calling for an immediate moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty. The UK will continue to work with partners to deter and challenge Iran’s human rights violations at all opportunities.

[Debbie Abrahams]

Will the Minister give way?

[David Rutley]

I will. This will be the last time, because there is not much time.

[Debbie Abrahams]

I want to mention the death penalty sought against Yasin Malik, who is a freedom-fighting activist. Why are we not talking about him?

[David Rutley]

We abhor the use of the death penalty and we call it out wherever we can. I can talk separately about that case with the hon. Member.

The UK has not only a duty but a deep desire to promote and defend our values of equality, inclusion and respect around the world. We continue to stand with partners across the globe to uphold freedom, democracy and the sovereignty of nations, and to call out violations and abuses of people’s fundamental rights wherever they occur.

Review of Wilton Park

David Rutley Excerpts

Tuesday 16th January 2024 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

I am announcing today the conclusion of the review of Wilton Park, an executive agency of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office.

As I noted in my statement in June on the commencement of the review, the public bodies review programme delivers against the commitments made in the declaration on government reform to increase both the effectiveness of public bodies and departmental sponsorship, making government work better in service of the public. This review of Wilton Park follows the tailored review of Wilton Park in 2018.

Wilton Park is a key strategic asset in the FCDO’s portfolio. The review found that Wilton Park continues to make valued contributions as a convenor and facilitator of international policy discussions, and noted that Wilton Park’s most important feature is its ability to convene and facilitate extended, in-person conversations among diverse groups of policymakers at mid-senior level to support international policy objectives.

The review comes at an important time for Wilton Park, which has successfully steered through the challenges of the covid-19 period and is considering options for its future.

We are very grateful to the lead reviewer, Lorraine Wilkinson, and her team, for their hard work on behalf of Wilton Park and the Government. Their recommendations will give vital structure to further sharpen the strategic alignment of Wilton Park with the objectives of His Majesty’s Government, while safeguarding its independence and ensuring that Wilton Park continues to provide value for money for the taxpayer.

The lead reviewer’s overview and the review recommendations, along with the Government’s statement of how it intends to take these recommendations forward, has been published on www.gov.uk.

A copy of the review and the Government’s response will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

[HCWS187]

Diplomatic Passport Policy

David Rutley Excerpts

Tuesday 9th January 2024 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

This statement updates the House on forthcoming changes in respect of the issue and use of diplomatic and official passports.

Diplomatic and official passports were first issued in 1994 to UK civil servants accredited, under the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations or the Vienna convention on consular relations, whilst on overseas postings at one of our diplomatic missions or consular posts. Their accompanying dependants also received them when the receiving state also agreed to accredit them. The intention was to clarify the holder’s diplomatic status and remove scope for misunderstanding, while ensuring that the privileges and immunities of our accredited staff and their families were respected by their host state. Diplomatic and official passports have been issued on this basis ever since, with only a few case-by-case exceptions agreed, for example to allow their use on security grounds and in relation to countries operating restrictive visa regimes.



The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has recently conducted the first in-depth review of diplomatic and official passport policy, in the light particularly of the needs of modern diplomatic families, who reflect our increasingly diverse UK society and workforce, and the values we hold in respect of that diversity.

The findings of that departmental review recognised challenges faced by some families in certain countries and the practices of like-minded international partners, and argued for greater flexibility in the issue of diplomatic and official passports. Accordingly, while the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office will maintain the fundamental link between a diplomatic or official passport and accreditation, the department will introduce some important exceptions, where accreditation by the receiving state will no longer be a prerequisite for issuing diplomatic or official passports, namely:

all same-sex established partners and spouses accompanying an accredited civil servant on an overseas posting, whether the partner or spouse is accredited by the receiving state or not;

unmarried opposite-sex established partners accompanying an accredited civil servant on an overseas posting, again whether they are accredited or not.

These changes will ensure that all spouses and established partners of those accredited to serve the UK overseas will have the same access to diplomatic and official passports. This ensures that the issue of these UK passports will more closely reflect UK values, rather than being limited by the policy of the receiving state in respect of accreditation. Diplomatic and official passports remain travel documents and do not confer the privileges or immunities associated with accreditation under the Vienna conventions.

As a rule, Ministers and other parliamentarians will continue not to be eligible for diplomatic and official passports, reflecting the original controls and limitations stipulated at the time of their introduction. However, where Ministers are required to conduct Government business involving travel to a country operating a restrictive visa regime, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office will consider whether issuing a diplomatic passport is necessary to facilitate that business.

These changes will be implemented with immediate effect.

[HCWS173]

Publicly Accessible Registers of Beneficial Ownership: Overseas Territories

David Rutley Excerpts

Monday 18th December 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

Illicit finance is an active and growing threat to the UK family, and can undermine our national security, prosperity and democracy. It is more important than ever that we work together to tackle the emerging challenges. Publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership are an essential tool in the fight against illicit finance and corruption and provide substantial wider benefits to public trust in institutions and transparency in the business environment.

We welcomed the commitments made by all inhabited overseas territories to implement publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership in line with the draft Order in Council issued in response to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018. In 2020, we set out in a written ministerial statement our expectation that the territories would implement registers by the end of 2023.

In November 2022, the Court of Justice of the European Union found that an EU requirement to implement publicly accessible registers was contrary to the EU charter of fundamental rights. This ruling does not apply to the UK or its overseas territories. However, several overseas territories have noted concerns about the legal implications of implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership if human rights provisions applicable to them were to be interpreted in a similar way. The UK remains satisfied with the lawfulness of our own register and the ability of territories to meet the requirements of the draft Order in Council.

Given our differing views on this ruling with several overseas territories, we have worked with them to find a way to make positive progress through the delivery of an interim step, which would involve the implementation of publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership, with a legitimate interest access filter, next year. This would allow access to beneficial ownership information by members of the public who have a legitimate interest in doing so, including media and civil society organisations that are involved in the fight against illicit finance and money laundering.

Following intensive discussions with each of the overseas territories at the Joint Ministerial Council and across a series of bilateral conversations, we have made significant progress in the delivery of greater corporate transparency. I set out below the progress individual overseas territories expect to make over the next year to deliver against their commitments for greater corporate transparency. We will collectively review progress and discuss broader issues related to combating illicit finance with the overseas territories in March 2024 during the ministerial illicit finance dialogue.

The following territories have either already implemented a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership or remain committed to delivering one as soon as possible in line with the parameters set out in the draft Order in Council. In recognition of the capacity constraints faced by these territories, the UK will continue to provide both technical and financial assistance.

Falkland Islands

The Government of the Falkland Islands are committed to having a full publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership, in line with the parameters set out in the draft Order in Council. Due to capacity issues, implementation is likely to be during the summer of 2024.

Gibraltar

The Government of Gibraltar successfully implemented a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership in 2020.

Montserrat

The Government of Montserrat are committed to implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership, in line with the parameters set out in the draft Order in Council. Legislation is currently going through the Montserrat Legislative Assembly and has had its First Reading. It is expected to be passed in the new year and implemented during the summer of 2024.

Pitcairn Islands

The Government of the Pitcairn Islands are committed to implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership, in line with the parameters set out in the draft Order in Council. Due to capacity issues, implementation is likely to be during the summer of 2024.

St Helena

The Government of St Helena are committed to implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership, in line with the parameters set out in the draft Order in Council. The draft legislation is currently undergoing its final review with the intention for implementation in the first half of 2024.

The following territories have committed to strengthening their respective levels of corporate transparency through the delivery of publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership with a legitimate interest access filter in 2024. The UK Government will provide technical assistance as required to expedite and support delivery.

Anguilla

The Government of Anguilla have committed to moving forward with the implementation of a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership where a person or organisation/entity can access specific information by demonstrating a legitimate interest that is consistent with the constitutional framework. Anguilla aspires to having this register operational by the end of 2024.

Cayman Islands

The Government of Cayman Islands are committed to implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership with a legitimate interest access filter no later than Q4 2024. This will include access to parties seeking to prevent or combat money laundering and terrorist financing, for instance media and civil society organisations under specific circumstances.

Turks and Caicos Islands

The Government of Turks and Caicos Islands are committed to implementing a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership with a legitimate interest access filter by Q4 2024. This will include access for media and civil society organisations with a legitimate interest.

The following territories have set out a commitment to delivering greater corporate transparency contingent on external developments. As a result, the parameters of their proposed registers, and the precise timelines associated with implementation, remain unclear. The UK maintains that the overseas territories should deliver greater corporate transparency, independently of action being taken in the European Union or other jurisdictions. The UK Government continue engagement with these territories in order to confirm that they will enable access at least to those with a legitimate interest, such as media and civil society organisations, and as soon as possible. The UK will make available technical assistance to expedite delivery.

British Virgin Islands

The British Virgin Islands Government have confirmed that they will implement a publicly accessible register of beneficial ownership consistent with the standards to be identified in the implementation review of the European Union’s fifth anti-money laundering directive. This directive does not apply to the overseas territories, Crown dependencies or the United Kingdom. The British Virgin Islands Government anticipate that the introduction of appropriate frameworks will occur in Q4 2024, but no later than Q2 2025.

Bermuda

The Government of Bermuda expressed their own commitment to make their register of beneficial ownership information accessible to the public within 12 months of the publication of the implementation review of the European Union’s fifth anti-money laundering directive. This directive does not apply to the overseas territories, Crown dependencies or the United Kingdom.

The UK Government welcome the continued co-operation of overseas territory Governments in this matter. Our long-standing commitments to meet the highest standards in beneficial ownership transparency set out our collective desire to be at the forefront of the fight against illicit finance. The commitments outlined above will represent a significant step forward in the overseas territories delivering their commitments to improve corporate transparency. We expect this interim step to be a part of the journey towards the implementation of fully publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership in due course. The UK Government remain committed to publicly accessible registers becoming the global norm.

[HCWS150]

Venezuela: Threat to Guyana

David Rutley Excerpts

Thursday 14th December 2023 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We dare not ask where.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

I will not ask where either, Mr Speaker, but it is good to see my hon. Friend here right now.

We are deeply concerned about the recent steps taken by Venezuela with respect to the Essequibo region in Guyana. I know that will be a key concern to the shadow Foreign Secretary and Members across the House, and we share those concerns. We believe Venezuela’s actions are clearly unjustified and should cease. We are clear that the border was settled in 1899 through international arbitration. The Foreign Secretary has made that clear in a recent meeting and calls with President Ali of Guyana.

The UK, countries in the region and the international community have been swift to respond. I have been in close contact with partners in the region to urge de-escalation, and earlier this week the Minister of State for Development and Africa, my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell), attended an emergency meeting of the Commonwealth ministerial group on Guyana, which issued a clear statement rejecting the use of threat of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Guyana.

Brazil and other countries in the region have expressed their deep concern at the situation and warned against unilateral actions that threaten the peace and stability of the region. The UN Security Council met in closed session last Friday, at Guyana’s request, to discuss the situation. We note that a meeting will take place later today between President Maduro and President Ali under the auspices of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, CELAC, and hope that that will reaffirm the importance of a peaceful resolution to this important matter.

We will continue to work with allies and partners in the region and through international bodies such as the UN Security Council, the Commonwealth and the Organisation of American States to ensure that the territorial integrity of Guyana is respected. I plan to visit Guyana in the coming days to further show our support for the Guyanese people on this vital issue. It is imperative that regional partners and friends across the House, in the region and around the world continue to press the Maduro regime to respect Guyana’s integrity and to avoid escalation.

[Mr Liddell-Grainger]

I will try again, Mr Speaker.

I am delighted to hear that the Minister is going to Guyana, which is an important part of the family of the Commonwealth. I am also deeply pleased that the two Presidents are meeting today in St Vincent to try to hammer out the situation. It must be of worry to this Government and to this House that a Commonwealth country is being set upon by a failing state because it wants to grab land to do oil exploration and take oil. That is not an acceptable position to anybody in this House.

The other problem is that the Brazilians are moving troops to their border to ensure its integrity, and I am also told that American military advisers are going to Guyana to help with the situation. The Guyanese have armed forces of 4,000; the Venezuelans have 350,000. I urge this Government to stand solidly behind Guyana, not just as a Commonwealth country, but as a country in South America. I remember that the last time there was an issue in South America, in ’82, it did not end well, and we stood for the oppressed. I urge this Government not just to send the Minister to visit, but to make sure that there is tangible help for the people of Guyana to encourage them to stand up for their rights.

[David Rutley]

The Government completely agree that the current situation is not acceptable. We are deeply concerned by the unilateral move by Venezuela over this region. Our position is absolutely clear and has not changed: the border was settled in 1899 through international arbitration. Venezuela must desist from its action. It has deliberately and unacceptably escalated the situation, and the people of Guyana deserve to be free from the threats to their country.

We work closely with our friends in the region. My hon. Friend mentioned Brazil. Of course, we have been in conversations with Brazil, which has taken a robust stance. I know that my Opposition counterpart with responsibility for Latin American affairs feels the same way. We are, across the House, completely opposed to this sort of action. We want peace and stability in Latin America to continue for decades to come.

[Mr Speaker]

We come to the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Mr David Lammy (Tottenham) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bridgwater and West Somerset (Mr Liddell-Grainger) for securing the question on this important matter.

The actions of Venezuela over the past few weeks have been provocative and dangerous. President Maduro has shown a determination to stoke historical grievances, attack recognised international borders and seek aggressive confrontation instead of good neighbourly relations. All that sounds worryingly familiar, because it is the playbook of President Putin. We have challenged it in Ukraine, and we must do the same in Guyana. We often talk in abstract terms about the importance of a rules-based international order, but this is its essence: that disputes are settled peacefully through proper legal and diplomatic processes, not through threats or intimidation; that settled and recognised borders are not subject to change through threat or force; and that the big cannot bully the small. We must be resolute in standing up to those with imperialist ambitions.

I welcome that there will be talks between the leaders of Guyana and Venezuela in St Vincent. I put on record my thanks to Brazil for its leadership on this matter, including the deployment of troops along its border. Those talks should be a mechanism to reduce the tensions brought about by Venezuela’s actions, not a discussion about settled borders or a reward for threats. The Essequibo border was settled more than 100 years ago in 1899. Has the Minister spoken directly to Brazilian or American counterparts, or to key regional bodies such as CARICOM—the Caribbean Community—and the Organisation of American States, about responding to Maduro’s actions?

Guyana is a diverse, beautiful and proud country with close ties of history, friendship and family with the UK. As the child of parents who came from Guyana as part of the Windrush generation, I am living proof of our shared history. For my relatives, and for all the people of Guyana, this is a deeply troubling time. I am grateful that the Minister has indicated that he will go to Guyana shortly, and that the UK’s support for Guyana’s sovereignty is unwavering. What specific actions are the Government taking to ensure that, if the threat is followed through, Guyana’s sovereignty is protected?

[David Rutley]

It is good to see strong cross-party support on this vital issue. I certainly recognise the right hon. Gentleman’s interest in this matter from his personal perspective and from a geopolitical perspective. He is absolutely right: this is from the playbook of Putin and other dictators around the world, and it needs to be called out and stopped. We are grateful for the work that Ralph Gonsalves, the Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, is doing to facilitate those conversations. They need to be about de-escalation; the border is a settled issue as far as we are concerned.

The right hon. Gentleman asks what action we are taking. I can assure him that there have been multiple conversations. The Foreign Secretary is absolutely concerned about this. I have held conversations with interlocutors in Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and many other places. I was in Argentina for the inauguration at the weekend, and I met many interlocutors there who all share the concern. We will work with CARICOM, the OAS, the UN, and, of course, the Commonwealth, which is vital, to call this out and take whatever steps are required.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) (Con)]

I am glad to follow the Opposition foreign and Commonwealth affairs spokesman in reminding the House and the Minister that when the United States persuaded the United Kingdom to go to international arbitration, the determination in 1899 was to leave that region as part of what is now Guyana, which became independent in 1966. The dispute with Suriname was settled some time ago by agreement. This should be as well, and Venezuela should go back to solving its own problems and exploiting its own hydrocarbons, if it chooses to do so, as it moves towards a more eco-friendly economy and preferably a better kind of politics as well.

[David Rutley]

The Father of the House makes a very important point. This is a settled matter, and Venezuela needs to sort out its own issues. There have been steps taken by partners in the region to try to help open the door to Maduro, and he has responded in this way. It is unacceptable.

[Mr Speaker]

We now come to the SNP spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

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

I thank the hon. Member for Bridgwater and West Somerset (Mr Liddell-Grainger) for securing this urgent question. It is indeed ironic that the day after the excitement of COP, here we are discussing the potential annexation of one country by its larger and more powerful neighbour because of the discovery of a huge oilfield containing 11 billion barrels of light crude. It matters not that the 1899 border issue remains controversial for Venezuela, because it has to respect international law.

I am pleased that the International Court of Justice has warned Maduro not to take any action that could alter the status quo, but can the Minister tell me what discussions the UK Government have had with representatives of the ICJ? Have discussions been had directly with the Venezuelans on behalf of the UK Government? To what extent does he share my concern that our previously weak response to states using dubious referendums, followed by the use of military force, to annex parts of a neighbouring country, as Russia did to Crimea in 2014, has emboldened people like Maduro to believe that should he take military action, the consequence for him would be extremely limited?

[David Rutley]

Again, it is good to see support for Guyana across the House. Whether this is because of Venezuela’s aspirations about oil or some other matter, whatever that might be, its actions are completely unjustified. As the hon. Member indicated, we need to call it out. The 1899 border issue is settled. We support Guyana in its efforts to resolve this matter in whichever way it wants to through the ICJ, but it needs to be done peacefully.

The hon. Gentleman also makes an important point about Russia. These actions are opportunistic. There are huge issues geopolitically, and dictators or other Heads of Government should not seek to exploit these moments when there are far bigger issues at stake elsewhere in the world, so we need to call it out. As I said earlier, we are keeping this under very close scrutiny and will take whatever actions we think are appropriate, along with our regional partners.

[Marco Longhi (Dudley North) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for his response to the urgent question, and my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater and West Somerset (Mr Liddell-Grainger) for securing it. I also thank the shadow Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), for his response. I do not often find myself in agreement with him, but, on this, I could not fault him on a single word. Both have raised the key strategic role that Brazil plays in the region. We are about to sign a defence partnership agreement with Brazil—in the not too distant future—so it plays a key strategic role. What further can the Minister do, particularly when he visits Guyana, to have enhanced conversations with Brazil to see what role it can play in making sure that we keep peace in the region?

[David Rutley]

That is a very good question from my hon. Friend. He knows more about Brazil than most people in the House, and I respect him for that knowledge and for the points he has made. Of course, we are working closely with Brazil. It has expressed its concern and warned against unilateral action. It has said that there is no way that Venezuela’s military forces would be able to access Guyana through Brazil, and we will continue to work with it very closely. As he says, we have a strong relationship not just defence-wise, but as we look to its G20 presidency and its hosting of COP30.

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

What we are seeing is a shameful and cynical move by Venezuela’s President Maduro to threaten and bully a smaller neighbour. We in the UK must make it clear that we cannot allow such threatening behaviour to continue, so what steps is the Minister taking, along with international allies, to affirm the UK’s unwavering support for Guyana’s sovereignty?

[David Rutley]

As I said in my statement, we have worked with the Commonwealth ministerial group to call out this action in joint harmony with our other relevant Commonwealth partners. We continue to work with other international bodies to call it out, and obviously, we will be in a position to form a view—along with others in this House—later today, after the meeting that is taking place in St Vincent and the Grenadines.

[Nickie Aiken (Cities of London and Westminster) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for confirming that the UK Government are standing with Guyana against Venezuelan aggression, sham referendums and the threat of annexation. Can the Minister confirm whether he has had discussions with the Commonwealth secretary-general about this situation to establish how the whole of the Commonwealth family can support Guyana at this worrying time?

[David Rutley]

That is an excellent question. I can confirm to the House that I have had conversations with Baroness Scotland. As secretary-general, she has taken a very strong lead: she has issued two statements and called the emergency session of the council of Ministers, which as I said, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Development and Africa attended. We will continue to work with the Commonwealth, which is a vitally important organisation in this context.

[Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Reclaim)]

Does the Minister agree that whenever a country’s borders are threatened, they must be secured, or it risks undermining that country’s sovereignty, social cohesion and national identity?

--- Later in debate ---

[David Rutley]

I could not agree more—that is absolutely vital, particularly in this case. Latin America has been a region of peace for many, many years, and it needs to stay that way.

[Andrew Gwynne (Denton and Reddish) (Lab)]

It is great to see the House speak with one voice in support of our Commonwealth friend and partner, Guyana. The Minister is right: these borders were settled in 1899. They are the borders that were transferred to the independent Guyana in 1966, and they are the borders that are internationally recognised. As the Minister also knows, President Maduro has said that he will immediately issue licences for gas, oil and mineral exploitation, in direct contravention—as we heard from the hon. Member for Argyll and Bute (Brendan O’Hara)—of the ICJ ruling. What more is the United Kingdom doing to take this case up on the international stage with Guyana to make sure that ICJ rulings are adhered to?

[David Rutley]

We have already highlighted the work we are doing with the Commonwealth. We have talked about the international engagement, and obviously, the situation was also discussed by the UN Security Council last Friday. We are taking it at every single level, and it helps if, in this place, we condemn with one voice the actions that have been taken by Venezuela. That will be noted in each of those forums, so I commend the hon. Member for his very important words.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his response, and I am pleased to know that he will be in Guyana shortly—his presence will send a message. Guyana has an army of some 4,000 and a population of 800,000; Venezuela has an army of 125,000, plus tanks and aircraft, so it is very much the aggressor and the stronger of the two countries. When it comes to the potential annexation of a democratic country by somebody who many of us feel is a demagogue, part of the axis of evil—that is North Korea, Iran and Russia, and now we can add Venezuela to that list—it is very important that we take a stand. As a country, as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, could we not send a Royal Navy ship to Guyana? That is the sort of strong action we need to see.

[David Rutley]

It is good to get the last word from the hon. Gentleman—that is often his role. We are working hard through diplomatic channels to urge partners in the region to use bilateral contacts and regional groups to advise and mediate, in order to de-escalate the situation. I also bring to the House’s attention the fact that HMS Trent is heading towards the region to support action against narcotics trafficking.

Overseas Territories Declaration and Joint Ministerial Council

David Rutley Excerpts

Thursday 14th December 2023 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

The UK and the British overseas territories of Anguilla, Ascension, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, St Helena, Tristan da Cunha, and Turks and Caicos Islands have agreed a joint declaration: “A Modern Partnership for a Stronger British Family”. The declaration sets out our united vision for our partnership with the British overseas territories (OTs), fit for the 21st century.

The agreed declaration sets out shared democratic values and respect for human rights which underpin the UK-OT partnership. The UK and OTs committed to: improve transparency and deepen bilateral partnerships; consult OTs on UK primary legislation that impacts them; and support OTs to take on more responsibility where they wish and are able to. Other commitments included: public sector capacity building, seeking improvements to UK financial support frameworks, and speaking with one voice at multilateral fora.

OTs’ elected leaders and representatives welcomed the declaration’s commitments to strengthen the relationship while ensuring that it is responsive to the needs and aspirations of the OTs. OT leaders and representatives also welcomed the commitment set out in the declaration for the UK to seek to develop bilateral compacts with each territory. The compacts will improve the transparency of responsibilities—of the elected Government, Governor and UK Government Departments—and set out mutual expectations to achieve shared priorities and objectives.

The negotiation of the declaration took place during the 11th meeting of the UK-Overseas Territories Joint Ministerial Council (JMC) on 14 and 15 November 2023. The JMC was attended by elected leaders and representatives from Anguilla, Ascension, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, Pitcairn Islands, St Helena, the sovereign base areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia, Tristan da Cunha and Turks and Caicos Islands. Discussions also covered publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership, on which I will update the House separately. The Foreign Secretary attended the plenary to welcome leaders and representatives from the OTs, and OT leaders also attended a private reception hosted by His Majesty the King.

A copy of the UK-OT declaration will be published on gov.uk, and made available in the Library.

[HCWS125]

Oral Answers to Questions

David Rutley Excerpts

Tuesday 12th December 2023 Commons Chamber

[Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury and Atcham) (Con)]

3. What recent discussions he has had with his counterpart in Mauritius on the negotiations on the sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

The Foreign Secretary has not yet had a chance to meet his Mauritian counterpart. However, the Prime Minister met the Mauritian Prime Minister at the G20 in September to assess the state of negotiations. They welcomed the progress made and agreed to meet again soon.

[Daniel Kawczynski]

I thank my hon. Friend for that answer, but in my 18 years of loyal service as a Conservative Member of Parliament, I have never been more disappointed, alarmed and angry about the conduct of the Foreign Office. In this matter, it is negotiating in a neocolonialistic way with Mauritius—an entity that is over 2,000 km away from the British Indian Ocean Territory—without consulting the indigenous people, the Chagossians, whom we expelled in 1968 to make way for an American air force base. The time has come for us to respect the right of self-determination and ensure that the Chagossians are allowed to return to the British Indian Ocean Territory, and for them to decide the future of those islands, rather than handing them to the Chinese client and puppet state of Mauritius, which would be highly counterintuitive to our AUKUS commitments.

[David Rutley]

The UK has been working in close co-operation with the US since negotiations began in November 2022, and it supports our approach. The UK, the US and Mauritius have all made clear that protecting the base on Diego Garcia, including by preventing foreign malign influence, is a top priority. We will ensure that any agreement achieves that. It is in our national interest and that of our partners, and it is vital for regional and global security.

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

The Government are preparing to disregard international law with their Rwanda Bill today. They seem to continue to want to disregard international law in the case of decisions handed down by the International Court of Justice and other international bodies with regard to the Chagos islands. If the UK Government will not live up to their international obligations and the findings of international bodies, how with any credibility can they ask other countries to do the same?

[David Rutley]

We are working closely with the relevant Government—with Mauritius, as I have said—to take forward those negotiations. They are being taken forward in good faith, notwithstanding the need to protect our national, regional and global interests at the same time.

--- Later in debate ---

[James Sunderland (Bracknell) (Con)]

6. What steps his Department is taking to support the overseas territories with climate change adaptation.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

The FCDO is working in partnership with the territories to develop climate security assessments through the conflict, stability and security fund. Our blue planet programme has provided over £35 million since 2016 to enhance marine protection and build climate change resilience.

[James Sunderland]

I am reassured that the UK is investing heavily in climate change adaptation. Does my hon. Friend agree that the best way of future-proofing that is for the FCDO to appoint a dedicated Minister for all the overseas territories and to ensure that the UK never relinquishes sovereignty for any of them?

[David Rutley]

I have recently been appointed as the FCDO Minister responsible for the overseas territories. Furthermore, the Prime Minister has made it clear that every Department should have a Minister whose portfolio covers responsibilities to the OTs. The UK has no doubt about its sovereignty over the overseas territories. Any decision to end British sovereignty should be on the basis of a clear constitutionally expressed wish of the territory’s people.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) (Lab/Co-op)]

As you know, Mr Speaker, our global British family in the UK overseas territories contains 94% of all the unique species that the UK is responsible for. These huge marine areas throughout the world’s oceans are hugely vulnerable to climate change, yet are negligible contributors to it. It has been great to see more OTs sign up to the blue belt initiative, work with groups such as Great British Oceans and attend the recent COP. What is the Minister doing to encourage more overseas territories to join the blue belt and to assist overseas territories to get access to strategic international funding for conservation, adaptation and resilience?

[David Rutley]

It is an important question. Our need to tackle climate change extends widely to the OTs. We have done significant work on the blue belt programme, and we have engaged a large number of OTs at COP28 this year so that we can help push forward their work and give greater access to this funding. It is vitally important.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

7. Whether he has had recent discussions with his counterpart in Pakistan on the Maira Shahbaz case.

--- Later in debate ---

[Theresa Villiers (Chipping Barnet) (Con)]

9. What steps he is taking to help tackle destabilising activities by Iran in the middle east.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

Iran bears responsibility for groups it has long supported. We have stepped up our response to recent attacks. HMS Diamond will bolster our maritime presence in the region and a new Iran sanctions regime will soon be in place, giving us greater powers to designate Iranian activity.

[Theresa Villiers]

The regime in Tehran has been blatant, public and even unapologetic about its backing, funding and arming of Hamas—terrorists who we now know are not just murders but rapists. In the light of that, is it not time to snap back the full range of sanctions on Iran, to sanction a wider number of officials in Iran and to proscribe the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps?

[David Rutley]

Our new Iran sanctions regime will be laid imminently, giving us new and enhanced powers to counter Iran’s hostile activities in the UK and around the world, and its oppressive practices at home. We have already sanctioned more than 350 Iranian individuals and entities, including the IRGC in its entirety.

[Sir Chris Bryant (Rhondda) (Lab)]

I agree with the comments made by the right hon. Member for Chipping Barnet (Theresa Villiers), but should we not also be wondering about what Iran is doing within its own borders? Four hundred and nineteen people were executed in Iran between January and July, and 127 have been executed since 7 October. Iran has been using what is happening in Israel as a cover for much faster executions, including those of 17-year-old Hamidreza Azari—a child—and Milad Zohrevand, who is the eighth “Woman, Life, Freedom” protester to have been executed by this horrible regime. Is it not time that we really took the case to Iran about its own human rights record?

[David Rutley]

The hon. Member makes a very important point. We call out the brutal repression of the protests that have taken place, and we continue to hold Iran to account for its human rights record, including the repression of women, girls and children, as he highlights. We will, as I said, bring to bear a new sanctions regime to assist in those efforts.

[Anne McLaughlin (Glasgow North East) (SNP)]

12. Whether his Department is taking diplomatic steps to help ensure that perpetrators of alleged human rights violations against the Tamil community in Sri Lanka are held to account.

--- Later in debate ---

[Selaine Saxby (North Devon) (Con)]

T2. What progress has my hon. Friend made on the granting of full environmental protection to the waters around the South Sandwich Islands, as well as additional protections and improved management around South Georgia?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (David Rutley)]

The South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands marine protected area provides comprehensive protection against the entire maritime zone. It has been rated one of the most sustainable in the world. The Government are currently undertaking their second five-year review, and a report is expected early next year.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kevin Foster (Torbay) (Con)]

T7. The threat to Guyana’s territorial integrity has already been highlighted. Can the Minister reassure me that we are taking steps with our allies in the region to deter any use of force by the Maduro dictatorship?

[David Rutley]

Venezuela’s actions with regard to Essequibo in Guyana are completely unacceptable. The border was settled in 1899, and we are working with our regional partners, such as Brazil, and with international bodies including the United Nations Security Council, the Commonwealth—as has already been mentioned—and the Organisation of American States to de-escalate tensions.

[Claire Hanna (Belfast South) (SDLP)]

T5. The horrifying death toll in Gaza includes more than 100 aid workers and some 70 journalists. The vast majority of media casualties have been Palestinian journalists who went on working in the face of airstrikes and the deteriorating humanitarian situation as a result of the lack of information caused by the denial of access to international media. The National Union of Journalists warns of systemic targeting of journalists in Palestine, a further breach of international law. How will the Minister impress on the Israeli Government these specific obligations?

[Henry Smith (Crawley) (Con)]

What precedent do the current negotiations between London and Port Louis on the future of the British Indian Ocean territory have in relation to the sovereignty of other uninhabited overseas territories, and, indeed the British sovereign base areas in Cyprus?

[David Rutley]

As raised earlier in substantive questions, we continue to have our negotiations on the British Indian Ocean Territories, which we are taking forward in good faith.

[Kenny MacAskill (East Lothian) (Alba)]

T9. It is not just citizens of the United Kingdom but the Government of Cyprus who are being denied information as to what the US military may be flying from RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus to Israel. Is that not something that they should know about, given the risks, and is it not something that we should know about, given the complicity?

--- Later in debate ---

[John Cryer (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)]

In answer to question 9, the Minister seemed to say that the Government were planning to completely proscribe the IRGC. Could he confirm that? If that were the case, it would be welcomed across the House.

[David Rutley]

To be clear, I said that we would be introducing a new sanctions regime.

[Deidre Brock (Edinburgh North and Leith) (SNP)]

My constituent Amani Ahmed arrived here from Gaza for her PhD just days before the outbreak of the war and is now desperately trying to bring her husband and three children to the UK. UK Visas and Immigration advises travelling to the nearest visa application centre but that is impossible as they are unable to leave Gaza. Can the Minister urgently intervene to ensure that Amani’s family are able to join her safely in the UK?