Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Debate between Geoffrey Clifton-Brown and Chris Elmore

Wednesday 4th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Chris Elmore]

I will make a bit of progress, but I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that I will give way later.

As you know, Madam Deputy Speaker, I am a pedant for procedure in this House, but I have forgotten something: I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), and my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry), for securing the debate. I am sorry that I did not thank them at the beginning of my remarks, but the shadow Foreign Secretary tempted me, and I felt the need to bite. I am equally grateful to all other Members for their contributions. One thing I have learned is that my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury has done a bit of gin-drinking and linen-wearing while travelling with the Foreign Affairs Committee. I need to up my game!

Let me set out and respond to some of the many points raised in the debate. Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, mentioned by many Members, including the shadow Foreign Secretary, has fundamentally reshaped Europe’s security landscape. Like many of our allies, we recognise the need to reduce overall reliance on the United States for our defence. Strengthening the UK’s sovereign defence capabilities is essential in this new era. It is in that strategic context that the Government have taken difficult but necessary decisions, although I appreciate that that view is not shared across the House. The Government have taken those decisions in that strategic context, while ensuring that the UK still plays a full part in European security and remains able to protect our people, our interests and our values.

I am known for many courtesies in this House, but I found it slightly disingenuous of the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), to skip over the fact that a Labour Government introduced ODA funding to begin with, and then gently suggest that the Lib Dems reached the 0.7% target after the 2010 general election. It is not my style to be combative in this House, but I thought that was slightly disingenuous—and I will leave it there.

The Chair of the International Development Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham, mentioned the ICAI. I can confirm that no decision has been taken. I appreciate that that will not please her, but we remain totally committed to meeting our statutory obligation, as the independent evaluation of ODA spending is extremely vital for the Government’s work.

The right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell)—I hope I have got the name of his constituency right—asked about Abercrombie House in Scotland. We are committed to maintaining Abercrombie House. In fact, we are considering how other Government Departments could be based on that. I give him that assurance on the record, and I am more than happy to take the conversation away from the Chamber if doing so would be helpful to him.

There have been many questions about a plan, a way forward and the transformation agenda. I do not underestimate the challenges that come with FCDO 2030. Just a few moments ago, I made very clear my support for the civil service in the FCDO—whether on King Charles Street, in Abercrombie House or across the globe—but I have also heard civil servants themselves talk about the need for change in order for the service to be more agile in responding to the global events that many Members have mentioned. There is no hiding from the work that we need to do.

The FCDO needs be equipped to meet challenges today and in the years ahead. The permanent under-secretary of state is leading the transformation programme, to build an organisation that is agile, innovative and equipped to seize the opportunities of the day. They build on deep expertise, which I know is a concern for colleagues, and on the professionalism and commitment that the civil service brings to Britain’s diplomacy and development work every single day. Our workforce reforms are designed to strengthen that foundation, with officials developing a clear sequenced strategy supported by a Department-wide assessment of our skills, capabilities and requirements. I want to stress that point, because Members from across the House have raised the skillset, the institutional memory, and the scale of the knowledge that we bring, across the world, through our diplomatic service. We want to improve those things, not lessen them, and that can be done, among other things, through the skills audit.

As part of that audit, we of course remain committed to maintaining our development capability, but reduced ODA means deploying it with greater precision and impact. It will also mean closing and transitioning programmes in a planned way, drawing on lessons from previous budget adjustments. This includes strengthening the skills we need most for the future, expanding opportunities for specialist development, and ensuring that colleagues can gain the depth of knowledge and experience, both in the UK and overseas, that underpins a world-class diplomatic service. In short, our aim is to build a workforce with the right mix of expertise, regional insight and professional capability to deliver consistently for the UK in a rapidly changing world.

Let me focus on the specific challenge put to me this afternoon: that of development. The Government remain committed to returning to 0.7% when fiscal circumstances allow. We should be proud of the progress made in international development this century, but the world has changed and so must we. The British people and our partners around the world want a new approach to international development—that was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law)—and the phrase “partners not patrons” is testament to where ODA needs to move to. We must listen to the countries that we support through ODA, not dictate the terms of what we think they need. That is important and I know the International Development Committee will agree with it, as will Members across the House.

The days of viewing aid as charity are frankly over. This modernisation is not simply the product of tighter budgets. It reflects what our partners have told us directly: they want support that is more responsive to their priorities, with partnerships focused on better health and education, and on ensuring that their people have opportunities at home. We have listened to that—I have listened, as have the Minister for Development and the Foreign Secretary—and our new approach is designed to match what our partners say they need, not what outsiders think they should have.

The right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale spoke about a plan. The new approach is based on four fundamental shifts: it moves us from donor to investor; it moves us away from delivering services ourselves and towards supporting the capacity of our partners to improve their own service delivery; it moves us away from providing grants to offering our expertise; and it moves us from imposing change from overseas to championing local leadership. My hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) raised the latter point with respect to co-operatives, and I was pleased that at the development conference at the beginning of November, I was able to include the crucial work done by the co-operative movement. I reassure him that while I remain in the job, co-operatives will be an extremely important part of how I see development moving forward.

As we progress through the aid budget work, and to announcements on decisions, I confirm that we plan to publish indicative ODA allocations for the next three years shortly. Those three-year budgets will provide the predictability that our teams need—the need for long-term funding allocations has been raised, and I can assure the House that the announcement will come soon. Effectively managing the reduction in aid spending will demonstrate how we intend to put our modern approach into practice. Our development work has never been solely about our aid budget, and access to private investment—the shadow Foreign Secretary raised that—remittance flows, efficient tax systems and trade opportunities are essential foundations for countries to achieve self-reliance. With less money to spend, we must make choices and focus on greater impact, as has been said by many Members. Every pound must deliver for the UK taxpayer and the people we support. The UK remains committed to meeting our statutory obligation on the independent scrutiny of our ODA spending—I am saying that again for emphasis, and to reassure the International Development Committee and its Chair of that work.

Let me come to points raised the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) and my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) about water, sanitation and hygiene. We have increased humanitarian funding that includes WASH support in both Gaza and Sudan, working with the World Bank and the UN. The shadow Foreign Secretary may see things differently, but I reassure the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes that that part of our ODA change is about being a player in this space—as an advocate in the room, ensuring that we campaign and lobby for investment within the multilateral space. I also speak as the Minister responsible for multilateral issues, and the change can be a crucial part of such work. We are also supporting several fragile and conflict-affected states to strengthen WASH services, and we have supported more than 700,000 people in Sudan with access to water. I assure the hon. Member and my hon. Friend the Member for Putney that we understand the importance of access to water, and how that can lead to security in the spaces where people are living and on which they are reliant.

The UK will also remain at the forefront of the world in relation to responses to humanitarian crises, particularly in supporting people affected by violent conflict, whether in Ukraine, Gaza or Sudan, and helping displaced people in or near their counties of origin. My hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham East (Janet Daby) raised the right of women and girls to live in a world free from violence, which I know is an issue that she champions. We recognise that human rights, good governance and our work through the preventing sexual violence in conflict initiative are key enablers of our wider FCDO priorities. I cannot stress enough to the House how important this is to both me and the Foreign Secretary. It is vital that we find solutions to the fact that the rape of women, girls and boys is used as a tool of war. I am sure that there would be no dividing line for anybody in the House over the part that the UK Government will play in reducing and, we would all like to hope, ending that practice. We will champion the rights of women.

We will accelerate the global clean energy transition, promoting green and resilient growth and seizing the opportunities for Britain. We will also continue to support countries to build resilient and sustainable health systems, as mentioned by the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale—I seem to be highlighting him today, but I promise I will get to other Members —including through major investments, such as our £1.25 billon pledge to Gavi and our £850 million commitment to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman a clearer reassurance than that. This will help to protect millions of children from disease and save well over 1 million lives in the years ahead. All this is underpinned by our commitment to sustainable, inclusive long-term economic development, and it is built on the foundation of our strong relationships with countries around the world and our standing on the global stage.

Let me turn to questions raised by the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Chair of the International Development Committee, the right hon. Member for Maldon (Sir John Whittingdale) and others, including the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton, about soft power. I know, understand and support utterly and totally the UK’s role in making sure that soft power is relevant and crucial to our wider work within foreign affairs and diplomacy.

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (North Cotswolds) (Con)]

The Minister may be aware that the Public Accounts Committee held a session on 8 January on the BBC World Service. At that session, we pushed for the BBC to be given a budget for the World Service, but here we are, two months on, and I understand that we have still not had notification of that budget, although we are nearly at the beginning of the next financial year. Will the Minister tell us when that budget will be forthcoming?

[Chris Elmore]

I thank the Chair of the Public Accounts Committee for his question. As I set out at the beginning of my speech, the announcements will be made shortly.

I want to expand on some of the points that have been raised by the right hon. Member for Maldon, among others. We are developing a soft power strategy to try to reverse the decline on the UK’s role in soft power. There have been four meetings of the Soft Power Council since January 2025, so I reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we are still working on developing a new strategy on soft power and ensuring that every part of the United Kingdom is supported by the work of the Soft Power Council.

Our offer to the world remains utterly unique. As hon. Members have said in different ways during the debate, and I completely agree with them, the UK’s democracy, rule of law and world-class institutions give us real global influence. That is why soft power is at the heart of our diplomacy, but we cannot take this soft power for granted. If we are to make progress on the challenges we face and create a world that is safer and more prosperous, we must engage the sectors, institutions and networks that together contribute to our success and project it to the world.

We are building our partnerships with all those institutions and businesses that contribute to our soft power, specifically to give us the edge when it comes to both geopolitics and growth. We are drawing on advice from bodies such as the Soft Power Council, alongside wider Government expertise, to enhance our attractiveness. In response to another point that was raised, our leadership of two major global alliances—the Open Government Partnership and the Media Freedom Coalition—reinforces our values internationally and shows that we practise what we preach on transparency and accountability. I can reassure the right hon. Member for Maldon and the House that just this morning I had a meeting with leading experts in the media freedom space, and I will be speaking at the Media Freedom Coalition’s conference in London tomorrow—[Interruption.]—as will the right hon. Gentleman, I am glad to hear.

What I want to see, through us retaking the chair of the Media Freedom Coalition, is a move back to the original pillars of this work to ensure that we have meaningful outcomes. One of the things I was challenged on today is leadership in this space, and I can reassure the right hon. Member for Maldon and the House that I care deeply about the freedom of journalists and their investigative work. They are often at the forefront of how we understand what is happening in conflicts across the world. I hope that gives him some reassurance.

I also happen to be the Minister with responsibility for the World Service and the British Council, and Members have rightly raised the work of both those distinguished organisations. The BBC World Service’s role has been especially clear in recent days—BBC Arabic and BBC Persia services are crucial in providing impartial and accurate reporting on events to audiences across the world, as was referenced by the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury.

That is why we have boosted the World Service’s grant by £32.6 million this financial year to a total of £137 million—a 31% increase in a tight fiscal situation. I reassure colleagues across the House that we are doing our best to work with the BBC World Service. Just last week I met Ministers in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to ensure that the World Service remains a cornerstone of the charter review.

Similarly, the Government highly value the work of the British Council in promoting the English language, arts and culture, and education. We are providing the Council with grant in aid funding of £163.1 million in this financial year alone, and we are working with its leadership and trustees to ensure its financial stability. I stress to the House that senior officials and I have had frequent, often and regular—however we wish to express it—meetings with the chair, vice-chair, chief executive and deputy chief executive. I have also provided briefings to the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee, my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington South and Finsbury, and its ranking member, the right hon. Member for Maldon.

I am determined to find a way through for the British Council to make it sustainable. We have talked about the losses that it has experienced, and I can assure the House that we are working through a plan—I will do my very best to ensure that Members are updated in due course. I want a sustainable future for the Council that allows it to grow and become a part of soft power for decades to come, and I give that commitment to the House.

I need to conclude—forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker, as I have gone on far too long. That was another pet hate of mine when I was Comptroller of the Household, but nevertheless I will stretch your good will towards me slightly longer. I can even see the Deputy Chief Whip, my right hon. Friend the Member for Alyn and Deeside (Sir Mark Tami)—I should know better. May I quickly canter through some of the other questions that have been asked?

I particularly want to respond to the hon. Member for Chester South and Eddisbury (Aphra Brandreth). Yesterday, in FCDO questions, the Minister for the Middle East offered to have a conversation with one of her colleagues—forgive me, I forget who it was. Can I make the same offer to the hon. Lady, if she wishes to meet the Minister to ensure that we work together in this space? I cannot be clearer that there is no space for antisemitism in the United Kingdom, or for us to be, in any way, supporting or funding anything that leads to hate towards Jews—either here or across the world. If the hon. Lady would like to take me up on that offer, I am happy to speak to the Minister for the Middle East.

To conclude—I am sure to the delight of the Government Whips Office—this Government have a modernised approach to development. We have the right combination of hard power and soft power tools to achieve our objectives. We have a plan for what we want to deliver, and we know that we have the best people and institutions working throughout the world to deliver it. I applaud all those members of staff for the work that they continue to do, and I commend the estimate to the House.

Korean War: 75th Commemoration

Debate between Geoffrey Clifton-Brown and Chris Elmore

Wednesday 22nd October 2025 Westminster Hall

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

Mr Twigg, it is, as ever, a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, although I have never done so as a Minister, so it is nice to be in this slightly different role.

I pay sincere tribute to the right hon. and gallant Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith). I know from having been in the House for almost a decade that when he speaks, many Members across the House listen. He always does so with great dignity. If I may say so, with genuine affection, he gives us a huge history lesson on the conflicts around the globe, which come with real authority. I mean that most sincerely, and I know that many Members across the House respect the work that he has done over the decades he has served in it. I also pay tribute to his work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on North Korea, and to the work of Lord Alton. I am sorry to hear that Lord Alton is currently in hospital; I do hope that there are ways in which our wonderful NHS can provide support to him as he recovers from his broken back.

The Under-Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), who is responsible for the Indo-Pacific, would have been delighted to take the debate today, but she is travelling on ministerial duties, so it is my pleasure to respond on behalf of His Majesty’s Government.

I thank the shadow Minister, the right hon. Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Wendy Morton). I am not sure we have ever sparred on any subject, including in our years of me shadowing her when I was in the Whips Office in opposition. I hope we can continue that friendly relationship as we start this new relationship as Minister and shadow Minister.

I am grateful for the many poignant contributions by Members from across the House, and I will try my best to respond to all the points raised. I make a commitment at this point that if I miss something, I will be more than happy to ensure that right hon. and hon. Members receive written responses, because I appreciate that this debate has cross-party consensus in the House, and it is our job as Members of Parliament to show that it is at its best when we are trying to find resolutions to some of the most difficult events, including those that took place 75 years ago.

Seventy-five years ago, the United Kingdom stood shoulder to shoulder with the Republic of Korea and the United Nations, defending freedom and democracy in what became the Korean war. The Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), had the privilege of visiting the national memorial to this conflict in Washington, where the words “Freedom is not free” are etched in granite. As has been said, it is a powerful reminder of the price that so many paid.

From this war-scarred island 75 years ago, more than 80,000 British troops crossed the seas to fight in the Korean war, standing with a community of nations committed to freedom for the Korean people. More than 1,000 never returned. Their lives were given in the cause of liberty. Many more were wounded or taken prisoner.

A short distance from here, a beautiful bronze statue, crafted by Philip Jackson, stands—on a base of Welsh slate, I should tell Members—in Victoria Embankment Gardens. That memorial, a gift from the Republic of Korea, is a lasting tribute to those who served. When it was unveiled, veterans spoke of their sacrifice finally being recognised. Today, this House stands united in honouring that sacrifice, which must never be forgotten.

I also pay tribute to those who continue to serve and support the UN Command in supporting peace on the Korean peninsula. Twenty-two nations joined together in the Korean war, and it was our collective effort that secured an armistice, enabling South Korea to flourish. Today, the Republic of Korea is an important and valued partner, and our relationship spans defence, security, trade, climate action and far more. Sadly, the same cannot be said for North Korea.

Today, global risks are evolving and tensions are rising, but our commitment remains firm to peace and prosperity across the Korean peninsula, stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction, and supporting a peaceful, secure and prosperous future for the people of the Indo-Pacific.

I pay particular tribute to the hon. Members for North Cotswolds (Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) and for Honiton and Sidmouth (Richard Foord) and to my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucester (Alex McIntyre) for their deeply moving contributions on the Gloucestershire Regiment. We could never do the brave men who served our country justice, but we stand united in thanking them and indeed, as the shadow Minister referenced, their families, who still talk, I am sure, about the sacrifice of their relatives.

The hon. Member for North Cotswolds asked about the repatriation of bodies, and I appreciate that this is a huge piece of work for him. The Ministry of Defence, along with partners, continues to identify the remains of those who fell during the war. If the opportunity arises, it will look to support efforts to repatriate the remains of those soldiers, so I encourage him to keep doing that work and to work with MOD Ministers to ensure that we do all we can to bring those remaining men home.

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown]

I am grateful for the Minister’s words, but what I was really trying to ask in my speech was whether the British Government would work with the Americans. It is only through the Americans that we will get the political buy-in from the North Koreans to allow these things to take place.

[Chris Elmore]

As the hon. Gentleman will appreciate, we do huge amounts of work bilaterally with the Americans. I will ensure that Ministry of Defence colleagues come back to him in a substantive way and that he gets an answer.

The UK Government’s long-standing position remains the same: we believe that diplomacy and negotiation are the best way to secure peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. That is not straightforward and progress is slow, but to honour the values our armed forces fought for, we will continue to work with our friends and allies in the region and across the globe towards peace and a better life for the people of North Korea.

However, the UK is clear about the threat the regime continues to pose to international security. We continue to condemn the DPRK’s illegal nuclear and ballistic missile programmes in the strongest terms, alongside our allies. Over the past year, North Korea has continued testing, launching one intermediate-range and six short-range ballistic missiles. As the right hon. and gallant Member for Chingford and Woodford Green referenced —as has been said, in good humour, although I am not sure that this was timed to coincide with the debate—the short-range missiles launched this morning are a brazen violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions.

The launches show that the DPRK continues to advance its illegal ballistic weapons programmes, posing a clear threat to regional stability. It continues to destabilise the peace and security of the peninsula. We call again on the DPRK to refrain from illegal launches and return to dialogue with the international community. As the G7 made clear in our joint statement at Charlevoix in March, these launches are a clear breach of UN Security Council resolutions. Today’s launches are no different. We will continue to call them out and work with partners across the region and beyond to uphold international law and protect global security.

The Russia-Ukraine conflict has already been mentioned and we condemn in the strongest possible terms the DPRK’s active support for Russia’s illegal war. The partnership between the DPRK and Russia poses grave risks to global security. Over the past year, Pyongyang has grown bolder, deploying 11,000 troops to Kursk. Our assessment is that there have been 4,000 North Korean casualties, including 1,000 fatalities. That is why in February the UK imposed sanctions on the DPRK, including sanctions against DPRK officials directly involved in supporting Russian military action against Ukraine. Alongside our partners, we will continue to impose costs on Russia and DPRK for this dangerous expansion of the war.

This year, we have stepped up our focus on cyber-space, working closely with partners. Today, I can inform the House that the UK, alongside key allies in the multilateral sanctions monitoring team, is publishing a report that exposes the DPRK’s malicious cyber-activity and use of overseas IT workers. Its cyber-activity includes theft of cyber-currency, fraudulent IT contracts and cyber-espionage. North Korea is using these tactics to bypass UN sanctions and fund its illegal weapons programmes. The report is available today on gov.uk; I commend it to right hon. and hon. Members.

While we continue to address the threat that North Korea poses to international peace and security, we have not lost sight of the fact that ordinary North Koreans are suffering. The DPRK’s regime prioritises weapons and illicit activity over the wellbeing of its people, whom we seek to support. We want a stable and prosperous DPRK. That is why we continue to highlight ongoing, widespread and systematic human rights abuses, and call them out. Last year marked 10 years since the UN’s Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and in June our permanent representatives at the UN Security Council said that the perpetrators of human rights abuses remain unaccountable and the people continue to suffer. Last month, the UN high commissioner’s report confirmed that, if anything, the situation has worsened since 2014.

We continue to call on the DPRK to address its appalling record. In April, the UK co-sponsored a Human Rights Council resolution renewing the special rapporteur’s mandate and calling for stronger accountability. The isolation of the DPRK regime is a major barrier to progress; we urge the DPRK to engage with the international community and to take steps to improve its human rights record. We also continue to press for the reopening of our embassy in Pyongyang and for the return of humanitarian agencies.

In response to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who is a passionate advocate for freedom of religion or belief, I cannot stress enough that we consider it unacceptable that the people of DPRK face surveillance, imprisonment or even death because of their religion or belief. The House should be utterly united in the belief that people should have the ability to practise their religion, whether that is reading the Bible or anything else. We raise the issue of the lack of freedom of religion within the DPRK directly with the authorities there, and at the UN, including at the Human Rights Council. Freedom of religion remains an absolute priority for the British Government.

To continue this theme, we are also deeply concerned by reports from Human Rights Watch that, as many Members have already mentioned, China has forcibly returned over 400 North Koreans since last year, despite UN warnings of torture, imprisonment, sexual violence, forced labour and, tragically, execution. In May, the UK raised the issue at the UN General Assembly, calling on all states to respect the principle of non-refoulement and to ensure that refugees from North Korea are not sent back there.

We must also remember that the Korean war has never officially ended. The 1953 armistice still holds, yet the DPRK continues to claim that the US, South Korea and their partners are hostile. We are not aligned with the DPRK, but we do not seek its destabilisation or to harm its people. Our aim is clear: to limit the DPRK’s weapons programmes, to prevent proliferation and to urge the regime to prioritise its people over its nuclear ambitions. Our approach is one of critical engagement—we hold the DPRK to account, but we also seek dialogue. We want to reduce strategic risk and encourage a return to international co-operation. We hope that our embassy in North Korea can reopen, so that we can once again understand the lives of the North Korean people from the ground up.

I have almost reached my conclusion, Mr Twigg. In response to a question from the hon. Member for North Cotswolds, I should say that I touched on the work that we were still doing from the 2014 report until last year. I reassure him that we are continuing that work; we will continue to try always to have constructive dialogue with North Korea, while also making sure that it is held to account for human rights abuses.

Finally, I come to the shadow Minister’s questions and those from Members across the House. Building on the Downing Street accord, we are developing an enhanced shared agenda through the UK-Korea joint growth mission, aligning UK priorities on economic growth, clean energy leadership and security with President Lee’s priorities, including growth, defence industry exports, AI and climate action.

Later this year, we plan to convene the first UK-Korea high-level forum, bringing together industry leaders, politicians, academics and civil society to deepen collaboration in defence, AI and soft power. As was mentioned by the right hon. Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), we are looking forward to concluding negotiations on our enhanced UK-Republic of Korea free trade agreement by the end of this year, as agreed by the Prime Minister and the President over the summer. Both sides will hold a series of talks in October and November to finalise the remaining areas of the negotiation.

Let me end by reiterating that the Government remain firmly committed to peace and stability on the Korean peninsula. We continue to believe that diplomacy and dialogue are the best path forward. We urge the DPRK to show restraint, engage meaningfully and choose peace. Over 75 years, we have seen what collective action and shared purpose can achieve. We have also seen the cost of isolation. It is our hope that the DPRK will reconsider its duty to its people and reconnect with the world, and that all Korean people will one day know freedom.