Oral Answers to Questions

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Tuesday 20th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Abtisam Mohamed (Sheffield Central) (Lab)]

1. What recent assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of the situation in Yemen.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

In November I made the first ministerial visit to Yemen in six years. I met the President and the Prime Minister to reaffirm the United Kingdom’s unwavering support for a unified and stable Yemen. We support their commitment to reform, and we continue to focus on delivering humanitarian assistance to all those in need in Yemen and, alongside our international partners, using every diplomatic lever to advance peace. The recent escalation of tensions in southern Yemen threatens to undermine those goals. We therefore welcome the calls by Yemen’s President for a dialogue addressing these issues, and Saudi Arabia’s offer to host a conference. We will continue to support efforts to achieve a swift diplomatic resolution.

[Abtisam Mohamed]

In the context of what the United Nations special envoy has described as a rapidly worsening humanitarian and economic crisis in Yemen, does the Minister welcome the forthcoming southern dialogue conference, led by Saudi Arabia and supported by the Arab League and the Gulf Co-operation Council? How is the UK, as penholder on Yemen, supporting that process to deliver a tangible road map for a way forward that addresses the aspirations of southern communities?

[Mr Falconer]

I do welcome Saudi Arabia’s southern dialogue conference. As my hon. Friend has said, it is supported by the Arab League and the GCC, and it is a vital step amid a worsening humanitarian and economic crisis. As UN penholder, the UK is actively supporting the process, through sustained engagement with Saudi leaders, the UN special envoy and regional partners, to help shape a credible road map that reflects southern communities’ aspirations.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

In his statement on 5 January, the Minister referred to the United Arab Emirates’ call then for a ceasefire. What discussions have since taken place with the United Arab Emirates, and is that still its position?

[Mr Falconer]

We have been in regular dialogue with our allies in the United Arab Emirates, and I understand that its position remains to support a ceasefire. I know that it is taking part in extensive dialogue on these questions, not just with us but with some of its other Gulf partners.

[Anna Dixon (Shipley) (Lab)]

2. What steps her Department is taking to help improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.

--- Later in debate ---

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

8. What steps her Department is taking to support UK citizens arbitrarily detained abroad.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

One of the Foreign Office’s most serious and important duties is standing up for British nationals who have been wrongly detained overseas, and supporting the families here at home who are working desperately for their release. We are committed to strengthening our efforts, including through the appointment of a dedicated envoy for complex detention cases. We expect to confirm that appointment in the near future.

[Douglas McAllister]

Exactly 3,000 days ago, my constituent Jagtar Singh Johal was imprisoned in India, and 3,000 days later, he remains arbitrarily detained. He faces the death penalty on trumped-up charges, having been brutally tortured to make a confession. While in opposition, our Prime Minister rightly recognised my constituent’s detention as arbitrary. We need to do more than just raise his case with Indian counterparts. My constituent was acquitted in March last year of all charges, but now faces essentially eight duplicate cases based on the same evidence. Does the Foreign Secretary or the Minister agree that this is clearly double jeopardy, as recognised under Indian, international and UK law, and will the Government make that clear to Indian counterparts?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for his persistence, and for the force of his advocacy for his constituents. Despite progress in Mr Johal’s legal proceedings, eight of the cases against him remain outstanding, as my hon. Friend said. We continue to raise concerns about Mr Johal’s prolonged detention with the Government of India at every appropriate opportunity, and to emphasise the need for a prompt, full and just resolution of Mr Johal’s cases in India’s independent legal system.

[Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)]

Sadly, Jagtar Singh Johal’s case is not the only instance in the world of human rights violations against British citizens, and one of our biggest allies has just said that peace is no longer a priority for it. Given that the world is such a dangerous place, and given the threat to the human rights of British citizens abroad, does the Minister agree that the time has come to make consular assistance a legal right for British citizens across the globe?

[Mr Falconer]

We are committed to introducing a right to consular assistance. We will return to this House with more detail about what form that will take.

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

9. What diplomatic steps she is taking to help ensure that international humanitarian law is upheld in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

We have consistently called on all parties in Palestine to comply with their international humanitarian law obligations. Where this Government have had concerns about Israel’s commitment to those obligations, we have taken decisive action. That has included stopping exports to the Israel Defence Forces that might be used in Gaza, suspending negotiations with Israel on a new free trade agreement, and last month voting in favour of the UN resolution that welcomed the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion on Israel’s obligation to allow lifesaving humanitarian assistance to reach Palestinian civilians.

[Ian Lavery]

In July 2024, the ICJ ruled that the Israeli occupation and settlements were illegal, and must be ended and dismantled. Then, in September 2024, the UN General Assembly gave Israel 12 months to bring to an end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories—a deadline that has now lapsed by more than four months. Why, after a year and a half, have the Government still not published their response to the ICJ advisory opinion? Is there something that we do not know, but perhaps should?

[Mr Falconer]

In that period, the UK has made a range of significant determinations in relation to our policy in the middle east. Of course, we continue to consider the Court’s advisory opinion on Israel’s occupation carefully. There is lots in that advisory opinion with which we agree, and which is, indeed, already Government policy. We agree that settlements are illegal, and we have already taken strong action against them. Since this Government came into office, we have introduced three packages of sanctions related to violence against communities in the west bank, and we continue to keep these matters under review.

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

Since the recent ceasefire came into effect, over 450 Palestinians have been killed by Israel. UNICEF reports that over 100 Palestinian children have been killed in Gaza since 10 October. Israeli airstrikes are ongoing, and the mental and physical torture and violence continue unabated. Will the Minister tell the children still alive in Gaza what action the UK Government will take to force Israel to comply with international law and allow essential humanitarian aid into Gaza, and to make the ceasefire a real one and stop the killing?

[Mr Falconer]

I know how deeply so many of our constituents and, indeed, Members of this House feel about these issues, and how often they raise them. We will continue to take action in the way that the Foreign Secretary set out this morning. It is vital that the ceasefire holds, and that we make progress in the three areas set out already, and that is the priority for Ministers.

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

10. What discussions she has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on planned levels of spending on official development assistance.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gurinder Singh Josan (Smethwick) (Lab)]

T3. I recently visited the Lodge community centre in West Bromwich to meet five of the 25 young people who had arrived in the UK from Gaza to receive specialist medical attention—they were with their families at a fun day put on by the Yemeni Community Association. I spoke with them about their community in Gaza and their journey here to the UK. Can the Minister tell the House what learning the Department has taken from the programme so far, in particular about the support required by the young people and their families while they are in the UK, and whether it is the intention to expand the project further?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

As the House will be aware, we have supported a number of sick and injured children to leave Gaza. I am very proud of our work in this area. We work closely across Government, including with our colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and with local authorities, to ensure that children and families arriving in the UK receive the help and support they need. In relation to future plans, I am sure I will return to the House in due course.

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

T2. President Trump’s new version of the board of peace will apparently cost $1 billion to join, Trump will chair it for life and Putin will be invited to join and offer his views on peace making. I understand that the Foreign Secretary is still having conversations about it, but has she managed to identify a single good reason for the UK to join?

[Mr Falconer]

As the Foreign Secretary set out earlier, the board of peace was part of the 20-point plan, which we welcomed, and there was a UN Security Council resolution, which also enshrines the progress made in the talks. Of course we want to see the ceasefire hold in Gaza. We are fully engaged with our American and other counterparts on these questions, but as the Foreign Secretary has set out already, we are discussing the way ahead with our allies.

[Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) (Lab)]

T4. Settler violence and expansion in the occupied west bank is a daily threat to Palestinian communities. In the face of persistent violence, entire villages have been forcibly displaced. This is ethnic cleansing, enabled by the Israeli state. Does the Foreign Secretary agree that a ban on trade with Israeli settlements would show Israel that we are serious in opposing this disgraceful activity?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jeff Smith (Manchester Withington) (Lab)]

T7. It will be impossible to get the necessary aid into Gaza until the Rafah crossing is fully open. Will the Minister update us on progress in trying to persuade the Netanyahu Government to do the right thing and open the Rafah crossing?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question and his continued advocacy on these issues. The 20-point plan clearly outlined the need to open the Rafah crossing, and indeed other crossings. There have been discussions between various partners, but we continue to press the Israelis to open all the crossings now.

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

T6. An opinion poll in the Sunday Herald at the weekend showed that three quarters of Scots would vote to join the European Union. They get that leaving the EU was a disaster a decade ago, and it is even more of a disaster given the international situation now, so why do this Government continue to pursue yesterday’s policies, backed up by yesterday’s men and women?

--- Later in debate ---

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

T9. My constituent Pelin Omar has asked me about the ceasefire that was announced on Sunday between the Syrian Government and the Syrian Democratic Forces, which has already unravelled, with fighting resuming in less than 24 hours. What is the Foreign Secretary doing to promote humanitarian access, international monitoring and a long-term reconciliation between the Kurdish people in Aleppo and northern Syria and the Syrian Government? Do the Government support more devolved government as a solution to bring about lasting peace for the Kurdish people?

[Mr Falconer]

Many across the House will be aware of the fast-moving situation in north-east Syria, which is of concern to the British Government. We are calling for de-escalation, and we want a halt to the advance into the north-east. We continue to focus on the humanitarian situation in Syria. Over 16.5 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance, and we are delivering up to £104 million of assistance this year.

[Peter Lamb (Crawley) (Lab)]

T10. What action are the UK Government taking to support Tamils in seeking justice for past and current injustices?

[Mr Falconer]

The UK is active in seeking justice and accountability for Sri Lanka’s Tamil community. Indeed, we lead in the UN Human Rights Council on the resolution on Sri Lanka. Last year, we sanctioned Sri Lankans for human rights violations in the civil war, and we have made clear to the Sri Lankan Government the importance of improved human rights for all in Sri Lanka, as well as reconciliation. Let me take the opportunity to wish the Tamil community a happy Thai Pongal.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Despite the Minister’s assertion that the Government are holding the Israeli Government to account, I would like to remind them that a tender has just been issued by the Israeli Government for a further illegal construction of more than 3,000 homes in the E1 project in the west bank, which will completely cut the west bank in half. Will the Government now comply with the ICJ’s opinion that third states like ours have a duty to bring Israel’s illegal occupation to an end by imposing sanctions on Israeli Ministers in their professional capacity and to prohibit UK companies from involvement with illegal settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

The Foreign Secretary and I have set out the position in relation to settlements over the course of this session, but I want to be clear: we have been the strongest that we can in condemning the increase in both violence by settlers and settlements themselves. I have from this Dispatch Box announced sanctions on Israeli Ministers, including Mr Smotrich and Mr Ben-Gvir.

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

I proudly declare that I will be visiting the Falkland Islands as a guest of their Government next month. What can the UK Government do to alleviate EU tariffs of between 6% and 18% on their fishing exports, so that the Falklands Government have more money to spend on health, education and their treasured environment?

[Mr Falconer]

We remain strong defenders of the Falkland Islands as part of our global great British family. I was pleased to speak with the new Legislative Assembly just the other day. It was, of course, the Brexit deal that the previous Government negotiated that left the Falklands out when it comes to tariffs, but we continue to work closely with them on a range of trade and tariff issues and have done so successfully in relation to the United States.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

The Israeli occupation of the west bank has resulted in almost 1,000 deaths over the past year and a half. We have seen the loss of villages, the loss of life and the continued enabling of settler violence against ordinary Palestinian people in their villages, and this morning there are reports that the Israel Defence Forces are now demolishing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency headquarters in Jerusalem. When are the British Government going to do something serious, with sanctions against Israel for its continued illegal occupation of the west bank?

[Mr Falconer]

I answered the substance of the right hon. Gentleman’s question when I replied to the hon. Member for Leicester South (Shockat Adam). We are aware of the reports in relation to the UNRWA headquarters in east Jerusalem and, as the Foreign Secretary has set out already, we are taking them very seriously indeed.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

Over 900 doctors have been killed by the Iranian regime since 1979. A leading medical union warns that Iran’s state health system is near collapse and medicines are increasingly scarce, leaving children vulnerable for lack of basic care. Does my right hon. Friend agree that urgent international action is needed to hold the regime to account, particularly for the devastating impact on paediatric care?

--- Later in debate ---

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

The Iranian regime is killing protesters in their thousands, and the communication blackout is enabling abuses to happen away from public view. The Minister said yesterday:

“They must restore internet access.”—[Official Report, 19 January 2026; Vol. 779, c. 48.]

What are the Government doing with partners, so that we can hear the voices of those freedom fighters?

[Mr Falconer]

As I said to the House yesterday, we treat the internet blackout in Iran as a breach of the human rights of the Iranian people. We continue to work on this issue with our partners for the reasons that my ministerial colleagues have set out, but I will not give further commentary on operational business.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Whitby (Derbyshire Dales) (Lab)]

Israel is the only country in the world that automatically and systematically prosecutes children in military courts, trying between 500 and 700 Palestinian children in that way each year. According to Save the Children, those children are at serious risk of contagious disease, hunger and abuse. Can the Minister reassure me that the Government are doing all that they can to put pressure on the Israeli Government to end this practice?

[Mr Falconer]

We are deeply concerned about the detention of Palestinian children by the Israeli military and by the allegations that my hon. Friend refers to. The UK calls for all reports to be fully investigated. The arrest and detention of children must follow due process, in line with international juvenile justice standards, and we call on all parties to the conflict to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross immediate and unfettered access.

[Andrew Rosindell (Romford) (Reform)]

Will the Foreign Secretary explain why, if she rightly supports the self-determination of the Greenlandic people as part of the Kingdom of Denmark, she does not support the self-determination of the Chagossian people to remain a British overseas territory?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Last week, I met a mother from my constituency who told me a terrible story. In October, her daughters were taken by their father, supposedly for a day out at the fair, but they never came home. It seems he has abducted them and taken them out of the country, either to Afghanistan or to Pakistan. Can the Minister set out what the Government can do about these kinds of abductions, and will he meet me to discuss how we get these little girls home?

[Mr Falconer]

Of course I will.

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

According to Open Doors’ world watch list, which was released last week, Yemen is now the third most dangerous country in the world to be a Christian. Since January, over 50 Yemeni Christians have been arrested and imprisoned, facing intimidation, interrogation and the risk of torture. Will the Minister explain why freedom of religion and belief has not been made a clear prerequisite for continued UK aid, with robust monitoring on the ground?

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful for an opportunity to comment on aid into Yemen. As I am sure the hon. Lady knows, there are significant restrictions on aid into the north of Yemen, where the Houthis are in control. It is rather easier to get aid into the south of Yemen, but given the events referred to earlier, doing so remains complex. We continue to prioritise freedom of religious belief, including through our excellent envoy, who is a Member of this House. I am very happy to meet the hon. Lady to discuss these issues further.

Iran: Protests

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Monday 19th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office if she will make a statement on the British Government’s response to the Iranian regime’s brutal crackdown on protests.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

The United Kingdom condemns in the strongest of terms the horrendous killing of Iranian protesters and the most brutal and bloody repression against public protest in Iran for at least 13 years. The Iranian authorities must immediately end the abhorrent killings and uphold the human rights and fundamental freedoms of Iran’s citizens, including the right to freedom of expression, to seek, receive and impart information, and the freedom of association and peaceful assembly, without fear of reprisal. The Iranian security forces must be held accountable for the deliberate use of violence that has claimed thousands of lives.

On 13 January, the Foreign Secretary was clear in her statement to the House and delivered that message directly to the Iranian Foreign Minister. The Prime Minister has issued a joint statement alongside the Chancellor of Germany and the President of France. On 15 January, alongside our G7 partners, we strongly condemned Iran and announced our readiness to impose additional restrictive measures if Iran continues to crack down on protests and dissent in violation of its international human rights obligations. We publicly called out Iran’s crackdown at the UN Security Council meeting on 15 January, and we have now secured a special session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, which will take place on 23 January. On 13 January, I summoned the Iranian ambassador to underline the gravity of this moment and to call on Iran to answer for the horrific reports that we have heard.

On 1 October, alongside our E3 partners, France and Germany, the UK implemented snapback in full by reinstating the six previously terminated United Nations sanctions resolutions on Iran. We are going further by bringing forward legislation to implement more sectoral measures. We have already designated key players in Iran’s oil, energy, nuclear and financial systems, and further measures will target finance, energy, transport and other significant industries. We will continue to work with the European Union and our other partners to explore what additional measures might be needed in response to these most recent developments.

[Priti Patel]

Since last week’s statement, we have seen more information about the horrific brutality that the despotic regime in Tehran has inflicted and the bloodshed it is responsible for against its own citizens. Reports from medics in country say that the figure could be as high as 18,000 men, women and children dead, slaughtered in cold blood. Reports also suggest that up to 360,000 people could be injured, with those wounded left dying due to shortages of blood in hospitals. This is an affront to humanity, and there must be accountability, including for the use of execution show trials.

The regime is one of the most consistently vile and brutal in the world. The UK Government cannot stand by, and we need to understand what more they are doing in response to the latest barbaric revelations and actions. What is the Government’s assessment of the numbers killed and injured and the brutal tactics used by the regime? What do they make of reports that the regime may have used chemical weapons in the recent attacks on its own civilians? What assessment has been undertaken of those imprisoned and being tortured? The principle victims of this vile regime are the Iranian people themselves. What did their ambassador say when he was summoned last week to the Foreign Office, and what did the Iranian Foreign Minister say when he was called by the Foreign Secretary?

Once again, protesters in Iran seek freedom from tyranny, and the response from the west has been shameful as Iranians have been slaughtered. Iran continues to pose a threat to us all and to our interests with its sponsoring of terrorism and its nuclear programme. The US State Department remarked on Saturday that it had

“heard reports that the Islamic Republic is preparing options to target American bases”.

Given that Britain has many joint military bases with the US in the region, what is being done to secure those assets? What is the latest assessment of Iran’s nuclear enrichment programme and ballistic missile capability, and what is being done to strip Iran of those weapons?

With phase two of the Gaza peace plan being implemented, what is being done to stop Iranian sponsorship of Hamas and other terrorist groups undermining efforts to secure peace in the region? This is not a time to be timid as the response to these continued atrocities continues to be shamefully muted.

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Lady asks important questions. Let me turn first to the question of numbers. I do not want to give the House an artificial sense of precision when the internet has remained restricted since 8 January. There clearly have been many deaths; we believe in the thousands. We will not put a more precise figure on it at this time because to do so would be at risk of misleading the House that we have a more precise picture than we do. That does not in any way take away from the strength of our condemnation.

The Iranian regime has provided a variety of rationales, both in private and in public. It has claimed that it was responding to armed protesters, and it has complained that others are seeking to interfere in its internal affairs. Let me be absolutely clear: there is no excuse for the scale of bloodshed that we have seen in relation to those protests. It is not to seek to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs to say that the protesters have rights—rights of assembly, rights to protest and rights to have their internet turned back on.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

We will not. As I said in response to the shadow Foreign Secretary, the Iranian people have rights—rights that we hold dear in this place and this country—and we will continue to press those points with the Iranian regime.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

Since the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week, Ayatollah Khamenei has confirmed the death of thousands of protesters, but he has again deflected responsibility for the brutal crackdown by his regime. The Foreign Secretary told the House last week that sanctions against the leaders of the regime, and the proscription of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, relied upon new legislation or instruments. We have waited too long for that. Will the Minister give the House a date by which those measures will be introduced?

Will the Minister update the House on internet connectivity? What is the UK doing, with our partners, to restore internet access so that people in Iran can communicate and evidence can be gathered to hold the regime to account? What dialogue have Ministers and officials had since last week about the Liberal Democrat proposal to pursue, through the United Nations, an International Criminal Court investigation into crimes against humanity perpetrated by the regime?

[Mr Falconer]

I am sure that my Liberal Democrat colleague knows that the processes of the ICC are independent of the decisions of Ministers here—rightly so.

To turn to the hon. Gentleman’s other questions, I will not presume to dictate dates on which the House might pass legislation, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I can confirm that we are progressing that legislation at pace.

Let me say a little about the impact of the sanctions that we have introduced. The House is aware that we now have over 550 sanctions on Iran. Most recently, in October, we sanctioned IRGC financier Ali Ansari. As an indication of the scale and efficacy of our sanctions regime, I am pleased to confirm to the House that that has led to the freezing of over £100 million-worth in UK property. There is exposure from Iran to the UK, and we will take every step required.

[Dan Carden (Liverpool Walton) (Lab)]

We must not be indifferent to the pleas of the Iranian people—what we are seeing is absolutely horrific. I welcome sanctions, but we must be honest: the people of Iran are fighting for their freedom. It is still possible that the US will intervene. Will the Minister reassure me that the UK Government are thinking about how they can offer meaningful support to the people in Iran who are fighting for their freedom?

[Mr Falconer]

I have set out our position in relation to these issues. I would not wish to give the House the impression that the protesters are not at risk; clearly, they are, and we have seen the devastating consequences of the regime’s behaviour in the most recent days. We will do everything we can to ensure that the protesters’ rights are protected. We are discussing closely with our allies what steps we can take.

[David Davis (Goole and Pocklington) (Con)]

This despicable regime goes in for state terrorism at home and abroad, and its principal instrument for terrorism abroad is the IRGC. This is now the sixth time that I have called on Prime Ministers and Ministers to proscribe the IRGC. The excuse given historically is that we want to keep our embassy open, but the embassy is now shut, demonstrating how futile that argument is. When will we proscribe that terrorist organisation?

[Mr Falconer]

I just want to be clear about the status of our embassy in Tehran. While it is true that we have withdrawn our staff, we have not closed our embassy. I expect that the embassy will be fully functional again soon—I hope with some of this behind us.

On the IRGC, which the right hon. Gentleman has asked about on several occasions, as have others in the House, we conducted the Jonathan Hall review and he found that it is important that we have a tool that is focused on the particularities of the threats from Iran and the IRGC. That is a different threat from that which emanates from a simple terrorist group, if I may use that language, and we are committed to taking forward those recommendations through the creation of a state threats proscription-like tool, and we will be coming back for the parliamentary time to do that.

[Anneliese Dodds (Oxford East) (Lab/Co-op)]

Chillingly, the head of the Iranian judiciary has publicly called for the acceleration of executions of protesters. The killing in Iran is not stopping. Last week, when the Foreign Secretary talked of further sanctions and sectoral measures, she linked those to the nuclear industry. Will the Minister now confirm that the UK will be seeking to go further than sanctions applied in relation to nuclear issues, to also seek to impose them on human rights grounds for those who have been linked with this brutal Iranian regime?

[Mr Falconer]

I pay tribute to my right hon. Friend who has considerable experience in these matters. She is right to differentiate: there are the snapback-related sanctions, which are in progress and which the shadow Foreign Secretary and I have corresponded on recently; and I can confirm that we are also separately considering human rights sanctions in relation to the abuses that we see.

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

Many of us will have read the reports in The Sunday Times yesterday detailing how IRGC forces burnt alive and machine-gunned down so many, and that this is not happening in just one town or one city, but right across Iran. We have very few levers in this country to make a difference, but one of them is to proscribe the IRGC. Please, Minister, just do it and make some small difference to send a clear message and make the Iranian people understand that we stand with them.

[Mr Falconer]

I do not have a great deal to add to the answer I have already given to the right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis), but I would say that we are under no illusions about the threat posed by the IRGC. The right hon. Member for Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge (Sir Gavin Williamson) talks about what they are doing in Iran; nobody on this side of the House has lost track of the fact that there have also been more than 20 plots in this country linked to Iran and to the IRGC. That is why it is so important to us that we have a tool focused on the particularities of a state-based threat, rather than treating them just as terrorists.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

The world has been appalled by the scenes of bloodshed. Will the Minister outline what discussions the Government are having with our G7 colleagues and European colleagues to make sure we send out a united message of condemnation and a common demand for the rights of the Iranian people to be respected?

[Mr Falconer]

I can confirm to the House that both the Foreign Secretary and I have been in extensive discussions over the last few days, and I expect those to continue this week, including at Davos.

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

The Iranian Government are massacring civilians, and brave young protesters are risking their lives for freedom and dignity against a violent and corrupt regime. The Minister has spoken about the thousands of people who we fear have lost their lives, and The Times is reporting that up to 16,000 people may have died—and in an age when we can see news as it happens in the palm of our hands, we see nothing because of the darkness of the internet crackdown. What are the Government doing to support internet access across Iran so that we can collect evidence to hold the perpetrators to account for this brutality?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Lady asks important questions. We are working with our allies and continue to press the Iranians, both in public and in private. They must restore internet access.

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

The brutal regime in Iran has destroyed so many lives, and as a woman and a feminist I want to pay particular tribute to the brave women of Iran fighting for their freedom against such odds. They were promised support by President Trump. Can the Minister say what form that support may take, and what involvement the UK may or may not have, and whether it is dependent on executions taking place? On the technical front, will he write to me in my role as Chair of the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee explaining exactly how the Iranian regime was able to turn off access to the internet? Do they have some switch somewhere? With our unique technical expertise, what is the UK doing to address that?

[Mr Falconer]

I join my hon. Friend in her comments about the bravery of protesters. I am sure we have all seen pictures of incredibly courageous protesters, often young women, showing defiance against a regime that is, clearly, deeply intent on not only stopping the protests but silencing the voices of protesters and ensuring that nobody can see them. Those protesters are admirable people asserting their rights. It is clearly an inalienable right of the Iranian people to be able to protest, and that is what we want to see. I am happy to write to my hon. Friend but, for reasons she will understand, I will not be able to delve too deeply into technical questions when they are sensitive.

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

Does the Minister’s Department assess that the Iranian regime can come back from this and move into a position of strength? If so, does he assess that the sanctions packages being put forward are enough to limit that happening?

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful for the opportunity to set out our position on the future of Iran, which is clearly a matter for the Iranian people. What we are pressing for and focused on is the Iranian authorities ensuring that their people can exercise their right to peaceful protest. What happens next is clearly a question not for London or Washington, but for the Iranian people themselves. That is a message we have delivered consistently to the Iranian regime, which is saying otherwise—publicly, particularly—so I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the opportunity to set that out from the Dispatch Box so clearly.

[David Taylor (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)]

The Trump Administration initially indicated that they would protect protesters when they came out, which they have done in droves, but, as many Members have indicated, thousands upon thousands of them have now been killed. We worry about outside interference, but if we listen to a lot of the protesters, they are actually demanding help from outside. I do not, and I am sure other Members do not, want to be standing here in a few years’ time, looking back and thinking, “What if?” Given that half a million people died in the recent Syrian civil war when a straightforward no-fly zone could have protected them, I urge Ministers to keep everything on the table and to talk to partners about how we might be able to degrade the IRGC’s ability to kill thousands of protesters, because I do not think it is going to stop.

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his continued commitment to these issues, and to those in Syria, which he has been engaged in for some time. As I said, we are deeply concerned about the use of violence against protesters and we strongly condemn the killings of protesters. People must be able to exercise their right to peaceful protest without fear of reprisal.

[Alicia Kearns (Rutland and Stamford) (Con)]

There are reports that the US is planning airstrikes or action in Iran. Following the previous US airstrikes there, Iran fired rockets at the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar in response. That base, which has recently been partly evacuated, is co-located with the prison where Matthew Pascoe is being detained. Will the Government advise the House on what they are doing to make sure that he, and any British nationals in the nearby area, will be safe? What is being done to ensure the safety of the Foremans, who continue to be held in Evin prison? We know that, in the past, Iranians have often rightly sought to overthrow the prisons, because of all those who are being held unjustly there.

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Lady asks a series of important questions. On our general posture in the region, I do not want to comment in great detail about force protection questions in relation to our bases, although I am sure she will be aware of reports. We are working closely with our American counterparts on those questions.

On those detained—the Foremans and others—I can confirm that I have been in touch with the families, who are at the forefront of our minds. I must draw the House’s and the public’s attention to our travel advice, however: with the embassy withdrawn, there is a limit to what can be done. We cannot offer a full consular package of assistance in Iran. This is a fast-moving situation and we try to keep our travel advice as up-to-date as possible to reflect the very latest developments.

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

For almost 50 years, Iranians have found refuge in the UK, and many have made their homes in west London. One of them wrote to me saying that even after 20 years, Iran still runs through his veins. Will the Minister outline how the Government are working with the Iranian diaspora in the UK to provide support and reassurance to them and to their families still in Iran?

[Mr Falconer]

I know how many families in the UK will feel very personally affected by developments in Iran. Where there are consular-related questions, they are very much on our minds for both dual nationals and mono-nationals. I am afraid that wider community concerns are a question for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government.

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

My British-Iranian residents are deeply worried about their families. The Minister has said that he hopes the embassy will reopen soon, but time is not on the side of the Iranian people. When is “soon” likely to be? How quickly should we expect the proscription of the IRGC?

[Mr Falconer]

I do not want to sound evasive, either about the delicate decisions we need to make about posture across the region or about parliamentary time, but I am afraid I am not able to be drawn any further on either.

[Rachel Blake (Cities of London and Westminster) (Lab/Co-op)]

In the last few weeks I have been inundated with communication from constituents who are part of the Iranian diaspora. It is very difficult to convey the extent of their agony about the lack of contact with their families and the fear they feel for their loved ones. They have said to me that they want to see the strongest possible action on sanctions and the fastest possible progress on proscribing the IRGC. I have listened carefully to what the Minister has had to say about the particularities of state-backed terror; will he set out in more detail why he believes it will take further time for us to tackle the vile state-backed terror that is affecting us all so much?

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the care that she puts into these issues in her constituency. The Jonathan Hall review sets out some of the reasons why, in his view, a state-focused proscription-like tool is necessary. We accept his recommendations and we intend to legislate.

[Stephen Flynn (Aberdeen South) (SNP)]

There is a shared horror across the Chamber at the killing of protesters in Iran, just as there is a shared condemnation of the brutal regime and, it appears, a shared view that the IRGC should be proscribed. I have listened carefully to the Minister’s answers, but I gently suggest that he has a consensus, which he should use to proscribe the IRGC as soon as possible to send a clear message to the Iranian people that we stand with them.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Gentleman’s points are well noted. For the clarity of the House, let me say that the legislation will be Home Office legislation, rather than Foreign Office legislation, but I will certainly pass on the strength of his feeling to the Security Minister.

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

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is undertaking and leading the brutal repression and murder of so many Iranians fighting for their freedom. We know that the IRGC has used two registered cryptocurrency exchanges to move approximately $1 billion since 2023, evading international sanctions. Zedcex and Zedxion routed funds through IRGC-controlled wallets, offshore intermediaries and Iranian crypto companies. What are the Government doing to ensure that the IRGC cannot fund this brutal crackdown through British-based companies?

[Mr Falconer]

If my hon. Friend writes to me, I am happy to provide a more detailed answer in writing. Clearly, our sanctions regime is wide-ranging, and any British companies need to give very careful attention to it. On the face of it, it sounds like what my hon. Friend has outlined would not be consistent with our arrangements, but if he writes to me, I will respond.

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

The Minister and I share the dubious distinction of having summoned Iranian ambassadors. Does he agree that whether it is Ambassador Mousavi, Baeidinejad or Abbas Araghchi, it does not really matter, because they are not the problem? The problem is the IRGC and its constituent parts. Does the Minister accept that Jonathan Hall KC’s review is not particularly controversial? He has made recommendations that would effectively get around the Minister’s problem with the proscription of state actors. There is cross-party agreement right across the House that would get such a measure through in a day. It is not as if we do not have enough time, as today’s cancellation of business has shown.

[Mr Falconer]

I am wounded that the comparison is a dubious one. On the question of time, I gently say to my predecessor—and I am glad to see the former Foreign Secretary, the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly), in his place—that there was rather a lot of time over the past 14 years to pass these things. We have done the Hall review and we are committed to implementing it.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

The brutal regime in Iran is well known to be attacking its own people at home, but it also poses one of the largest credible threats to Jewish people here in the UK. As the regime is currently blaming Israelis, Jews and Zionists for being responsible for the protests, will the Minister set out what discussions are happening across Government to ensure that the proxies and agents that we know are in the UK are being monitored, to make sure that the Jewish population of the UK do not feel a backlash as a result of the protests in Iran?

[Mr Falconer]

I have said repeatedly and in no uncertain terms to our Iranian counterparts, as has the Foreign Secretary, that any threats in the UK to British people of any faith or denomination in any building and, indeed, any other diplomatic premises in the UK will be treated with the utmost seriousness. I have reiterated that strength of feeling to a range of representatives from the Jewish community in the UK, and I am happy to reiterate it again from the Dispatch Box.

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

Last Tuesday afternoon, President Trump took a short break from attacking America’s NATO allies to write on Truth Social the following:

“Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING—TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!!”

He added:

“HELP IS ON ITS WAY.”

Have the Government the faintest idea of what he was talking about?

[Mr Falconer]

US posture and policy towards Iran is, I am afraid, a matter for the US Government.

[Peter Prinsley (Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket) (Lab)]

Many in this House are concerned about the malign influence of the ayatollahs in our own country. There has been dreadful slaughter on the streets of Iran, but curiously little protest on the streets of Britain. What a contrast that is to the regular protests—sometimes intimidatory to local Jewish people—about the terrible war in Israel and Palestine. Could the aforementioned malign influence explain this?

[Mr Falconer]

As the Home Secretary has said, we are aware of the very considerable concern that the ongoing protests have caused, particularly in places of real sensitivity such as outside synagogues, and we are taking measures to address it.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

At the weekend, I visited several Iranian-owned businesses in my community to show my support and solidarity. The business owners told me that they have relatives inside Iran who, due to the internet shutdowns, are going to increasingly extreme lengths to pick up information from the outside world, including travelling close to the border with Iraq to pick up a mobile phone signal or across towns to connect to the community-owned Starlink network. They expressed their frustration at the lack of activity from the British Government, as they see it, but they also expressed their fears that the US Government have marched protesters up to the top of the hill and left them abandoned there. What co-ordination has the Minister had with our American allies—if I can still call them that—on their approach? Are we aligned with them on what we are doing in Iran?

[Mr Falconer]

I understand the degree of anxiety within Iran. The restriction of the internet since 8 January is obviously a source of real concern, both to Iranians in Iran and to those with family links there, and to those few, but none the less profoundly affected, British families who have loved ones detained there, who are also suffering from the restrictions. As I said, US policy and posture towards Iran is clearly a matter for the US Government, but we are in close consultations and discussions with our American counterparts and, indeed, others.

[David Pinto-Duschinsky (Hendon) (Lab)]

I share the Minister’s horror at the brutal repression we have seen in Iran. Hendon is home to a large and vibrant Iranian community, and we are all horrified beyond words to see the savage, murderous violence being meted out by the Iranian regime to protesters. Is it not the reality that even when there are not protests in the street, the regime is engaged in industrial levels of violence against its own people? Executions in Iran more than doubled in the last year alone. Does the Minister agree that we must keep up the pressure on the Iranian regime to end this barbarity once and for all, and to let the Iranian people exercise their fundamental rights?

[Mr Falconer]

I do. We have spoken in some detail about current events in relation to the protesters, but I can confirm to the House that we oppose any and all executions in Iran, and across the world.

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

As thousands of brave Iranian protesters are slaughtered on the streets of Iran, I was humbled yesterday to speak in front of thousands of wonderful Iranians here in Whitehall. They asked me to ask the Government a simple question: how much more will it take for this Government to do the right thing and proscribe that terror group, the IRGC—and, while they are at it, the Muslim Brotherhood?

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful to my Lincolnshire colleague for the question. I do not have a great deal more to add to the discussions that we have already had this afternoon on the IRGC. “Muslim Brotherhood” is a term that covers a whole range of groups, including, depending on how we consider it, Hamas. Where there is a violent threat to the UK, we will of course take proscription action as necessary.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

I condemn the violent oppression of the Iranian people. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to the work of the BBC World Service and BBC Persian, not only in getting free journalism and the truth into that country, but in getting stories of bravery, courage and suffering out to the wider world?

[Mr Falconer]

I will. The BBC World Service and BBC Persian are a lifeline, as are so many of the other World Service channels. I pay tribute to the vital work that they do in reporting, even in the most difficult circumstances.

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

If I may, I will return to the topic of Craig and Lindsay Foreman. The Minister will be aware that they have been imprisoned for more than a year and are in Evin prison, regarded as the harshest in Iran. Can the Minister update the House on their medical condition since the outbreak of violence in Iran in recent weeks? Can he say when he was last informed of their medical condition, and whether they are still safe?

[Mr Falconer]

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that I do not want to provide too much personal information to the House, but I can confirm that we have had consular access relatively recently. I have spoken to the families twice, I think, since the protests began. Those people are very much at the forefront of my mind.

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

The scenes from Iran are barbaric, and those executions that we are aware of are an affront to human dignity. Wherever we look around the world, we can see the malign influence of Iran, including here. Our national security strategy, published in June last year, highlighted that. Can the Minister assure me that our law enforcement is taking every step possible to manage the risk? Following on from the question asked by my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger), will the Minister make a contribution to the BBC charter review consultation in respect of the positive work that the BBC is doing in that troubled part of the world?

[Mr Falconer]

The Foreign Office has a special relationship with the BBC, given our role in the World Service, which we have talked about already this session. I can confirm to the House that law enforcement is making full use of the powers afforded to it, including under the National Security Act 2023. It is under that Act that those associated with potential violence were arrested in May last year.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

My constituents have contacted me sick with worry. They have not heard from their loved ones for over a week. There are reports of tens of thousands of citizens being killed, but the number could be higher because of the deliberate communication blackout. This is now an international human rights emergency. Will the Government act faster on the proscription of the IRGC, and will the Minister support stronger diplomatic consequences for this brutal regime?

[Mr Falconer]

We have discussed the IRGC proscription process, and I do not have much further to add on the more detailed timing questions on which the hon. Lady has sought to press me. As for diplomatic consequences, I have described some of the actions that we have taken in recent days, and I imagine that we will have more to tell the House shortly—for instance, during Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office questions tomorrow.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

The scenes in Iran that we are seeing are obviously absolutely terrible, but I am also concerned about the impact that the ongoing situation will have on safety in this country. May I ask the Minister to pass on my thanks to the Foreign Secretary for her decision, in her previous role, to list Iran under the enhanced tier of the foreign influence registration scheme, and may I also ask him to be specific about what difference that will make?

[Mr Falconer]

Putting Iran on the FIRS regime means that there is a new offence of seeking to act on behalf of the Iranian regime in the UK without properly so declaring, so it is harder for people to do that in this country without being exposed to the force of law enforcement. As I said just now to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies), UK law enforcement has proved itself capable of finding these people and ensuring that they are prosecuted.

[Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)]

There have been many calls across the Chamber for sanctions and the proscription of the IRGC, which I fully support. I think we need to be honest and admit that those measures are unlikely to save the lives of protesters who are under a regime fearing for its survival, but I point out that the drone strike in 2020 against Soleiman, the head of the IRGC, did influence Iranian behaviour.

These protests follow on from western military intervention. As was pointed out by the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis), the United States President has explicitly called on the protesters to overthrow the regime. That reminds me of the 1991 Shi’a uprisings in Iraq; President Bush did exactly the same in the aftermath of the Gulf war, and left those people to be massacred by Saddam Hussein’s helicopter gunships. Is the Minister considering that legacy in his deliberations?

[Mr Falconer]

When it comes to events across the middle east, I am reluctant to focus on a particular incident in the long and, I am afraid, fraught history of interventions and the violence that follows them, but we are of course considering the broader history of the wider region as we consider our response.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I share the horror expressed by colleagues on both sides of the House at the brutal, repressive crackdown on protesters in Iran, and pay particular tribute to the bravery of women protesters who are fighting for their rights. Among the many concerning stories that are now emerging is testimony on the use of sexual assault as a weapon of repression. Did the Minister and the Foreign Secretary raise that specifically during their recent interactions with representatives of the Iranian regime, and can the Minister set out in more detail the timetable for next steps, including implementation of the additional sanctions to which the Foreign Secretary referred last week?

[Mr Falconer]

I can confirm to the House that the Iranian representatives were left in no doubt about the strength of our views, but because these were not terribly long conversations, we were not able to get into the full detail of our concerns, and there is not much more that I can add on the timing of further sanctions.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

For me, this is personal. It reminds me of what I saw when I was in Tehran nearly 50 years ago, at the beginning of the revolution. My father was appointed naval attaché to the British embassy in Tehran before and during that revolution, and we saw some awful things. What kept us going when the nights were cold, the power was off, the phones were cut, the guns were going off outside and people were demonstrating on rooftops nearby was the British World Service broadcasting; we could rely on that information. What extra support is the Minister giving the BBC to ensure that the World Service and BBC Persian are boosted in that area, so that we can get information through, and give people the lifeline that I had as I took the last flight out before Khomeini arrived back?

[Mr Falconer]

I am very grateful to the hon. Member for his question, and I pay tribute to him. I hope he will not mind my saying that he was a diplomat brat. I know from my own service—many Members will be familiar with this—that when diplomats are in difficult positions, their family face the same worries and the same hardships. That was obviously very much in our minds as we considered the position of the embassy in Tehran last week, and it continues to be in our minds as our brave diplomats face perilous situations across the world. I echo the hon. Gentleman’s generous words about the World Service. I can confirm that we are thinking about how its future can be ensured, so that it can continue to perform its vital functions.

[Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)]

Given the horrific scenes of pro-democracy protesters being attacked by the police in London over the weekend, what steps will the Minister take to ensure that peaceful protest can take place in this country?

[Mr Falconer]

We completely support peaceful protest, but it is true that diplomatic premises are subject to particular protections under the law. That applies in London, as it does in Tehran. There is a balance to be struck, and I was in discussions with the Security Minister throughout the weekend to ensure that we get it right.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

“There were so many people killed, they were hosing the blood down the street using fire engines.” That was the message coming out of my constituent’s home town. She has no idea if her mum and dad are safe in Iran during the communications blackout. When she asks me, as she no doubt will, “Why won’t the Government do everything they can to proscribe the IRGC?”, what would the Minister have me tell her?

[Mr Falconer]

I am sure that the hon. Lady’s constituent is suffering great anguish, as are so many constituents who will be in correspondence with MPs from across the House. I cannot imagine how I would feel if my loved ones were in a situation in which communications were not certain. I feel it in relation to our consular cases, and I know that it is felt by people right across the country. We will do everything we can to ensure that the protesters are able to enjoy their rights and, indeed, that the communications restrictions are lifted. Iran was plunged into darkness on 8 January, just as Afghanistan plunged into darkness last year. This is a malign trend, which we oppose completely. We will do everything we can to see that the situation is temporary in Iran, as it proved to be in Afghanistan.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his answers. He will be under no illusions about the barbaric tactics that are being employed in Iran; indeed, last week’s statement made it very clear that the Government are fully aware of them. The strongly worded condemnation has not brought about any change, and we have British citizens incarcerated and in danger. The IRGC’s forces have killed thousands. They have shot them in the head, neck and face, and the IRGC has had a “shoot to kill” policy. What discussions has the Minister had with the United States of America, which promised physical action, about ensuring the safety of our citizens and nation, protecting Iranian citizens from sustained terrorism, and showing Iran that its recent abhorrent actions will no longer be tolerated? Physical action against the IRGC, on the ground, is what is needed.

[Mr Falconer]

We have already discussed our attitude towards the protests. We are not threatening physical action against the IRGC in Tehran. We want the whole Iranian regime to respect the rights of their people, in accordance with international norms; to ensure that the protesters can exercise their rights; and to lift internet restrictions.

UK-France Relations

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh (Chris Murray) for securing the debate. It is a particular pleasure, as always, to hear about different constituencies’ histories; my own constituency’s history with France involves fighting a moderately successful battle to prevent France’s invasion of England—defended by the suspiciously French-named Nicola de la Haye, who was then the constable of Lincoln castle. It was a successful but bloody affair, so I am glad that my hon. Friend and so many others have carried off their commentary about their historical links with our neighbour over the channel with rather more élan than Lincoln can manage. I am grateful for the contributions of hon. Members and will endeavour to respond to the points they have raised. The Minister for Europe, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), would have been very glad to be here, but he is conducting a general debate about Ukraine in the main Chamber today.

We have a deep shared history with France, not just in combat but in many other things: values, trade, cultural links and partnerships on the international stage—in NATO, the G7, the United Nations and beyond. Our relationship remains vibrant, ambitious and essential. As my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh said so graciously, since this Government came to power, we have prioritised resetting and deepening relations with our European partners to deliver tangible benefits for our security, people and economy. France is central to that—even in Lincoln.

As permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Europe’s leading defence and only nuclear powers, our countries share responsibility for international peace and security. We are at the forefront of efforts to support Ukraine and uphold European security. Our deep defence relationship under the Lancaster House treaties has enabled us to convene the coalition of the willing, sustaining long-term support for Ukraine and preparing conditions for a just and lasting peace.

Last week, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister co-chaired a meeting of the coalition of the willing with President Macron in Paris. Alongside President Zelensky, they signed a declaration of intent on deploying forces to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal, paving the way for a legal framework of British, French and partner forces to operate on Ukrainian soil to secure Ukraine’s skies and seas, and regenerate its armed forces. The Paris declaration, agreed with the US and others, sets out guarantees to be activated once the ceasefire comes into force.

My colleague the Minister for Europe is in regular contact with his counterpart: they met last month in Vienna, and in London last October ahead of the Berlin process summit. The Foreign Secretary visited her counterpart in Paris last October, and they are in regular touch. Last July’s state visit by President Macron marked the renewal of our shared bonds at every level of Government. As part of that visit, at the 37th UK-France summit President Macron and the Prime Minister strengthened our partnership with groundbreaking agreements covering migration, defence, growth and culture.

The Lancaster House 2.0 declaration will accelerate our bilateral defence and security co-operation to new levels and strengthen Europe’s contribution to NATO. We agreed to overhaul the combined joint expeditionary force to refocus it on the Euro-Atlantic area and to address evolving security threats. We reaffirmed our commitment to nuclear co-operation through the Northwood declaration, an important declaration that states that our nuclear forces are independent but can be co-ordinated. The new UK-France nuclear steering group met in December to co-ordinate work across nuclear policy, capabilities and operations. At the summit, the Prime Minster and the President also committed to strengthening co-operation on illegal migration, and tackling the criminal gangs responsible for the small boat crossings that have cost so many lives. This has been an important part of the activities of my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh in Parliament.

France is also a key part of our growth and energy security. I will not dwell on the important and vital investments that EDF has made in Sizewell C; they were covered effectively by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh—he is also a former colleague in the Foreign Office. He also covered the important cultural and educational co-operation opportunities between our two countries. The exchange of the Bayeux tapestry and the Sutton Hoo treasures is a real celebration of our joint history. Our re-association to Erasmus+ in 2027 will create new opportunities for young people in exactly the way my hon. Friend described.

Across Government, we will continue to strengthen the bonds between our countries and our people in our many areas of shared ambition and co-operation. Through our co-leadership of the coalition of the willing, the UK and France will continue to provide global leadership in an era of renewed instability.

Question put and agreed to.

Middle East and North Africa

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

Madam Deputy Speaker, there have been a number of developments in the middle east that I would like to update the House on, including in Gaza, Iran, Yemen and Syria. I would also like to take the opportunity to provide an update on the case of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, which has been a subject of debate during the parliamentary recess.

To begin with Gaza, the humanitarian situation there remains desperate. Even with the ceasefire, half a million people are struggling to find enough food, and 100,000 people are in catastrophic conditions. The peace plan was clear: the Israeli Government agreed to let aid in, without interference, through the UN and other international organisations. At the same time, Hamas must disarm, their weapons must be decommissioned, and they must allow a path to lasting security for Palestinians. More trucks are entering Gaza, which is very welcome, but right now key crossings remain closed, convoys are being turned back, medical and shelter supplies are blocked, and non-governmental organisations are being banned. Over the recess, we joined nine other countries in stating that this is not acceptable. The peace plan cannot work if NGOs are shut out, and Israel’s decision to ban 37 of them is unjustifiable.

Furthermore, many trucks entering Gaza carry commercial goods, which face fewer barriers than humanitarian aid. This means that, perversely, it is currently easier to get cigarettes and luxury goods into Gaza than the basic medicines and shelter that people so desperately need. Too much aid is still stuck at Gaza’s borders—thousands of tents and shelter supplies, funded by the UK, are waiting to get in. Families are sheltering from winter floods and storms under rubble, and are suffering from hypothermia and sewage running in the streets. This is unforgivable.

We have not wavered in our commitment to help. This financial year, we are providing £116 million for humanitarian and other aid, including healthcare, food, clean water and sanitation. That includes treatment for 800,000 Palestinians through UK-Med. The UK formally recognised Palestine last autumn to protect the viability of a two-state solution and to create a path towards lasting peace for the Israeli and Palestinian people. We welcome the establishment of full diplomatic relations with the state of Palestine, and I can confirm the establishment of a Palestinian embassy in London today.

Let me turn to Iran, where we have seen protests enter a ninth day following the rapid depreciation of the currency. We are disturbed by reports of violence against those who are courageously exercising their right to peaceful protest. We are monitoring developments closely, and we urge Iran to protect fundamental freedoms, including access to information and communications. The UK was integral to delivery of the Iran human rights resolution adopted by the UN Third Committee in November. It called on Iran to halt its human rights violations, including in relation to women and girls and ethnic and religious minorities, and to stop the use of the death penalty. We will continue to work with partners to hold Iran to account for its rights record.

I know that many in the House will be thinking about Craig and Lindsay Foreman, who spent Christmas in detention in Iran. We are deeply concerned that they have been charged with espionage. We are focused on supporting them and their family and we remain in regular contact with the Iranian authorities. The Foreign Secretary raised their case with the Iranian Foreign Minister on 19 December.

I wish to provide the House with an update on another consular case that has been in the spotlight for many years: Alaa Abd el-Fattah. Supporting British nationals overseas is at the heart of the work of the Foreign Office, and the provision of that consular support is based on the circumstances of the case. Following Mr el-Fattah’s registration as a British citizen in 2021, successive Governments gave him consular support and made it a priority to argue for his release. That is why it was welcomed by Ministers across the Government, and many others in this House, when he was released from detention in September and reunited with his family in the UK on Boxing day. However, we recognise and share the deep concern felt across the country following the subsequent emergence of extremely disturbing historical social media posts by Mr el-Fattah. Let me emphasise once again that the historical posts were abhorrent, and I join my colleagues in condemning them wholeheartedly. It is right that Mr el-Fattah has apologised.

I fully recognise the profound distress that the posts have caused, in particular to the Jewish community in this country, and especially in the context of rising antisemitism and recent horrific attacks against Jewish people in this country and around the world, and I very much regret that. The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary and I were all unaware of those historical posts, as were the civil servants working on the case. The Foreign Secretary has therefore asked the permanent under-secretary to urgently review the Department’s systems for conducting due diligence on high-profile consular and human rights cases to ensure that all necessary lessons are learned. The Foreign Secretary has undertaken to update the Foreign Affairs Committee on the changes that the Department will put in place.

I turn now to the dramatic developments in Yemen, which we are monitoring closely. I welcome calls by Yemen’s President for dialogue in the south. I also welcome Saudi Arabia’s offer to host a conference and the United Arab Emirates’ calls for de-escalation. A swift diplomatic resolution will best serve the Yemeni people. The United Kingdom remains committed to supporting Yemen’s unity, including the Yemeni Presidential Leadership Council and the Government of Yemen, as we set out in the recent UK-led UN Security Council statement. I, the Foreign Secretary and the National Security Adviser have all been in regular contact with our partners in Yemen, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates about the situation, and we will continue to work closely with them.

We must not forget that Yemen already faces one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises: 18.1 million people face acute food insecurity, as I saw for myself in November when I visited a clinic supported by the UK in Aden. Responding to this crisis is a priority for the UK. We are the largest donor to the Yemen humanitarian needs and response plan, maintaining our commitment to provide £139 million in humanitarian aid in the current financial year.

In Syria, the past year has seen remarkable change. The Syrian Government have shown commitment to tackling security threats, joining the Global Coalition Against Daesh and committing themselves to dismantling Assad’s chemical weapons stockpiles. In my engagements with the Syrian Government, I have heard directly a commitment to build a Syria for all Syrians. Despite that progress, the challenges remain immense. There have been outbreaks of sectarian violence in the last year, most recently in Latakia at the end of December. The recent attack on US soldiers in Palmyra is a reminder of the enduring Daesh threat.

A stable Syria is firmly in the UK’s interest, as it reduces the risk of irregular migration, terrorism and other threats to our national security. That is why we have stepped up our engagement and our support for Syria over the last year. The UK remains an active partner in the Global Coalition Against Daesh, and on 3 January the Royal Air Force conducted a joint strike with France on an underground Daesh facility north of Palmyra. The UK will continue to do what is necessary to prevent a Daesh resurgence, support Syria’s stability and protect UK national security.

I hope that that update on the developments that have taken place in the middle east over the recess has been helpful to the House. His Majesty’s Government remain committed to playing their full role in the region.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the shadow Foreign Secretary.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

Britain’s place in the world matters, and the Opposition are clear about the fact that our influence should be used to its fullest effect to support efforts to combat the complex and dangerous conflicts and tensions in the middle east about which we speak all too often in the House. From Israel to Gaza, Iran, Syria and Yemen, the UK can and should be able to make a difference.

The Opposition stand with the brave Iranians in their fight for freedom against their terrorist-supporting, despotic and oppressive Government. Their fight for freedom must prevail. What discussions are taking place with our partners in the region about the actions that can be taken to stop the regime’s cruel and barbaric acts against those who are campaigning for freedom? Iran threatens our domestic security by continuing its nuclear weapons programme, supplying weapons and drones to Russia, and backing China and its repression in Hong Kong. Britain must send it a clear signal by imposing more sanctions on it, and take action to stop the sanctions-busting that is taking place through cryptocurrencies and other methods that facilitate and bankroll this tyrannical regime. Why have the Government, and the Minister in his statement today, been silent on those specific issues, and where is the plan to keep Britain safe from Iran?

What is being done to secure the immediate release from Iran’s cruel captivity of Lindsay and Craig Foreman, the two British nationals who, tragically, are still in captivity? I appreciate that the Minister referred to the call that took place on 19 December, but what practical measures are being taken?

In Gaza, Hamas continue to breach the ceasefire. They have refused to release the body of the remaining Israeli hostage, Ran Gvili, which has been in terrorist captivity for more than 820 days. What pressure has been put on Hamas to adhere to the terms of the ceasefire, to disarm and to bring Ran back to his family?

The Minister mentioned aid. Will he confirm that 4,200 trucks are delivering aid to Gaza each week in accordance with the 20-point peace plan, and that that is being overseen by the Co-ordination of Government Activities in the Territories and the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre? Is he meeting representatives of the CMCC and COGAT to observe the operational delivery of this aid and the role that the United States is playing in securing aid delivery?

As for the licensing of non-governmental organisations, can the Minister tell us how many agencies have undergone the licensing process and the contribution that they are making? We have heard a great deal in recent weeks and months about terrorists infiltrating aid agencies and diverting aid. What discussions has the Minister had with his Israeli counterparts about working with them to find practical solutions that will address the serious concerns that have been raised, so that more aid can get through and not be compromised by terrorists? On reforms to the Palestinian Authority, why are the Government still backing them with taxpayers’ money while they continue with the pay-to-slay programme? When will this practice stop?

I agree with the Minister’s comments about Yemen, the conflict there, and the humanitarian suffering. Every single successive Government have worked tirelessly to secure more aid and to support global efforts to address the suffering in Yemen, but what direct discussions has the Minister had with the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are both long-standing partners and players, particularly on the recent dispute and tensions? Is there a bridging role that Britain can play? What planning is under way with our partners in the region to respond to further threats from the Houthis?

On Syria, the actions targeted at Daesh were absolutely essential, but there are still many concerns about stability in Syria. When will progress be made on tackling sectarian violence, protecting minority rights and delivering democratic transition? What quantity of chemical weapons has been disposed of? What measures are being taken to stop the criminality, the gangs, the drugs and the weapons?

Finally, on the el-Fattah case, I welcome the way in which the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office has instigated its inquiry. When will the inquiry into what has happened be completed? Were the Government informed by any other Departments about the views that were expressed? I recognise what the Minister has said thus far. Will Ministers—probably now in the Home Office—pick up the case and work fast to strip Alaa Abd el-Fattah of his citizenship, as the Opposition have been requesting over the recess?

[Mr Falconer]

I can confirm that I have been in touch with my counterparts in both the UAE and Saudi Arabia, and indeed that I spoke to the Yemeni Foreign Minister this morning. We are in intensive discussions with all our partners in the region on the questions on Yemen, which are very significant. I did not speak about the Houthis, but they remain a very significant threat; I saw some of that threat during my visit to Yemen in November.

In relation to Syria, I thank the shadow Foreign Secretary for her spirit of cross-party co-operation on the strikes that we conducted. There remain very significant outstanding questions about the security of Syria, which I am sure she and other Members of the House will have been tracking. The violence at the end of December is indeed concerning. There has been progress on a range of questions. We need follow-through on the independent reviews that were conducted into the violence, both in the coastal areas and in the south, including on accountability measures. I have made those points, as has the Foreign Secretary, directly to our Syrian counterparts.

The shadow Foreign Secretary asks the important questions about chemical weapons. I am very pleased that an Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons programme is now engaged to ensure the destruction of chemical weapons. That will be of real interest to this House, given the extent to which chemical weapons in Syria have been discussed here, even before I was elected. That is welcome progress, and it is important for regional security.

On Iran, the shadow Foreign Secretary is right to highlight the bravery of the protesters. I am sure that she will have seen our spokesperson’s statement over the past few days, as well as having heard the remarks that I have just made. We are, of course, speaking to our partners in the region. We are careful in the way we discuss matters in Iran. It is absolutely obvious that some in the leadership of Iran wish to portray these protests as externally animated. Of course they are not. This is a response from the Iranian people themselves.

In relation to Mr el-Fattah and the next steps, he was—as the shadow Foreign Secretary knows well—provided with citizenship by the previous Government. That is not something that is stripped lightly. She will have heard the remarks of the Home Secretary during Home Office oral questions earlier today. As for the timeline of the review, we intend it to be swift. We want to draw a line under this matter as quickly as we can and ensure that, in all other cases, appropriate lessons are being learned.

On aid in Gaza, I would like to be clear. We are talking about charities such as Oxfam and Save the Children—credible charities supported by the British public, who have donated generously over Christmas. There have, of course, been concerns in relation to aid in Gaza. We have ensured that wherever they have been raised, they have been investigated, but we should not let that take away from the credibility of the organisations involved. It is vital that those aid agencies be able to work; 30% of Gazans cannot afford basic food.

The shadow Foreign Secretary is right to say that there has been an increase in aid going into Gaza, but the amount is not yet in line with what is in the 20-point plan. Fewer UN truck shipments are going in than was agreed; I think it was agreed that 250 aid trucks from the UN would go in per day, but only 147 are going in. It is welcome that commercial goods are getting into Gaza, but as I said in my statement, it is vital that lifesaving humanitarian aid—particularly tents and medicines—get in.

[Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow West) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his statement. I entirely agree with him that, at a time when the humanitarian crisis in Gaza remains so desperately urgent, the decision by the Israeli Government to withdraw accreditation from 37 extremely credible aid agencies, such as Caritas Internationalis, ActionAid and the International Rescue Committee, is an act of cruelty. Will the Minister therefore join me in condemning this decision, and urge Israel in the strongest possible terms to rescind it immediately, before more deaths occur in Gaza and the west bank because of a lack of humanitarian aid? Will he also urge Israel to open the Rafah crossing as a matter of extreme urgency?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for the question. We have engaged extensively with the Israeli Government, both on the importance of overturning the non-governmental organisation registration provisions, and in order to speak against the deregistration process that she described. We have also called repeatedly for the opening of the Rafah crossing and other vital crossings.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

I thank the Minister for advance sight of his statement. I regret that the Government have presented developments in four significant states in one statement, but I will do my best to respond in the time afforded to me.

While the attention of the world is seized by the illegal actions of the US President, it is crucial that the UK works closely with our allies to support just, lawful and humanitarian action in the middle east. After two years of widespread destruction, people in Gaza are already facing severe shortages of food, clean water and medical supplies in the midst of winter. What immediate action are the Government taking to persuade Israel to reverse its decision to bar reputable international aid agencies from Gaza and the west bank? The continued expansion of settlements on Palestinian land by Netanyahu’s extremist Cabinet since the House last met is explicitly intended to undermine any prospect of a two-state solution, so will the Government implement immediate sanctions on members of the Israeli Cabinet, and a full ban on the import of settlement goods? Will they finally publish their response to the 2024 International Court of Justice ruling that Israel’s occupation is illegal under international law?

The Liberal Democrats condemn the violent repression of public demonstrations in Iran. The US President’s casual threats to take unilateral military action there merely serve to escalate tensions. How are our Government working with European and regional partners to co-ordinate lawful external pressure on Iran, and when will the Government commit to proscribing the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps in UK law?

The people of Yemen desperately need peace, yet regional powers continue to intervene to support the armed factions. Will the Government review all arms export licences to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to ensure that UK weapons are not enabling them to sustain the conflict? The UN estimates that around 24 million Yemenis desperately need food and protection. How is the UK ensuring that humanitarian aid reaches those most in need, particularly in areas where access is restricted or contested?

The Liberal Democrats support limited multilateral strikes against Daesh in Syria to ensure the eradication of its infrastructure, and to counter its dangerous and violent ideology in the middle east. Can the Minister confirm that the Government are confident that the recent strikes were fully compliant with international law and proportionate to the threat, and what steps are the Government taking to ensure that the new Syrian Government are protecting the rights of all, including minorities and women?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for the spirit in which he asked his questions. I put so many developments into the statement because there were so many developments that I wished to update the House on at the earliest opportunity, and I wanted to provide Members with an opportunity to ask questions on any element of the statement.

We will continue to voice our position on the vital importance of the right to assembly in Iran, and indeed the right to communication as well. We will continue to do that alongside our partners, as well as in our own voice. I am confident and can assure the House that the strikes on Iran were consistent with and compliant with international law. As I said to the shadow Foreign Secretary, we continue to raise with the Syrian Government the importance of accountability in relation to violence in Syria.

On developments in Yemen, particularly relating to aid, there is, I am afraid, a very significant divergence between the ability of the UK to deliver aid in the areas controlled by the Houthis and the areas not controlled by the Houthis. The Houthis have continued to seize aid workers and aid premises. It is simply not possible under those circumstances to have an aid operation that operates at the scale of the needs of the Yemeni people. I again call on the Houthis, as I have done repeatedly, to release all those whom they have detained, leave those offices, and abide by humanitarian principles. If they do not, it is simply not possible for the UK, or indeed any other humanitarian actor, to ensure that the Yemenis get the support that they require.

On arms sales, as I know the Liberal Democrat spokesperson is aware, we have the most robust arrangements in the world. I am confident that they have been followed in this case, but of course, as ever, we keep these matters under close review.

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

I was one of those MPs who campaigned hard for the release of Alaa Abd el-Fattah, so it is important, when we consider the overall process, that there is an accurate narrative. The narrative is partly this: yes, there were vile social media interventions by this person, which we all condemn, but which he apologised for. More than that, he became a campaigner in his country of Egypt—he is a joint citizen—for civil rights, civil liberties and religious freedom, and against antisemitism. For that, he served 10 years in prison. Not many in this Chamber have gone anywhere near that record of campaigning for civil liberties, so maybe that narrative could be taken into account when this individual is considered.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his question. I do not want to prejudge the review, but we provide consular assistance to many thousands of British nationals every year. There is, of course, a debate, which the shadow Foreign Secretary alluded to, on whether or not Alaa Abd el-Fattah should have been made a citizen in 2021, but in 2024, when we came into government, he was undoubtedly a British citizen. We will continue, I am sure, to provide consular assistance on a non-judgmental basis if a British national is in considerable distress overseas. British nationals of all kinds can rely on the support of the United Kingdom if there are outstanding questions about their treatment.

[Tom Tugendhat (Tonbridge) (Con)]

First, I welcome the Minister’s statement. I certainly agree with him on the strikes in Syria, and with the view that he has taken towards the Houthis in Yemen, who have murdered so many people over recent years. May I ask him about a separate aspect of the Iranian situation? We see extraordinarily courageous protestors on streets across Iran, in various cities and towns. We also see Russian cargo aircraft landing in Tehran, presumably carrying weapons and ammunition. We hear reports of large amounts of gold leaving Iran. Could he update the House on any of those reports, which suggest that the regime is preparing for life after the fall?

[Mr Falconer]

For reasons that I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will understand, I am not in a position to give a detailed update on the reports that he alludes to. I simply underline the point that I made in my statement, which is that the freedom of assembly and the right to protest are inalienable rights of the Iranian people, and we want to see the Iranian Government respect that.

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

I thank the Minister for all his work on Yemen, which gets too little attention. It is a personal commitment of his. The humanitarian crisis there is truly horrific. As he said, over Christmas, the Israeli Government banned 37 international humanitarian organisations, many of them British, from delivering lifesaving aid in the state of Palestine. They include Medical Aid for Palestinians, the International Rescue Committee, Action Aid and Médicine sans Frontières. In doing this, Israel follows in the footsteps of other aid-banning regimes, such as North Korea, Russia and Myanmar. More civilians are dying as a result. We know from the past two years that words and statements have no impact on the behaviour of this Israeli Government. When will the UK take real action and impose sanctions on all the Israeli Government officials who are involved in this illegal, inhumane ban on humanitarian organisations?

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend speaks with considerable experience of delivering aid in Palestine. She will know that I will not comment further on sanctions, but the question of the NGOs’ ability to operate in Gaza is obviously vital for the very pressing questions facing the Palestinian people, and the British Government will continue to raise it.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

I also very much welcome the fact that the Minister made such reference to Yemen. As the hon. Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) has just said, we often say that Sudan does not get enough attention in this Chamber, but I am afraid that the attention that has been focused on Yemen in this Parliament, given the scale of the crisis there, has been pitiful, and I hope that today reflects a change in that. How can the Minister convince us that that he and the Foreign Office can actually deliver on prioritising these issues when, as we heard in the previous statements, there are so many other issues that are commanding attention?

[Mr Falconer]

I would just like to emphasise wholeheartedly that I would like it if there were fewer issues on the international stage, and indeed in the middle east, particularly over Christmas. There are clearly a range of significant and important developments happening in the region I am responsible for and in those of my colleagues. Yemen is a priority for us; I was glad to be the first Minister to visit in six years. The developments subsequent to my visit underline both how dramatic the stakes are in Yemen and how important it is that the UK remains focused. It is one of the reasons I have been speaking to my colleagues in Yemen, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates over the past few days.

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

I welcome the fact that, as the Minister said, the UK is spending £116 million this financial year on vital aid to the Palestinians, providing healthcare, food, clean water and sanitation. However, that aid is often stuck at the border because of the continued closure of the Rafah crossing. More importantly, at a time of desperately urgent humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the decision by the Israeli Government to withdraw support or accreditation for NGOs such as ActionAid, CARE International, the International Rescue Committee and the Norwegian Refugee Council is an act of calculated and unconscionable cruelty, is it not? Will the Minister join me in condemning that act and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy (Melanie Ward) says, urgently consider the question of sanctions against the Israeli Ministers responsible for it?

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend has been a doughty campaigner on these issues since he arrived in the House. I do not have much to add. The British position on the deregistration of NGOs is absolutely clear; we opposed the proposals when they were first mooted, and we oppose the deregistration now. My hon. Friend refers to many of these credible organisations, many of which featured in the appeal by the Disasters Emergency Committee ongoing through Christmas; I know that many of our constituents, including mine in Lincoln, will have contributed generously because they are so keen to see aid entering Gaza, as we all know it needs to.

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

The Minister speaks at length about humanitarian need and the UK’s desire to lead, yet the reality is that this Government have cut aid to its lowest level this century and that the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Yemen and Syria all face cuts—aid to Syria alone this year has been slashed by 35%. How can the Government credibly claim urgency on humanitarian access, stability and peace while simultaneously withdrawing aid budgets? The Minister rightly condemns the suspension of international NGOs’ licences in Gaza, but the restriction of humanitarian aid is against international humanitarian law. Beyond these words, what consequences will this Government place on the Israeli Government?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

We have talked at some length before about the actions we have taken, including sanctions against two Israeli Ministers. I will not, for reasons I have already alluded to, speculate on sanctions from the Dispatch Box.

On the questions about aid, it is absolutely incontrovertible that we have made tough decisions in relation to aid budgets, but we have to be clear on the restrictions that are in place, which no amount of money can overcome. We talked about the situation in Yemen, particularly in the Houthi-controlled areas. I am not saying that the overall volumes of aid do not matter, but the question that in all these contexts is most vital is whether access to the aid is allowed. We can spend an awful lot of money on aid that then ends up waiting in warehouses, and that is why we have been focused in the way that we have.

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

I welcome my hon. Friend’s statement. The lack of progress in Gaza is a real concern. On top of this, we have seen a shockingly callous display by the Israeli Government in their banning of 37 organisations. It is just incomprehensible. I want to focus on what is happening in the west bank, where people are being stripped of their land and murdered in cold blood. As the illegal settlements are expanded, when will the Government act in lockstep with international allies and use the legislative tools at their disposal, such as the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018, so that we can stop the illegal trade that is happening and ensure that we are banning goods, services and investments from the illegal settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

I know that my hon. Friend has written to the Foreign Secretary and I on those questions, and I will respond fully to that letter. She knows that the Government are deeply concerned by the expansion in settlements and the violence associated with it. That is why we joined our E4 colleagues—France, Germany and Italy—in a statement. It is why we condemned the most recent announcements from the Israeli Government about settlements, and it is why we have continued to press them not just on the approval of settlements but on correspondent banking, which is an issue of vital importance to the Palestinian economy. It was good that there was a temporary extension of correspondent banking arrangements for the west bank, but that must be extended further.

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

I thank the Minister for a comprehensive regional update. It looks like we may be seeing the beginning of the end of a wicked regime that has ruled Iran since 1979. However, despite the best intentions of Israel and the US last year, a large part of Iran’s nuclear inventory remains intact and potentially poses a threat if the regime crumbles. What measures can reasonably be taken to ensure that that inventory is secured and put beyond use by any malign state or non-state actors?

[Mr Falconer]

My predecessor is knowledgeable on these questions and invites me to comment on a speculative proposal about what would happen should the Iranian Government fall in response to the protests. I have learned in this job not to make predictions or speculate in that way. All I will say is that the status of Iran’s nuclear programme remains of the utmost interest and priority to the British Government. It is why we reimposed the snapback sanctions late last year. We will continue to monitor these developments very closely. Nuclear proliferation is among the gravest threats to not only regional but global security, and we will continue to give it the focus that it deserves.

[Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)]

The reality is that Israel continues to breach the ceasefire while the international community continues to offer words and statements of concern without any real action. As we have already heard, this week it announced that 37 international aid organisations will now be prevented from distributing aid in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. That means that more women and children, already starving, will die in continuation of Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Does the Minister not think that the time for words and statements of concern without action is over? When will he finally announce proper meaningful action, including ending all arms sales, putting widespread sanctions on Israel in the same way that we have done to Russia for its war crimes in Ukraine, and ending all trade with illegal settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

I have already set out the continued aid efforts and the work we are doing both alone and alongside partners to ensure that the points we are discussing are made to the Israeli Government with the force they require, and we will continue to do so.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

Madam Deputy Speaker, it will not surprise you that I will more or less echo what many hon. Members across the House have said on Gaza, which is that 1.6 million people are facing starvation, winter floods, winter storms and freezing temperatures. Aid has been totally blockaded, with 37 non-governmental organisations including Médecins Sans Frontières, the Norwegian Refugee Council, ActionAid, Oxfam and others denied access, and less than 10% of the aid that was received before October 2023 is now getting through. The question that keeps getting asked in the House is this: what is the next concrete step that the UK Government are prepared to take if we cannot discuss sanctions? Can something other than talk be offered to all of us in the House who are desperate to hear that some further progress will be made?

[Mr Falconer]

I reassure the hon. Gentleman that this has been a priority through the Christmas period. We will continue to work on it with the urgency that it requires, and I will continue to come to the House to provide updates.

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

I must press the Minister on the further 19 settlements announced over the Christmas period in the west bank. Minister Smotrich has been explicit that that is deliberately about making it impossible to establish the Palestinian state. That brings the total in the last three years alone to 69 new settlements in the west bank, several of which had previously been dismantled. These actions are provocative at best, and deeply disturbing for a peace process that will benefit so many people in both Israel and Palestine as a result. The Minister has said that the Government condemn the settlements, but we know from the history of the crisis that condemnation is not enough; we do need concrete action. What more can he tell us about his conversations with our allies in America, for example, who are also concerned about the settlements, and what action will he take to stop this deliberate attempt to stop the peace process?

[Mr Falconer]

Let me say a little bit about the 19 settlements that were announced. I condemned them immediately. I have sanctioned the Minister in question—I announced it in June—Minister Smotrich, who is completely committed politically to opposing the establishment of a Palestinian state. As I announced in my statement, today we have a Palestinian embassy in London. The British Government now irrevocably recognise a Palestinian state. I recognise the force of what my hon. Friend says. There are Ministers in the Israeli Government who are completely opposed to the establishment of a Palestinian state. That is not the policy of the British Government, and those are not the actions that I and the rest of the Government have taken since July 2024.

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

As the Minister pointed out, the situation in Gaza remains catastrophic. I join colleagues in recognising that, against that backdrop, the barring or denial of access for those aid agencies is particularly cruel and wicked; it is horrifying to think what the motivation might be. Of course, those agencies also deliver services in the west bank where, as colleagues have also pointed out, the situation deteriorates, with home demolitions, summary executions and seemingly psychopathic thugs roaming the territory, burning homes and attacking innocent Palestinians.

Happily, we have recognised the state of Palestine and, as the Minister said, we have now established full diplomatic relations. Against that backdrop, if the Palestinian Government were to request that the UK ceased trading with foreign nationals illegally resident on its territory, on what basis would we refuse that?

[Mr Falconer]

As with the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison), I will resist the temptation to be drawn into speculative questions, but let me just be clear that the west bank is considered Palestinian territory, and Israeli goods must be labelled as being produced within green line Israel if they are to benefit from the trade arrangements that Israel has with the UK. If they are not produced in green line Israel, they are subject to very different arrangements indeed. I think that the right hon. Gentleman has signed the letter that my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) has written, and I will provide a full response in due course.

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

I want to pick up on my hon. Friend’s point about the paucity of the aid getting in and to highlight the utter ridiculousness of how Israel is frustrating not just the quantity of aid but the basic elements of aid, such as tent poles, tents, razor blades and generators, by claiming that they are somehow dual use and therefore a potential threat. Can I urge him, on a humanitarian basis, to pick up with his opposite number just how wrong it is to deny humanitarian aid to the people of Palestine?

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend makes important points. The dual use list, which restricts aid into Gaza, is clearly having very significant humanitarian effects, as it covers a wide range of items, including the shelter items he describes. It has also had an adverse effect on the ability to ensure even the rudiments of health provision in Gaza. We will continue to call on the Israeli Government to review the dual use list to ensure that vital supplies get in, in the quantity required and with the urgency demanded.

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

I welcome the Minister’s statement and the good news about the establishment of the Palestinian embassy in London today. However, my question concerns Sudan. As a member of the International Development Committee, I know that the latest assessment we have of the number of killings in El Fasher is now 75,000 people. The horror that those poor people are living and dying through every day demands action before the city of El Obeid suffers the same fate or worse. With millions of people at risk of starvation through this war, what discussions are being had with the UAE to stop the flow of weapons, and with the African Union to see an expeditionary peace force put together to save Sudan?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman is right to highlight the situation in Sudan. It is the worst humanitarian crisis of our time. Despite the many other pressures that I have described in other parts of the world, we are doing all we can politically and diplomatically to end the fighting. It remains a priority for the Foreign Secretary and the Minister for Africa, and we are working alongside the US-led Quad, including in engagements with our colleagues in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, and with all those with an ability to influence.

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

This morning I had the honour to attend the official opening of the Palestinian embassy in my constituency by His Excellency Ambassador Husam Zomlot and also by 14-year-old Obeida, who was evacuated to the UK for medical treatment after losing two of his limbs in Israeli bombings. I thank the Minister for his work in achieving recognition, which his predecessors failed to do in the past 80 years, and also for supporting the medical evacuation, but can I press him on the point about action against settlements? When the Israeli Government have a declared policy of using settlements to prevent the very Palestinian state that we have just recognised, what reason can he give for not taking action to stop investment in settlements and to stop trade with settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for his kind opening remarks. It is easy, with so much going on, to lose sight of the individual cases in these conflicts, and meeting some of the children that we have medically evacuated is a truly humbling reminder not only of the horror of war and what is happening in Gaza, but of the power of the UK to really make a difference to people’s lives. I am grateful to him for bringing that to the House’s attention.

We are not only committed to a Palestinian state; we have recognised one. We have set out clearly where that Palestinian state is, and that clearly has implications under international law—points we have made both in relation to the most recent set of settlements announced by the Israeli Government and, indeed, some of the other very significant settlements, including the E1 settlement that has been announced. We are also taking steps on the correspondent banking questions, which are also vital. I can assure my hon. Friend, and indeed the House, that we will continue to work on these issues through the new year.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

I thank the Minister for his statement. He rightly condemns the outrageous blocking of the delivery of humanitarian aid, which is desperately needed in Gaza. His statement did not mention the west bank but, as colleagues have highlighted, another development over the Christmas period was the decision by the Israeli security council to permit the establishment of 19 new settlements. He rightly condemned that, but repeated condemnation that is repeatedly ignored by an Israeli Government that repeatedly break international law is simply not enough. Will the Minister finally take the straightforward and concrete step that is open to him by banning all trade with illegal settlements? They are illegal; their proceeds are the proceeds of crime. Why will he not take that step?

[Mr Falconer]

I remind the House that I have announced three waves of sanctions in relation to settlements in the west bank. I have announced sanctions on both Mr Smotrich and Mr Ben-Gvir—the two politicians in the Israeli Government that colleagues from across the House have most often referred to in their understandable concerns about the expansion of settlements. I will respond to the letter in relation to goods. As I said to the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Kit Malthouse), there are very different arrangements in place for trade with those settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

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

The number of illegal settlements approved by the Netanyahu Government in the occupied west bank has shamefully reached the highest level since 2017. Alongside that, with the wholly inadequate level of humanitarian aid reaching desperate Palestinians in Gaza, the Israeli Government have cruelly withdrawn the accreditation of a further 37 NGOs and have cruelly blacklisted some essential items. Does the Minister agree that this continued intolerable suffering must stop? What is the UK Government doing to increase aid and ensure that NGOs can operate freely to distribute aid to the vulnerable and the dying?

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend has pushed these points with force, and I know that he will continue to do so in this House. I have set out our position on de-registration. I have also set out our position on the importance of removing restrictions and ensuring that the aid that we and so many others are providing—including, I am sure, some of his constituents in Slough via the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal—gets to the people who need it in Gaza, and we will continue to work on that.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

More than 500 aid workers have been killed by Israel in Gaza since October 2023. Back in October 2024, our Prime Minister said to Israel that

“the world will not tolerate any more excuses on humanitarian assistance.”

Will the Minister please explain any tangible policy steps—not words or condemnation, but tangible policies—that the UK will take now that Israel has taken further actions to obstruct much-needed aid and endangered our aid workers?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman is right to talk of the danger to aid workers. He and many others across the House will be aware that more than 500 aid workers have died in the Gaza conflict. I have set out some of what we are doing to try to ensure that aid gets into Gaza. We will continue to take those steps. We will continue to work with our partners in the way that I have set out.

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

I agree with the Minister that Mr el-Fattah’s tweets are abhorrent, and I am glad that the Government have made their position on his views clear, but I cannot understand the clear lack of due diligence on such a high-profile case, which has led to getting him over here being a priority for successive Governments. It calls into question the adequacy of the procedures within the FCDO if even the civil servants working on the case were not aware of his tweets. Will the Minister set out what he will do to ensure that due diligence is conducted on high-profile consular cases, so that officials can provide advice and Ministers can make decisions with as full an understanding as possible of the facts relating to any particular case?

[Mr Falconer]

It is precisely the concerns that my hon. Friend outlines that led to the Foreign Secretary commissioning the permanent under-secretary to conduct the swift review that I described in my statement. We will update the House when that has concluded.

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

It is quite difficult to know what to focus on in this wide-ranging statement—the rights of women and girls in Iran or the awful situation in Yemen—but I would like to focus on Israel banning 37 international aid organisations, such as Médecins Sans Frontières and Oxfam, from Gaza. The Minister used passive language in his statement. He said:

“Too much aid is still stuck at Gaza’s borders”.

This might be the ex-Reuters editor in me, but I think that is wrong. The aid is not “stuck” at Gaza’s border; it is being deliberately held there in an act of cruelty by the Israeli Government, who do not want the aid to help the people of Gaza. Will the Minister tell the House exactly what the UK Government are doing to restore access? What leverage are they using to force the Israeli Government to reverse this cruel decision, and when will they work with EU allies to bring in much wider sanctions? Perhaps it is time for trade, sport and cultural sanctions against Israel so that it will really listen, rather than just a passive statement that is clearly making no impact on the Israeli Government’s actions.

[Mr Falconer]

I hesitate to argue with an editor, but I think the British Government’s view on the restrictions on aid imposed by the Israeli Government has been absolutely clear in my statement today, and indeed in all my statements from the moment I went myself to the warehouses in Al Arish, where aid was being blocked from crossing the border by the Israeli Government.

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

The provision of aid and healthcare is needed at pace, yet over the past 27 months pace has not been the response. Is the Minister taking a step back and looking, for instance, at the instruments available to him, such as the international law framework, to ensure that they can operate at pace? Clearly, without pace, the Israeli Government feel that they have impunity to do whatever they wish.

[Mr Falconer]

As I alluded to in my previous answer, we have wanted more aid to go into Gaza almost since the first day that we were in government. I have travelled extensively to the region and seen the restrictions on aid. I have called repeatedly for the Israelis to allow that aid in. We will continue to work to try to see that aid getting in at the pace and scale that is required. We are doing a range of things. We are part of the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre—I believe the shadow Foreign Secretary visited the CMCC and met our UK embeds within it—we have worked with the Jordanians on airdrops, we have gone to Al Arish ourselves to make these points, and the Foreign Secretary went to Jordan in November. I would not wish my hon. Friend, or anybody else in the Chamber or watching at home, to draw any conclusion other than that the British Government are committed to getting aid in as quickly as possible.

[Mike Martin (Tunbridge Wells) (LD)]

I would like to pick up the theme of increased settlements and trade, which has been mentioned across the House. Along with the concerns expressed across the House, I have a particular concern that there are currently Israeli settlements that are trading with the UK but passing their goods off as coming from Israel. As the Minister himself said, there are more favourable trading arrangements with Israel than with the settlements. Will the British Government commit to publishing segregated trade statistics by category of good and by origin of good vis-à-vis green line Israel versus the settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman asks an important question. He raises the spectre of those in the Occupied Palestinian Territories falsely labelling their goods as being within the green line. Publishing more detail about the goods that he alludes to potentially being falsely labelled probably would not enlighten the House or anybody else on the truth of the situation. I say to all those in the Occupied Palestinian Territories who are producing goods in settlements that if they breach the arrangements set out very clearly for trade with the UK, they will be in breach, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs will investigate and we will take action.

[Paula Barker (Liverpool Wavertree) (Lab)]

As the Minister alluded to, British taxpayers have witnessed atrocities committed by Israeli authorities in Gaza and then acted by donating to NGOs that are ordinarily able to deliver much-needed humanitarian aid there. However, Israeli authorities continue to impede full humanitarian access, leaving aid paid for by the British public out of the reach of those who urgently need it. Can the Minister explain to the British public how the UK plans to urgently solve this ongoing issue and ensure an end to the obstruction of British charities?

[Mr Falconer]

As I set out in my statement, it is very clear in the 20-point plan what the aid provisions need to be. It includes the unimpeded operation of the UN and humanitarian agencies, and that is what we need to see. We are talking to all our partners and raising these points directly with Israel to ensure that, as my hon. Friend says, the aid provided from the UK and many other places gets into Gaza in the way it needs to.

[Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)]

As Israel continues its brutal treatment of Palestinians in Gaza, aid remains blocked even as people face the flooding, severe weather and freezing conditions that have already claimed the lives of infants. Why are the Government not demanding full unrestricted access for international aid workers, UN agencies and medical teams? Why are foreign media still barred from Gaza, and what is the UK doing to ensure that independent international journalists can report freely so that the world can see the true scale of the devastation and the horrific crimes being committed?

[Mr Falconer]

I have already set out why we want international NGOs in Gaza and why it is so vital that aid can get in unimpeded. It is also vital that international journalists—indeed, journalists of all kinds—are able to report freely.

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

The Minister is aware of the case of Marwan Barghouti, which was reported by the Inter-Parliamentary Union to have been in violation both of the Oslo accords and the Geneva convention. He was abducted by Israel from the west bank and put on trial in Israel. The Minister will have seen reports today that Minister Ben-Gvir said that Barghouti should be executed—an unconscionable statement by a sanctioned Israeli Minister. Have the Government assessed the compatibility of Mr Barghouti’s trial and detention with international humanitarian and human rights law? If so, has their assessment informed any representations made to the Israeli authorities, beyond calling for access for the ICRC?

[Mr Falconer]

Let me be clear: the British Government oppose the use of the death penalty in all cases everywhere, as a principled position. We have also recently raised the treatment of detainees in Israel. I am happy to come back to my hon. Friend on his more detailed question about Mr Barghouti.

[Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD)]

I was extremely proud to serve on the anti-Daesh campaign in the Foreign Office and the Army. It is important to recognise that that campaign is just and represents the UK learning lessons from Afghanistan and Iraq in what has been a largely successful intervention. I strongly welcome the new Government in Syria, but it is concerning that there has been an increase in ISIS activity in the past year. In my experience, perhaps the most intractable issue with ISIS are the 27,000 ISIS members and their families in prison camps in Syria, including many children who are being radicalised. Can the Minister assure me that the Government and the global coalition are monitoring that risk and taking what practical measures they can to prevent the next generation of ISIS from emerging?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the hon. and gallant Member for his service both in the Foreign Office and in the British military. I can confirm that the camps in north-east Syria remain a high priority.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for being so quick to condemn Netanyahu for yet again trying to block aid from getting into Gaza, and for his condemnation of the new settlements, which, I hope, will not actually go forward.

I want to talk about Iran. Before Christmas, I visited a few schools in Edinburgh South West—Boroughmuir, Balerno, Currie and Tynecastle high schools—where I met young people who were really keen to vote in our Scottish Parliament elections this year. By contrast, I see on social media that young people of around the same age in Iran are out on the streets risking everything to vote—particularly women, given the pressures in that country. Will the Minister join me in applauding those young people in Iran, particularly the women, for all that they are doing? When he meets his Iranian counterpart, will he remind them that those people have the right to protest and determine their country’s future?

[Mr Falconer]

We do remind the Iranian authorities of the right to protest. It is vital that that people are able to conduct that right with access to communications, which have come under pressure in Iran in recent days, and indeed without the threat of violence.

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

Deep down we all know that there is no real ceasefire. How can it be a ceasefire when more than 500 civilian Palestinians have been murdered, approximately 100 of them children? We all celebrated the new year with family and friends with fireworks, while Israel Defence Forces soldiers celebrated new year by firing unlimited bullets into Gaza blindly. The level of depravity is unspeakable. We now know that 37 reputable organisations are being prevented from providing humanitarian aid. Here is one suggestion. We know that nine countries, along with the UK, expressed their concern. What stops the Minister and this Government joining with those nine countries and making a visit to the International Criminal Court to raise this matter, so we get a ruling and then enforce it, if necessary with military?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman will be familiar with the deliberations of the ICC already in relation to this conflict. The ICC is supported by the UK, but it operates independently and at a distance, rightly, from the Ministers of this country and any other country.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his statement and his continued work in the region, but the IDF continues to deliberately target children in Gaza. The ongoing genocide and the systematic destruction of medical facilities in the region mean that desperately sick and injured children are unable to access the medical attention they need, but I thank the Minister for meeting with Obaida and Mahmoud, two medically evacuated children hosted by the Prime Minister in No. 10 just before Christmas. Will the Minister update the House on what work is going on to increase the number of Gazan children medically evacuated to this country for the support they need?

[Mr Falconer]

I was deeply moved to meet the injured Gazan children with my hon. Friend. As I said during that meeting, it is vital that we ensure that children in Gaza have access to the healthcare that they need. It is vital that the supplies to provide that healthcare can get into Gaza. It is in most cases going to be more appropriate that children who currently have to leave Gaza to get medical assistance are provided with that assistance in the region, but there clearly are specialised cases where the UK can make a real contribution. We continue to look at that and I will return to the House shortly on it.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his detailed statement; it is much appreciated by all of us in this House who have a very deep interest in human rights—we know his heart is in it and we appreciate and thank him for that. Iran is in the throes of street protests over the price of, and access to, food, with 31 people killed. Women and girls are denied basic human rights, and for years Christians, Baha’is, Shi’as, Sunnis and many other religious groups have been directly abused and murdered, with churches destroyed. Religious groups have been denied access to education, health, jobs and property, and even the right to have their own burials of their co-religionists and their own graveyards. It is truly time, I believe, to step up all actions to protect these religious groups in Iran and to provide the freedom that Iranian people desire. What can be done with the Iranian Government in exile to deliver freedom, liberty and democracy, and the secular and non-nuclear republic that all Iranians desire?

[Mr Falconer]

Alongside many of our international partners, we set out a statement covering a range of rights-based issues at the UN General Assembly Third Committee in November. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are important rights for which we will continue to advocate across the world.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

On behalf of my constituents, I welcome the establishment of the Palestinian embassy in London today.

Syria’s long-term stability depends on protecting its long-standing diversity and preventing sectarian violence, as the Minister said. In the light of recent violence and the lack of progress this weekend in integrating the Syrian Democratic Forces in north-eastern Syria into national institutions, what would the Minister say about the progress that has been made towards building an inclusive Syria for the future?

[Mr Falconer]

It is vital that Syria is a place that is seen as safe and secure, not just by its majority but by the important minorities, which are a vital part of Syria’s fabric. My hon. Friend refers to the Kurds of north-east Syria, but there are a range of other minorities, not limited to the Alawites, the Druze and others. It is vital that the Syrian Government provide all minority communities in Syria with assurance of their place in the new Syria, and we discuss these questions regularly with the Syrian Government.

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

The combined operation of the Royal Air Force Typhoons and French aircraft in Syria reminds us of the continuing threat that Daesh poses to the people of Syria and our partners in the region, the importance of our European allies, and the importance of funding a strong and capable military. Does the Minister agree that we should honour our brave servicemen who took part in the operation? Will he outline what steps are being taken to ensure the continued security of Syria?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. and gallant Friend for his service in the RAF. I am proud to be the MP for RAF Waddington, but he probably trumps me in closeness to the RAF, given his long service. The RAF performed vital work in countering the threat of Daesh in Syria. We will continue to use our diplomatic and all other levers to ensure that Daesh does not re-emerge in Syria, and pose a threat not just to Syria but to the region and the UK.

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

Late last year, I met constituents who run a community link with Jayyous in the west bank. Villagers there have described a daily life of hostility and obstruction by police, and intimidating and threatening intrusions by nearby settlers, despite repeated Israeli court rulings in favour of the villagers. Will the Minister advise the House how the UK’s recognition of the state of Palestine will translate into practical steps to protect communities like Jayyous and to advance peace, security and democratic governance?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend and her constituents. We will continue to take action as required to ensure that the rights of Palestinians are protected. Indeed, as she said, Israeli courts have upheld those rights on a number of occasions, and it is vital that the rule of law is seen and operates in these areas.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his statement and for all the work that he has been doing on these issues. What reason has the Israeli Government given for stopping NGOs operating in Gaza? If it is clear, as has been mentioned by other Members, that it is a deliberate act of cruelty to prevent healthcare and aid going into Gaza and to defeat the peace plan, what actions are we taking as a UK Government against Israel and to reinstate those NGOs?

[Mr Falconer]

As they have set out publicly, the Israeli Government have sought more detail about the Palestinian staff of those NGOs, but many of the NGOs have not provided it, given concerns over the targeting of aid workers. That impasse has led to the deregistration of many of those NGOs. A number of international parties, including the UK, have proposed acceptable solutions, consistent with humanitarian principles, to try to navigate these concerns, but they have not been taken up.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

The Minister advised in his statement that consular cases of British citizens detained abroad are at the heart of the work of the Foreign Office, and he provided an update on some of those cases. My West Dunbartonshire constituent Jagtar Singh Johal has remained arbitrarily detained in India for more than eight years; in two weeks’ time, it will be 3,000 days. What is being done to secure his release, beyond just raising his case with Indian counterparts? We have been doing that for eight years with no effect.

[Mr Falconer]

I know how dedicated my hon. Friend is to the case of his constituent. I raised in particular the cases in Iran, but I do not want the House to draw conclusions about relative priority. There are a range of cases across the world of great sensitivity, and I am sure that the Minister responsible for India, where my hon. Friend’s constituent was detained, would be happy to meet him to discuss the case further.

[Sonia Kumar (Dudley) (Lab)]

I welcome the Palestinian embassy, but with the crisis in Gaza still acute, the Israeli Government’s decision to strip NGOs of accreditation is unconscionable and puts vulnerable families at even greater risk. I welcome the steps taken to bring injured Gazan children here for treatment, but many are just too unwell to travel. What additional steps, whether through field hospitals, specialist equipment or teams and medicines, will the Minister take for children still in Gaza who are unable or not stable enough to travel to receive specialist treatment?

[Mr Falconer]

I need to be clear that the contribution that the UK has made to the provision of aid to children will always be a tiny drop in the ocean of overall need. We are working in the ways that I have set out to try to ensure that medical assistance is provided in Gaza, with all the equipment and expertise that that involves. Where that is not possible, we have provided aid to the Egyptian healthcare system, in order to support Palestinians there; I have met some of them myself, in El Arish general hospital. As I set out to my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool Riverside (Kim Johnson), where there are specialised cases, we must look at them, and I will say more to the House in due course about that.

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

I thank the Minister for taking over an hour’s-worth of questions on the updates he has provided on the situation right across the region. He has a very difficult job to do, particularly given the decimation of the United States Agency for International Development, and the cuts in our aid. What are we doing to open the borders for those people who have family in, and connections to, the UK, so that they can escape the horror that they are in in Gaza, and can get a visa to visit family in the UK? Can he update the House on any progress in getting those borders open, or any discussions that he has had with the Home Office to stop biometrics-related restrictions, and to help people apply for visas from Gaza?

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend has been a committed campaigner for cases in her constituency, and I know that there are colleagues right across the House with a constituency or personal interest in these cases. As I said to the House shortly before we rose for Christmas, there are a range of cases in which we have been able to provide support, both to Chevening students and to the injured children we have discussed. It remains a real challenge to ensure that people with a legitimate reason to travel can do so, and I am happy to take up any individual cases.

Rights of Women and Girls: Afghanistan

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) for securing this debate. I pay tribute to her for her work with the all-party parliamentary group on Afghan women and girls, and indeed to the other doughty champions for Afghan women represented in the Chamber this evening. As she alluded to, Afghanistan matters to me not only as a Minister, but as a person who knows the country well. I have first-hand experience of dealing with the Taliban, and I am determined that they should be held to account for their horrific treatment of women and girls.

My hon. Friend set out the situation well. She is right to point out that Afghanistan is now one of the worst places in the world to be a woman. Every single aspect of life is restricted by the Taliban. Girls cannot attend school after the age of 12. Women’s employment is almost entirely blocked. The sound of a woman’s voice outside her home is considered a moral violation. Millions are being systematically excluded from society and robbed of their future. Afghan women deserve meaningful, equal participation in all areas of life. These infringements on their freedoms must be reversed.

The UK Government have consistently condemned the Taliban’s treatment of women and girls. Senior officials travel regularly to Kabul, most recently in December, to urge the Taliban to reverse their barbaric decrees. On every visit, the treatment of women and girls is raised. Our officials press the Taliban to meet their international obligations, and we use our voice on the world stage to keep up the pressure. This includes speaking out at the UN, in the UN Human Rights Council and in our other international forums.

During my visit to the UN last January, I made it clear that the Taliban’s actions are unacceptable and that we will not allow the voices of Afghan women to be forgotten. In December, at the UN Security Council, the UK condemned the ongoing restrictions on female staff at the Islam Qala reception centre, which is near the border with Iran. We use our position as chair of the G7+ group to mobilise and co-ordinate international engagement on Afghanistan. We also support the initiative of key member states to hold the Taliban to account for violations of the UN convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women.

I recognise the powerful calls to classify the situation in Afghanistan as gender apartheid. This is a complex and emotive issue. We are still determining our position, but we are actively engaging with civil society and international partners to understand all perspectives.

[Wendy Chamberlain]

I know the Minister’s commitment to and experience of Afghanistan. Before Christmas, the APPG, including the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald), met the UNHCR Afghanistan representative. As we know, many people are returning to Afghanistan from Pakistan, Iran and elsewhere, and they are often from single female-headed households, so they are doing so with a degree of trepidation. My understanding from that meeting is that that body receives no funding from the UK Government. Would the Minister consider looking at that, because that surely must be an item of leverage in the meetings with UK officials that he has described?

[Mr Falconer]

We are providing support to returnees from Iran to Afghanistan, and that support is mostly funnelled through the International Organisation for Migration. We have not yet announced our allocation of aid for Afghanistan next year, but we will of course come back to this House when we are in a position to do so.

This year, the Human Rights Council voted to establish an independent accountability mechanism. We are exploring how the UK can contribute meaningfully to that, especially as the scope and operational details become clearer.

There is a growing humanitarian crisis across Afghanistan, as my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich North made so clear—23 million people are in desperate need of humanitarian assistance. As the hon. Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain) highlighted, women and girls bear the brunt. Afghanistan is one of the most dangerous places in the world to give birth, with the highest maternal mortality rate in the Asia-Pacific region.

We remain committed to tackling this crisis. We have allocated more than £150 million this financial year for lifesaving aid to Afghanistan, ensuring that at least half of the beneficiaries are women and girls. Last November we hosted a successful food security and nutrition conference in London, strengthening our response to the hardships and hunger facing Afghan families. We are focusing on effective solutions, working alongside international partners and those in Afghanistan who know the country best.

Turning to human rights and accountability, we support the mandate of the UN special rapporteur on Afghanistan, Richard Bennett. I met him last year to discuss the situation, and we remain in regular contact with him. We also maintain regular engagement with Afghan women to hear their perspectives. I have met them, and the doughty Baroness Harriet Harman, the UK special envoy for women and girls, held a roundtable for Afghan women in September and attended a parliamentary event on sexual and reproductive health in November.

The UK special envoy to Afghanistan, Richard Lindsay, joined me to brief parliamentarians today. He regularly meets Afghan women both in the diaspora and in their home country. We seek their perspectives on how we can better support their cause and hold the Taliban to account. My hon. Friend the Member for North Northumberland (David Smith), the special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, recently met individuals from the Hazara community. They discussed the discrimination faced by Hazaras, including the plight of Hazara women and girls, and he and I remain focused on supporting such vulnerable communities.

In December, Foreign Office officials participated in the Hear Us conference led by Afghan women demanding accountability for Taliban human rights abuses. Their courage and perseverance in the face of adversity are profoundly inspiring, and their resilience commands my deep respect. Our work on accountability is strengthened by our close engagement with Afghan civil society, both in the UK and abroad.

Those responsible for international crimes in Afghanistan must be held accountable. The Taliban’s systematic erosion of the rights of women and girls is the destruction of every kind of freedom. The Foreign Secretary’s recently announced All In campaign reaffirms our desire to tackle violence against women and girls. At its launch, Dr Sima Samar, an Afghan human rights activist, was present and spoke about the appalling situation for women and girls in Afghanistan, making it a central focus of the campaign.

I have been privileged, both as a Minister and in my previous life, to meet many non-governmental organisations, activists, campaigners and politicians who want a better future for Afghan women and girls. Earlier today I hosted a briefing for parliamentarians on the latest situation. I look forward to meeting, on Wednesday, Chevening scholars from Afghanistan who are now studying in the UK. Some of these women had to be chaperoned out of Afghanistan to take up their studies here. Their studies—from psychology to human rights; from health to construction—put them in a strong position to shape tomorrow’s Afghanistan for the better.

[Wendy Chamberlain]

The Minister rightly mentions the Chevening scholarship scheme. I also commend the work of the Linda Norgrove Foundation in relation to the 19 female Afghan medical students who are brought to the UK to study at Scottish universities. That was really groundbreaking work between the UK and Scottish Governments on funding for their studies and the visas that allowed them to come. There are very small numbers of individuals who would like to do the same. Will the Minister take away that request to ensure we have that pipeline, so that hopefully in future those women can return to Afghanistan and provide the care that is required?

[Mr Falconer]

I am very happy to take that away.

In conclusion, the UK will continue to fight for the rights of Afghan women and girls, and will continue to urge the Taliban to reverse their barbaric decrees. As the Foreign Secretary recently said,

“there cannot be peace, security or prosperity without women playing their part, free from violence and free from fear.”

Question put and agreed to.

Chagossians: Trust Fund and Resettlement

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Tuesday 16th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if she will make a statement on the rights of British Chagossians to access the trust fund and resettle on the Chagos archipelago.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

On 22 May the Diego Garcia treaty was signed and laid before the House. As the Defence Secretary told the House on the day of signature, the treaty secures the strategically important UK-US military base on the island of Diego Garcia. The base is essential to the security of the UK and our key allies, and to keeping British people safe. Under the terms of the treaty, the UK will capitalise a £40 million trust fund for the benefit of Chagossians, which will be established by Mauritius.

On 12 December the Mauritian Government approved the introduction of primary legislation to establish the trust fund. The Mauritian Bill confirms the principle that the trust fund will be operated for Chagossians and by Chagossians. Decisions on the use of funds will be taken by a trust fund management board. The board will comprise 12 members, seven of whom will be Chagossians, ensuring majority representation. The chair of the trust fund will be a Chagossian, selected by the Chagossian members. Following extensive representations and engagement by this Government, the Mauritian Bill also confirms that a UK-based Chagossian representative will sit on the board, alongside representatives living in Mauritius and the Seychelles. The UK high commissioner to Mauritius will also attend board meetings. We welcome these commitments by Mauritius, which will ensure that the trust fund reflects the full spectrum of perspectives within the Chagossian community.

The treaty enables Mauritius to develop a programme of resettlement on islands other than Diego Garcia. This agreement is the only viable path to resettlement on the archipelago. The UK Government have been in talks with Mauritius to ensure that the programme is open to all Chagossians, irrespective of their country of residence. The Mauritian Government confirmed on 12 December that eligibility to resettle will apply to Chagossians born on the archipelago before 31 December 1973, and to the children of a parent who was born on the archipelago before that date.

As of April 2025, 94% of Chagossians with British nationality also had Mauritian citizenship. However, any UK-based Chagossian who does not hold Mauritian citizenship and who meets the criteria will be eligible for it and therefore able to participate in any future programme of resettlement. All Chagossians will remain eligible for British citizenship under the current citizenship pathway, and they will be able to hold both British and Mauritian citizenship. Mauritius has also confirmed that civil status documents issued by the Government of Mauritius will continue to record the place of birth as the Chagos archipelago for all those born there. Where for any reason this has not been the case, the Government of Mauritius will review and amend the documents as necessary.

This landmark agreement secures the future of the strategically critical UK-US military base. As the Defence Secretary told the House, there was no alternative but to act. In so doing, we have protected Britons at home and overseas.

[Priti Patel]

Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question. We have basically just heard from the Minister that the Government’s betrayal of the British Chagossian community continues. We have just had more details on how bad this deal is for the Chagossian community. Labour’s surrender of British sovereign territory means that future decisions on access to and resettlement on most of the archipelago, the ancestral home of Chagossians, are now left in the hands of—guess what?—a foreign Government.

Can the Minister confirm if British Chagossians will need to become Mauritian citizens to have any hope of being entitled to or eligible for resettlement under the future resettlement programme? That is a simple yes or no—it sounds like the answer is an absolute yes. This is a country that, until only weeks ago, had an offence on its statute books of “misrepresenting the sovereignty of Mauritius”, and it is a country from which hundreds of Chagossians have fled to Britain in recent weeks. By the way, housing this community across the country is adding to the pressure on local authorities. Does the Minister recognise the sheer madness of this plan?

The Government have confirmed that, despite this Government giving the Government of Mauritius £40 million of British taxpayers’ money for the trust fund, Britain has no proper representation on the board and no control over how the funds are spent. There will be just one UK-based Chagossian representative on the board, chosen not by the British Chagossian community, but—guess what?—by the Prime Minister of Mauritius. Can the Minister tell us if he thinks this is acceptable, and did the Government—I cannot say the Minister specifically—press for greater Chagossian and British representation on the board? Can he tell us exactly what UK delegations have been doing in Mauritius this year, who they have met and what has been discussed?

On the so-called contact group, why have the Government refused to seek the views of the British Chagossian community on this surrender treaty? They have instead chosen to outsource this vital function to a House of Lords Select Committee, whose survey, as we have seen online, has been open to manipulation by and interference from the Mauritian Government.

It is no wonder that the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has called the Government out for their betrayal of the Chagossian community. That is massively embarrassing, particularly when we have a Government of human rights lawyers. What is the Minister’s response to this UN committee? Will he suspend the ratification of this appalling treaty, which is what the UN calls for, and importantly, say sorry to hard-pressed taxpayers in this country, who are forking out £35 billion for this shameful betrayal?

[Mr Falconer]

In the spirit of Christmas, I will not respond to allegations of betrayal. I suspect that Conservative Members will want to chunter throughout this discussion, but they might remind themselves who started these negotiations and on what basis. No doubt they will wish throughout this session to focus on transfer of sovereignty, but they might remind themselves what their negotiating position was when they were in government.

Let me turn to the questions asked by the right hon. Lady. I am pleased to inform the House that we met the Chagossian contact group on both 2 and 8 December. The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), who leads on these issues, has been very keen to ensure that he hears the full range of views from Chagossians in the UK. I understand, as I know Opposition Members also understand, that there is a range of views among the Chagossian community—they do not speak with one voice—and this Government are trying to listen to all of those views.

The shadow Foreign Secretary asked about the ratification of the treaty. As she knows, the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill will have its Third Reading in the House of Lords in the new year. No doubt this will be discussed further then, as it was in this House. This treaty will be scrutinised properly in the normal way, and all of these points will be surfaced.

[Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)]

I welcome the Minister’s clarification that the Chagossian community will be involved in the operation of the trust fund.

Turning to support in the UK for the Chagossian community, which is a significant issue, the previous Government—including Conservative Members who now sit on the Opposition Benches, pretending they have no idea where some of these issues come from—legislated in 2022 to expand the rights of Chagossians to settle here in the UK and to claim citizenship up to 2027. I represent the port authority of Hillingdon, and we are seeing a significant movement of people based on the historical rights given by the Conservatives without adequate planning. Will the Minister and his team meet me to discuss the adequacy of the support available in the UK, and how we can stop playing politics with this complex historical issue and continue to find solutions?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. I will ensure he gets a meeting with the relevant Minister.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

The Liberal Democrats have been clear from the start: nothing should be happening to the Chagossian people without the full democratic input of Chagossians themselves, who, in the custom of other overseas territories citizens, we should recognise as a self-governing and self-determining people, even if the UK has deprived Chagossians access to their homeland for more than 50 years.

Those principles, if they are to mean anything to our overseas territories family, must be both immutable and universal. In recognising that, I note that I am now joined by the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which last week reported that the proposed agreement on the future of the Chagos islands should not be ratified on the grounds that it risks

“perpetuating longstanding violations of the Chagossian people’s rights.”

I am also concerned about the requirement—made, I think, explicit in the Minister’s statement yesterday—that Chagossian people will only be able to partake in the resettlement programme if, and only if, they accept Mauritian citizenship, even in circumstances where individuals and families have no historical connection, cultural or civic, to that state. Will the Minister therefore set out whether any negotiations have taken place that would have enabled Chagossians to exercise their right of return without being required to subscribe to Mauritian citizenship? Were there any discussions about a Hong Kong-style arrangement, whereby permanent residency and freedom of movement may have been granted outside of citizenship? Finally, how does the Minister reconcile last week’s UN report with his stated desire to conform with our international obligations?

[Mr Falconer]

In relation to the UN report, I am sure that it will be discussed on Third Reading, when the House of Lords further considers the treaty, and again in this House if that is where it returns. On the trust fund, the written ministerial statement yesterday set out the position of the Mauritian Government. There will be further discussions between the UK and Mauritius in the new year.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Father of the House.

[Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)]

The Chagossians have been treated appallingly by successive Governments—we all accept that. To me, it is unconscionable that, for the first time since the first world war, a colonial people is being transferred from one colonial power to another 1,000 miles away with no control. I think there should be a referendum, but we are where we are. Does the Minister recognise that it would lighten the whole atmosphere if there was an absolute right of return for all Chagossians, with them not having to take Mauritian citizenship and being fully in control of their own trust fund? In other words, they have a right to self-determination like any other people on earth.

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my constituency neighbour for that question. The UK negotiations with the Mauritian Government have had the wishes of the Chagossian people very much at their heart. Some of the elements that I laid out in my response to the shadow Foreign Secretary are responses very much to the Chagossians themselves, including both the majority control of the board that will determine the nature of the trust fund, and the element about civil status documents and origin of birth. We will continue to talk to the Chagossian community about their wishes.

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

Is, in the Government’s opinion, Mauritius a free society, and what is the Government’s assessment of the nature of its relationship with communist China?

[Mr Falconer]

These issues have been discussed at some length. Mauritius is obviously an important partner for us. I will leave it to the relevant Minister to provide a fuller commentary about the state of its relations with China.

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

It is striking that the Government, despite deriding 14 years of Conservative Government, want to follow the example of the previous Government on just this matter. May I just point out that the former Foreign Secretary, the noble Lord Cameron, decided that the negotiations were not in the national interest and not in the interests of the Chagossian people, and that they should be suspended? May I recommend that the Minister follows our example on that?

[Mr Falconer]

I am confused whether I am or am not to follow the example of those on the Opposition Benches. My understanding was that Boris Johnson offered large quantities of money to Mauritius, absent negotiations, to try to make this all go away. That did not work. Negotiations were then opened with sovereignty at their heart. I am not sure which elements the hon. Gentleman would say I should or should not demur from. We are taking the action required to ensure the safety of the base and the security of the British people, and we are doing so closely with our partners, including the United States and Mauritius.

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

The Minister talks warmly of the relationship with the Chagossians. They have, of course, just formed a Government in exile. Do the British Government recognise the Chagossian Government in exile?

[Mr Falconer]

As colleagues across the House will know, there is a range of views across the Chagossian community. I am not familiar with the Government in exile in any great detail, but I suspect that there is a whole range of views among Chagossians here in the UK, in Mauritius and elsewhere. The relevant Minister has been closely engaged with a wide range of Chagossian voices.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

I accept the fact that the treaty and the UN report will be discussed further in the other place, but the Minister is here to answer our questions, and we are the only ones who are able to question the issue. What is the Government’s reaction to the United Nations reports, and will they honour the recommendations?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman will know that I have been asked an urgent question about the trust fund. That is what I have come prepared to talk about. I am sure that the relevant Minister, in the plenty of opportunities he has had before and no doubt the House will give him again, will answer further questions about the UN report. We have undertaken this process soberly and seriously. We recognise that the Members on the Conservative Benches who started this process had views. We are now trying to follow the process through. We will, of course, accord with international law throughout.

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

After a string of high profile corruption cases across Mauritius, what confidence does the Minister have that the bounty he is about to bestow on the Mauritian Government, including on the Chagossian trust fund, will be spent appropriately and will not end up in the pockets of corrupt officials and politicians?

[Mr Falconer]

As I set out in my response to the shadow Foreign Secretary, the trust fund will have a majority of Chagossians on it and a chair appointed by the Chagossians. The conduct of the trust fund will also be observed by our own high commission.

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

Last month, after a three-month wait for an answer, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry informed me in a written answer that the Government Actuary’s Department’s figure for the cost of the Chagos deal of £34.7 billion is inaccurate. I struggle to believe that the Government Actuary’s Department would have published the figure in error in August. It was widely reported at the time, and the Department has never publicly corrected the figure. Will the Minister confirm that the Government Actuary’s Department figure of £34.7 billion over the length of the deal is correct and that the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry is misinformed?

[Mr Falconer]

I will have to consult the Ministry of Defence to be sure where the error is. My understanding is that all costs have been verified by the Government Actuary’s Department, and I cannot provide any further clarification.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

In getting to this point, the Government have made much of their adherence to international standards and bodies, yet in the last 15 minutes the Minister has been asked three times to respond to the United Nations’ findings, which call for a suspension of the treaty, and criticise the denial of the right to self-determination and the right to return. Why is the Minister now so timid when it comes to dealing with those international findings?

[Mr Falconer]

I wonder if the hon. and learned Gentleman accepts all the UN findings—for example in relation to Gaza or UNRWA. There is a wide range of different UN bodies with different responsibilities. The UN Secretary-General himself welcomed the agreement between the UK and Mauritius. This further report by a UN body will no doubt be studied carefully by the relevant Minister, but I do not have a fuller response today.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The Minister is an honourable and just man, but I do have to ask this question. Does he accept the reasons that Chagossians are concerned about the delivery of the UK-funded trust fund? They are concerned that the fund will not help to resettle Chagossians, but will be used by other settlers. How can the Government, with only one seat at the table, so to speak, ensure that that is not the case?

[Mr Falconer]

I feel a deep sense of foreboding when the hon. Gentleman chuckles before he asks me a question, as it is an indication that it will be difficult. I think the answer is straightforward: in addition to the British Chagossian who will sit on the board, our own high commissioner will be an observer of the board in order to give greater insight and transparency to the UK about its operations.

Africa: New Approach

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Tuesday 16th December 2025 Commons Chamber

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

(Urgent Question): To ask the Foreign Secretary if she will make a statement on the Government’s new approach to Africa.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

Africa matters to the United Kingdom and it matters to this Government, our missions and our plan for change. Africa has the greatest growth potential of any continent, providing expanding opportunities for UK businesses to kick-start economic growth. Strengthening the foundations of UK growth requires engagement with Africa to secure our borders and address the drivers of illegal migration. Africa is home to 30% of the world’s mineral resources, including significant deposits of the growth minerals identified in the new UK critical minerals strategy, which are essential to securing our supply chains and enabling the UK’s mission to become a clean energy superpower.

However, we inherited an approach that reflected the past and not the opportunities of Africa’s future. That is why we committed in our manifesto to deliver a new approach for mutual long-term benefit. We were also clear that reframing our relationship was not something to cook up here in London and then package as a shared approach, so we launched a five-month listening exercise, hearing from Governments and more than 600 organisations—from civil society and diaspora communities to businesses and universities—about what they valued and wanted to see from Britain. There was a clear common message: African nations want respectful, long-term partnerships that deliver real change for people’s lives.

Responding to the consultation, the UK’s new approach provides a high-level framing to guide the Government’s long-term engagement with African partners, reaffirming the shift from paternalism to a partnership of respect and equality over seven areas of shared interest. First, we are moving from donor to investor. We will go further to unlock investment and trade, helping African and British businesses to create quality jobs, economic opportunities and prosperity. Secondly, we are working together on the challenges of illegal migration. Migration should be fair, managed and controlled. We will be unapologetic in pressing for high ambition and clear progress against our priorities in this area. Thirdly, we are advancing shared interests on climate, nature and clean energy, recognising their significance for growth and security. Fourthly, we are continuing to collaborate for peace and security, working to silence the guns and tackle violence against women and girls. Fifthly, we are strengthening the systems that support people and growth, including strengthening financial self-resilience. Sixthly, we are championing African voices in global decision making, including in the global financial system. Finally, we are supporting innovation and cultural partnerships. This adds up to a new kind of partnership—one that works with African leadership and is inclusive, respectful and strong enough to work through difficulties and disagreements.

Our high commissions and embassies will be at the forefront of embedding this approach in spirit and content, and we will take it forward into the UK’s G20 presidency in 2027. British Ministers will be out there on the continent championing these principles, strengthening coherence across our partnerships and backing diverse African voices to shape our work.

[Mr Speaker]

I will just say gently, Minister, that this is a very important statement, and what you have said is so important to the House. We do not need written ministerial statements; it would be easier if it was brought to the House, rather than hidden away in the Library.

[Adam Jogee]

I am grateful to you for granting this urgent question, Mr Speaker. I declare an interest as chair of the all-party parliamentary group for foreign affairs and co-chair of the APPG for the Commonwealth.

The geopolitical challenges we face as a nation are acute and mounting and have real impacts on people back home in Newcastle-under-Lyme and across our United Kingdom. For too long, our relationship with countries on the African continent has been viewed through the prism of colonial guilt, which has harmed our ability to engage, left relationships to suffer and let generations down. We must think about what we can do with, not to, nations on the African continent.

The African continent is a big and diverse place and cannot be put in one basket. Each region will have different characteristics, and our approach needs to reflect that with respect, understanding and action. The United Kingdom has been found seriously wanting in relation to its former colonies over the past 30 years under successive Governments, and this must be a turning point based on respect, friendship, equality and our shared histories, bonds, systems and experiences.

I have the following questions for the Minister. How will the Government’s approach protect the United Kingdom against the geopolitical threats we face from Russia, China and other hostile states and their corrosive impact on nations across the African continent? Many African nations are members of the Commonwealth—a hugely important but totally underutilised post-war creation. How will the approach ensure that the Commonwealth gets meaningful support and is properly fit for purpose? I am concerned that one word that was not mentioned in the statement was “Commonwealth”.

How much money will be put behind this new approach? What steps will be taken to ensure that new, meaningful trade deals are established between African nations and the United Kingdom? Fair, balanced and decent trade has a hugely important role to play in this relationship, and it must be taken seriously. What will be expected of our heads of missions at high commissions and embassies across Africa to advance this approach? Finally, what will our new approach mean for British engagement with the African Union?

The bonds of history and people bind together our United Kingdom and many independent nations on the African continent; we have common languages, common legal systems, common but difficult histories and a common purpose. This new approach has the potential to help to grow our economy here at home, neutralise the influence of hostile states and move forward together. If it does that, it will have my full support.

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend both for the question and for his dedication to and diligence on these issues. I reassure him of the importance that this Government place on the Commonwealth, which is a vital partnership both in Africa and across the world. It is the C in FCDO, and it is very close to our minds and central to our strategy both in Africa and elsewhere.

My hon. Friend asks important points about the role of Russia and China in Africa. As he knows well, China particularly has been a long-standing presence in many African countries as an important source of trade and finance. In my experience, though, African countries are not naive about Chinese motivations or the potential risks associated with elements of its offer. The Africa strategy that we announced yesterday is in part a response to the desire from so many African countries for a longer, enduring and sustainable partnership with the UK, both to respond to the interests of others, whether that is China or Russia, and to build on the historic ties to which he so eloquently referred.

I pause briefly to talk about Russia’s role in Africa. Russia is exploiting conflicts, instability and natural resources right across Africa, in the Sahel and indeed in north Africa. We are already supporting African partners through strategic security and defence relationships with countries such as Kenya, Nigeria and Ghana, co-ordinating closely with like-minded states and international organisations. The role of the Africa Corps in Africa is malign.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Priti Patel (Witham) (Con)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee) for securing this important urgent question. May I say that I do not think it is acceptable for the Minister to just regurgitate the written ministerial statement from yesterday?

There are some fundamental issues about what should be the Government’s strategy. First and foremost, it was wrong to simply say that the approach that the Government inherited was wrong. I should know that, having recapitalised the Commonwealth Development Corporation, with British International Investment now having a huge amount of annual investment and reinvestment every single year on economic development in Africa. Fundamentally, whether it is from Gavi, the Global Fund or the sustainable development goals, these are founding principles that are now being advanced across Africa, and the Government really should do much more to stand up and defend them.

In the written ministerial statement yesterday there was no reference to China’s belt and road debt traps, Russia’s nefarious activities or the Wagner Group in Africa. Yet before our eyes, we see the axis of authoritarian states pillaging African countries for its natural resources. Where is the substance for a plan of action to counter the growing influence of that axis?

As we have already heard, there is also scant regard in the Government’s plan for the Commonwealth and its role in upholding democracy, capacity building and freedoms. Why is that the case? Are the Government working with the new secretary-general on her economic vision, which would clearly benefit the UK and Africa?

We do not know how the Government intend to support the African Union or rise to the challenges in the continent, and sadly, we are seeing so much conflict right now. Can the Minister explain what the UK will do to leverage our conflict resolution expertise to good effect?

Finally, on illegal migration, can I remind the Minister and the Government that they intentionally tore up engagement with a key Commonwealth partner? Rwanda sought to provide leadership on illegal migration and stop young men leaving the continent at great risk because it wanted to create an economic development partnership with the UK. That surely speaks to some of the serious challenges that this Government now need to pick up and confront.

[Mr Falconer]

I addressed the questions of Russia and China somewhat in my previous answer, but let me reassure the shadow Foreign Secretary how central those issues of conflict are to us. I travelled to Libya in recent months, where, as she knows, Russia has been active, particularly in the west. The Wagner Group may have been renamed the Africa Corps, but it remains as malign a threat to Africa and, indeed, British interests as it ever was. We are active across the continent in seeking to counter its baleful influence.

The right hon. Lady talks about migration pressures from Africa. We are working in places such as Algeria, Tunisia, and indeed Libya, where small boats cross into Mediterranean Europe—

[Priti Patel]

We always have been.

[Mr Falconer]

I am glad to hear a moment of uncharacteristic harmony between the two Benches.

Where the work that was started by the previous Government was functioning, we continued it. Where it was not—such as the Rwanda deal that the right hon. Lady referred to—we stopped it.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

I welcome the publication of the Government’s Africa approach. Strengthening systems that support people and growth is the right approach to improve health, education and social protection. Can the Minister confirm that the approach will include disability rights and inclusion, which the written ministerial statement did not mention? To truly strengthen systems and support, disability must be at the heart of the approach.

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend is a powerful advocate in this area. I know that the Minister responsible for Africa has been considering those issues, and I will ensure that my hon. Friend gets a meeting to discuss them further.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)]

The Government are absolutely right to say that the United Kingdom needs a new relationship with Africa. Many Members in this House had hoped that that partnership would be sustainable, strategic and built on mutual trust. Africa, after all, has one of the youngest populations in the world and incredible economic potential, yet the Government are cutting aid to Africa by 12% this year alone, with further reductions likely in years to come.

Over the last decade the Liberal Democrats criticised the constant churn in Ministers under the previous Conservative Government, and we are very disappointed that the Africa Minister has recently again been changed. That has come as hard news in continental Africa, where the Minister was appreciated and the hard work that had been undertaken was bearing fruit.

Warm words are not enough when the overall trajectory that we see from the UK is arguably one of a diminishing partnership and diminishing influence. The Government are cutting overseas development aid from 0.7% to 0.3%—the lowest this country has ever seen—at a time when debt costs are rising in continental Africa. It is important to invest in the work of the FCDO, because trade commissioners, for example, provide the in-country expertise that is needed to develop the new economic relations that the Minister talks about. On migration, upstream investment in poverty reduction and conflict prevention is more important than ever, as is support for organisations such as the British Council.

Africa is an essential strategic partner in an increasingly contested world, so may I ask the Minister directly, how can the Government seriously claim that they are strengthening partnerships and seeking to influence Africa while cutting aid and hollowing out the very tools that make engagement sustainable?

[Mr Falconer]

As I set out, at the centre of the new strategy is a move from simply donation to investment. We are hearing that that new partnership is demanded from across Africa.

Let me join the hon. Gentleman in paying tribute to the previous Minister for Africa, who I worked closely with. He was a diligent servant of the FCDO and the country, and I know that he continues to do important work in the other place. The new Minister for Africa is excellent. I have been the Minister responsible for North Africa consistently throughout the period, so I can reassure the hon. Gentleman that while some things have changed, others have not.

We will set out the ODA allocations in due course in the new year. On the point about whether or not we can truly have influence in Africa given the decisions we have made on ODA, I think that the hon. Gentleman has heard clearly from the continent itself the valuable work that the Minister for Africa, both past and present, is able to do, and that work will continue.

[Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)]

I welcome the change of approach that the Minister has outlined—a change from a paternalism to partnership—and I welcome the listening way in which it has been done. I am concerned that poverty reduction was not mentioned in the statement—neither were sustainable development goals, or working with local organisations on the ground that know best. Will the Minister reassure the House that poverty reduction is at the heart of our strategy in working with local organisations across the many countries in Africa to achieve the real change that Africa needs?

[Mr Falconer]

I reassure my hon. Friend, who has long experience in these matters, that we remain committed to sustainable development goals, poverty reduction and working with local partners.

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

I absolve the Minister entirely from responsibility for this statement, as he is not the Africa Minister, but is the so-called new approach for Africa not rather like the old strategy—which was so well set out in the White Paper published by the former Prime Minister in November 2023, with its emphasis on investment—but with much less development investment and much less influence? Will the Minister confirm that bilateral programmes are being cut to ribbons across Africa? Does he realise that in major African institutions there is genuine amazement and astonishment that a Labour Government, for the first time ever in the Labour party’s history, have slashed development aid? Does he appreciate that as Britain and America are withdrawing from Africa, it is Russia and China that are taking our place?

[Mr Falconer]

Let me pay tribute to the work of the right hon. Gentleman. I served for two years in South Sudan when he was the Development Secretary; I know his commitment to these issues and I know that many of the programmes that are still run in Africa were set up during his tenure. As I said, we will set out the ODA allocations in more detail in the new year. As the right hon. Gentleman alluded to, it is vital that we make this shift; there has been recognition on both sides of the House that there was a need for a change in approach. That is what the Africa strategy is about, and we will no doubt set out further detail in the new year.

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

I have visited four of my six markets in southern Africa this year, and we are clearly hearing support from those nations for this new approach. It transforms our relationship from donor to investor and from benefactor to partner. Key to delivering this ambition will be a focus on economic diplomacy. Therefore, it is critical that we sustain our resources and networks within the region. How will that be reflected in a new appreciation of the vital work that our diplomatic network does within Africa and the expertise that it has, because it is vital to enhancing both our interests and African interests?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend both for his kind words about the diplomatic service and for his own diligent efforts as trade envoy to southern Africa, which I know is yielding real results. He is right that there is a real desire for serious engagement on economic issues. We see in his work and the work of many other trade envoys the potential for further growth in Africa, and the Foreign Office will remain focused on it.

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

Since it is nearly Christmas, and in the spirit of goodwill, may I congratulate the Government on changing and updating the UK language on the Western Sahara? What will the Government now do to ensure that the good progress we have made since the 2019 association agreement with Morocco is sustained and improves further both our bilateral trade and our mutual security?

[Mr Falconer]

In the spirit of Christmas, I thank my predecessor for that important and helpful question. I know the House will be aware both of the shift in position on Western Sahara announced by the previous Foreign Secretary and of our vote in the recent Security Council deliberations about the future negotiations over Western Sahara. The UN special envoy, Mr de Mistura, retains our full confidence. He is working hard to try to advance talks. It is vital to try to bring to a close this long-running conflict and impediment to greater unity in north Africa, and we hope to see progress in the coming months.

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

Although I do not disagree with any of the principles set out in the strategy, I am disappointed by its level of ambition and detail. It does not reflect what we did when we were last in government with the Commission for Africa, which was an all-encompassing report looking at how we work together at the university level as well as on skills, trade, women and girls—all those issues—and build democracy. Unfortunately, it also does not address the real risk from Russia and China’s role in Africa. We have 21 Commonwealth countries in Africa, and they are telling us that they desperately need us as a partner so that we can bring the stability and prosperity to the continent that we all want to see.

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend has much experience in these matters. I sought earlier to address some of the questions on Russia and China. The Minister for Africa will have heard her disappointment and I am sure will be happy to discuss it further.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

As you will know, Mr Speaker, I have been calling for the Government to publish an Africa strategy for a very long time. Has it been worth the wait? No. Yesterday, we got a written ministerial statement with a new approach—a partnership. It is not a strategy. As has been said, of the 54 nations, 21 are Commonwealth nations.

Many years ago, I visited the Foreign Office and met the Africa Minister. He said, “Mark, I want you to tell me about certain countries in Africa.” I said, “The first thing you need to do, Minister, is change the map behind you.” He looked round at a tiny little map—as the Minister knows, the continent is huge. This is a timid, timid, timid approach to Africa; it is rather embarrassing. The Minister and the Government should be doing better.

[Mr Falconer]

I do not accept that it is a timid approach. We have set out seven principles of a new approach following hundreds of consultations launched by the previous Foreign Secretary, but I heard what the right hon. Member said, as the Africa Minister will have done.

[Danny Beales (Uxbridge and South Ruislip) (Lab)]

I welcome the Government’s new approach to Africa and the shift from discussion of the continent and our role as donors to that of investors and partners. In the last 50 years we have seen the importance of Asia, with the tiger economies of India and China driving the global economy. It is quite clear that the next 50 years will be an African future, with demographic growth, economic growth and the role of critical minerals and other resources in Africa. I welcome recognition of the importance of that in the approach. In the light of the continent’s growing importance, will we see a shift in FCDO and diplomatic resources to ensure that our resources to discuss and build those relationships align with the new strategy and the continent’s importance?

[Mr Falconer]

As my hon. Friend would expect, our resources will indeed reflect our strategy. However, as I said earlier, ODA allocations will be announced in the new year, as of course will questions about the laydown of the Foreign Office.

[Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)]

Warm words offer cold comfort to those facing brutal aid cuts this winter. While the Scottish Government remain fully committed to their global partners, the UK is in full retreat. While Scotland’s First Minister has personally visited Malawi in recent weeks to see at first hand the impact of the lifesaving partnership we have, the UK Government leak to the press that they are likely to cut all their aid to Malawi, which is one of the poorest countries in the world. In the spirit of Christmas, will the Minister do the right thing and halt all those aid cuts until the Government have carried out full country-by-country impact assessments on the African continent?

[Mr Falconer]

In the spirit of Christmas, I am glad to hear that the First Minister of Scotland has been travelling to visit UK aid programmes, as have I and the whole of the Foreign Office ministerial team. As I said earlier, decisions on ODA allocations will be announced in the new year.

[Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)]

One of the issues is what the effect of the new policy will be. To take one example, what will be the position of the new policy on Nigeria, where so many girls are not in education? The UK has invested in education to encourage them, but many of them come under threat from Islamists who try to convert them.

[Mr Falconer]

As I have said, we will set out further details on allocations in the new year, but I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising the situation in Nigeria. To understate the position considerably, women and girls in Nigeria clearly face very considerable threats—as do Christians in Nigeria, as recent events have demonstrated. Let me take the opportunity to condemn the recent abductions. We welcome the news that some have been released, and we join the Government of Nigeria in calling for the release of all remaining abductees and for perpetrators to be brought to justice. Events in Nigeria have taken a very dark turn in recent months, and it is a high priority for the British Government to see that reversed.

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

Following on directly from that, what can the Minister tell us about any military advice or assistance that our experts in counter-insurgency are giving to the Governments of friendly Commonwealth countries like Nigeria that face vicious jihadist extremist attack from organisations such as Boko Haram?

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Gentleman asks an important question. We have a security and defence partnership with Nigeria and we are helping to build capacity within Nigeria’s security agencies to respond to and prevent attacks, including through support to the multi-agency anti-kidnap fusion cell, which is particularly critical given the events to which I just alluded.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

As Shakira once famously said, “This time for Africa.” Although I welcome the Minister’s statement, I am a little underwhelmed, especially by the constant cuts by successive Governments to the foreign aid budget. We know that 800 million Africans are living in countries where public spending on debt interest exceeds that on health expenditure. That is a feedback loop that only makes life harder. What Africa needs is long-term investments and to be viewed as a partner. What steps are the Government taking to invest in partnerships with African countries? How will they stack that up against what China has been doing for close to three decades?

[Mr Falconer]

The hon. Gentleman asks an important question—obscured by Shakira lyrics—and makes an important point. It is indisputable that China has put more financial resources into Africa in recent years than in any period before. However, what we hear from many African Governments and African people is that they are wary of some of the conditionality that comes with that investment, and the debt to which he referred. We are seeking a partnership that is respectful and can help African Governments address those issues. Where private sector investment is available from the UK, that is what we are working to support, including through trade envoys such as my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey), who spoke earlier.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answers and recognise his intent and that of the Government to try to help in whatever way they can. For centuries, churches and faith groups have sent missionaries to Africa. I think of the Samaritan’s Purse charity, which works across Africa and the middle east. I also think of many churches from Ards and Strangford, such as the Elim church and missions who go to Swaziland—Eswatini—and have built schools, clinics and hospitals. They have also brought farm implements and introduced modern farming practices to feed the people. In the past, I have highlighted the key role that church missions could play. Is it not about time to work with churches and make those partnerships work for Africa and its people?

[Mr Falconer]

I appreciate the question. In my own time overseas, and indeed in Africa, I saw the vital work that church groups do. It was the bishops in South Sudan who performed some of the most important peace mediation work. Just last night I met Christian groups operating in the Holy Land as well. We are conscious of the vital work done by faith communities in Africa and across the world, and freedom of religious belief and partnership with groups of all denominations is important to the Government.

Kashmir: Self-determination

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. The fact that this is the fourth debate on Kashmir this year tells its own story; it shows the strength of feeling in this House and among our constituents. With your permission, Sir Roger, I will try to make a little progress before taking interventions, of which I suspect there will be many, so I can leave some time for my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford East (Imran Hussain), who made a powerful speech and, I am sure, wishes to make some concluding remarks.

As the whole House knows, Kashmir is one of the most sensitive and enduring challenges in south Asia. It is a flashpoint between two nuclear-armed states and a place where history, identity and geopolitics collide. As both my hon. Friends the Members for Bradford East and for Brent West (Barry Gardiner) demonstrate, even the history of the ’40s remains a fraught question in this House and many other places. The dispute has endured for nearly eight decades, and it defines the security landscape of south Asia. As we have seen this year, the stakes are incredibly high, and miscalculation or escalation could have consequences far beyond south Asia. That is why Britain, while maintaining a neutral stance, urges dialogue and respect for human rights.

We also encourage restraint, and we are working with our international partners to support peace and stability in south Asia. I recognise that Kashmir is not just a territorial dispute, but a question of identity, rights and aspirations for millions of people. It is a matter that resonates deeply here in the UK, given our historical ties and the presence of vibrant British Pakistani and British Indian communities—I am proud to be joined this morning by representatives of those communities. About 1.6 million British Pakistanis and 1.8 million British Indians live here, many of whom have roots in Kashmir.

I reaffirm the UK Government’s long-standing position on Kashmir, which is that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting resolution to the situation, taking into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. That principle is central to our approach, and it reflects our belief in diplomacy and our respect for human rights.

[Gareth Snell]

Will the Minister give way?

[Mr Falconer]

I will make a brief comment on the important points raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East (Andy McDonald) in relation to the UN statement of 24 November on alleged human rights abuses in Indian-administered Kashmir. The British Government take such statements seriously and are continuing to monitor the situation in Kashmir. We are clear about the importance of respecting human rights, and we wish to see any remaining restrictions lifted as soon as possible and any remaining political detainees released.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Minister for the tone in which he is responding. He says that the UK Government’s position is that this is a matter for India and Pakistan, but that we encourage dialogue. Will he set out what practical steps the Government are taking to ensure that dialogue happens? What is the FCDO tangibly doing, short of determining an outcome, to get India and Pakistan to come to a conclusion?

[Mr Falconer]

As the hon. Member for Fylde (Mr Snowden) rightly said, this has clearly been a year of incredible tension between India and Pakistan. We have used our relationships with both countries, both of which are friends and have long-standing diplomatic, historical and political connections with the UK, to try to ensure dialogue. It is clear from press reporting, let alone diplomatic reporting, that the tensions between those two countries continue.

[Jeremy Corbyn]

What plans do the UK Government have to take the issue to the UN? We must ensure the UN is seized of the issue in a way that it has not been. It has obviously tried to bring about a ceasefire when there has been conflict between India and Pakistan, but that is not enough; there has to be a fundamental resolution to the basic problem, which is the lack of a right to self-determination for the people of Kashmir.

[Mr Falconer]

As I was explaining to my hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent Central (Gareth Snell), we talk directly to both India and Pakistan. As the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) knows, there is strong disagreement between India and Pakistan about whether this issue should return to the United Nations. As my hon. Friends the Members for Brent West and for Bradford East noted, at different times India and Pakistan have respectively thought UN involvement was helpful or not helpful. I do not wish to take a view this morning about whether a further reference to the United Nations is useful at this time, but it is critical in 2025 and into 2026 that there is dialogue between India and Pakistan. We have seen the extent of the pressure when dialogue breaks down.

[Barry Gardiner]

I am very grateful to the Minister for taking all these interventions. Does he agree that the cross-border terrorism—most of the terrorist camps are based in Azad Kashmir—is specifically designed to engender a crackdown on human rights in Jammu and Kashmir and to foment tension? Therefore, one of the things that his Government could do is press the Government of Pakistan to close those terrorist camps. We know where they are: the South Asia Terrorism Portal records 42 identified terrorist training camps located in Pakistan, and 21 located in Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan. That report was updated in September.

[Mr Falconer]

The House will appreciate that I will be moderately circumspect on security questions in relation to the region, but clearly there was an abominable terrorist attack in May, and there continue to be terrorist attacks in Pakistan week in, week out—not, we suspect, related to Kashmir, but related to the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and ongoing tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is clearly a blight on south Asia that so many countries in the region believe their neighbours are hosting terrorists who threaten them. The UK seeks to help on this issue. It is vital, and it has clearly been a cause of the most recent breakdown in relations.

[Tahir Ali]

In 2020, our delegation from the APPG on Kashmir was refused entry to Indian-occupied Kashmir, and we were given full, free and unfettered access to the side of Kashmir administered by Pakistan. If India has nothing to hide, why does it not allow international and United Nations observers unfettered access to occupied Kashmir on the Indian side?

[Mr Falconer]

As I have said in other contexts, it is valuable for British MPs to be able to travel across the world to see the situations on which we report, but British travel advice in relation to Indian-administered Kashmir, as well as in relation to the other side of the line of control, is complex. I encourage people, including MPs, to look at that advice before they travel. I have already helped colleagues who have got themselves into scrapes in 2025, so I would like people to warn me in advance.

[Mr Adnan Hussain (Blackburn) (Ind)]

The situation is exactly the same in respect of journalists. Does the Minister agree that journalists must always be allowed access to every part of the world so they can truly document the position, whether in respect of alleged terrorist camps or otherwise?

[Sir Roger Gale (in the Chair)]

Order. The hon. Member came into the Chamber very late indeed. I call the Minister.

[Mr Falconer]

It is, of course, important that journalists can do their jobs across the world. I take from your tone, Sir Roger, a renewed clarion call to make a bit more progress before taking further interventions.

We do not advocate a specific mechanism for self-determination, but we support efforts that allow Kashmiris to shape their future. I hear colleagues’ desire that British officials and Ministers be available to the very significant Kashmiri diaspora. I have sought this year to engage directly, including in Birmingham in June. If MPs would like me to meet their constituents in relation to these issues, I would be very happy to do so. I remind colleagues that I am the Minister with responsibility for Pakistan, and that the Minister for the Indo-Pacific, my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra) has responsibility for India. I am sure we would both be prepared to do diaspora engagements, where appropriate. Some of these questions are sensitive—in some areas, very sensitive—and I am always happy to engage on them with Members across the House. I recognise how deeply and personally they are felt, and how it is sometimes easier to have such conversations away from the Hansard record.

The UK Government stand firm in our commitment to human rights, peace and stability. We believe that it is for India and Pakistan to find a lasting solution to the situation in Kashmir, which must take into account the wishes of the Kashmiri people. We will continue to encourage dialogue, condemn violence and support efforts that uphold dignity and human rights for all.

[Jim Shannon]

I made a specific request in relation to the persecution of Christians and other religious minorities in Kashmir. What has been done to assist them?

[Mr Falconer]

I can confirm to the hon. Member that we make representations to both the Indian and Pakistani Governments on human rights, and the protection of minorities on both sides of the line of control, and indeed in both countries, is an important issue for the UK.

We want to see a future in which both countries enjoy peaceful relations, the Kashmiri people can live with dignity and security, and south Asia can thrive as a region of stability, growth and opportunity.

--- Later in debate ---

[Imran Hussain]

My hon. Friend makes the point that I was coming to about the international picture at the moment. Frankly, it continues to expose time and again the absolute double standards and disrespect for international law, along with the need to reform the United Nations from its current format. Furthermore, it continues to expose the absolute denial to accept certain injustices in the world.

[Mr Falconer]

I am rather shocked by the discourtesy of giving my hon. Friend 10 minutes, only for him to claim that it was because I did not have enough speech to give. I am very happy to provide further remarks on the points that my hon. Friend raises.

The question of whether this is a situation of interest to India and Pakistan seems to me inarguable—it was inarguable in the 1940s, just as it is inarguable in the 2020s. One of my colleagues mentioned the build-up of military forces in the region. Clearly, we must attend to the world as it is and to conflicts as we have seen them in 2025. I want to reassure my hon. Friend, because I know he pays close attention to these issues: we do not take a two-sides approach to international law. We remain deeply and profoundly committed to it, but we also believe in diplomacy. It is inarguable that in south Asia diplomacy between India and Pakistan is necessary. We want to see more of it. Kashmir has been disputed for such a very long time; no plausible analyst in the entire world would believe that the issue is resolvable without the involvement of those two states.

I am sad that my hon. Friend felt that, in my speech, I was not attending to some of the core questions of the conflict. I reassure him that, just as during my engagements with Pakistan and my colleagues’ engagements with India, we are very conscious of the diplomacy.

Venezuela: US Military

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Wednesday 3rd December 2025 Commons Chamber

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

(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if she will make a statement on imminent US military strikes on land targets in Venezuela, and the implications for UK foreign policy.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

As my hon. Friend the Minister with responsibility for north America—the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty)—told the House yesterday, questions about United States military action in the Caribbean and Pacific are questions for the US. The UK has not been involved in US strikes in the Caribbean. The Foreign Office currently advises against all but essential travel to Venezuela due to ongoing crime and instability. As always, our travel advice remains under regular review to ensure that it reflects our latest assessments of risks to British nationals.

The UK stands with the Venezuelan people in their pursuit of a fair, democratic and prosperous future. Nicolás Maduro’s claim to power is fraudulent. The UK continues to call on the Venezuelan authorities to publish the results of the 2024 presidential election in full. The Government announced sanctions against 15 more members of Maduro’s regime in January. The UK will continue to work with our international partners to achieve a peaceful negotiated transition in Venezuela which ensures that the will of all Venezuelans is respected.

[Calum Miller]

I am grateful for the granting of this urgent question, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I am grateful to the Minister for that answer.

At oral questions yesterday, the Foreign Secretary and the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) both stated that the UK was committed to upholding international law. Last night, Donald Trump announced that US military strikes against Venezuelan land targets would “start…very soon”. Does the Minister believe that such an action would be legal?

Over recent weeks, the US has acted with complete impunity in the Caribbean, conducting unilateral military strikes in international waters with no due process. Let me be very clear. President Maduro is a threat to democracy and civil liberty. He is an ally only to dictators such as Vladimir Putin and President Xi. Yet the UK’s response to the culture of impunity in the Oval Office must be robust and consistent. We must always hold accountable those who breach international law. By failing to do so, we risk normalising abuses that are eroding the international liberal order, all to the benefit of strong men such as Maduro who reject entirely the rule of law.

I have several questions for the Minister. Have US strikes in the Caribbean already violated international law? What steps are the Government taking, including on halting intelligence sharing, to ensure that the UK cannot be complicit in other US violations? Has the UK been complicit in illegal actions already taken by the US, including the alleged “double tap” operations authorised by War Secretary Hegseth? Does the Minister believe that War Secretary Hegseth has authorised the commitment of war crimes? Finally, will the Minister confirm what further steps the Government are taking to sanction Maduro and his associates, and to work with international allies to strengthen our collective diplomatic and economic pressure on his regime?

[Mr Falconer]

As this House will understand, we must be very careful on making assessments. We, of course, continue to stand by international law. I am not in a position to provide a detailed assessment of the strikes conducted by the US, which are clearly a matter for the US, as the Foreign Secretary and my hon. Friend the Minister of State said during oral questions yesterday. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson asks whether we were involved in the strikes. I confirm again, as we confirmed yesterday, that we were not. He will understand that I will not comment on intelligence matters from the Dispatch Box. He asks about our policy towards Venezuela. As I set out, we do not accept the legitimacy of the current Administration put in place by Nicolás Maduro, but we do maintain limited engagement with Venezuelan officials where necessary.

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

This is an enormous military build-up under Trump, one of the largest in decades. Retired US generals, along with US politicians including Republicans, are warning that Trump’s strikes off the coast of Venezuela are already violating international law. Yesterday, the Government told me that no British troops are aboard the US warships near oil-rich Venezuela, despite reports to the contrary. What are the Government doing to try to stop Trump from taking this dangerous, escalatory path, which he now says could include land strikes?

[Mr Falconer]

As the Minister of State made clear to my hon. Friend yesterday, the UK is not involved in these operations. There has been, as my hon. Friend mentions, much reporting and speculation in the US media and the US Congress. I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on the deliberations of their House on these questions.

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

I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) for securing this urgent question. Venezuela may be thousands of miles away, but instability there has a direct impact on the safety and prosperity of the British people here. The restoration of democratic institutions is essential if Venezuela is to escape the political, economic and humanitarian crises imposed on its people by Nicolás Maduro’s authoritarian regime. The Maduro regime is propped up by the same axis of authoritarian states that undermine the rules-based international order and foster instability around the world. We know the shocking level of smuggling that comes out of Venezuela, and at a moment when our allies appear to be taking quite decisive action, the world is watching how Britain responds.

What discussions are taking place with President Trump’s Administration about the objectives and scope of any imminent US military action? What would be the implications for the wider UK-US defence partnership, particularly our joint counter-narcotics operations?

The House will also expect clarity on how the Government intend to hold the Maduro regime to account. What further diplomatic pressure, targeted sanctions and co-ordinated international action is the UK pursuing to support Venezuelans fighting for a peaceful, democratic transition?

Will the Minister also update the House on the Government’s position regarding Venezuela’s provocation and aggression towards Guyana, the risks of escalation and the steps being taken with CARICOM—Caribbean Community—partners?

Finally, given the scale of organised crime linked to the regime, what additional measures are being deployed to disrupt drug flows, money laundering and criminal networks that threaten communities here in the UK? Are Interpol and our intelligence partnerships being fully leveraged? Britain cannot afford to be a bystander. The Government must demonstrate clarity, conviction and leadership at this critical moment.

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the right hon. Lady for those important questions. The US is of course the UK’s principal defence and security partner. We have extensive discussions on a wide range of shared security objectives, including counter-narcotics. We are committed to fighting the scourge of drugs and organised crime, including with our partners in Latin America and the Caribbean. We are, of course, continuing to work with our international partners to achieve a peaceful negotiated transition in Venezuela, which ensures that the will of all Venezuelans is respected.

[Dr Scott Arthur (Edinburgh South West) (Lab)]

One of my guilty secrets is that I like to listen to CNN in the evening, so I know that people in the United States are divided on this issue. The Minister started by talking about sanctions. Have we assessed the impact of the sanctions on Venezuela? What efforts are we making with civil society there to protect human rights? I really respect the fact that we are not engaging with the way in which the United States is trying to deal with the drug trade there, but are we able to show leadership in the region by trying to restrict the drugs trade in a way that definitely fits with international law? When did he last speak to his counterpart in the US in an effort to reach a peaceful solution on this issue?

[Mr Falconer]

On my hon. Friend’s last question, I understand that the Foreign Secretary has been in discussions with her US counterparts in recent days on these questions. He asks an important question about civil society. We strongly condemn the ongoing repression of civil society and members of the opposition in Venezuela. We continue to call for the unconditional release of those arbitrarily detained, including members of civil society and independent media, such as through the UK’s published statement to the UN Human Rights Council in its most recent session.

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

President Trump would no doubt argue that there is a parallel between this situation and George Bush senior’s invasion of Panama in late 1989, but does the Minister agree with me that it will be interesting to see, if something like this goes ahead, what sort of outcry there is from either Russia or China? If there is no sort of outcry, would that not suggest that there is some sort of understanding between these three major powers that they each leave each other to get on with, shall we say, unilateral actions within what they regard as their own spheres of influence?

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Gentleman is learned and offers the opportunity both to make historical comparisons and comment on the conduct of other powers. I will avoid the temptation on both. Clearly, the British position is that international law is vital. Counter-narcotics action is important and we support that.

[James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)]

Nicolás Maduro’s presidency clearly has no legitimacy after he was so roundly defeated in last year’s elections; he has continued to refuse to release any evidence to show that he was victorious, as he claims. However, does the Minister agree that the presidency of Venezuela is a decision for the Venezuelan people to make in a peaceful, democratic way, supported by the international community—not a decision for the US President to make, under threat of military force?

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for providing an opportunity for me to give a slightly fuller commentary. The UK is clear that the outcome of the 2024 presidential elections in Venezuela was neither free nor fair, and therefore Nicolás Maduro’s claim to power is fraudulent. While the National Electoral Council of Venezuela has not yet published the results of the elections, the results published by the opposition appear to show Edmundo González securing the most votes in the presidential election by a significant margin. Clearly, proper process and a free and fair election is the way to determine the leadership in Venezuela.

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

On data sharing with our allies, does the Minister agree that signals intelligence and human intelligence are not a pick and mix when it comes to the Five Eyes community? Will he assure the House that we will continue to provide the information that the US needs in order to deal with Venezuelan cocaine, most of which lands up in Europe? I need not remind the Minister that cocaine deaths in this country were up by a third in 2022-23. Will he ensure that we do not apply an overly lawyerly approach in our dealings with an ally doing its best to tackle the scourge of drugs in the US and the rest of Europe, and in particular on the streets of Britain?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the hon. Gentleman—my predecessor—for his question. The Government stand by the principles of international law. I will not provide a detailed commentary on intelligence matters, obviously, but I will say that the Five Eyes remains a vital, vibrant and free-flowing intelligence sharing arrangement that allows us to tackle a range of threats. That includes the illegal drug trade, which is having such an impact in both America and the UK; like many others across the House, I see that impact in my constituency.

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

Nicolás Maduro is no respecter of the international rules-based system, but we must be. We do not want to see chaos in Latin America, but we are seeing the biggest military build-up in the Caribbean since the Cuban missile crisis and the biggest US military build-up since the war in Iraq. What lessons would the Minister draw from previous regime change that the UK Government have been involved in, and what advice would he give his US counterparts?

[Mr Falconer]

Again, it is tempting to indulge in some historical analysis, but the advice we give our friends and allies is mostly done in private. Clearly, it is important that the rights of Venezuelans to free and fair elections are respected in the way that I outlined in my previous answer to the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary).

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

I will continue with what has been a bit of a history lesson today. President Reagan had his famous wobble over the Falkland Islands but eventually he came to the right decision, supporting the UK at that time. This issue is about how we liaise with the United States as its closest ally—certainly, in our eyes we are its closest ally; whether it is the same the other way around, let us wait and see.

It could be Venezuela today but Cuba tomorrow, and then Haiti and so on and so forth. We need to be candid with the United States, to uphold international law and to encourage our cousins across the water to show restraint, while recognising the need for them to counter the very bad drugs trade going into the United States, which affects crime on the streets in many cities there.

Among the potential impacts of this action are the growing malign influence of both China and Russia in the region and how that might affect proximate Commonwealth countries such as Trinidad and Tobago or Guyana. There are unintended consequences from something that the United States might feel is completely legitimate. Finally, there is the issue of whether this legitimises Putin’s actions in Ukraine.

[Mr Falconer]

I am grateful for the experience that the right hon. Member brings to these questions. I want to be absolutely clear about the pre-eminent role of international law and how important that is to this Government and the actions we take. Those are, of course, points that we make to our allies as well.

[Edward Morello (West Dorset) (LD)]

I say to the right hon. Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) that I suspect he grants President Trump far too much credit when it comes to understanding the Munroe doctrine—but that is an aside.

What legal advice have the Government received or obtained in regard to the legality or possible legal implications of support for the US, albeit through intelligence sharing, for any potential strikes on Venezuela?

[Mr Falconer]

As the House will know, Ministers receive legal advice on a range of matters relating to foreign policy, and that advice is subject to legal and professional privilege.

[Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)]

I compliment the hon. Member for Bicester and Woodstock (Calum Miller) on securing this urgent question.

Could the Minister be very clear? What the US is doing, in bombing vessels at sea in both international and potentially territorial waters, is illegal, as is the harassment of Trinidadian fishing communities. The threat now of bombardment on the Venezuelan mainland is completely illegal within all sections of international law. Have the British Government made any representations to the US on this, and what role do the British Government play at the United Nations in the discussions about this issue? Does the Minister accept that this is an incredibly dangerous, massive build-up of military force in the Caribbean, and that it can only be dangerous to the people not just of Venezuela but of every other country and island within the region? Surely there should be some move towards peace, rather than allowing this military confrontation to develop.

[Mr Falconer]

The right hon. Gentleman brings considerable experience of Latin American issues to this House. On the legal position, I do not have much more to add. There has been extensive reporting over the last few days of some specific US strikes. I reiterate to him that they were not strikes in which the UK had any role, so we are not in a position to provide the fuller explanation that we would have, had we been involved—which we were not. On his wider question about build-up in the region, the House has heard his views.

[Martin Wrigley (Newton Abbot) (LD)]

I thank the Minister for his answers so far. I reiterate the question of the legality of the US bombing ships that are simply accused of carrying drugs. Is the Minister willing to actually say whether he thinks that is legal or not legal in international waters?

[Mr Falconer]

I want to be absolutely clear that the UK Government stand behind international law, in relation to both the law of the sea and international humanitarian law. In every forum, that is what we stand for. I am not in a position to make assessments on individual strikes, for the reasons that I have set out, but I once again underline our position on IHL and the law of the sea.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his careful and thoughtful answers on an issue that concerns us greatly. Given the widespread concern about the potential for civilian casualties from these strikes near Venezuela, what assessment has been made to ensure that UK co-operation in the region does not in any way contribute to harming civilians, and remains fully consistent with our human rights obligations?

[Mr Falconer]

As ever, the hon. Gentleman asks an important question in a courteous way. The prospects for the people of Venezuela must be at the heart of our deliberations. We have been engaged with civil society and, where necessary, with the Venezuelan Government. We will continue to keep the human rights of the people of Venezuela in our minds.

Oral Answers to Questions

Hamish Falconer Excerpts

Tuesday 2nd December 2025 Commons Chamber

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

1. If she will meet with representatives of the Dawood Family Justice Campaign to discuss the potential repatriation of their family members’ remains.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

I am deeply saddened that more than two decades after the tragic deaths of brothers Sakil and Saeed Dawood in 2002 the family are still waiting for Saeed’s remains to be repatriated. Following the conclusion of the criminal case this year, our consular teams remain fully committed to resolving this matter and continue to raise it with the Indian authorities to secure a resolution.

[Iqbal Mohamed]

Saeed and Sakil Dawood were abducted and murdered in Gujarat, India in February 2002. Their nephew, my constituent Imran Dawood, survived the attack. For over 23 years, the family have sought accountability and the return of the victims’ remains. The previous Labour and Tory Governments supported the family during the court trials, which ended earlier this year without justice. I wrote to the Foreign Secretary on 1 October regarding the Dawood Family Justice Campaign that seeks repatriation of the victims’ remains. We held a parliamentary event on 22 October, to which the FCDO leadership were invited. Will the Foreign Secretary meet the Dawood family and will she commit to providing urgent direct support to assist further in securing the remains of their family members, held by the Indian Government for over two decades, and help the family to achieve some level of closure?

[Mr Falconer]

We will.

--- Later in debate ---

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

9. What recent progress she has made on helping Alaa Abd el-Fattah to return to the UK.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

The Prime Minister raised this case with President Sisi on 18 November, and the Foreign Secretary has pressed for Mr el-Fattah’s return on multiple occasions with the Egyptian Foreign Minister, most recently on 25 November. Mr el-Fattah must be allowed to return to the UK and be reunited with his family.

[Olly Glover]

I am sure that the Minister will join me in welcoming Alaa’s recent release from detention in Egypt, and in thanking the many people who have campaign for and helped secure that over the years. This week, Alaa will miss the 14th birthday of his son Khaled, because the Egyptian authorities are not letting him travel. It is good to hear about the engagement that the Minister describes, but what further steps can he and the Prime Minister take to ensure that Alaa is able to return to the UK to spend Christmas with his family?

[Mr Falconer]

I have set out some of the steps we have taken already. I met Mr el-Fattah in Cairo last month, and am in regular contact with his family. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this case is right at the top of my priority list, as well as that of the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister.

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

Ryan Cornelius, a British citizen, has been unfairly incarcerated in Dubai for the past 17 years. His son was six when he went to prison; he is now 23 years old. Some 150 parliamentarians from both Houses wrote to the Dubai authorities asking for Mr Cornelius’s release on the UAE’s national day—today—to no avail. Can the Foreign Secretary use her good offices to bring some urgency to the issue of freeing this British citizen from unfair detention?

[Mr Falconer]

I thank my hon. Friend for his doughty advocacy for Mr Cornelius and a range of other consular cases overseas. He will know that the former Foreign Secretary has raised this case with the UAE and met the families on 4 September, and we will continue to provide them with support. I have seen these families myself, and I am sure that we will continue to do so at times that they find useful.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Richard Quigley (Isle of Wight West) (Lab)]

T5. My constituent has expressed deep concern for his family and friends in Syria who belong to a minority ethnic group and he seeks reassurance. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that all minority communities in Syria are protected?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

I thank my hon. Friend for that important question. We have consistently advocated for an inclusive political transition and underlined the importance of protecting the rights of all Syrians, publicly and in our engagement with the Syrian Government. The Foreign Secretary and I were clear on UK expectations for Syria’s transition when we met Syrian Foreign Minister al-Shabani last month: the protection of the rights of all Syrians, wide consultation with Syria’s diverse communities on next steps in the transition and, of course, holding perpetrators of violence to account.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

T8. Last month, I met Anoosheh Ashoori and opened his exhibit “Surviving Evin” at a Harrogate district Amnesty International branch event at Ripon cathedral. Given the continued use of arbitrary detention and state-sponsored kidnapping and hostage-taking by Iran, what steps are the Government taking to strengthen protections for British nationals when abroad?

[Mr Falconer]

I am familiar with the case that the hon. Member mentions. On all the other detention cases in Iran, we are working to ensure that those individuals have full access to consular assistance where they need it, as British nationals have across the world.

[Dr Beccy Cooper (Worthing West) (Lab)]

T9. We know that our official development assistance budget is currently reduced to allow for defence investment, but given the continuing need to improve global health, not least to guarantee our own health and security, will the Minister meet me and other concerned colleagues to discuss how best to continue to protect lifesaving health programmes and the work with women and girls that she has rightly prioritised?

--- Later in debate ---

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

Since the beginning of 2025, the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs has documented more than 1,600 attacks in the west bank perpetrated by Israeli settlers. What more can the UK do in terms of sanctions for illegal settler outposts and settlement trade and to hold the Israeli Government to account?

[Mr Falconer]

On 27 November, the UK, France, Germany and Italy collectively condemned the massive increase in settler violence against Palestinian civilians in the west bank. The pace of settlement building in the west bank continues unabated, as my hon. Friend knows well because she has been engaged on these issues for some time. Israel must stop settlement expansion, and it must crack down on settler violence, which has reached record levels. This Government have introduced three waves of sanctions focused on settlements, including against Mr Ben-Gvir.

[Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)]

In an earlier answer, the Foreign Secretary said that trade relations between China and the UK were “in our national interest”. To that extent, can I ask what conversations her Department had with Invest Northern Ireland prior to its signing a co-operation framework memorandum of understanding with the China Chamber of Commerce in the UK?

--- Later in debate ---

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

Parliamentarians for Peace was set up in 2023 in the aftermath of the terror attack in Israel and the killings of innocent Gazan civilians. On International Human Rights Day next Wednesday, will the Foreign Secretary, her team and everyone here join us for the Parliamentarians for Peace vigil that we will be hosting?

[Mr Falconer]

I will do my utmost, as I am sure other Ministers will.

[David Mundell (Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale) (Con)]

The child nutrition fund is one of the most effective ways to enhance the impact and value for money of official development assistance spending by mobilising domestic resources, with philanthropic and private capital having the potential to multiply UK ODA contributions as much as sixfold. In 2023, the UK Government committed to a £16 million contribution to fund. Will Ministers confirm that the commitment will be honoured despite the changes in ODA spending?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sir Oliver Dowden (Hertsmere) (Con)]

Today is UAE National Day, marking 54 years since its full independence. In that time, it has become one of our nation’s staunchest allies and a key investor, benefiting constituencies up and down the country. Will the Minister join me, as chairman of the all-party parliamentary group, in congratulating the UAE and recommitting to this key strategic relationship?

[Mr Falconer]

I will. I was delighted to see my Emirati counterpart just yesterday. We had a Minister representing the British Government at the Emirati National Day. It is a key partner. I welcome its investment all over the country, and we will take the relationship from strength to strength.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

In July 2024, the International Court of Justice ruled in its advisory opinion that Israeli settlements and occupation are illegal and needed to be ended and dismantled retrospectively. Can the Minister explain why the UK Government still have not responded to the advisory opinion after 17 months?

[Mr Falconer]

The advisory opinion is an important piece of international legal opinion, so we are taking our time and ensuring that we have an adequate response. But I remind my hon. Friend that it is not like nothing has happened over the course of those 17 months: we have recognised the Palestinian state. That is absolutely central in the deliberations of the advisory opinion, and we have done many other things, too, as have been discussed over the course of this session.

[Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green)]

What action will the UK Government take as a consequence of Israel’s flagrant violation of international law in establishing and expanding settlements? The lack of action creates a culture of impunity in which Israel feels able to green light the expansion of the E1 settlement, creating division between the west bank and east Jerusalem and putting a nail in the coffin of the two-state solution. Will the Foreign Secretary ban trade with illegal settlements to show that violating international law has consequences?

[Mr Falconer]

We have, from this Dispatch Box, announced three waves of sanctions, including on Mr Ben-Gvir and Mr Smotrich. I have discussed the questions around trade on a number of occasions with the hon. Lady. Any trade with settlements does not benefit from the trade arrangements in place with green line Israel. We continue to take steps to ensure that that regime is enforced in full, and we continue to look at these issues very carefully.