(2 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberThe Prime Minister was clear about his view at the weekend, including in an interview on CNN. It is clear where we stand on this. In terms of Northern Ireland legislation, the issue is a matter of conscience, and colleagues have an opportunity to vote based on that. The Prime Minister’s view is clear, and it is one that I share.
It is a failure of politics in the United States that, after all these years, it still relied on Roe v. Wade to guarantee abortion rights. The failure is to continue to allow the debate to be seen as an ideological pro-choice or pro-life position. We are not in a strong position to lecture the United States on that point, because we have done much the same ourselves. Is it not time that we led by example and reviewed our abortion laws, which are now more than 50 years old, and based them on a safe framework for terminating pregnancy in the interests of women, rather than their being characterised by absurd moral extremes?
In terms of our domestic policy on abortion, legislation in this House is a matter of conscience. Our policy is to ensure that women can access health services in a safe and secure way. That remains a key priority. We will work closely with abortion providers and other stakeholders on the provision of those services.
(3 years ago)
Commons ChamberI totally endorse what my hon. Friend is saying, but could I perhaps encourage her to amplify this point? I get a sense of déjà-vu from 30 years ago, when we looked the other way for too long, but involvement became inevitable. Will she emphasise that the timeliness and promptness of an intervention is all the more important?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, which is why this debate is so important. We as parliamentarians can raise the flare and ask the international community to sit up and take action now, not wait until the first shot is fired.
I ask that when the Minister convenes the Quint, the G7, or UN partners, we seek to secure an uplift to our personnel at NATO HQ Sarajevo. A joint exercise in the Balkans would also have much merit. As ethnic tensions rise, I ask that the UK activates the new conflict centre for which I lobbied and campaigned. It would map actors, identify those perpetrating identity-based violence, look at what multilateral activity is needed to prevent conflict, and act as an early warning system. I urge the Government to create a cross-Government, counter-atrocity strategy for what is happening in Bosnia, as well as in China and so many other places. Indeed, the Prime Minister has received an excellent letter about that from Protection Approaches, which is a fantastic charity. We need a strategy that would allow us to identify emerging tensions and early signs of human rights abuses, and trigger action before mass bloodshed.
One might ask why Dodik feels so emboldened to act in this way. When threatening the secession of Republika Srpska, Dodik stated:
“If anybody tries to stop us, we have friends who will defend us.”
Those friends—they say you should judge a man by his friends—are Russia, Serbia, China, and even a handful of EU member states. Dodik himself has named Hungary, Slovenia, and even, in his words, “the Brussels Administration” as having an understanding of his position. Some of those hostile states are using their influence to foment instability and ethnic tension, to distract from their own heinous actions at home, to secure their own territorial ambitions, or to feed instability in Europe’s near neighbourhood.
Dodik has stated publicly:
“When I go to Putin there are no requests. He just says, ‘what is it I can help with?’”
At this moment, Dodik is with Putin in Russia. I fear what he is asking, and clearly he will receive whatever he asks for. In the last few years, Putin has delivered semi- automatic weapons to Republika Srpska—2,500 to be exact, that we know of. He has sent his paramilitary motorcycle gang, known as the Night Wolves, to bring pro-secessionist messages to the streets of Bosnia. China has steadily increased its presence, and Bosnia’s international debt is now held by China. If we do not support Bosnia, it will find itself in the same situation as Montenegro—indebted, and facing the reality of China’s wolf warrior diplomacy as its loans become due next year. Dodik must learn that Bosnia also has friends, with none more committed to Bosnia’s stability than the UK. We must use deterrence diplomacy to demonstrate our resolve, and to stop autocrats making our neighbourhood their playground.
I ask the Minister to ensure that we engage with Serbia, and call on it to stop telling us behind the scenes that it wishes to prevent conflict and division, while in the same breath giving Dodik platform after platform. We must engage heavily with western Balkan nations to demonstrate that our eye is firmly on the region, and we must counter Russian and Chinese overtures towards them.
(3 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberI am very pleased to be able to speak in this debate on the very important issue of preventing sexual violence in conflict and I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Totnes (Anthony Mangnall) on bringing this matter to the House. We probably do not spend enough time tackling these humanitarian issues in this place—we spend far too much time playing knockabout—but this country is at its best when it shows global leadership on these humanitarian matters.
We know that sexual violence is a weapon of war. It has been since time immemorial, but perhaps only in recent years have we collectively faced up to that. That might be the case for any number of reasons. Interestingly, it is a fundamental part of the strategy where conflicts are between ethnicities and, when we think about it, it is pretty obvious why. Although we readily talk about the murders and killings that take place as part of an ethnic genocide, we talk rather less about the rape and sexual violence that is associated with it. That has to change. We need to face up to the fact that men are perpetrating terrible, heinous, evil acts against women and girls specifically, but also against men and boys. Rape and sexual violence are being used as a way of exerting power, and humiliating and degrading people. We need to show that and shame the perpetrators out of it. Things such as the Geneva convention have pointed out international and multilateral actions against gratuitous execution, and we need to do exactly the same about rape and sexual violence.
I think that “sexual violence” is often a vanilla-sounding term for something that is fundamentally evil, so let us call it what it is. It is rape; forced incest; mutilation; and buggery. It is the ultimate defiling of human beings, and the ultimate corruption of an act that should be about love and intimacy. In that sense, it is a crime against humanity and one that we should show global leadership on in tackling.
I am very proud that William Hague, when Foreign Secretary, showed that global leadership on the issue by establishing this initiative. It was a very personal interest of his and in that sense he put it front and centre of foreign policy at the time. I hope we can use this presidency of the G7 to reboot that agenda, particularly in the light of the other ethnic conflicts going on in the world at this time, which we have heard about in previous speeches.
I remind the Government that this is entirely complementary to their wider policy towards women and girls. Domestically, we are for the first time having a proper violence against women and girls strategy, so it makes perfect sense to take that into the international field. At the heart of our international aid programmes is the focus on education for girls around the world. We recognise the immensely civilising influence that the education of girls has on societies. So it is absolutely consistent that we put the prevention of sexual violence at the heart of our future agenda.
As I said earlier, since the dawn of time, rape has been a weapon of war and it is important that we continue to treat it as a serious crime as we prosecute on a global basis, but it is only recently that we have begun to understand just how prevalent it is. It is only by making sure that we spread that understanding of how prevalent it is that we will encourage anyone to take action.
The conflict in Bosnia was the first time the international community recognised properly that rape was being used as part of the military strategy. We understand that there were as many as 50,000 rapes during that conflict. When we think that each of us represents 80,000 constituents, it brings home how significant this is. When we remember Srebrenica, we always remember the murder of all those men and boys, but we never talk about the rapes. I was a student at university during that conflict. I remember seeing the pictures of the camps and the shelling in Sarajevo, and hearing about the fact that this was an ethnic conflict between Bosniaks, Croats and Serbs, but I never heard about the rapes. We will not be able to take actions until we are honest about this. We should not just see this as an inevitable fact of any ethnic conflict. We have to call it out for what it is and say that it is unacceptable. I am pleased that, in prosecuting the war crimes following the conflict in Bosnia, rape was included. It was seen as a genocide and as a crime against humanity.
It is inevitable in an ethnic conflict that rape will be a fundamental part of the strategy. Again, we need to highlight exactly what we are talking about. In the Bosnian conflict, rape camps were established where women were systematically raped and released only once they were pregnant. Gang rape and public rapes were common. Men were forced to rape their family members. There was one report of a 14-year-old boy being forced to rape his mother. Forced oral sex and forced anal sex were also common, and in some prisons detainees were forced to rape other men. How horrific that this should be happening just 20 years ago in Europe. Once we face the facts about sexual violence in conflict, we cannot look the other way. This country is a great country that shows leadership on these matters, and it should please continue to do so.
(4 years ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
I congratulate the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr Carmichael) on securing the debate and reminding us of those days, pre lockdown, when we could travel and go on fact-finding visits. I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. That was a truly fascinating visit to a long-standing ally of this country, but I recognise that there are obviously still many issues about which there are ongoing discussions and challenges.
I highlight the issues that a number of colleagues raised regarding the blockade. It is, of course, illegal, and we strongly hope that those issues can be dealt with in the immediate future. The right hon. Gentleman was right to highlight that the reasons for it are very serious. I gently suggest that terror issues emanate from a number of states across the world, and that it would perhaps be more constructive to deal with them collaboratively, as Governments in dialogue with each other, rather than by taking illegal measures designed to inflict economic damage.
As it happens, the country has responded extremely positively in the wake of the blockade. It is a case of “What does not destroy me makes me stronger.” During our visit, we visited the new port that the Government constructed in order to import supplies directly, given that they cannot get them through their normal established trading routes. As the hon. Member for Thurrock, with the port of Tilbury in my constituency, I often describe my constituency as the ports capital of the UK. In that regard, I have to remind my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess) that it is far more important than the so-called city of Southend. That new port was a hugely impressive operation. London built its wealth as a port city, but as trade became more sophisticated and ships ever bigger, ports had to become bigger, and so the port of London moved east to my constituency. We are very much constrained by the available space in delivering a modern port, so it was truly a revelation to see this fantastic new facility. I pay tribute to the engineering feat accomplished there. I look forward to that port building from strength to strength, as well as to some good shipping line links between Tilbury in my constituency and London Gateway, and indeed, Qatar, so congratulations to them.
We have had a number of references to human rights issues surrounding Qatar. I tend to take the view that although it is absolutely important that this country, which prides itself on being liberal and having the rule of law, should be at the forefront of pushing for human rights and tackling discrimination and oppression wherever they occur around the world, equally, we need to be a bit less holier than thou about it. It takes a long time to foster cultural change, and the truth of the matter is we are not as perfect as we like to think we are. Some of the issues come down to how we really tackle behaviour and establish better human rights. It is very easy to pass a law and say, “This is now the law and this is the state of play.” But for that to really filter down into changes of behaviour and good practice takes an awfully long time.
We must not be accused of looking the other way when there are human rights abuses, but we also need to give credit where it is due. My hon. Friend the Member for Gravesham (Adam Holloway) mentioned the camp that we visited. It is true that the facilities were very good there. I have visited similar places in the Emirates, and I think we need to be real when we say that lots of countries rely on imported immigrant labour to deliver the jobs that they are not prepared to do. Some countries are better than others at ensuring the rights of those people are protected. Although I am satisfied that the direction of travel in Qatar is extremely positive, there is clearly a way to go.
Obviously, we welcome the minimum wage legislation. At the instigation of the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Justin Madders), we actually met some workers who clearly acknowledged that the opportunity to work in Qatar was life changing and very good for them and their families. However, there were still some issues where their rights could have been enhanced, so that is very much still a work in progress.
I would also say that there are countries whose economies are entirely driven by sending workers overseas to repatriate money into those countries. Personally, I find that morally obscene. We, as a nation, should be encouraging them to become more sustainable. I consider those countries that benefit from such practice as talent-stripping developing countries. It is all very well to have a good record on dishing out international aid, but if, at the same time, we are taking their best talent to work here, I am afraid that becomes somewhat hypocritical. We need to acknowledge that when it comes to manning the NHS, we do the same to countries such as the Philippines as Qatar does to countries such as Nepal to get workers. We should be a bit more honest with ourselves about that.
We can also do better on some issues. I mentioned shipping. Again, we turn a blind eye to the fact that lots of the crews that work our ships and keep our supermarkets stocked are also working in conditions far worse than those that we saw in Qatar. Let us acknowledge that this is a collective endeavour for the whole world to tackle in ensuring that all workers across the world are treated fairly and are given the rights that they are due to expect.
My hon. Friend the Member for Southend West (Sir David Amess) mentioned the question of women. When we went to see the Emir, I was very pleased to have the opportunity to discuss this. Again, I was the only woman in the room, but I am quite used to being the only woman in the room in this country in meetings to do with politics, as I am sure you are, Ms Rees. It is not peculiar to countries in the middle east. I said that we welcome the fact they are moving towards democratic elections, but I asked what the prospects were for seeing women elected. I was very pleased that the Emir said he was retaining a number of positions that would be directly appointed by him. He gave a very clear commitment that if a sufficient number of women were not directly elected, he would use his power of appointment to make sure women achieved representation. That is an extremely constructive position to take. I put that point to the Minister because I hope that that is something that we will hold the Emir to. Frankly, having women in politics civilises nations. I am sure everyone would agree, so let us make sure we do our bit to encourage that.
As we approach the World cup, everyone is very excited. I share the enthusiasm of my hon. Friend the Member for Southend West for the football stadium. I am not the biggest fan of football, to be quite frank, but it is a major engineering feat and I do not think I have ever been so cool and relaxed sitting in a football stadium, despite the heat outside. It is quite special. I know that a lot of concern has been expressed about the treatment of tourists who go to see the football, with particular concerns about gay rights. Again, these things were discussed and there was some understanding of the issues, but I reaffirm the point made by the right hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland. In this country, it is only very recently that we have established gay rights in the way that we now take for granted. We can welcome the tone that has been taken about how tourists will be treated as part of the World cup, but we must recognise that there is much more to do.
I have little more to add. I congratulate again the right hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. I look forward to strengthening Britain’s relationship with Qatar and to Britain doing its best to make sure that relations within the GCC are returned to a more constructive position.
(11 years, 1 month ago)
Ministerial CorrectionsTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many staff in his Department were made redundant in (a) 2010-11, (b) 2011-12 and (c) 2012-13; and how many such staff received payments in lieu of notice.
[Official Report, 14 October 2013, Vol. 568, c. 546-47W.]
Letter of correction from Hugh Robertson:
An error has been identified in the written answer given to the hon. Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) on 14 October 2013.
The full answer given was as follows:
In 2010-11, 131 staff left the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), at a cost of £15.3 million. 118 of these left under old exit schemes.
In 2011-12, 89 staff left the FCO, at a cost of £5.3 million.
In 2012-13, 55 staff left the FCO, at a cost of £4 million.
The correct answer should have been:
(11 years, 5 months ago)
Commons ChamberI will endeavour to be brief. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton South (James Wharton) on his articulate, professional introduction of this excellent Bill. I hope that I am able to support him all the way to Royal Assent.
I want to remark on the timetable for this referendum. We have heard a lot of talk about those who want a vote now. That is fine, for those who are of the view that our current relationship with Europe is satisfactory or for those just want to leave the EU, but the reality is that most of the British people, and most of the Conservative party, are in the same space as me, thinking that there can be a role and a constructive relationship with Europe, but that at the moment it is not right. Europe simply has too much power. We need the opportunity to seek a renegotiation and put that to the British people.
It is important that we give the British people their say. As has been said, there has been one referendum, seeking consent for membership of a common market. That was all the British people signed up to, but we now find that we are part of a political union that interferes in all aspects of our lives. The British people do not like it. It will be bad for the body politic if we do not get behind my hon. Friend’s Bill and endorse the concept of a referendum, but that referendum must follow a debate about what we think our relationship with Europe should look like. It is time that this country took charge of its relationship with Europe and made it work in our best interests.
This Bill, if it receives a Second Reading today, will strengthen the Prime Minister’s hand in any negotiations. It will tell Europe that we mean business and that we are determined to get our powers back. The Prime Minister can then say, quite categorically, “We don’t want any more interference in our employment laws. We don’t want any more benefit tourists. We don’t want any more messing around in our criminal justice system. We want our sovereignty back.” The British people simply will not support a relationship with Europe until it gets back to what it was set up for: trade and trade only.
This relationship is far too important to be decided purely by Members of this House. This is about Britain and its place in the world and we must let the people of Britain decide.
(11 years, 10 months ago)
Commons ChamberI want to express my pride that Britain is leading the world in tackling this important issue. Given that so many conflicts around the world are ethnic in nature, it is perhaps not surprising that sexual violence as a weapon of war is becoming increasingly prevalent. I encourage my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary to make every effort to take the rest of the world with him on his quest.
We have talked about some of the countries around the world where rape is being witnessed. I remind the House that we should not think that this is limited to faraway lands or countries that are less developed than our own, because it happened right here in Europe less than 25 years ago. I feel some shame that it happened so close to our doorstep. It is also shaming that so few people in Bosnia-Herzegovina have been brought to justice for the many rapes that took place there. The intent to dehumanise and degrade was an obvious weapon of war in that ethnic conflict.
I am mainly moved to address the House because of a story from Kosovo that I heard. I had the privilege of visiting Kosovo some 18 months ago. I met a very inspirational lady there, and I want to share some of the things she said. We can talk glibly about sexual violence in theoretical terms, but this story really brings it to life.
Flora Brovina is a Member of Parliament in Kosovo and a well-known Albanian feminist and poet. She was a paediatrician by profession. As the political situation in Kosovo deteriorated in the 1990s and fighting broke out, Flora was one of the community leaders. She rallied support for women and got involved in giving health care to victims of the war and giving shelter to those who were orphaned.
As a consequence, she became a high-profile target for the Serb paramilitaries and, sure enough, she was abducted in 1999. She was tortured and interrogated before being tried and convicted of terrorist activities, but thankfully, due to international pressure, she was eventually released. By then her family had claimed asylum in the US. It was probably anticipated that she would follow them, but that was not for Flora. She wanted to go back to Kosovo to help the women and children who were victims of the war.
Flora is doing a great deal of work to support that conflict’s victims of rape. She has told me in great detail about the impact it has had on some of those women. The circumstances of the rapes that took place are horrifying. They have been well documented by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. I will not go into the details, but I would encourage other Members to do so, because they bring to life the horror of the use of sexual violence in conflicts.
Flora also told me about how families treat women. Although this is a European society that is not very far from us, it is very rural and, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has said, a society in which women’s rights are not as advanced as they are here. Given the ethnic nature of the conflict, the Serbs knew how those of the Muslim faith would treat victims of rape, so it was deliberately used as a weapon.
The rights that we enjoy in the UK mean that it is difficult for us to grasp the impact on those women, who are often ostracised. It is natural for people to look to their families for support but, often, these families witnessed the rapes, so there is a double crime and it is very difficult for the women to grasp what has happened to them. It is difficult to understand just how lonely the victims’ plight can be. Flora was anxious for me to highlight the fate of those women and I am pleased to be able to do so today. I am also humbled by it, because all I am doing is talking. The day-to-day suffering of the women and, often, the children born as a consequence of what happened to them is very real.
That is why I am so proud of the initiative being taken by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. We must go after the perpetrators. It is unacceptable that only 30 people have been convicted in Bosnia. We must also make sure that we do our bit through our humanitarian work to give support to victims, so that they are not left alone, as they have been in Kosovo.
I cannot do adequate justice to the forgotten victims of sexual violence in Kosovo, but I hope that today I have done my bit to bring to life what it means in practice and to give added resolve to the Government to ensure that this issue is central to our humanitarian and diplomatic activities.