Israeli Settlements: Trade Ban

Debate between Jeff Smith and Joe Morris

Thursday 9th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jeff Smith]

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point and we should not overlook the role of services—it is not just about goods.

The Government will say, and have said, that it is difficult to enact in practice, but just because something is difficult does not mean we should not attempt to fulfil our obligations. Yes, there will be practical complications about enforcement, but complications are no reason to do nothing. They do not stop us committing to the principle. Then we can work out how we make it work. We have heard a number of examples of how we can make the situation work.

[Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab)]

I thank my hon. Friend for giving way; he is making a very powerful and informed speech, as did my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed). I just want to press him on that point. Is not the important thing now for the Government to commit in principle to a ban on settlement trade? We can agree with our international partners that we should work out the technicalities when possible, but such a commitment would give the public the moral clarity that we are prepared to act in line with our values.

[Jeff Smith]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right and puts it better than I did. We can figure out how to make a ban work once we have committed to the principle, and there are ways of doing it. As we have heard today, the Government already have processes in place to distinguish between goods coming from Israel and the OPT as a result of the processes on preferential access for Israeli goods, and we can build on that experience. We have heard that other countries are already instigating such measures, and we can learn from their experience.

A settlement trade ban is no longer a marginal or unrealistic demand; it is becoming a mainstream response. A ban on trade with settlements would not, on its own, bring peace to Israelis and Palestinians, but it would ensure that Britain is not contributing to an unlawful situation that the world’s highest court has concluded all states have a duty not to support. It would demonstrate that our principles are reflected not only in our words, but in our actions.