(2 days, 6 hours ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for his support. I know that he has extensive experience on these issues, and he is right that many, diverse voices across this country have welcomed our actions.
The Minister has been very generous in giving way. In his discussions with the Government of Israel, has he ever raised the issue of Israel never defining what its borders actually are? That seems to me to be a fundamental problem in any discussions on this issue going forward.
Ultimately, we have always been very clear, as the right hon. Member will know, that these matters must be determined in future negotiations. Fundamentally, when we talk about the actions that we are taking, we are clear about 1967 and the green line. When it comes to the actions that I will talk about, we make very clear distinctions between illegal settlements and green-line Israel.
The Foreign Secretary announced new sanctions regimes, and powers through which we will ban trade in goods from illegal Israeli settlements. We will also take action on services; we will create new designation powers to go after individuals and companies that support, facilitate or profit from illegal settlement activity. We will ban advertising or the promotion of land and property in illegal settlements, and we will strengthen our existing global human rights sanctions regime to go after those who defy international humanitarian law, be it in Palestine or around the world. I can think of a range of other contexts for this, as sanctions Minister, and a range of other matters that Members raise in this House, including in relation to Sudan, Yemen and Myanmar. It is important that the Government have the power to act against those who defy international humanitarian law, deny access to humanitarian aid or frustrate the actions of humanitarian organisations. We are using our existing global human rights regime to sanction several extremist settlers who have supported or incited acts of violence against Palestinian communities.
Monica Harding
The hon. Member is absolutely right that America has a critical role to play in this conflict.
To give some numbers, as of 6 August, at least 300 children have reportedly been killed in Gaza in the 300 days since the ceasefire was announced—an average of one child a day. Gazans continue to remain in the grip of a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in the strip. The UK Government must do more to alleviate the humanitarian crises there and the one growing in the west bank. Over 2 million people in Gaza are living on around 30% of the territory, sheltering in unsafe conditions among destroyed buildings, rubble and waste. Some 70% of Gaza remains under IDF control. The UK must now apply genuine pressure to Netanyahu’s Government to ensure that food, aid, medical supplies and other essentials can reach Gazans now, without impediment and under the auspices of the UN, and that children and all civilians are protected.
I have called on UK Ministers to pressure Netanyahu’s Government to lift their arbitrary restrictions on non-governmental organisations supplying humanitarian aid to the strip. Last week, I noted in this Chamber that more than 1.4 million people in Gaza are acutely food insecure, yet Israel’s current interpretation of dual-use restrictions means that Palestinians are routinely and systematically denied essential items, including those needed for rehabilitation by the tens of thousands of people who have suffered life-changing injuries during this conflict.
The Foreign Secretary agreed that blocking those goods was appalling and seemed to suggest that it was a strategy. What does the Minister think is the strategy of the Israeli Government? Will he put pressure on them to undo those dual-good restrictions to allow the Palestinians to be self-sufficient, and to ensure that aid is sustainable and that they are no longer expected to live hand to mouth?
From October, the World Food Programme will cut the number of people it can feed in Gaza from 1.1 million to 600,000—not because the need has reduced, but because the money has run out. Those are people who will go without food, in a territory where 100,000 women and children are already expected to need treatment for malnutrition in the coming year. The UK is the ninth-largest donor to World Food Programme operations in Palestine, behind the USA, Germany and France. Our annual contribution fell from $18 million in 2024 to $9.3 million last year, and to just $4 million this year. That is a reduction of 78%. The Government cannot truly speak of their commitment to the Palestinian people while presiding over cuts like those. Will the Minister explain how those two things are reconcilable?
The brutal cuts to our aid budget have meant that our response to all humanitarian crises is limited. I have asked many Ministers in this House when we should expect at the very least a road map for restoring the 0.7% aid budget—a commitment that we in this House have enshrined in law. Again, can the Minister set out that timeline? Can he confirm that his party—the party of the Department for International Development and making poverty history—is committed to seeing our aid budget returned in full?
The hon. Member is making a very strong point about the lack of food security for the Palestinian people in Gaza. Does she recognise that Israel now occupies around 70% of Gaza, so the population is restricted to 30% of the area? Some years ago, there was a huge move to make Gaza once again a major food-growing area, which traditionally it always had been. Does she think that should be part of the development process again?
Monica Harding
I 100% agree. I made the point last week that the dual-use restrictions mean that people can bring an egg into Gaza, but not a chicken; and a potato, but not a potato tuber. That means Gazans are living hand to mouth and are absolutely reliant on the Israeli state for their wellbeing and health.
The Government must engage with international partners and the Israeli authorities to ensure that journalists and human rights investigators are allowed into the strip. That is essential for accountability for war crimes on both sides of the conflict. We believe that robustly challenging the illegal actions of this extremist Israeli Government is compatible both with staunch support for the rights of the states of Israel and Palestine to exist and with resolute support for the rights of British Jews to live free from the scourge of anti-Jewish hatred. Antisemitism has no place in our society. We stand in solidarity with the Jewish community and all those affected, and we reaffirm our commitment to tackling hatred in all its forms. Those who spread antisemitic hatred or incite violence against Jews—whether online, at marches or elsewhere—must be stopped. It is never acceptable.
Lastly, this is a debate on Israel and Palestine, but any serious discussion of the situation must also consider the situation in Lebanon. In Lebanon, more than 350,000 people remain displaced, and more than 1,200 civilians have been killed in the latest phase of fighting, including children and health workers. Israel has reportedly seized and occupied 230 square miles of Lebanese territory, creating a yellow line restricted zone similar to that in Gaza. The Israeli Government must cease their military operations in southern Lebanon and withdraw from the country.
I was unable to attend the House last week when the Foreign Secretary made his statement on Israel and Palestine, so I wanted to take this opportunity to put on record my support for what he proposed.
On the day of the announcement, I tuned into Radio 4’s “Six o’clock News”. Included in the headlines was a sentence from what the Foreign Secretary had said. Also broadcast were some of the comments made by the Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), when he, too, supported what the Foreign Secretary said. He added how much he admired the Jewish people and their faith, but deeply regretted what is happening on the west bank. It is in that context that I make clear that I share my right hon. Friend’s views of the Jewish people. He said he was a Conservative Friend of Israel. I, too, put myself in that category. My criticisms are of the Israeli Government.
After the appalling events of 7 October, it was inevitable that there would be a response from the Israelis, and rightly so, but tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed, many of them children. Surely, it would have been possible to target the leaders of Hamas without the loss of those innocent Palestinian lives? I can understand the determination of Israel to take an extremely robust approach to defending itself, when there are those in the region who want to wipe the country from the face of the map. Its actions in that respect are justified, but I ask the Israeli Government why that involves repeated violations of international law. If the international community seriously believes in a two-state solution, we need to call out Israeli policy for what it is: action to prevent that ever happening.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way; he is generous with his time. Is he aware that both the Prime Minister and the alternative Prime Minister in Israel have both said, in terms, that they do not accept the idea of the entity of a Palestinian state?
I was aware that Ministers in Israel had indicated that. I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his intervention.
As I say, if the international community is serious in its support of a two-state solution, it needs to call out the fact that Israel is deliberately implementing policies to thwart that. I can understand and fully support Israel as the home of the Jewish people. They should therefore recognise the desire for the Palestinian people to have their own homeland.
When I was elected in 2010, my focus was entirely on my constituency. I was determined to earn myself a second term. During the five years of the coalition Government, if memory serves me correctly, I undertook just two foreign trips. I was mindful of the fact that the Israel-Palestine issue might well come to the fore and that I might have to make a decision on it, so I travelled to Israel. My first visit was actually to Gaza. Interestingly enough, when we got to the border we had a call from the consulate in Jerusalem advising us not to cross the border, but having got that far, we were determined and insisted on crossing over. I witnessed the tragedy of what the residents there had to face—it is much worse now, of course—and the events I witnessed had a considerable impact on how I viewed this seemingly never-ending dispute. In October 2014, I was one of 39 Conservative Members who supported a motion to recognise Palestine. Sadly, only three of those Conservatives remain, one of whom, the Father of the House, I mentioned earlier. I appreciate that to some extent it is only symbolic, but nevertheless it is extremely important.
Returning to last week’s announcement, how effective it will be remains to be seen. One thing is certain: public opinion is broadly supportive. The views expressed in my inbox, and by those who visit my surgery to raise the issue, are most certainly critical of Israel—I should be more specific and say the Israeli Government. One particular constituent I have in mind is so passionate about the issue—she comes to see me on repeat occasions—that she will be absolutely delighted. Though I say to the House, as I said to my constituent, who regularly travels to London to take part in the many demonstrations, and contrary to the views expressed by a Member earlier, I do not think that the continued demonstrations are actually beneficial to the Palestinian cause.
Israel is an ally, a democracy and a nation that, as I said at the outset, has every right to exist and to defend itself. I fully support that, but its Government need to recognise that they are losing further support. If they continue with their illegal acts, that will only continue.
It is a pleasure to follow the speech from the hon. Member for Bradford West (Naz Shah), who has made a huge contribution to supporting the Palestinian people over many years in this House.
This debate is obviously very welcome. I acknowledge that the Government’s statement last week on resetting policy is a very important and highly significant change in Government policy. While I welcome some aspects of it, I feel that it does not go far enough, and it is taking far too long to bring what was announced into operation. It is also very unclear what kind of ultimate sanctions there would be against Israel in the event of it evading the sanctions concerning Israeli settlements, and what military co-operation there will be with Israel in the future. These things must be clarified. I hope that when the Minister replies, we will learn a little more about the details of the policy, and in particular why the Government have given themselves so many months to bring it into operation.
Succeeding generations will ask very serious questions of all of us politicians. Our children are taught in school the horrors of the Holocaust against the Jewish people, and of so many other genocides around the world. They are taught the way in which racism leads into that horrible scenario. They will ask why we were unable to do anything to prevent the massive loss of life in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli forces.
As the hon. Member for Bradford West pointed out, 73,000 people have been killed in Gaza. Those millions of tonnes of rubble hide many more bodies. The Israel Defence Forces will cart some of the rubble away, so that it can become hardcore for buildings in Israel, but there will be bodies in that rubble. There will be human remains there and DNA evidence. We are seeing the most massive killing of innocent civilian life in Gaza, and we have not been able to stop it; it still carries on. There are many statistics that one could quote, but a simple one is this: it is estimated that there are 63 million tonnes of rubble in Gaza. There are 2 million people in Gaza. That is more than 30 tonnes of rubble per person. Almost every building has been damaged or destroyed.
The destruction has moved on to the west bank, where settlers are destroying land, chopping down olive trees, polluting wells, driving people out of their homes, burning villages and driving people away. That is the sort of activity that the frontiersmen from Europe—the white people who invaded native American land in the wild west—undertook against Indian villagers. That is the equivalent of the horror that is going on there.
Sometimes we seem to pretend that we can continue normal relations with Israel, but these are not random illegal acts, committed by people acting alone; these acts are condoned by the Government of Israel. The settlers are protected and armed by Israeli police and the IDF. It gets worse and worse. As many colleagues have pointed out, the idea of a contiguous Palestinian state disappears if E1 is settled in the way that the E1 plan proposes.
That is not the end of it. Israeli forces are now occupying a very large part of southern Lebanon, and it looks to me as though they have every intention of remaining there. Israel is also taking part in the wholly illegal bombardment of Iran, alongside President Trump. Is it not time that we were a bit stronger and more assertive against these wholly illegal acts? The Government have made it very clear that they recognise international law and international legal instruments, and that they expect every other country to do the same. Good—that also applies to Israel.
When the Foreign Secretary made his statement, very interestingly he acknowledged the role that public opinion in Britain has had in bringing about this change in policy. I have been on a very large number of marches about Palestine, and there are probably about a million people in Britain who have made their voices very clearly heard, either by attending a demonstration or sending letters, emails, petitions—all sorts of things. The marches are made up of large numbers of people, some of whom have never been involved in anything political at all before. They are a very wide range of people; they are Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist and humanist. It is very clear that we will not allow any of the marches to descend into any kind of racist hate speech. They are marches of support and solidarity with people who are victims of the most atrocious bombardment. I thank all those people who have come along and made their voices very well heard.
It is important that the Government go a bit further on accepting the process of international law. I attended the ICJ hearing for the South African application. It was a deeply moving experience to sit there in the Peace Palace in the Hague—a beautiful, stunning building—listening to the South African application. My mind went back to the apartheid years—all the demonstrations to try to bring about an end to apartheid, and the bravery and all the suffering of the South African people in trying to throw off the yoke of apartheid. I thought, “How brave of South Africa to present that case.” What was their reward? Extra tariffs and tax by President Trump.
Later, I was in South Africa with my good friend Dr Mustafa Barghouti, addressing a meeting in Cape Town about Palestine. At the meeting was an elderly man who had been part of the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa. He had been very badly beaten by the South African army and police force while he was campaigning to end apartheid in his country. He got up and said that the treatment of the people of Palestine is far worse than anything that happened to the black community in South Africa. There was not carpet-bombing of cities and villages there, of the sort that the Israeli forces are carrying out.
If we respect international law, then arrest warrants issued by the ICC for a number of individuals in the Israeli Government must be enforced, should those individuals show up in this country. As my hon. Friends the Members for Blackburn (Mr Hussain) and for Birmingham Perry Barr (Ayoub Khan) pointed out, if the ICJ considers that acts of genocide could be committed—that is its opinion, and it is a very important opinion—then anyone who provides arms to Israel and provides support for acts of genocide becomes complicit in genocide. I hope that the Government understand the dangers of all that. I hope that we will be very assertive about what the settlers and settlements are doing, and that we will impose real sanctions against Israel.
We must recognise that although the Israeli body politic, including all the major parties, essentially supports the strategy pursued by Netanyahu—perhaps in mildly different forms, but fundamentally they are of the same mind—there are people in Israel who absolutely oppose what their Government are doing and absolutely detest the way in which the Palestinian people are being treated. Are we to be silent bystanders while these ghastly acts of genocide go on—as people are denied food and decent medical facilities?
As other Members have pointed out, Britain’s role in all this is not one of a recent arriviste on the scene. We have been involved since the 19th century in the issue of settlements, and in preventing the Palestinian people from asserting their statehood. We were obviously involved in the Balfour declaration and the secret Sykes-Picot agreement. For historical reasons, moral reasons and reasons of courage, we should be far clearer about our role in all this. We must bring peace and justice to all the peoples of the region and oppose racism in absolutely any form in society, in this country or anywhere else.
I am conscious that other colleagues wish to speak, so the last thing I will say is this. I introduced a ten-minute rule Bill calling for a public inquiry into Britain’s policy in Gaza, like the Franks report into previous conflicts and Sir John Chilcot’s inquiry into Britain’s policy on Iraq, because we need to know what was going on in the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence, and what was happening at RAF Akrotiri and in other places. When it became clear that the Bill would not make any progress in the House, Professor Neve Gordon, Dr Shahd Hammouri and I put together a tribunal. We held a Gaza inquiry over two days in Church House Westminster, and we heard from 29 expert witnesses. It was a deeply moving occasion. We listened to young people from Gaza explain what their life had been like. We listened to medical practitioners talk about the horror of doing everything they had been taught that they could not do: they had inflicted pain on people to try to prevent further pain, and had amputated the limbs of children without anaesthetic, antiseptic or even water. After all their heroic work, they would think that, only a few kilometres away from where they were operating in ghastly conditions under a piece of canvas, there was food, water, electricity, medicine and antiseptic—everything that was needed—but it was deliberately denied to the Palestinian people by the IDF.
Aid workers have been killed. As was said earlier, the limited aid that gets in is deliberately designed to prevent a sustainable way of life in Gaza. Some foodstuffs can be imported, but potato tubers and seeds, which could be used to develop agriculture for the future, cannot. Our Gaza inquiry pointed out the depravity of what was going on. I thank everyone who took part in it, but I want a proper public inquiry, so that we know what those surveillance flights were doing. The former Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, said that there are things going on at RAF Akrotiri that he was not able to talk about. It is time that somebody talked about what is going on there, because we need to know the truth. The truth will help set us free. I believe that the truth will help bring about what is essential: peace and justice for the people of Palestine.
Several hon. Members rose—
(1 week, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for the conversation we had earlier. He raises such an important issue about the healthcare crisis in Gaza. The answer is that we want to do as much as we can as a country, and as much as we can working with others. I spoke to the Jordanian Foreign Minister on Sunday about an event that we are going to hold at the UN General Assembly, and one of the things that we both agreed on was that we want to move things forward and make a difference. I absolutely promise my hon. Friend that that is what we will endeavour to do.
Will the Foreign Secretary recognise that the hundreds of thousands of us who have marched and met in support of the Palestinian people, be they Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu or Buddhist, have done so out of a motivation to bring about justice and peace for the people of Palestine? Will he specifically call on Israel to withdraw in totality from Gaza—not just the 70% it occupies now, but the remaining part that it is bombarding? If military sanctions are to mean anything, surely that must include an end to the sharing of surveillance information by the RAF overflying Gaza, the use of RAF Akrotiri and Israel’s ability to manufacture weapons at Elbit Systems factories in this country. If we are serious about ending a military occupation, then we have to play a full part in achieving it.
I want to see Israel withdraw from Gaza and I want to see Hamas disarm. That is the whole point of the 20-point plan—I agree with the right hon. Member on that. Campaigners on the issue have played an important role. The way in which young people and people across the country—not just in Britain but across the world—have been mobilised on this issue should tell all of us in this House something about the deep sense of injustice that people feel about what has unfolded. On the right hon. Member’s point about intelligence—I want to be careful on this—we are not, in any sense, helping with the occupation, but we have important and valued intelligence and security relationships with Israel.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Falconer
I am sure a Minister from the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero will give the hon. Gentleman such an assurance—I do not think there is any concern in that area—but let me be direct. We get a lot of energy via the strait of Hormuz. The strait of Hormuz is clearly not open, so if the hon. Gentleman is asking me, “What do the supply chains for British energy look like?”, the answer is that they look like global energy supply chains: under very considerable pressure, and under more pressure because of what Iran has done this week.
Could I take the Minister back to the question raised by the hon. Member for Poplar and Limehouse (Apsana Begum)? How many US flights have recently taken off from the UK to bomb Iran? When decisions on granting permission for those flights to take place are made, is the Minister consulted on the target and purpose of them, and is he really satisfied that anyone in Iran thinks these are anything other than aggressive attacks on the people of Iran?
This is an awful situation—it is very, very dangerous in many, many ways. Is it not time to try to bring the good offices of Pakistan back in, to try to arrange a further ceasefire and a long-term, peaceful arrangement to stop this conflict in the strait of Hormuz, which is so dangerous?
Mr Falconer
The arrangements that govern UK-US military co-operation and the use of our bases have been set out in some detail by Defence Ministers. They remain in place and they include provisions that the Secretary of State for Defence has discussed on the Floor of the House a number of times before. I agree with the right hon. Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn) that we want to get back to a ceasefire. Pakistan has played a vital role, as have Qatar and other mediators. I have been in regular contact with mediators from a range of countries, and I was glad to discuss these issues during my recent visit to Islamabad.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberThank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Interruption.]
Order. I remind the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) that he must not walk in front of another Member when I am calling him.
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, global arms expenditure has now reached $2.8 trillion, with the USA, Europe, Russia and China spending the largest amounts. At any time during the NATO summit was there any strategic discussion about the way the world is spiralling out of control, with massive levels of expenditure on armaments, increasing wars, cuts in overseas aid by almost every country, and attacks on welfare budgets in every country as well? We are becoming a world that is increasingly at war, with increasing poverty at home. I realise that none of these issues is simple, but surely there needs to be some strategic look at what we are doing, or is the history of the 21st century going to be how we allowed the world to burn and spiral into war while increasing poverty at home in every country?
As I have said, our security since the second world war has very much depended on the NATO alliance, which has always been a defensive alliance that has built its strength through deterrence. Deterrence is immensely important. When we reached the end of the cold war in 1990, there was at that point a substantial peace dividend. Many countries, including our own, saw reductions in investment in defence and more money went into other things in that period. Sadly, since then, what we have seen, including in Europe since Russia’s invasion of Crimea, is the end of that post-cold war peace dividend.
When we see growing threats to our security, we have to maintain the defensive alliance that NATO has always been and make sure that NATO has the capabilities to respond to any threat that might come in our direction. That is how we deter those threats, whether that is through our deep precision strike capability that we have been talking about or through other increased capabilities, such as matching the technical capabilities that Ukraine has demonstrated in anti-drone warfare. We have to ensure that we have all those kinds of capability, including air defence capabilities, so that we deter the threats against us and maintain our security. It is troubling that we now live in a more dangerous world, but we have to rise to that threat and ensure that we can keep our people safe.
(2 months, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberUrgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
All this hand-wringing over the E1 zone is very important, but in reality what is happening is part of the greater Israel plan. Israel already controls 70% of the Gaza strip; it is squeezing the whole population into the sea or into Egypt. It is already supporting, by military means, all the activities of the settlers, their abominable behaviour towards Palestinian people, and the construction of massive settlements all over the west bank. In reality, it is Israel’s strategy, Israel’s plan and Israel’s determination that we are up against. Merely condemning Israel for this occupation of E1 will achieve nothing. There has to be a policy of stopping all arms trading and military co-operation of any sort with Israel until it ends this settlement policy. Anything less will just be hand-wringing that the Israeli Government will ignore.
Mr Falconer
I do not think the policy of settlements is supported across the whole of Israel. That is very clear in the discussions about the coming elections. There are many voices in Israel who recognise the terrible harm being done to the state of Israel by the expansion of settlements. I hope you will forgive me, Madam Deputy Speaker, if I come back to the point about antisemitism. We must be really careful in our language. There are many, many Israelis—and indeed many, many British Jews—who can see the terrible damage being done by violent settlement, and we must not tar communities in this country or the whole nation of Israel with the same brush. I am grateful for the opportunity to return to the point raised by the right hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison).
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberI thank my hon. Friend for her representations around the medevac scheme, which I strongly support. I know of and have looked at cases where children have been able to bring more family members than that. If she has individual cases, then she should raise them, but I know there are many cases where children have come with both parents from Gaza. We will make further announcements in due course around the medevac scheme. There are also many children who may not have the most life-threatening conditions but who still desperately need medical treatment and support that they are not getting in Gaza. One of the greatest priorities is to rebuild healthcare facilities in Gaza and to treat as many children as possible.
At the moment, the Palestinian people are allowed to occupy only 40% of the Gaza strip, and that figure will go down to 30% next month if Netanyahu has his way. Israel is bombarding—through settlers and its own violence—the people of the west bank, and it is also now occupying a large part of southern Lebanon. The House needs to know exactly what the nature of the security relationship is between Britain and Israel. What information is shared, what weapons are supplied, and why are we still supplying parts for F-35 jets knowing full well that those planes are used in acts of genocide against the Palestinian people?
The right hon. Member will know that after the election we introduced new and strong arms export controls to cover anything that could be used in operations in Gaza, including anything that might breach international law. We have been clear about that.
The right hon. Member raises the issue of the yellow line in Gaza, which I am deeply troubled about. We have heard Prime Minister Netanyahu talking about trying to seek 70% control of Gaza, when the 20-point plan involved full withdrawal. I am worried that there are attempts under way to make that yellow line permanent, and to condense the land available for the Palestinian people in Gaza into an ever-smaller area. That fundamentally goes against the agreements in the 20-point plan, which were endorsed by Hamas, Israel and countries across the world. That 20-point plan needs to be upheld, and it includes the withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza as part of its implementation.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs if she will make a statement on the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Cuba, following the US naval and financial blockade of the island.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his urgent question.
The United Kingdom is concerned about the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Cuba, particularly shortages of food, fuel and essential medicines, which are having a real impact on ordinary citizens. The United States’ long-standing embargo continues to place significant constraints on Cuba’s economy and its access to international finance. The United Kingdom has consistently opposed the embargo, for instance at the United Nations, for nearly 30 years. At the same time, domestic economic challenges within Cuba also play a role, and sustainable improvement will require economic reform and greater resilience.
We welcome confirmation from the Governments of both Cuba and the United States that talks are under way to permit an urgent improvement in the current circumstances, and we urge all parties to move swiftly to an agreement that can alleviate the suffering of the Cuban people. We also welcome and encourage confidence-building measures that can help to reach that goal, including the release of political prisoners and easing of restrictive measures. Our priority is the safety and welfare of British nationals in Cuba, alongside the resilience of the Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands, our two overseas territories in the region. We remain deeply concerned for the Cuban people, and will continue to support constructive engagement, monitor humanitarian needs, and work with international partners to encourage solutions that ease hardship and promote long-term stability.
I thank the Minister for his answer, and I thank him for confirmation of Britain’s consistent opposition to the blockade of Cuba. My entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests will indicate my own interest in respect of my recent visit to Cuba with the hon. Member for Leeds East (Richard Burgon). During that visit we were able to deliver some medical aid, for instance during a visit to a cancer hospital. Forever seared in my memory is the sadness in the eyes of the hospital director as he tried to deal with the catastrophic loss of power and loss of medicines while dealing with people whose conditions meant that they were potentially terminally ill.
Owing to the fuel blockade, any fuel bought on the open market in the streets of Havana would cost at least £10 per litre, which means that for most people it is impossible to obtain. As a result, traffic simply does not flow. Bus services do not run, very few taxis run, and refuse collection—and so much else—is impossible. Moreover, because a fair amount of the electricity is generated by means of oil, there are power cut-offs lasting up to 20 hours a day. The health risks are enormous, the education risks are enormous, and Cuba is really up against it.
We had a fascinating meeting with the Government and others about converting the economy to a much greater extent through sustainable energy sources, and about the way in which they wish to take things forward. However, the US sanctions and blockade, the order from Donald Trump in January this year and the long-term effects of the Helms-Burton Act mean that the economy of the island is strangled. The loss of financial services, and of the use of international credit card facilities, means that the tourism industry has halted. There is no tourism industry at the moment, and there are no visitors to Cuba. At best, there are one or two flights a day at an airport that used to be quite busy.
None of this is necessary, and we should recognise and thank the Governments of Mexico, China, Canada, Japan and EU member states for the support they have given. Britain has recognised Cuba for 124 years. Can we please have some aid for Cuba, including oil?
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. As I said in my opening remarks, this is the 30th year in which the UK Government have objected to the embargo, and we will continue to do so. We work through the United Nations on humanitarian aid relief to ensure that direct support reaches the Cuban people.
(3 months, 1 week ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Falconer
We have already covered sanctions in these exchanges. I slightly correct my hon. Friend: what will protect Lebanon is not Iran or its talks with the United States of America; it is the Lebanese Government and armed forces, the process that is happening in Washington today between the Governments of Lebanon and Israel, and the efforts of the United States, which I have welcomed, in seeking to ensure that there is no further violence. The President of the United States said earlier this week that the guns must fall silent, and I agree with him.
Is not the issue that Israel’s occupation and destruction of so much life in Lebanon at present is a continuation of its genocide in Gaza, of its continued occupation of the west bank, and of its arming of settlers to commit violent acts against Palestinian villages and steal their land and crops? Is not the real issue that Israel is allowed to get away with it because the rest of the world provides Israel with the wherewithal to do it? Will the Minister be very clear about this: what is the British Government’s military relationship with Israel at the moment? Are we supplying weapons? Are supplying parts for the F-35? Are we sharing intelligence information? Are we assisting Israel’s military occupation of the three areas that I have just mentioned?
Mr Falconer
We are not—I have set out to the House on a number of occasions that the steps that we took were to ensure that no bombs and no bullets were being sold to Israel, or were being licensed to be sold to Israel by UK companies. That is because of concerns that we had about Israel’s conduct in Gaza. That applies to Gaza, it applies to the west bank and it applies to Lebanon. The right hon. Gentleman asked specifically about the F-35 programme, so let me reiterate this to the House: the UK does not permit licences for direct sales of F-35 parts to Israel, but we are part of the global F-35 supply chain. We do contribute to the global spares pool—from which Israel may indeed be able to buy parts produced in the UK—but as part of a global arrangement that is vital to our security and to that of our friends and allies, such as Ukraine. That continues to be our policy.
(3 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons Chamber
Mr Falconer
I thank my hon. Friend and former colleague in the Foreign Office for her question. We are pressing for full consular rights—we made that point this morning. We understand from the Israelis that all participants on the flotilla will be deported back to their place of origin. We are urgently following up with the Israeli Government on the detail and manner of that.
Yesterday I raised a point of order on the attack on Khan al-Ahmar and the brutality of the settler forces who are destroying lives there. That is now continuing all across the west bank, where settler violence is destroying Palestinian villages. The genocide in Gaza is continuing; the occupation of the west bank in its totality is continuing. The Minister talks about sanctions against Israel, but where are the sanctions that mean anything? Why are we still supplying arms and weapons? Why are we still supplying security information to Israel? Why are we still occasioning its military attacks against the Palestinian people? If sanctions are to mean anything, they have to do something to prevent Israel’s brutality against the entirety of the Palestinian people, be they in Gaza, in the west bank, or in refugee camps in Lebanon.
(5 months, 4 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberI agree with my hon. Friend; we have seen these deeply disturbing reports. This comes against a backdrop not just of increased settler violence but of settlement expansion and the decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to extend control over the west bank in a way that we strongly condemn. That is deeply damaging. It goes against all the long-standing international agreements and arrangements, it is counterproductive and it sets back the process of peace and the two-state solution.
In this overarching statement on the middle east by the Foreign Secretary, it is surprising that she did not take the opportunity to condemn the continuing genocide in Gaza, the brutality of the occupation of the west bank, the destruction of Palestinian villages there, the invasion of Lebanon by Israel and the continued supply of British weapons. Trump has declared war on Iran without any war objective or war plan, and we are involved in that. Can she end this nonsense about whether we are sending defensive or offensive strikes from this country? The reality is that if a bomber takes off from RAF Fairford and bombs civilian targets in Iran, we are involved in that act of aggression against the people of Iran. Should we not join Spain and say no to the USA?
We have taken a different approach to the US and to Israel over this conflict, and that has been guided by our principles and our assessment of the UK’s national interest. But I would also say to the right hon. Gentleman that there have been Iranian airstrikes against our partner countries—countries that were not involved in those initial strikes and countries where 300,000 British citizens were either visiting or resident—and strikes on hotels as well as on energy and civilian infrastructure in places across the Gulf. If the UK had done nothing, when we had the ability to take out the missiles and the drones while they were in the air, I think people would have found that extremely difficult to understand.