Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 5th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I thank the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) for leading today’s debate with such a detailed, informative speech. We are all impressed by the way he set the scene.

This United Kingdom is made up of four countries that are directly impacted by public finances in how we can distribute allocated money and what we have the capacity to deal with, so this debate is important. There is already a strain on public finance; we all witness it every day. We see our public Departments struggling, especially health and education. Whether it is here or back home, the issues are the same. We must also note that the Chancellor has not yet ruled out tax rises ahead of the Budget. The public are already taking on the burden of the UK’s debt.

We have seen, and the Government are aware of, countless instances of tax evasion and avoidance by people in the United Kingdom, especially in the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands. That contributes to lost tax revenues across the country. My issue is the loss of tax revenue—money that should be spent in this country on our own people. The UK Treasury loses billions each year to offshore tax avoidance. Northern Ireland relies on the block grant from Westminster through the Barnett consequentials for our devolved Government, so this tax avoidance and evasion means less funding for crucial sectors in Northern Ireland such as health, education and infrastructure. That is frustrating for people. [Interruption.]

[Joe Powell]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Jim Shannon]

Just for a second; thank you.

[Joe Powell]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for joining the last debate we had on this topic in this Chamber seven months ago. Does he agree that the link we are discussing between the overseas territories and the sorts of criminal activity that we all see demonstrates that the British public would be on side with cleaning up this mess?

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving me the chance to get my cough sorted; I appreciate that very much. I agree with him.

There is obvious unfairness in taxation, especially because citizens face higher scrutiny than wealthy users of offshore arrangements. For example, the average person will at some point in their life be hit with a tax bill—that dreaded letter that comes through saying, “You haven’t paid enough tax.” The same does not go for those who partake in tax avoidance. The Treasury should do more to ensure that such people pay into the system just the same as everybody else.

The UK’s register of overseas entities 2022 revealed that several properties in Northern Ireland were held via entities in secrecy jurisdictions—more evidence of offshore-linked ownership of commercial and residential assets, especially in Belfast. Such investments can inflate property value and cause confusion over true ownership of property. That has a great impact on the ordinary person.

My focus and my responsibility are my constituents and the money that they must lose from their wages each month to increase Government spending. There must be more clarity and better insight. Government must do more to reinstate trust with the public, because there is disillusionment when it comes to finance. The Minister is a good and honest man. I look to him for an acknowledgment that Northern Ireland and the devolved nations suffer as a result of this and that he will endeavour to do more for this country to protect finance and, ultimately, my constituents.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stephen Doughty]

The right hon. Gentleman is right about the legal and constitutional position. My position is that I want to work very closely and co-operatively, and that approach has succeeded in producing very welcome progress over the past year and a half. That is the way that I always try to approach our relationship with our friends in the overseas territories and the wider family. However, he is absolutely right, and the strength of feeling today should leave nobody in any doubt about the wider impact of the challenge and the concern, among many right hon. and hon. Members, about its direct impact in their communities. As I said, this is about the direct impact on citizens in the overseas territories themselves, as well as in the wider world.

I do not rule out any option in the future, but I hope that at first we can keep to and deliver on the commitments that were made at the Joint Ministerial Council last year. Some of those have been met; some have not. I have been very candid about that with the current president of the UK Overseas Territories Association, and have had very direct conversations with Premiers and others.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West asked three specific questions. He asked about a visit with Baroness Hodge. I do not want to divulge our personal conversations, but he can be absolutely sure that we have met to discuss her findings, which she shared in great candour, as one would expect. I will take those on board. My expectation is that we will discuss this matter at the Joint Ministerial Council. The Premiers and elected representatives understand our position. Our expectation on fully public registers of beneficial ownership has not changed; nor has our expectation about the functioning of legitimate interest access registers in the meantime. I can assure my hon. Friend and others that we are engaging in forensic detail on how each of those works. For example, I had constructive conversations with the Premier of the Cayman Islands on my recent visit about the progress that it is making, and I expect further improvements in the months to come.

We follow these matters extremely closely and offer technical support and other advice on how we can work together co-operatively to deliver the most effective registers. For a register to be in place, with the necessary legislation, is all well and good, but if it does not function effectively because of fees or other barriers to its usability in practice, that is a serious concern. Obviously, there are territories that are yet to introduce such steps; the BVI, in particular, was mentioned.

My hon. Friend the Member for Bolton West asked whether I would meet his colleague from the AUGB and I would be happy to do that. The links to Ukraine that many right hon. and hon. Members mentioned are examples of why this matters. The Government’s recent action on Cambodian scam centres was mentioned. That was a shocking scam involving fraud against our constituents up and down this country, which involved property in London and involved a UK overseas territory, the BVI. I know the Premier of the BVI shares our concern about tackling that type of activity. It is in all our interests that we have the transparency to enable more of these scams—more of this shocking activity—to be exposed.

Many links were made to property, including by my hon. Friend the Member for Kensington and Bayswater (Joe Powell). I have seen examples in my own constituency of Cardiff South and Penarth, where residents faced with issues relating to fire and building safety have been unable to work out the original beneficial owners of large apartment buildings so that they can take appropriate action to ensure the safety of the buildings and their residents. Such issues impact every aspect of all our daily lives, including, as I said, in the overseas territories.

The BVI was mentioned extensively, so I want to be clear that the Government recognise some of the challenges. In August, a vessel owned by a BVI-registered entity transferred 2 million barrels of Iranian oil, which was delivered to China. Also this year, BVI-registered entities were discovered in the corporate chains of at least three sanctioned Russian oligarchs who own £35 million-worth of UK property, undoubtedly some of it in constituencies represented in this room. BVI-registered entities accounted for over 90% of identified suspicious funds invested through OTs into UK property between 2016 and 2024. We also have the challenge of inactive or dissolved BVI companies owning UK property. That creates substantial legal challenges around bona vacantia and ownerless assets, which many of us will have encountered in our constituencies.

As was rightly pointed out, in the three decades to 2018 more than 1,100 BVI-registered companies featured in corruption cases around the world. I know the seriousness with which the Premier and the Government there take these issues. I want to work with them in addressing them, because they impact all of us and they impact the BVI’s reputation, but to do that we need transparency and progress.

Colleagues made many important contributions and I will not be able to respond to them all in the time I have today, but I note the serious concerns about Mr Abramovich raised by my hon. Friend the Member for St Helens South and Whiston (Ms Rimmer). I am not able to comment on individual tax matters at the Dispatch Box, but we remain committed to ensuring that the proceeds of the sale of Chelsea reach humanitarian causes in Ukraine. We are deeply frustrated that it has not yet been possible to reach an agreement with Mr Abramovich and his representatives. The door for negotiations remains open, but we are fully prepared to pursue the matter through the courts if required, as we have said on a number of occasions recently.

Important points were raised, including by my hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Rebecca Long Bailey), about HMRC. I am sure she will be able to raise her points with the relevant Ministers, but what she said about why transparency principles matter was very powerful. My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) spoke powerfully about the impact on public services, on housing and on the high street, and about the challenges for our constituents. We have touched on all those points of nexus during the debate.

Financial secrecy is the oxygen that allows illicit finance to thrive and sanctions breaches to go undetected; it creates blind spots. It is, of course, a transnational problem. Dirty money pushes up property prices, making it harder for people to buy homes. Overseas corruption and illicit finance undermine economies, prop up kleptocratic regimes and threaten democracy. As the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield made clear, it is estimated that African countries alone lose around $90 billion a year in illicit capital flows. That is more than they receive in development assistance.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Minister for his detailed response to the issues that we raised. I mentioned the properties in Belfast that were allegedly held by certain people. Will he ensure that there is a concerted plan, driven from Westminster, for Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, to ensure that those people are held accountable wherever they may be in the United Kingdom?

[Stephen Doughty]

I absolutely agree. The hon. Member spoke powerfully for his constituency of Strangford, as he always does. The fact that this issue impacts every part of the United Kingdom has been made very clear during the debate.

I want to update the House on where there is progress and where challenges remain. At the last Joint Ministerial Council, overseas territories made important commitments to improve corporate transparency by widening access to their registers of beneficial ownership. As I set out in my written statement to the House on 22 July, all territories are making progress on their commitments to implement the registers, and that progress is welcome, but we need to keep up the pace and to challenge in cases where there has been real back-marking on the issue.

I compliment St Helena, which launched its fully public register on 30 June 2025. The Falklands has shown me its draft legislation and it will have that implemented by next year—there are some capacity constraints for its officials. As has been mentioned, Gibraltar has had a fully publicly register since 2020 without any damage to its economy; the Chief Minister speaks powerfully about that issue. I compliment Montserrat, which has had a public register since 2024. The Caymans launched its legitimate interest access register in February 2025, which allows access by a range of people, including journalists. Turks and Caicos launched an LIA register on 30 June, we understand that Anguilla will implement within the next few months, and we have talked much about Bermuda and the BVI.

I want to reassure all right hon. and hon. Members that this issue remains a major priority for the Government. The overseas territories will have heard this debate, and the strength of feeling. Our commitment on this issue sits alongside our commitments to the relationship with the overseas territories more broadly, and to tackling corruption and illicit finance globally, which will be highlighted by the summits that were mentioned.

Conflict in Sudan

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 5th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

My hon. Friend is experienced in these matters, and she asks the right set of questions. The details of what has happened in El Fasher, and indeed what is still happening, are horrifying, and continue to emerge from north Darfur. We are doing everything we can to try to ensure the safe passage of civilians, but I must be clear with the House: progress is limited, and what civilians are facing in north Darfur remains appalling.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answers. Open Doors reports that there has been a spike in the abduction and killing of Christian men, women and children by radical Islamist groups. Church leaders have been targeted with false charges, including terrorism and apostasy, while Christian converts face violence, forced marriage, sexual violence, and losing custody of their children. Many Christians are forced to flee their homes because they feel that to stay would be unsustainable. Action for those persecuted Christians is needed. May I ask the Minister what can be done to protect Christians and religious minorities, and to stop the violence against them?

[Mr Falconer]

Freedom of religious belief is absolutely vital in the region, and I have raised these questions in the region over the past few weeks. Obviously, in the wider context that we are discussing, almost everyone is facing very serious risks to their human rights, but I will give the hon. Gentleman a further update in due course on what we have done in Sudan specifically.

Official Development Assistance Reductions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I thank the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for setting the scene so incredibly well. International development aid has been significant in helping at-risk individuals and groups around the globe. As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, I acknowledge the importance of providing financial and physical support to religious minorities that are facing threats, violence and persecution on a daily basis.

International aid has long served as a lifeline for minority groups to rebuild their lives, to provide additional education and to support local organisations. It is a reminder that we have not forgotten those facing the most horrific forms of persecution simply because they choose to believe, whether that is the Rohingya population in Myanmar, Christians in the middle east or the Ahmadiyya in Pakistan, all of whom face ongoing violence, forced displacement and deep-rooted discrimination.

The devastating effects of global cuts to international aid have been evidenced most clearly in the decision to dissolve USAID. In January 2025, thousands of humanitarian and international aid projects were put on a 90-day freeze, and over 80% of its projects were permanently terminated. Global organisations such as World Vision and Samaritan’s Purse, which are active in my constituency of Strangford, were directly impacted, as well as Catholic Relief Services.

Several affected projects involved a focus on freedom of religion or belief, such as Asia and ethnic freedom, or the documentation of religious freedom incidents in Sudan. The NGOs and faith-based humanitarian organisations have now been left with depleted resources, unfinished missions and heartbreaking reports from the field, where support is now absent. That is the effect of the cuts: the staff, volunteers and international partners, who are driven by compassion, conviction and service, now find themselves unable to meet human need because the infrastructure that enabled them to do so has been abruptly dismantled.

The termination of USAID has led to a global vacuum in which NGOs struggle to survive, rendering communities such as the Yazidis in Iraq increasingly vulnerable to the termination of psychosocial support and humanitarian aid. The effect is like a stone hitting water—it ripples the whole way out. Persecuted religious minorities are suffering more than ever without the commitment of permanent, ongoing support. The Government must ensure that their needs are protected and addressed.

The UK has long been a leader in championing freedom of religion or belief, and the Government made a good decision by renewing the appointment of a special envoy for freedom of religion or belief—the hon. Member for North Northumberland (David Smith) —in December 2024. To ensure that we are upholding our reputation and protecting the right to religious freedom, we must strongly oppose cuts in the budget that clearly harm the vulnerable individuals that we are striving very hard to protect.

I believe that we must remain committed to providing high-quality international aid that will contribute to a long-lasting positive change in areas where the persecution of individuals is most targeted. We cannot allow the most vulnerable to be left to suffer, and we cannot turn our backs on injustice.

I am always minded of Proverbs 31:8-9—I know you will appreciate this, Sir Desmond, as I do—which states:

“Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves,

for the rights of all who are destitute.

Speak up and judge fairly;

defend the rights of the poor and needy.”

There must also be full transparency about how our international aid is being used to promote the fundamental right to freedom of religion or belief, particularly in countries such as Nigeria, Pakistan and Myanmar where so many continue to suffer simply because of their faith. While continuing the aid is vital, it is equally essential that receiving Governments uphold their responsibilities and adhere to the highest human rights standards. Our support must be accompanied by a clear expectation that Governments respect the dignity and freedoms of all people within their borders. I ask the Minister that, where aid is extended, so too must there be a commitment to protect vulnerable religious and ethnic minority groups.

Sudan: Government Support

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Commons Chamber

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

We are in Remembrance Week, when we remember the dead of past wars. Right now in Sudan, a war as murderous and horrible as anything the world has faced is shattering the lives of civilians, of children, of women and of men, in ways we can scarcely countenance.

I have secured this debate because what is going on in Sudan cannot continue. The fall of the city of El Fasher, after a brutal 18-month siege, is the latest disaster in what the Foreign Secretary accurately described at the weekend as

“the largest humanitarian crisis in the 21st century.”

Over the past week, reports have been coming in of executions, forced expulsions and organised massacres—the evidence of which is literally visible from space, with images of carnage and bodies strewn in the streets. Conditions in El Fasher have been described as “apocalyptic”. However, this was not unexpected. Tragically, it was very much predicted, with warnings from numerous sources. Descriptions of El Fasher as another Srebrenica are not misplaced, although they are in many ways worse.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate and for all his work across Africa before coming to this place. I respect him greatly for his desire for human betterment.

As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, I have spoken and asked questions about Sudan some 14 times in the past year—as have others—because I am acutely aware of the precarious situation for Christians in the region. Christians have been murdered in the beastliness and wickedness that is happening. Patients and staff have been murdered in hospital. I have consistently asked the Government to step up support for those who are being targeted because of their faith. It grieves me greatly, it grieves the hon. Gentleman greatly, it grieves us all greatly. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that we must use any and all methods at our disposal to help those desperately needy and innocent people as a matter of urgency?

[Brian Mathew]

I thank the hon. Member for his kind comments. I agree with him, and I hope to put forward some ideas that may prove useful.

There are no United Nations peacekeepers on hand even to witness the killings. Current events are a continuation of a calculated political strategy to destroy and ethnically cleanse a province that gives its name to one of the tribes —namely the Fur. The Zaghawa, Berti and Masalit tribes have been similarly targeted in a strategy that began, arguably, well over 20 years ago. Despite the commendable efforts to improve international accountability—including through support for the International Criminal Court and UN fact-finding missions—as well as the efforts of many Members here and our UK aid programme to raise awareness and support the Sudanese people, what has been done so far is clearly not enough.

Sudan: Protection of Civilians

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 30th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

I completely associate myself with my hon. Friend’s comments and expectations. I assure her that this issue remains at the heart not only of our work on holding individuals responsible and on bringing this conflict to an end, but also of the specific support we are providing through our programming for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence. Some of the reports we have been receiving in recent days are horrific. These incidents must end.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his well-chosen words. I thank the right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) for securing this urgent question. Other MPs and I have long been highlighting the atrocities taking place in Sudan, including stomach-churning terrorist attacks, and rapes and murders taking place daily. It grieves me greatly, and I know it grieves this House greatly. I underline the issue for Christians in particular, who are particularly targeted in Sudan. The latest attack is yet another where the detail makes me feel sick to my stomach, yet it is simply an extension of the evil that the world has turned a blind eye to thus far. I know the Minister is honest, so what more will the Government do to deliver the right help and to step up and step in for the people facing that devastation in Sudan?

[Stephen Doughty]

The hon. Member rightly raises the many atrocities that have taken place in Sudan on the basis of people’s religion, ethnic grouping and other minority status. I share his absolute revulsion at some of the recent allegations. He can be assured that, whether it is through our work at the United Nations later today, our work in the programming that we provide or our support for holding the perpetrators to account, this issue will remain at the top of our agenda.

Gaza and Hamas

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I hope the hon. Member will forgive me, but I do not have the numbers precisely to hand. I did an extensive hearing in front of the Foreign Affairs Committee in which we went through the numbers in some detail, but let me focus on the key point. We have suspended all arms that could be used in this way; we are not selling bombs or bullets that could be used in Gaza or the west bank. The munitions that he and so many others in this country saw exploding last night on their television screens were not British.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answers, his tone and his well-chosen words; we appreciate them. The moment that there were reports of shots fired at Israeli soldiers in Rafah and of an IDF soldier being murdered, my heart sank—as the hearts of many others probably did—because I knew that the tenuous peace had been broken by Hamas. Does the Minister accept that retaliation is inevitable? What role can the Government play, along with our allies, to rebuild the fragile peace process and disarm Hamas, remove their weapons and destroy them? Real and lasting peace can then actually happen.

[Mr Falconer]

I thank the hon. Member for his important question and his as ever courteous tone. The work is important. The threats to the ceasefire are many and varied, and we will continue to work with our partners in exactly the way that he describes.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 28th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

The hon. Member is right to highlight water as a crucial humanitarian aid and support. I have spoken to Tom Fletcher, who is co-ordinating much of the UN support, and to the Egyptian and Israeli Foreign Ministers about the importance of ensuring that the crossings are open so that water can be provided and critical infrastructure rebuilt. That will require financing, and my hon. Friend the Middle East Minister has already been involved in looking at ways in which we can finance reconstruction for the long term.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Secretary of State very much for her responses. The peace plan can succeed only if Hamas are not part of it. Hamas need to return the dead hostages to the families, and they need to be disarmed. We also need to ensure that they are not carrying out summary executions of fellow Gazans, as they are currently doing. If we are going to have a peace plan that lasts, Hamas need to be removed from the situation—we can then have peace.

[Yvette Cooper]

The hon. Member will know that I have always described Hamas as a barbaric terrorist organisation, and that remains the case. Crucially, we have seen the Arab League condemn and reject Hamas, and join us and other countries from across the world in being clear that Hamas can play no role in the future governance of Gaza or of Palestine. The UK has particularly been offering support on the decommissioning of weapons and the disarming of Hamas—a crucial part of the peace process—so that Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace and security.

Black History Month

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 23rd October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered Black History Month.

I am honoured to open this debate on Black History Month, which, for the second year running, is being held in Government time. It is a chance to honour those who came before us, to celebrate their lives and their courage, and to recognise the huge contribution that our black communities make in Britain today.

In her powerful opening speech in last year’s debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Erith and Thamesmead (Ms Oppong-Asare) made the very clear argument that black history is British history. She said:

“the lives of black Britons are the building blocks of our nation, from the Roman occupation to the Windrush generation; because history is never static, but a story constantly being told and re-told over again; and because the voices of black Britons have so often been marginalised and dismissed, ignored and overlooked.”—[Official Report, 24 October 2024; Vol. 755, c. 446.]

She was right: generation after generation, black Britons have been present on the frontline of efforts to break down barriers, even when set against persistent and sometimes hostile opposition.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the Minister and the Government for bringing us this debate. What the Minister said applies to my constituency of Strangford. People from Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, Egypt, Pakistan and India contribute to the work-life and economy of Strangford, as well its culture, religion and history. I think we all recognise their contribution, and the Minister is making that point in an absolutely excellent way.

[Seema Malhotra]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He describes powerfully the contribution to his community and our country of those from all backgrounds and nations.

Korean War: 75th Commemoration

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I commend the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green (Sir Iain Duncan Smith) for securing this debate. I always come along to support him because his heart is always in the subject matter. Today he illustrated that incredibly well.

Seventy-five years ago, British and Commonwealth servicemen and women joined a United Nations coalition to defend the Korean peninsula from aggression. It was one of the bloodiest conflicts of the 20th century; it is estimated to have claimed about 3 million lives, most of them civilians. The scars of that division remain visible to this day. More than 1,000 British servicemen were killed, and several thousand more were wounded or taken prisoner. They fought with extraordinary bravery in the harshest of conditions, from the battle of the Imjin river to the defence of Seoul. Their courage stands as a lasting testament to our nation’s commitment to freedom and peace in this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

I am ever mindful of my constituent Colonel Robin Charley. He was born in 1924 and died in 2019 aged 95. He was a magnificent soldier who showed incredible courage and bravery. I remember his medal, because it always intrigued me—the Queen’s Korea medal—and he wore it with pride. I was not quite sure what it was; I asked him one day and he told me some of the stories of Korea and what had happened. He has passed away now, but his daughter, Catherine Champion, is a vice lord lieutenant of County Down. He passed on to his children that commitment to duty and doing one’s best; he did that wonderfully well.

I am also reminded of another gentleman who has passed away: Mr Milligan from Loughries outside Newtownards, who also lived to a ripe old age. He fought in that war and carried the scars of Korea each and every day.

The war ended not with peace, but with an armistice—a fragile ceasefire that still divides one people into two nations. The south rebuilt and flourished as a democracy; the north closed itself off inwardly under totalitarian rule. What did the Korean war leave us with for Christians and people of faith? Seventy-five years on, we honour the legacy best by standing for those who are still denied the freedoms for which our soldiers fought all those years ago.

I am grateful to the all-party parliamentary group on North Korea—we have representatives here today—for its continued commitment

“to promote and support human rights, including religious freedom, humanitarian needs, democracy and…international security”.

This debate is very much about the international security that people fought for 75 years ago and fight for today. As the right hon. Member for Chingford and Woodford Green said, that fight has not finished.

I am also grateful to the North Korean exile community for the immense courage that it takes to share their stories. Ten years ago, the United Nations Commission of Inquiry described the “gravity, scale and nature” of the Kim regime’s crimes as having no

“parallel in the contemporary world.”

A decade later, little has changed. There is no parallel in the contemporary world. North Korea is top of the tree when it comes to persecution, denying human rights and murdering its own people.

As chair of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief, I care deeply about promoting freedom in North Korea and around the globe. Religious freedom is effectively non-existent in North Korea. According to non-governmental organisation and United Nations estimates, between 50,000 and 70,000 Christians are believed to be detained in political camps solely because of their faith—some for owning a Bible, others for praying in secret. Some of us pray every day and carry our Bible. In North Korea, people cannot do that, because the punishment is death.

Broader estimates suggest there might be 400,000 underground Christians across the country, worshipping quietly and at constant risk of discovery. These are not just statistics; these are people. Defectors have testified that people have been beaten, starved and executed simply for believing in God. One mother was reportedly forced to watch her sons shot for possessing Christian literature. Such cruelty is part of a deliberate campaign to eradicate faith and enforce absolute devotion to the ruling family.

Those who try to flee face grave danger. There are credible reports of a shoot-to-kill policy at the border. Those who reach China are often forcibly repatriated, as others have said, in violation of international law and the principle of non-refoulement. Human Rights Watch and other organisations report that hundreds of North Koreans have been returned from China in recent years to face imprisonment and torture, especially if they are suspected of contact with Christians or missionaries. How wrong it seems to be, to North Korea’s regime, to be a Christian, to have a faith, and to have independent thought.

One voice that brings that horror into focus is that of Jinhye Jo, a North Korean defector who has spoken with remarkable courage. Fleeing to China with her mother and sister, she found God in a small countryside church—a glimmer of grace amid fear. For that faith, she was forcibly repatriated four times, and was each time beaten and interrogated by the Bowibu, the secret police, who demanded to know whether she had attended church or had social engagements with Christians. That courageous lady said this:

“All these methods of severe and cruel punishment were to try to find out…whether we had attended church or come into contact with Christians”.

She went on to say:

“God saved me so that I would be able to tell the world the plight of the North Korean people’s unfair suffering and the worst modern-day evil that is going on right now.”

Jinhye Jo’s testimony is not only a cry of pain, but a call to conscience. Today, we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters facing persecution in North Korea. As Jeremiah 22:3 reminds us, we must do what is just and right always, and rescue the oppressed from the power of the oppressor. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland must continue to press for justice and accountability for crimes against humanity, urge China to end forced repatriations and support those documenting evidence for future prosecutions. A day of reckoning will come, and we want to ensure that that day is in this world, although of course they will get their day of reckoning in the next.

Seventy-five years after our forebears fought for the freedom of Korea, let their courage inspire us to defend freedom again, until the day comes when every person in North Korea can live in peace, dignity and hope.

Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Committee of the whole House & 3rd reading
Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Thank you for allowing me to speak on this issue once again, Ms Ghani. I will prefix my comments with this. It is always good to see the Ministers—the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty) and the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry, the hon. Member for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport (Luke Pollard)—in their place. They are both honourable men whose friendship I value. Being ever respectful, and with great respect to both hon. Gentlemen, I wish to make some comments that will be very contrary to what they have put forward today.

It will be no surprise that I rise at the last hour and as the last Back-Bench speaker—that is often the case, but none the less it is always a pleasure to make a contribution —to ask the Government again to reconsider their decision and ask the Committee to oppose the Bill, even though I know that the numbers game does not stack up.

As we all know, the treaty provides for Mauritius to exercise full sovereignty over the Chagos archipelago, with the UK exercising rights on Diego Garcia during an initial 99-year period. Over those 99 years, the UK will pay Mauritius a total of around £3.4 billion in 2025-26 prices, and that will probably rise. At a time when the Government are taxing farmers, taxing widows’ pensions and taxing the middle class into oblivion, handing over £3.4 billion with a benefit that is not tangible is unacceptable. Our constituents will be worse off in the next financial year. Indeed, a typical British family are as much as £15,000 a year poorer than they were five years ago, according to recent Telegraph Money analysis. Why, then, have we entered into this agreement, which may fluctuate and cost substantially more than the figure that has been predicted?

I want to make it clear that I believe this treaty should be renegotiated from beginning to end, but if the Bill is to go ahead, it is essential that any increases in payments should come through this House, and that whatever Government are in place at that time should present that. I therefore support new clause 1, which would give certainty and security that increases would not take place without the approval of this House.

Turning to new clauses 2, 5 and 7, I have long stated that there are now substantial risks to our military bases, and that has been reiterated by every person bar one in the Committee today. I am anxious to understand our legal standing on this. I believe it is right and proper for the Committee to understand the nature of how renting from Mauritius will give us the safety and security needed to ensure that those stationed on the base, or relying on support from the base in that area, will not feel vulnerable or exposed. I believe that this deal does expose us, and that we need to be very much aware of our standing and take the necessary steps. That begins with having full knowledge and not simply empty assurances. The recent debacle with the Chinese spies decisions has shown that openness, transparency and accountability are needed even more tonight than they have been in the other statements and urgent questions today. New clause 2 would enforce that as a minimum.

New clause 9 is similar to new clause 8, tabled by the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) and my right hon. Friend the Member for East Antrim (Sammy Wilson). I support new clause 9, given its similarity to the new clause brought forward by my Northern Ireland colleagues, who are intimately aware of how issues on the ground can be vastly different from those that are reported. This addition to ensure that a report is made on the compliance of the treaty and the Act with the UN General Assembly resolutions on decolonisation is vital and, I believe, underlines the words of support that have been given to those in the area who are fearful of the removal of British influence and support and fearful of the Mauritian ideals, which were flagged by our American allies in their human rights report in 2023.

As the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on international freedom of religion or belief, I know that the two issues of human rights and persecution are married together as one, because when we highlight the issue of human rights, we also highlight the issue of persecution of religious beliefs, and vice versa. I really have to express some concerns over human rights in this context. I understand that the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth will reply to the debate. Although I believe he understands and believes in these issues as strongly as I do, I still have great concerns about human rights. It is essential that we do not simply hand over control and abandon not just the military base but all in the region who have relied on our support and friendship over the years.

Unfortunately, this has been a bad treaty from beginning to end. Our Chagossian citizens remain unhappy, our armed forces remain unhappy and the families who are footing the bill are unhappy. I believe that the Government have made the wrong decision on this. The recent Chinese debacle has heightened the need to continue to have boots on the ground and eyes wide open against those who would seek to thwart British interests and the interests of freedom and democracy worldwide. We have recently seen the result of appeasement when the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister highlighted the difficulties brought about by this Government’s decision to recognise terrorism and a Palestinian state with no borders, no working non-terrorist Government and no social care system. The handing over of Chagos and renting it back will prove to be a costly and dangerous exercise in capitulation, and even at this very late stage I urge the Government to think again and, at the very least, accept additional protection for the sake of all our collective security.

[Stephen Doughty]

I thank all hon. and right hon. Members for their contributions. I will attempt to respond to the specifics of the amendments and new clauses in due course, but I want to come back to some of the fundamental points that have been raised during the debate first, and I also want to respond to some of the specific questions that were raised.

With the exception of some genuine questions in relation to the Chagossians, the MPA and the environmental protections, and the implementation of this treaty, it was a shame to see the rehash of the same arguments that were made on Second Reading. There were some outrageous and nonsensical arguments and claims, particularly relating to the costs and to other matters, which I will come to.

I was shocked by some of the anti-American, conspiracy-fuelled nonsense that we heard at various points during the debate. The base is critical to the United Kingdom, the United States, our allies and our national security, and the Bill and the treaty protect the functioning of that base. It does not surrender it; it secures it into the future. This is a Government who inherited a mess from the former Ministers on the Opposition Benches. We are getting stuff done. We are a patriotic Government; our first duty is to protect the national security of this country, and that is why we have got this deal done. It is why it is backed by the United States. It is why it is backed by our Five Eyes partners. It is absolutely crucial to protect the British people and our allies.

We have been very transparent about the reasons for it, and they are the exact opposite of what has been suggested. I come back, as I always have done, to the fundamental question: if there were not a problem and a risk to the operations of this crucial base, why did the previous Government start the negotiations, why did they continue them through 11 rounds of negotiations, and why did they continue them right up until the general election? Those are the facts.