Mahsa Amini

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Tuesday 11th October 2022 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Scottish National party spokesperson.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

The SNP condemns the Iranian regime’s violent crackdown on protesters, particularly women, in the strongest possible terms. We are deeply concerned by the regime’s vow to crack down further “with no leniency”, which appears to be an ominous indication of further mistreatment.

The bravery of Iranian citizens, especially Iranian women, is inspiring, and we stand in full solidarity with them. We wish to hear the UK Government explicitly recognise the death of Mahsa Amini as femicide. I am also keen to understand how they intend to go forward with international partners, for instance in calling for an independent investigation and raising the mistreatment and killing of protesters at UN level.

We would welcome clarity on how the UK Government are able to support the free flow of information to help to protect protesters—particularly women—and on what plans are in place to support ethnic minorities such as Kurds amid this regime crackdown.

[Gillian Keegan]

As I mentioned before, the UK has called for a full and transparent investigation of the murder of Mahsa Amini, and we continue to work with our international partners and others to explore all the options for addressing Iran’s human rights violations. As the hon. Lady knows, we never comment on possible future designations or on our future work, but we will continue to work closely with our international partners.

Jagtar Singh Johal

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Wednesday 7th September 2022 Commons Chamber

[Rehman Chishti]

This case is a top priority for the United Kingdom Government, the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister, and I will ensure that everything is done to ensure that Mr Johal’s case is dealt with as quickly and swiftly as it can be.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for West Dunbartonshire (Martin Docherty-Hughes) for his persistence in this case. That is doubly important because it sounds as if the Minister is somewhat rowing back and hiding behind proceedings today. That is wholly unacceptable. My constituents who often travel to India, and constituents across Scotland and the UK, will be looking at this case with deep concern. What will the Minister do to move this forward and ensure that we accept this as a case of arbitrary detention? How can he reassure those who come and go from India that the UK Government will not simply abandon them on a whim, as they have Jagtar?

[Rehman Chishti]

The hon. Lady says that I might be hiding behind procedure, but she knows me as a parliamentarian for 12 years, and I have previously stepped aside from the Government on matters of principle. In this case, the Government are doing all they can to support Mr Johal, and this is a top priority for his family and the United Kingdom Government. The matter has previously been looked at from Foreign Secretary to Foreign Secretary, and from Prime Minister to Prime Minister. I know Lord Ahmad, who covers that part of the world, has been looking at this case consistently with his counterparts in India, and the matter is a top priority for the Government.

Non-proliferation Treaty: 50th Anniversary Review

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Wednesday 13th July 2022 Westminster Hall

[Beth Winter (Cynon Valley) (Lab)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas) on opening the debate. The review conference will bring together over 190 signatory states to discuss progress in preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology since the last review conference in 2015 and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament.

The original treaty was negotiated by Labour’s Minister for Disarmament, the MP, later Lord, Fred Mulley, under Harold Wilson’s 1964 to 1970 Government, but it has been a formal commitment of all Governments—Labour and Conservative—since 1970. Nuclear disarmament is a priority of humanitarian politics, given the function of nuclear arms to wipe out mass civilian populations, as occurred tragically and appallingly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki with smaller weapons than those that exist today, and their use by all sides to assert foreign policy priorities throughout the cold war and since.

The text of the non-proliferation treaty sets out the aims of

“strengthening of trust between States in order to facilitate the cessation of the manufacture of nuclear weapons, the liquidation of all their existing stockpiles, and the elimination from national arsenals of nuclear weapons and the means of their delivery pursuant to a Treaty on general and complete disarmament”.

A clear goal of the treaty is to end the existence of nuclear weapons in states that possess them, alongside preventing their further proliferation. Therefore, it is truly regrettable that both Labour and Conservative Governments have retained nuclear weapons and failed to progress to the complete disarmament of the UK’s nuclear weapons, which we have agreed to.

Over 60 years, the UK has replaced Polaris with Trident warheads and missiles, and replaced the Resolution-class submarines first with the Vanguard class and now with the Dreadnought class. Furthermore, the Government announced in 2021, in their integrated review of security, defence, development and foreign policy, that alongside the new submarines the ceiling on the number of nuclear warheads held by the UK will increase by 40%, in a reversal of the downward trend seen in recent decades. The proposed changes in warhead numbers are a reversal of the UK statement by Baroness Anelay at the 2015 review conference and run counter to international momentum towards global nuclear abolition.

The repeated failure of the nuclear weapons powers to make progress on taking steps towards disarmament and to carry out disarmament at repeated NPT review conferences since the first one in 1975 has made it necessary for disarmament-committed states in the New Agenda Coalition to work with civil society to drive the process forward. As the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion referred to, that has resulted in the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, which 86 states have signed up to and 66 states have ratified, and which has now entered into force. That is the right step forward.

However, the UK remains outside that treaty, which is dominated by nations from the global south but, critically, also includes forward-thinking countries such as New Zealand and Ireland. It really is regrettable that the UK national report on the NPT, which was published in November 2021, says nothing about the UK’s planned increase in the warhead ceiling or about engagement with the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, and that its reference to the P5 process has no timetable for warhead reduction.

The war in Ukraine has resurrected ghosts of the cold war and brought home to all of us again the threat from nuclear weapons and nuclear accidents, at a time when both Russia and the USA have been modernising their weapons of mass destruction and the UK is also proposing to increase its nuclear arsenal, contrary to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

We need strong civil society movements in the UK and elsewhere to push the UK Government and others to join the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, and I am proud of the leadership being given by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament in Wales, of which I am a member. This year marks 40 years since all the then county councils in Wales declared themselves to be nuclear-free zones, which meant that nuclear weapons could not be stationed in Wales. That landmark decision is being celebrated this summer with a travelling exhibition across Wales—including a visit to my constituency during the week of 8 August—that commemorates the horrific bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 6 and 9 August 1945.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

The hon. Lady is making some powerful points. I note her point about nuclear weapons not being stationed in Wales, and I want to put on record that I am very envious of that. I wish that they were not stationed in Scotland, where they are located a stone’s throw from our largest population centre—despite the opposition of most elected politicians in the Scottish Parliament and Scottish politicians here, and against the will of civil society.

[Beth Winter]

I agree, and I hope that one day we will have a nuclear-free United Kingdom and indeed a nuclear-free world. The horrific consequences of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remain in our memories. Let us not forget that it was women from south Wales who had the courage and vision to march to and surround the US cruise missile base at Greenham Common, and I am proud of the fact that I was there as a child with my family.

As part of the work around the touring exhibition, CND Cymru is urging support for the UN treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons. CND Cymru says that while nuclear weapons exist we all live under the threat of such weapons being used. It is vital that there is support for the global abolition of nuclear weapons and that the UK Government start to engage with the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons and eventually become a signatory to it, so that the world can be free from all nuclear weapons. I am pleased to say that the Welsh Senedd—our Welsh Parliament—voted to back the treaty in March, calling on all states to ratify it. I also welcome the fact that a number of local authorities in Wales have signed resolutions to the same effect.

We need action now more than ever. The world continues to be an extremely dangerous place, and I am sure that everybody in this room shares my desire for a future for our children, grandchildren and beyond. Unless we have a nuclear-free world, that is unlikely to happen.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

I had not put my name down to speak in this debate, but I am happy to make a brief contribution to reinforce what I said to the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Beth Winter). The key point that I want to make is that nuclear weapons are located in Scotland, although the elected representatives of our country in our own Parliament and in this Parliament oppose them. That is a democratically unsustainable position. They are weapons of mass destruction that are morally and economically inappropriate to any of the threats that we face today. I am grateful to you, Mr Dowd, for giving me the chance to put that position on the record. That is all I would like to say for now.

--- Later in debate ---

[Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)]

It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. Thank you for being here this afternoon.

I thank the hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion (Caroline Lucas) for stepping in at the last minute and opening this debate on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Brentford and Isleworth (Ruth Cadbury), who secured it. It could not come at a more important time, as all Members said, especially as Russia continues to recklessly wage an unjustified and illegal war in Ukraine.

We have had a very interesting set of speeches, and there has been a lot of unanimity. I hope the Minister’s response will continue the unanimity, because this is one of the most important treaties ever signed in the history of human society—certainly the history of the United Nations.

The hon. Member for Brighton, Pavilion opened the debate by saying that the specific number of warheads in the UK stockpile is not published anywhere. Will the Minister correct that? The hon. Lady said, and I agree, that there is no transparency, in line with our obligations to the non-proliferation treaty. Importantly, she said—again, I hope the Minister will put us right on this—that no Minister has yet been allocated to attend the NPT review conference in New York. It should be the Foreign Secretary, or at least the Foreign Secretary should be there for part of it. I am hoping to be there myself as an observer.

The aim of the NPT is to prevent the use of nuclear weapons. An inconsistent approach to multilateral nuclear disarmament seems to be emerging from the British Government, although I hope that is not the case. We want to be consistent. We want all parties in the country and the Government to agree on this.

The hon. Lady said that the security of a nation is about more than simply the weapons we hold. She is absolutely right. It is vital, it seems to me and to the Labour party, that we look at food security, energy security and the terrible inequality from which many nations in the world suffer, as I saw recently on my visit to Colombia. That is what brings security: if we reduce inequality and ensure the security of food, energy and housing, we can have a more sustainable and much more secure human society and planet. She said that a nuclear-free world is possible.

My hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Beth Winter) spoke about the horrors of the use of nuclear weapons, quoting Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and was echoed by my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington North (Jeremy Corbyn). The NPT demands, eventually, the elimination of all nuclear weapons. Are we going down that path at the moment? We have to conclude that that is not happening. We are increasing stockpiles not just in the UK but across the world.

My hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley said that the Ukraine war has resurrected fears of a nuclear war. I remember from my campaigning youth as a student the fears we had of living under the threat of nuclear war. It seems that many generations have lived under that fear, and the NPT offers the hope that we can reverse that position. She said that she deplores the 40% increase in the number of warheads in the UK stockpile. We need an answer as to why that is necessary. I cannot understand it either. We all live under the threat of nuclear weapons being used.

We then heard from my right hon. Friend the Member for Islington North. He said that this is an opportunity for the Government to set out their plans for what they will do at the NPT review conference. He is absolutely right: we would like to know. Here is an issue where we can all agree on a policy put forward by the British Government—there are not many of those right now. It would be a really good gain for this Parliament and this country if we could do that.

My right hon. Friend said that a large number of Governments across the world treat this issue with great seriousness, and so should we. The non-proliferation treaty has achieved a great deal in its 50 years. He mentioned the JCPOA—the nuclear weapons agreement with Iran—which should be resurrected. I hope we will hear more about that from the Minister. There is a serious danger—we all feel this, don’t we?—that the Ukraine war could escalate into a nuclear war. That would be the end.

We heard briefly from the hon. Member for East Renfrewshire (Kirsten Oswald), who more or less said that she would like to see nuclear weapons removed from Scottish soil. I think we would all like to see nuclear weapons—

[Kirsten Oswald]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Fabian Hamilton]

Yes, of course.

[Kirsten Oswald]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for indulging me. I want to be very clear: I would like to see nuclear weapons removed from all shores across the world. There is no place for nuclear weapons in the world. They resolve none of the challenges the world faces today. He has set that out very clearly himself.

--- Later in debate ---

[Graham Stuart]

It is not our practice to announce in advance who will be attending. What I can tell him is that we are very much looking forward to it. It has already been delayed. I hope that the rest of my speech has made clear that we take this as a serious opportunity and aim to make the most of it.

We have published a working paper on a new sustained dialogue on peaceful uses, which aims to help overcome barriers to accessing the benefits of the peaceful uses of nuclear technologies. We continue to urge all non-NPT states to sign and ratify the treaty as non-nuclear weapon states as soon as possible.

There are a number of issues, and I will try to deal with some that have been raised. The spokesman for Her Majesty’s Opposition, the hon. Member for Leeds North East, raised the point that the UK supports the universalisation of the NPT. Though we cannot force any state to join, we discuss the importance of the NPT with all states at all levels, and whenever we engage with states. We regularly seek to encourage India and Pakistan, for example, to join the NPT.

On Scotland hosting nuclear weapons, the UK’s independent nuclear deterrent is a national endeavour benefiting the whole of the UK, and it underpins the security of this nation and that of our allies. By way of information, I note that recent opinion polls show that Trident enjoys 58% support among young Scots, even though the SNP and Green Ministers in the Scottish Government wish to see us remove it and even leave NATO altogether—[Interruption.] I do not think the SNP can have it both ways. It wants to have an independent Scotland and join NATO, which is perhaps what the hon. Member for East Renfrewshire (Kirsten Oswald) will say, while also removing part of its nuclear deterrent.

[Kirsten Oswald]

I wonder if I can point the Minister back to the speech that my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling (Alyn Smith) made only a few minutes ago. He set out our policy position very clearly, and I do not think that it is helpful for the Minister to represent what has been said in an entirely different way. It is not for the Minister to determine what happens to people in Scotland and whether nuclear weapons are situated there. That is something that rightly and properly should be for those who are democratically elected by the Scottish people.

[Graham Stuart]

As the hon. Lady will be aware, that is a matter for the UK Government, and this Parliament of the Union reflects the whole of the United Kingdom, including the people of Scotland.

The hon. Member for Stirling (Alyn Smith) requested that we should put on paper our position on the New York conference. I have already directed him to our November 2021 national report, and I am confident that the Government will update the House after the rev con in due course.

On the point made by the right hon. Member for Islington North about having a weapons of mass destruction-free zone in the middle east, we remain committed to that and firmly believe it can be achieved only by consensus of all the states of the region. I can reassure the right hon. Gentleman that we continue to push for that.

I hope that has addressed most of the points that right hon. and hon. Members have made. The right hon. Member for Islington North also made a point about the humanitarian impact. The UK recognises the importance of engaging with the humanitarian consequences debate and listening to the views of non-nuclear weapon states. However, we believe that that conference was co-opted by civil society organisations to press for unilateral disarmament, which obviously is not the policy of this country. It was on that basis that the UK decided not to attend.

I hope that I have dealt reasonably with right hon. and hon. Members’ points. We will be able to discuss any further ones following the New York conference, and I look forward to working with Members of different parties in doing so.

British Council Contractors: Afghanistan

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Thursday 23rd June 2022 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Ford]

The hon. Gentleman is right that in certain parts of Afghanistan it is particularly challenging. That is part of the reason why we are giving a window.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

I am listening to the Minister with a bit of incredulity. She said:

“It is right that the Government do the right thing…and that includes resettling eligible contractors if they are at risk.”

Minister, they are at risk! That is a totally mealy-mouthed and profoundly unhelpful statement. We have known about this for months and months. The UK Government have given those of us asking questions the runaround time after time. We know who these people are, we know that they are vulnerable and we know that their lives are at risk. Will the UK Government stop giving us all the runaround and tell us how and when these vulnerable people will be given the opportunity to come to safety?

[Vicky Ford]

I am actually extremely proud of the work that the UK does to support vulnerable people coming to the UK from so many different areas. Many of my constituents are working to bring in Ukrainian families and support the Afghans who have come to my constituency. Many tens of thousands of Hong Kong nationals have come here. As I said, 4,600 people have come under either ARAP or ACRS since then. This is an important prioritisation that we are doing to support these contractors. They will be given time to apply because, as the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Justin Madders) points out, sometimes it can be challenging to get online in these places. That is why we have to give them a window. We have brought 4,600 people, including some of the most vulnerable, during this period. These are difficult circumstances and the UK is doing much, much more than many others. I continue to be proud of what we are doing.

Rape as a Weapon of War in Ukraine

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Thursday 31st March 2022 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Ford]

These are really important issues, and I completely agree with the right hon. Lady about how important it is to highlight them, especially the issue of safeguarding. That is why I had a discussion about safeguarding with the Charity Commission earlier this week. Significant work is also happening through Interpol to look at the situation on the ground. It is important to remind people that they are at risk of sexual exploitation and of modern-day slavery, which can involve sex workers. As I said earlier, we are aware of reports of civilians being forcibly removed, which is another violation of international humanitarian law. That is why we continue to support efforts to investigate the violation of human rights and international humanitarian law.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

I recently tabled a named day question asking about the requirement for refugees from Ukraine to obtain visas to enter the UK, and the assessment of the level of risk to women and children from human traffickers in that context. The response to that question is now nine days overdue. I know that this is an incredibly difficult situation, but it is even more difficult to properly safeguard women and girls if we have not identified and assessed the risks. Is the Minister able to commit to that being taken forward as part of the work she has set out today?

[Vicky Ford]

On the issue of visas, there is about to be an urgent question on that subject. It is important to have proper processes for visas and for those who have offered homes to Ukrainian refugees precisely because of those safeguarding concerns.

Sanctions

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Monday 28th February 2022 Commons Chamber

[Elizabeth Truss]

Yes is the answer, and that is what we are doing; we are pushing as hard as we can for the toughest possible sanctions. This is the biggest package of sanctions the UK has ever put in place in our history, and we want to do even more and we want to push it with our allies. Together with the G7, we represent half the global economy, and that is what will really shift Putin’s behaviour. That is what will really degrade the Russian economy and stop him being able to fund his war machine.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

Listening to the right hon. Lady’s comments, I am not entirely sure yet what the hold-up is with clarifying the plans to sanction Russia’s political ruling class—members of the Duma, Senate and presidential council; the top echelons of the security and defence services; and public television employees. Is she able to set out for us a little more about how soon we might see that happen, given the need for action to be swift, decisive and clear?

[Elizabeth Truss]

I assure the hon. Lady that we have a hit list of oligarchs and Duma members—those key personnel we are talking about. We will be announcing those as we build the evidence and case against them, but we need those cases to be legally watertight—that is what is important—so that when we hit them, the hit sticks.

Ukraine

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Tuesday 7th December 2021 Commons Chamber

[Vicky Ford]

We stand firm in our support for Ukraine’s NATO membership aspirations, in line with the 2008 Bucharest summit declaration, in which NATO allies agreed that Ukraine will become a member of the alliance. Allies have reiterated that commitment at every summit since.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

The White House statement released yesterday after President Biden’s call with his European counterparts did not mention sanctions. Although I appreciate they are not a magic bullet, significant sanctions might serve as an effective deterrent. Can the Minister confirm that on yesterday’s national security call, the Prime Minister pushed for significant and co-ordinated sanctions? Can she also confirm that any such sanctions would target those in Putin’s inner circle, limiting their ability to travel and potentially cutting off access to US, UK and EU banking and credit card systems?

[Vicky Ford]

We never speculate on future sanctions designations; to do so could undermine their effectiveness if they are put in place. However, we are closely monitoring the situation. We have taken action against Russia for its illegal annexation of Crimea, in co-ordination with international partners. We worked closely with the EU, the US, Australia and Canada to impose costs on those facilitating Russia’s illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol through sanctions. We will continue to work closely with international partners to ensure that those sanctions remain in place as long as Russia’s illegitimate control of the peninsula continues.

Islamophobia Awareness Month

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Wednesday 24th November 2021 Westminster Hall

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd, and to participate in such an important debate secured by the hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton (Afzal Khan). Those people who pay attention to the parliamentary calendar might notice that we had a debate quite recently on the definition of Islamophobia. We are debating a not dissimilar topic today, which is important and welcome. We need to be much more focused and relentless in looking at this issue, and this debate today is part of that. The recent high-profile cases of racism in cricket are just one example of why that really matters.

I am a member of the APPG on British Muslims, like a number of other hon. Members here today. The APPG is a good example of cross-party work, which is really important: collective purpose is absolutely necessary when we are dealing with Islamophobia, given the significant harm and detriment caused to so many people, some of which we have heard about today.

We have heard powerful speeches today from several hon. Members. My hon. Friend the Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Ms Qaisar) is a strong woman. I am proud to be her friend and colleague. What she had to say today was really important; I am grateful to her for saying what she did. Tackling Islamophobia absolutely requires us to listen to the lived experience of those who are affected. It is absolutely not on for those voices to be minimised in any way.

There are other people whose powerful work in this area is making a difference. We heard about Tell MAMA, which supports real change and works closely with the Community Security Trust. Joint working between Muslim and Jewish bodies is really important. It is a shame that such work is needed, but it is assuredly needed. From what some people might describe as low-level discrimination or harassment—presumably, those people have never experienced it themselves—to very serious crimes, the way that Islamophobia touches lives is broad and ever evolving. We heard from the hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton about his worries for his grandchildren and the hon. Member for Tooting (Dr Allin-Khan) talked about her own children. We heard about the online space, which is a bin fire of abuse and harassment, with anonymous trolls spreading bile and threatening people in a terrible way. The impact on women is greater, online as it is offline. This is not a straightforward issue, however, and it requires all of us to focus.

Somebody whose work we have heard about in this area—somebody who will deliver change—is Zara Mohammed, the new general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain. The call from the hon. Member for Sheffield Central (Paul Blomfield) for the Minister to discuss with Zara is sensible. Zara is a young, Scottish woman on a mission to deliver real, positive change. She is absolutely committed to pressing for action to deal with Islamophobia and improving lives. Part of how we can do that is to be open and encourage dialogue, to make sure that people are focused together. She was good enough to spend some time recently with me and my right hon. Friend the Member for Ross, Skye and Lochaber (Ian Blackford), explaining the issues she is dealing with. I am grateful to her for that.

Of course, these issues reach far beyond this place. The hon. Member for Manchester, Gorton hosted some visitors earlier in the week, including Rahima Mahmut, whose work on behalf of the Uyghur Muslim community is so important. We owe her huge thanks.

It is also worth reflecting on the work that other groups are doing, including groups led by young people. In my local area, Kirsty Robson is a co-founder of Yet Again, a group of young people who work to prevent genocides such as that faced by the Uyghur Muslim population in China. There is the work of Never Again Right Now, another youth-led movement, spearheaded by the European Union of Jewish Students, including my colleague, Olaf Stando. It is international in membership, and calls out the treatment of those who suffer human rights abuses because of their religion. I note its campaign in support of Uyghur Muslims, calling for a diplomatic boycott of the Beijing games.

I mention those groups in particular because solidarity is important. Tackling Islamophobia is not something that only Muslims should have to deal with and it is not something that is the responsibility of Muslims. We need to be open, all of us, to the fact that it is an issue everywhere. I have heard some comments today that make me think that I need to emphasise that point. I live in a fantastically religiously diverse community. I live in a country where there is a lot of work going into delivering fairness and social justice and stamping out racism in all its forms, but we do not have a magic wand. We cannot wish away the reality that Islamophobia remains and is an issue in Scotland just as it is everywhere else. We need to be alive to that and we need to be willing to work hard to deal with it.

The Scottish Parliament has a cross-party group working hard on this issue. It has been working with Professor Peter Hopkins and his team from Newcastle University, has conducted an inquiry and has adopted the APPG definition of Islamophobia. As we have heard, all parties in the Scottish Parliament have agreed to do that.

We need to define Islamophobia; we need to be clear what we are talking about and what is unacceptable, and we cannot do that if we do not define it. We need to be confident in our language.

It is welcome that the Scottish Parliament has got to that place. I am really keen to hear from the Minister the UK Government’s plans to look at this again and push ahead with this. I do not think they should get to keep kicking this into the long grass, particularly given the Prime Minister’s past comments, which are indefensible. The tone of some comments from Government Members today is regrettable. That is not the way we should conduct ourselves in here. Some of the eye-rolling and the language used was most unfortunate. However, I have to say that the contributions from the hon. Members for Burnley (Antony Higginbotham) and for Wycombe (Mr Baker) were eloquent and welcome. We need to see and hear more from the UK Government on this. We need to be mindful of the broader environment that we are in: there is a changing climate across in the world. We have a part to play here, using the platforms that we have, in making sure that we make a difference, because there has been a surge in respect of how the Muslim community is treated.

I conclude by returning to something the Minister said, which others have reflected on. She said that this is not political, or should not be, but her comments were. We need to take a step back from some of that. We need to accept that this is an issue for all of us in this Chamber and across the House; we all have a responsibility and duty to deal with Islamophobia. We will do that better if we can have discussions without raising the temperature in the way that it was raised, regrettably, today. I hope the Minister has something positive to say on that.

[Peter Dowd (in the Chair)]

I want to give Afzal Khan two minutes to wind up the debate.

Violence against Christians: Central African Countries

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Thursday 23rd September 2021 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the matter of violence against Christians in central African countries.

This issue concerns us greatly. I applied for this debate with the hon. Member for Congleton (Fiona Bruce) and others. We have a deep personal interest in the violence against Christians in particular across the world. Those who intend to speak and intervene understand that the issue is close to our hearts. I declare an interest: I am chair of the all-party parliamentary groups on international freedom of religion or belief and on the Pakistani minorities.

In the Chamber today there is a selection of right hon. and hon. Members who also have deep interest in these issues. I am very pleased to see a goodly turnout, especially as it is the last day before we go home. I often call this the graveyard slot because it is the end of the time before recess. It is important that we are all here to discuss this issue.

Across vast and growing swathes of the globe, Christians are no longer free to peacefully practise their faith. For many, threats of abduction, sexual violence and even killing have become a daily reality, and entire communities live under a constant and pressing fear. We hear the stories; I know others will tell them, and I find them quite hard to deal with. They involve my brothers and sisters in the Lord, so they are close to my heart. Those are things I feel deeply, which is why this debate is so important.

In its 2021 report, the charity Open Doors estimated that just in the 50 countries in the world watch list, 309 million Christians face very high or extreme levels of persecution and discrimination for their faith—an increase of a fifth in just one year. It is not getting better; it is actually getting worse. That is the issue.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

The hon. Gentleman mentioned the charity Open Doors. Does he agree that its work is absolutely vital in continuing to shine a light on the situation that many Christians around the world face? It must be commended for that.

[Jim Shannon]

The hon. Lady is absolutely right. I thank her for that intervention, because her words are salient to this debate and underline the issue.

Events in sub-Saharan Africa have accounted for much of that persecution and discrimination. There has been a significant increase in the number of violent attacks against Christians perpetrated by Islamic extremists. In Niger, Mali, the Central African Republic, Sudan and Nigeria—I will focus on Nigeria, as others probably will—the situation has become increasingly worrying. Many of us in this House—everyone who is here today—try to highlight the shocking and rapidly deteriorating situation in Nigeria, where the number of Christians killed last year rose by 60% on the year before. That illustrates the issue that the hon. Lady referred to. Open Doors states that things are getting worse, not better, because the number of people being murdered because of their faith has increased greatly. The stories of what is happening on the ground are horrifying. More Christians are being killed in Nigeria than anywhere else in the world. That is worrying for us all.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Ali. I commend the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and the others who secured this important debate on a topic that should be of deep concern to us all. Today’s speeches have been particularly thoughtful.

I am fortunate to represent East Renfrewshire, which is one of the most religiously diverse areas in Scotland. The issue of freedom of religion and belief, particularly for religious minorities—including Christians in some areas of the world—is of significant concern to many of my constituents, although the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh) made the very good point that the topic is not given a wider airing. I am very grateful to my constituents for their continued engagement on this issue. I know that the ability of Christians to practise their religion freely and fairly across the world is a matter of real significance, and should be of concern to people across Scotland, the UK and the world.

There is no doubt that we would be right to remain deeply concerned about the severity and scale of violations and abuses of freedom of religion and belief in central African countries. The hon. Member for Strangford spoke about Open Doors—a fantastic charity that allows us to have information about persecuted Christians around the world that we might not otherwise have access to. The Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Cameroon are all mentioned in information that Open Doors has shared, highlighting the top 50 most dangerous countries in which to be a Christian. We have heard very powerfully, particularly in the speeches made by the hon. Members for Strangford and for Congleton (Fiona Bruce), about the situation in Nigeria.

This year, the Democratic Republic of the Congo rose 17 spots in the Open Doors world ranking, mainly due to attacks on Christians by the Islamic extremist group Allied Democratic Forces in the east of the country, with 460 killed in the period 2019-20 and 100 churches attacked or closed down. Christians in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are at risk at all times of kidnapping, torture, murder, forced recruitment into militia groups, forced labour, and having their homes destroyed. Christian women in particular are extremely vulnerable to rape and sexual slavery, as the hon. Member for Aberconwy (Robin Millar) has powerfully expressed.

In the Central African Republic, there has been near-constant conflict and fighting since 2013. Much of the country is occupied by various armed militia groups that are responsible for a range of human rights abuses, and many of those groups—whether Islamic extremists or otherwise—specifically target Christians, so life is constantly uncertain for people in areas under militia control.

Prior to the coup in 2013, there had been no previous history of sectarian violence in the area, but since then, armed groups have regularly manipulated ethnic and religious divisions to realise their aims, as we have heard today. For instance, this February, over 100 homes were destroyed and supplies damaged in an arson attack on a camp located in the Catholic Church compound of Alindao. In Bangassou, 500 Muslims are reported to be sheltering with Christians in the Catholic churches, and in Grimari, churches have also provided shelter to 1,500 Muslims and Christians.

I turn to Cameroon. Dictatorial paranoia and Islamic oppression have led to the targeting of Christian communities there. For instance, as we have already heard, the Islamic extremist group Boko Haram is very active in the north, and has kidnapped and killed Christians for their faith. Christian women also face significant danger of abduction by Boko Haram and forced marriage—the comments we heard about that earlier were absolutely on point. Again, we see that double whammy effect of Christian women and girls being doubly vulnerable, targeted for both their faith and their gender. In addition, country experts indicate that several girls have been forced to act as suicide bombers to further decimate Christian populations. While the Government have been fighting a civil war, Boko Haram has regrouped, and the pandemic has also increased opportunities for action by jihadists, who are likely to make further inroads if a sustainable peace is not achieved.

This UK Government’s progress in implementing the recommendations of the Truro report, which should be a means of trying to make progress in this area, has been too slow. We in the Scottish National party welcomed the Truro report: it was a bit shorter than we would have liked, but it makes robust points, and it is important that we see a commitment to real action in a timely way. I appreciate that the UK Government did say that they would accept the 22 recommendations made by the report in full. However, as of 9 July this year, which is the latest update I can see, only 10 of the recommendations have been fully implemented. As we have heard, an independent review of progress is due to begin next year, but there is nothing that suggests to me that the 22 recommendations will be fully implemented, especially given that work on four of them has yet to start, two years on.

It was somewhat unfortunate that the role of the Prime Minister’s special envoy for freedom of religion or belief was vacant for a time, although I am very aware that the hon. Member for Congleton is very focused on these matters, which is welcome. We also need to think about the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Human Rights and Democracy Report. If that report is correct in saying that defending freedom of religion and belief for all is a priority for this Government, as I know it is for the hon. Lady, then more urgency is needed in achieving the implementation of the remaining recommendations, especially given that the number of those being targeted for their faith is certainly not reducing.

Every day 13 Christians are killed worldwide because of their faith. In 2020, 260 million people—approximately 10% of all Christians in the world—were persecuted for their religious beliefs. That is an increase from 245 million in 2019 and approximately 215 million in 2018, according to a report by Open Doors. More can and must be done to provide adequate support, particularly in relation to aid, to persecuted Christians. However, as we know, the UK is in fact cutting bilateral aid to Africa by 66%. Frankly, that is not good enough.

International aid is vital in stemming the spread of religious intolerance, stigma and socioeconomic exclusion, all of which tie together. The UK Government have been warned time and again not to lose sight of the benefits of international aid in tackling these issues, but they are cutting that aid. They are sending no bilateral aid to Cameroon at all this year, for example, although a very small amount has been promised. It is not entirely clear if that will go towards trade purposes rather than humanitarian support.

The Bishop of Truro’s report did draw positive attention to the £12 million freedom of religion or belief programme under the Coalition for Religious Equality and Inclusive Development. However, it has not yet been publicly confirmed whether that programme will continue beyond its current schedule. I would welcome any clarity on that.

Last year, the Advocacy Policy Officer at Open Doors at that time, Dr Matthew Rees, said:

“Both the Department for International Development and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office must do more to recognise the specific and hidden vulnerabilities of women from minority religious communities and provide tailored and added support through targeted programming.”

I would be keen to hear from the Minister about the commitments made in the report that detail this double vulnerability and the disproportionate impact that Christian women face in many countries because of their gender and faith.

It would also be interesting to hear what the FCDO is intending. How will it look to increase funding in areas of reconciliation mediation, religious persecution survival, trauma care—all really important points, which have been well-aired today—and also places of worship, security funding and rapid response teams globally? Will it make an assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of aid distribution to persecuted Christians? It is vital that the UK Government’s words and actions marry up, acting, as the hon. Member for Strangford said, in deed and in truth. These deeds really do matter. The Government cannot simultaneously criticise religious persecution abroad and overlook human rights abuses when they are searching for a post-Brexit trade deal with Cameroon, for example.

The UK should have followed the lead of the US and Canada in approving resolutions that call out with great force the brutal campaign of subjugation of minorities in Cameroon. The US Senate’s resolution praised the fact that the US trade representative at the time terminated Cameroon’s access to preferred trade rights due to persistent gross violations of internationally recognised human rights, in order to penalise the Biya Government and urge members of the international community to join the United States in a strategic, collective effort to put pressure on the Government of Cameroon, including the use of all available diplomatic and punitive tools.

On the very same day, the UK Government brought into effect their continuity trade agreement with Cameroon, which still remains unpublished and was subject to negligible parliamentary scrutiny. If it had been subject to due parliamentary consideration, we would have highlighted that it gives no concern to the persistent gross violations of international human rights taking place inside Cameroon. We are yet to see whether it contains the provisions that we would want on human rights, but I remain somewhat sceptical. Perhaps the Minister can clarify that point. The negotiations were a missed opportunity to raise valid concerns about the persecution of Christians. Instead, the UK Government signed an agreement, apparently with no hesitation over the Government of Cameroon’s human rights record and no apparent effort to strengthen human rights provisions.

The issue of freedom of religion and the protection of people’s right to their religious faith should be something we all agree on. We know that Christians in central African countries are routinely persecuted for their faith. We have heard that other groups, including Muslims and those of other faiths, are similarly persecuted. We should be sending a message here, backed up by actions. I sincerely hope the Minister is going to talk us through that. It is very clear that people in these situations can wait no longer.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Vicky Ford)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma. I thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing such an important debate. I commend him for his tireless work in defending freedom of religion and belief.

I thank my predecessor as Minister for Africa, my hon. Friend the Member for Rochford and Southend East (James Duddridge). He worked tirelessly to build strong relationships across Africa and put great effort into promoting this cause during his time in the role. I am absolutely committed to continuing work on this important issue.

My own interest in bringing people together across religious divides comes from my childhood and teenage years, when I saw the work that my mother did as a volunteer English doctor in Northern Ireland, reaching out to Catholic and Protestant communities, and bringing them together to help in that long journey towards peace. It is also rooted in memories of my grandmother, a theologian, who was one of the people who worked towards and succeeded in setting up the World Council of Churches after the war.

I thank all the members of the all-party parliamentary group for international freedom of religion or belief who have come here today. I have taken note of their annual commentary. It provides valuable insights and I would be delighted to meet the group’s members.

Violence against any person because of their religion or belief, or indeed lack of belief, is completely unacceptable. I deeply agree with hon. Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for South West Bedfordshire (Andrew Selous) and my right hon. Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), that it is important that we continue to raise these matters in this place. Although this debate focuses on the plight of persecuted Christians, we must not forget those who have been persecuted for belonging to other religions and holding other beliefs, and those who have no religious belief at all. The Government are committed to championing freedom of religion or belief for all, which is enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights.

Earlier this afternoon, in my first week in this role, I met the African heads of mission based in London. I strongly emphasised that democracy, human rights and the rule of law are core UK values, and that they include the freedom of religion or belief. I also emphasised the UK’s support for 12 years of quality education. All boys and girls must be able to go to school safety. Our Prime Minister continues to be passionate about championing the right of all girls across the world to get those first 12 years of education, and we chaired an education summit on that in July.

When I met the heads of mission, I also took the opportunity to emphasise my interest, and that of so many Members, in the rights of women and girls. Women and girls should have the right to make the decisions about what affects their lives. That means that they need access to education, healthcare and employment opportunities, and that they must know that they can live their lives safely and securely.

[Kirsten Oswald]

Will the Minister give way?

[Vicky Ford]

I will not take too many interventions, if that is okay, because I want to cover quite a lot of content, and we have already run over the hour and a half. I may come back to the hon. Lady later.

We want everyone, everywhere to be able to live in accordance with their own conscience, to practise their own choice of faith or belief, or to hold none. They must be able to do so free from persecution, prejudice and harm.

--- Later in debate ---

[Vicky Ford]

I will very much look into what the hon. Gentleman says, and I thank him for his praise of the project.

I want to come back to Sudan, as it was mentioned in one of the earlier interventions. I spoke to the Prime Minister of Sudan, Abdalla Hamdok, yesterday. We totally condemn the attempted coup and strongly support the civilian-led Government in the country’s transition to democracy. Standing up for democracy is a core value of our country.

In Cameroon, we engage with faith actors of all kinds and the Government. We are deeply concerned about the upsurge of Islamic State and note that it is targeting security forces—including, sadly, some security forces trained by Her Majesty’s Government.

[Kirsten Oswald]

I am glad that the Minister mentions Cameroon, but I would not like her to move away from that subject just yet. Is she able to answer some of the questions that I posed about Cameroon and trade? It would be helpful to Members across the House to hear a bit more about what lies beneath the agreement that has been reached.

[Vicky Ford]

I will get back to the hon. Lady separately on that topic, if I may.

There have been some questions about the implementation of the recommendations in the Bishop of Truro’s report. I am pleased to hear many colleagues draw attention to the Bishop of Truro’s independent review on the persecution of Christians. I was personally delighted when I heard that he was going to do the review. It was at a time when I was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Foreign Secretary’s team and to Foreign Office Ministers, and I know how important it was to Members across the House. I was really pleased to see the report come out and the conclusions that it had reached. The Government are committed to implementing the bishop’s 22 recommendations in full, to drive real improvements in the lives of those who are persecuted. Eighteen of the recommendations have already been implemented or are in the process of being implemented, and we are on track to deliver all 22 recommendations by July 2022—so 22 by ’22.

As a long-standing champion of human rights and freedoms, the UK has a duty to promote and defend our values of equality, inclusion and respect, both at home and abroad. I can assure right hon. and hon. Members that this Government will continue to do just that.

Withdrawal from Afghanistan: Joint Committee

Kirsten Oswald Excerpts

Wednesday 15th September 2021 Commons Chamber

[Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)]

Mr Deputy Speaker,

“It’s like the entire country is being held hostage.”

That is how my constituent Abdul Bostani, the chief executive of Glasgow Afghan United, described the situation in Afghanistan after the Taliban takeover. One of those trapped was his own brother, a UK citizen who had travelled back to visit his wife and children because the Tory Government’s arbitrary earning thresholds for visas meant that he had not been able to bring them to the UK for a family reunion. Thankfully, they were among the lucky ones who got out in the airlift, but they should have been here years ago.

Likewise, Abdul has friends who served as interpreters for the UK armed forces who are still in Afghanistan because they were employed by a security company and not directly by the British Army. There were told that they were therefore not eligible for schemes to resettle in the UK. The Minister for the Armed Forces offered to look into that earlier this week, but again, they should have been here years ago.

[Kirsten Oswald (East Renfrewshire) (SNP)]

There is also a great deal of confusion over the treatment of British Council staff. It is still unclear why they were excluded from ARAP; they should certainly be here. It is unclear what will happen to those staff in the future, how many were special cases, and how many still remain in Afghanistan. Does my hon. Friend agree that that is another issue that really needs to be clarified?

[Patrick Grady]

My hon. Friend is right and the Minister should respond to that.

I fully support the Labour motion for a Committee of inquiry. The Government have pretty thin reasoning for opposing that. Technically, the establishment of a new Committee is a House matter, so there should be a free vote for their Back Benchers tonight.

Hundreds of my constituents have been in contact with me since the US withdrawal began, distressed at the scenes in Kabul and across Afghanistan, and demanding action from Governments in the UK and wanting to express their solidarity. I have spoken to constituents who are particularly concerned about the treatment of women, girls and minority groups, as we all are. Expat constituents from Afghanistan have emphasised that Afghanistan is not a lost cause. Resistance to the Taliban remains real and the UK Government need to be aware of that.