Lord Callanan
Main Page: Lord Callanan (Conservative - Life peer)
Lord Callanan (Con)
My Lords, I join all sides of the House in thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Featherstone, for securing this important debate today. We have heard some excellent speeches, none more so than those from our two maiden entrants. First, the noble Baroness, Lady Hyde of Bemerton, told us where Bemerton is; then the noble Lord, Lord Barber, of the splendidly named Chittlehampton, did not tell us where that is, but Google tells me that it is in North Devon, with a population of 820. If it is half as nice as its name, I am sure it is a wonderful place. Both made splendid contributions to your Lordships’ House today, and I am sure they will continue to do that in the years to come.
It was also an unwelcome surprise to hear that today’s was the final, valedictory contribution from the noble Lord, Lord Browne of Ladyton. I did not know that he was intending to retire. He will be a great loss to the House. I think it is fair to say that we have not agreed on much over my time in government and now on the Opposition Front Bench, but he is a formidable parliamentarian, always difficult to argue with and against, who contributed across a whole range of subjects with great vigour and ability. He will be sorely missed. I think it was Chris Mullin, a party colleague of the noble Lord, who said it was better
“to go while people are still asking ‘why’ rather than ‘when’”.
That is very definitely the case with the noble Lord. He will be missed by the House.
As the sixth-largest economy, the United Kingdom has an important role internationally. Through close working with our international partners, we can and should influence the direction of global politics to promote our core values of freedom and democracy. In our increasingly unstable world, that role is more important than ever. In Iran, we have seen mass protests against the oppressive regime that have been met with unspeakable brutality. In Ukraine, Putin continues to wage his illegal war against a sovereign, democratic nation that has every right to decide its own future.
Under the previous Conservative Government, the UK stepped up to the challenge of the international crises that we faced at the time, supporting the people of Ukraine with military and humanitarian aid—I am delighted to see the current Government continuing that—and establishing the Homes for Ukraine scheme. We supported Hong Kongers in the face of oppression by the Chinese state—I hope the Prime Minister is continuing to raise their plight in his current visit—and we have supported many Afghans who worked with us in the wake of the Taliban’s return to power.
Alongside that specific support, in the face of international crises and in the context of the serious fiscal challenge of the Covid pandemic, we continued to deliver official development assistance, although at the lower rate of 0.5% of gross national income—which I am sure will disappoint the noble Lord, Lord Purvis—with the top three recipients of UK country-specific bilateral ODA in 2024 being Ukraine, Afghanistan and Ethiopia.
The Official Opposition recognise that Britain can and should play its part internationally, not simply because it benefits those living in developing countries—of course, it does—but because it is in our own interests to do so. But we have to be wiser about how we go about this spending. Too often, organisations that receive UK government support have been found to be supporting activities that contradict our own objectives.
I have raised this before: in 2024, the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East sacked nine members of staff who it said “may have been involved” in the 7 October 2023 attacks on Israel. When British taxpayers’ money is spent in support of organisations that have been forced to sack individuals who may have been involved in genocidal terrorist attacks, our international reputation is harmed. Indeed, these incidents damage trust in the Government’s due diligence processes when making decisions about overseas aid. I recognise that a lot of this went on when we were in power, but we suspended funding to UNRWA, which has now been resumed by this Government. So will the Minister set out what steps the Government have taken following the 2024 UNRWA case to improve due diligence in respect of some of that overseas spending? Does the FCDO have any concerns about the department’s existing spending on overseas aid?
While the examples of UK action on the international stage are concrete and were welcomed by those who benefited, the concept of soft power is, of course, much harder to define. Those who benefited from the Afghan resettlement scheme, the Ukrainians who have seen the UK support them as they defend their own country, or the Hong Kongers who have been given the opportunity to build a new life here in the UK with greater protection from the Chinese state, all know what we have done for them. But more generally, our soft power is hard to measure. Will the Minister confirm whether his department has a way of measuring our soft power? How is this monitored and have the Government set themselves targets against those metrics to grow our soft power? Without some way of measuring success, it becomes very difficult to evaluate the impact of changes made by this Government.
In 2025, the Government established the UK Soft Power Council with great fanfare. When it was established, we were told that it would meet four times a year and that it would provide concrete and actionable proposals to support the Government. Around the same time, the noble Baroness, Lady Chapman, the Minister, told the noble Earl, Lord Clancarty, that the UK Soft Power Council would have a “minimal budget”.
So, could the Minister, when he replies, give the House a sense of the successes of the UK Soft Power Council to date? How often has it met? Is the attendance at these meetings published? If not, does the Government have any intention of doing so? The minutes that are published tell the public almost nothing: I think that could do with significant improvement. What concrete and actionable proposals has the council provided to the Government since its establishment?
Given, as I said, that this was a flagship announcement from the Government in January 2025—made around six months after they came to office—could the Minister please explain whether, in his view, the Soft Power Council has delivered on the Government's ambitious plans for it to,
“re-imagine Britain’s role on the world stage”
and
“reinvigorate alliances and forge new partnerships”?
In conclusion, I of course thank all noble Lords for their contributions to this important debate, which has brought the importance of the UK’s reputation on the world stage to the fore. Although there are differences of opinion on the best way to strengthen the UK’s influence on the international stage, I can say with confidence that we are all united in our support for a stronger and more confident Britain that is able to promote justice, peace, freedom and democracy across the world.