Global Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law Sanctions Regulations 2026

Lord True Excerpts

Wednesday 4th November 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness; I am familiar with that document—I may even have had a hand in helping to write it. There is confusion, if the noble Baroness does not mind me saying so, at the heart of her point. On 8 September, the Foreign Secretary announced two things—in fact, he announced many things, including a series of sanctions, which some noble Lords have forgotten, on the financing arms of Hamas and Hezbollah, but he announced two things in particular.

First, the Foreign Secretary announced that there will be a new sanctions regime designed to stop UK economic activity supporting the expansion of illegal settlements, and that that would be laid before Parliament within six to nine months. Many comments made by noble Lords and noble Baronesses in the last hour have been focused on a Bill that is yet to be produced and measures that have yet to be clarified. I take very seriously the injunctions of many noble Lords, including my noble friend Lord Mendelsohn, for clarity to be provided, as much as is consistent with those new rules. But today is about the second thing the Foreign Secretary talked about: the expansion of our existing global human rights regime. That is what we are discussing, and it is not what the quote the noble Baroness read out was about.

I will happily come back to noble Lords on specific issues, but I am afraid I do not have time to go through everything now.

As I said earlier, if this amendment was successful, we would not be taking action on any one country; we would be saying no to the expansion of the Government’s ability to act in response to abuse of human rights or serious violations of international humanitarian law. Is that the message we want to send, or do we want to make a general modification to an established and successfully operating set of regulations to expand our ability to act against abuses that we all debate, day-to-day, and which people rightly get upset about and ask me Oral Questions about on a regular basis?

[Lord True (Con)]

My Lords, I understand that the Minister wishes to make progress, and I welcome the fact that more time was given to this through the usual channels. However, the Minister says he has no more time. Will he assure the House that he will place in the Library a full response to all the questions raised by noble Lords in this debate?

[Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab)]

I will happily provide answers to the questions I have not been able to address.

[Lord True (Con)]

Will he place them in the Library?

[Lord Wood of Anfield (Lab)]

I am happy to place them in the Library.

In recent years, the UK has transformed its use of sanctions and continues to lead internationally in their implementation. This amended global human rights and international humanitarian law regime gives us a stronger and more flexible means of promoting accountability and responsibility, and responding to some of the gravest abuses seen around the world. I therefore respectfully urge noble Lords not to support the amendment from the noble Lord, Lord Leigh. It is motivated by things that are not the substance of today’s regulations, which concern the global human rights regime rules.

To conclude, I once again thank the House for the many insightful contributions and the continued cross-party support for our sanctions regime. We continue to lead internationally on sanctions implementation. This amended global human rights and international humanitarian law regime will give the UK a powerful tool to respond to human rights abuses and international humanitarian law violations across the world.