West Bank: Forced Displacement

Martin Rhodes Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd July 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered the forced displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. The Palestinian people face intolerable hardship, suffering and misery. In Gaza, the world witnesses the killing of civilians, the blocking of aid, the destruction of civilian infrastructure, attacks on aid workers and forced displacement. Israel, like any sovereign state, has the right to defend itself and seek the return of its hostages, and Hamas should be held accountable for the attacks on 7 October, but that is not a justification for what is happening now to the Palestinian people.

While international attention remains fixed on Gaza and the recent escalation of tension between Israel and Iran, we must not ignore the deepening injustice in the west bank. According to Amnesty International, Israel’s military operations in the occupied west bank over the past four months have led to the largest displacement of Palestinians since the 1967 war. Furthermore, Save the Children reports that almost half of all Palestinian children killed by Israeli forces or settlers in the occupied west bank since records began were killed in the past two years.

We need to uphold international law and promote a just peace. This debate provides a small opportunity to highlight the injustice facing Palestinians in the west bank today. There is so much that could be said to fully represent the difficulties that face the lives of Palestinians in the west bank every day in everything from accessing healthcare to having a peaceful existence without harassment or degrading treatment. That is one reason I believe the UK should formally recognise the state of Palestine as soon as possible. I hope the Minister in his response can agree that recognition is not only a matter of justice, but a necessary step to help rebalance negotiations and support the long-term viability of a two-state solution.

The situation on the ground continues to deteriorate. The recent increase in the forced displacement of Palestinians in the west bank seems to reflect a growing sense of impunity for increased settlement activities.

[Claire Hazelgrove (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Lab)]

I completely agree that what we are seeing on the ground in the west bank and in Gaza is horrendous. Does my hon. Friend agree that with the ultimate goal in mind of a lasting peace via a two-state solution, it is crucial that Palestinians are able to return to and rebuild their homes and lives? Does he also agree that to secure that future, there must not be any attempt to annex land in Gaza?

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

Order. Can I just say that interventions are supposed to be short?

[Martin Rhodes]

I agree. We need to make sure that there is a Palestine to first be recognised and then be part of that two-state solution.

In May 2025, Israeli Ministers approved 22 new illegal settlements in the west bank—the biggest expansion in decades. Defence Minister Israel Katz, as reported by the BBC, said the move

 “prevents the establishment of a Palestinian state that would endanger Israel”.

I hope the Minister can address that issue in his remarks. How can we hope for a negotiated two-state solution when the very existence of a Palestinian state is framed as a danger by Israeli Ministers?

Since the ’67 war, Israel has occupied the west bank and East Jerusalem, which has led to 160 settlements housing 700,000 Israelis. Those settlements exist alongside an estimated 3.3 million Palestinians under occupation and are widely seen as illegal under international law. Last year, the UN International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion that Israel’s continued presence in Palestinian territory was unlawful. Furthermore, the court said that all settlements should be evacuated due to their establishment and maintenance being in violation of international law.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

On my hon. Friend’s point, what is happening in the west bank has legally been defined as a war crime by the International Criminal Court. As a supporter of the rule of law, should the UK not therefore condemn these actions as horrific war crimes committed by the Israeli Government, and encourage the wider international community to do the same?

[Martin Rhodes]

It is important to note that the International Court of Justice has indeed given the advisory opinion that Israel’s continued presence in Palestinian territory is unlawful. I hope the Minister will refer to that in his remarks.

There have long been concerns that the illegal settler movement has aligned with Israeli state policy goals that could not be openly pursued due to international scrutiny. Under the current Israeli Government, the open support for and increase in state-sanctioned illegal settlements give the perception of a political strategy that undermines a two-state solution and risks de facto annexation of the west bank.

This debate is not only about illegal settlements, however; it is also about the human cost of the forced displacement of Palestinians. According to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, 905 people, including 181 children, have been killed in the west bank, and a further 7,370 people have been injured. The UN Human Rights Office has reported rising settler violence, forced displacements and arbitrary detention against Palestinians. Over the last couple of years, 6,400 Palestinians have been forcibly displaced following the demolition of their homes, and a further 2,200 have been uprooted because of settler violence and access limitations. That does not include the approximately 40,000 Palestinians displaced from three refugee camps in the northern west bank because of increased Israeli militarised operations there since January.

That is deeply troubling. Those are not just numbers, but daily lived injustices that undermine the prospects for peace and must be addressed with the seriousness they deserve. I continue to believe that the UK should use its voice on the international stage to call for accountability and the protection of civilians in all parts of the occupied territories. I hope the Minister can address that today.

Forced displacement in the west bank not just strips Palestinians of their homes, but involves the destruction of vital public services. A recent report from a coalition including UNICEF and Save the Children found that 84 schools across the west bank, including East Jerusalem, are currently subject to pending demolition orders issued by the Israeli authorities. That puts the right to education at risk for some 12,655 students, of whom more than half are girls. In parallel, the World Health Organisation reported more than 500 attacks on healthcare facilities, leading to numerous deaths and injuries, in just under a year after the 7 October 2023 attacks.

All children have the right to safely access education and all people have the right to access medical care as enshrined in international and humanitarian law. The attacks on or destruction of those services sends a message that neither health nor the prospects of opportunity are safe under occupation. That is best encapsulated by a quote shared with me by Save the Children. Marah, an eight-year-old girl who lives in the Jenin refugee camp in the west bank, says:

“We are scared…There’s a lot of mud, bullets, and they shoot tear gas. Our school isn’t safe. It’s close to the army…I was sitting here, this window shook, and the glass fell. Every day, there is the sound of drones. We’ve kind of gotten used to it a little.”

What can be done? In recent months, the UK Government have taken action. I welcome the recent sanctions on individual outposts, settlements and now two far-right Israeli Ministers in an effort by the UK Government to help to secure the west bank for Palestinians and not illegal settlements, but those settlements are now state sanctioned, state funded and state protected. We must go further. There must be a ban on the import of goods to the UK from illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Those settlements remain a significant obstacle to peace—one that the UK must not be responsible for supporting.

Ultimately, we need to see the withdrawal of Israel from the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and the final negotiation towards the recognition of a democratic Palestinian state, including a rebuilt Gaza, in peaceful co-existence with a democratic Israel. I ask the Minister what more the UK Government can do to prevent the west bank from becoming like Gaza, given the escalating violence, increased military operations and forced displacement of Palestinians there in recent months.

[Kit Malthouse (North West Hampshire) (Con)]

I want to add to the hon. Gentleman’s list something that the Government could do. In the main Chamber we are busy proscribing two Russian supremacist organisations. Does he think it would be appropriate for the Government to proscribe settler organisations who, as President Biden said, are perpetrating terrorism upon a defenceless Palestinian people?

[Martin Rhodes]

I certainly think that the Government should look at that. There is obviously a process to go through in terms of proscribing, but it is something that should be looked at.

With regard to the plight of the Palestinian people in Gaza, the UK Government must redouble their efforts to pressure Israel to reopen crossings and lift restrictions on movement and fuel. The UN co-ordination of humanitarian aid must be restored and a permanent ceasefire agreed. That will once again allow professional and experienced humanitarian aid agencies to reach people in need at scale, with meaningful assistance.

Finally, for there to be a peaceful two-state solution between a safe and democratic Israel and a safe, democratic and viable Palestinian state, there must be a people and a land called Palestine left to recognise. As the UK, let us work to ensure that.

[Karl Turner (in the Chair)]

There are a couple of housekeeping matters that I need to mention. The debate can go on until 5.44 pm because of injury time in previous debates, so I want the wind-up speeches to begin at 5:20 pm. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to catch my eye to speak in the debate. There will be a three-minute time limit on speeches.

BBC World Service Funding

Martin Rhodes Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Jeremy. In recent years, we have seen a rise in disinformation, with malign actors seeking to sow division and distrust within communities, across countries and throughout entire regions. One of the key problems with our global information ecosystem is that it takes significantly more time and effort to refute false or misleading information than it does to produce it. That is why continued funding and support for the BBC World Service is not just desirable but essential: it acts as a factual counterweight to disinformation.

There is documented evidence of states such as Russia employing trolls to spread misinformation internationally, in countries such as the UK and India, on platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter. In 2020, Facebook uncovered a Russia-linked disinformation campaign run through a front organisation in Ghana. The operation used fake accounts to post about US social issues such as race, LGBT rights and celebrity culture, aiming to sow division while concealing its Russian origins. Those and similar actions are designed to accelerate societal division and encourage support for illegal and unethical activities such as the invasion of Ukraine.

In contrast, the BBC World Service shares a balanced view of international developments, delivered through news, speech and discussion, on TV, on radio and online, in 42 languages around the world. It is the world’s largest external broadcaster by reception area, language diversity and audience reach, with an average weekly audience of 450 million. It reflects and projects impartial, accurate and independent journalism. In an increasingly competitive global media environment in which authoritarian states invest heavily in state-run media, the BBC stands as a trusted voice globally.

The case for the BBC World Service is about not only the rise of disinformation but the decline of similar global news services, of which the closest in scale was Voice of America, as mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket (Peter Prinsley).

A striking example of the self-defeating nature of the cuts to such organisations and to impartial global journalism came when Persian-language reporters for Voice of America who had been on administrative leave were called back to work following the escalation of tensions after Israel’s attacks on Iran. Just days after returning, these journalists reportedly stepped outside for a cigarette break only to find themselves locked out of the building, and they were then informed that they had been dismissed. At a moment of heightened geopolitical instability, when their language skills and regional insight were more valuable than ever, the termination of their employment was not just poorly handled; it was a serious loss for factual reporting, both for the region and for the global audience.

That is precisely the role that BBC World Service continues to play. In the absence of other trusted international broadcasters, the BBC must fill the gap. If we do not, others will, and the voices that take the place of the BBC might not be platforms promoting informed and informing journalism. I trust that in her closing remarks the Minister will recognise the role of the BBC World Service and give her support to its continuing existence.

UK Democracy: Impact of Digital Platforms

Martin Rhodes Excerpts

Thursday 3rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

I thank the hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Sorcha Eastwood) for bringing this debate to the Chamber.

Throughout history, from the printing press to social media, technological advancements have often outpaced the laws meant to regulate them. Today, digital platforms evolve at a speed that outstrips Governments’ abilities to fully understand or regulate their impact—especially concerning for democracy, which depends on informed citizens making choices shaped by debate. Yet democracy is increasingly undermined by bad faith actors, misinformation and manipulation.

As digital natives and future voters, young people face particular risks, and Governments owe them a duty of care to help them to develop in an informed and safe way online. However, older citizens with less experience of social media and newer tech platforms can also face difficulties in how they interact and interpret information or disinformation. In addition to the risks of early forms of digital platforms for democracy, such as the spread of misinformation, contemporary digital platforms now possess novel risks such as deepfakes, AI bots and short- form video content. I will focus my speech on how this situation relates to our democratic engagement.

In Scotland, 16-year-olds have the right to vote in local and national elections; with the Government’s manifesto promising votes at 16 in UK elections, it is important to consider the impact of digital platforms on young voters and the younger generations who will one day become voters. It will not surprise many to hear that young people are extensive users of digital platforms and that their online habits are evolving rapidly. According to Ofcom, 86% of 9 to 16-year-olds use social media, and even among children as young as 5 to 7, a third are now active online. Platforms such as TikTok and Discord are increasingly shaping young people’s understanding of the world, including politics. Ofcom reports that children aged 5 to 15 are now spending an average of five hours and 24 minutes a day engaged in social media activity.

It is right to note that there are benefits to the use of digital platforms by young people in our political system. These platforms allow young people access to the entire sum of human knowledge, and therefore have real scope as a great source of education and knowledge. They can not only provide helpful information and analysis on our politics, but act as a new means of getting young people engaged and interested in our democratic system.

Despite these benefits, it remains the case that there are real risks and harms associated with children’s use of social media and their outlook on democracy. Recent TV shows such as “Adolescence” have highlighted that digital platforms can act as echo chambers where extremist communities can influence young people’s ideas and opinions. A recent survey published by the University of Glasgow’s John Smith centre, based in my constituency, found that nationally, 57% of 16 to 29-year-olds would prefer to live in a democracy; that said, 27% of those surveyed would prefer to live in a dictatorship. The fact that more than a quarter of this age group would prefer to live in a system completely juxtaposed to our own democracy should be a warning to us all. In difficult times globally, with uncertainty and disruption to previously accepted patterns of international, national and local environments, the lure of simplistic but dangerous solutions promoted by bad faith actors can be all too persistent.

I welcome the actions taken to address these challenges by committing both to making the digital world a safer place for young people and to delivering real, tangible improvements in their lives through other policy initiatives, but we must work harder as we move forward to respond to the ever-changing environment of online activity that we face. Social media giants must be held accountable for the role their platforms play in shaping public discourse, and no tech executive should be above the law.

I commend the efforts of the hon. Member for Lagan Valley in securing this Backbench Business debate and introducing it today. We must not only protect young people—and, in fact, all citizens—from harm online, but equip them with the tools to shape their future, assuming they are not just passive consumers of digital content, but informed and engaged citizens in our democracy.

Gaza: Israeli Military Operations

Martin Rhodes Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I have set out the steps we have taken and the sanctions we have issued, and I will continue to return to this House with further updates.

[Martin Rhodes (Glasgow North) (Lab)]

I recognise what the Minister has said about what has been done, but given the desperate situation, what more could be done through diplomatic efforts to ensure that Israel allows in humanitarian aid at speed and at scale, and to support the Arab initiative, so that Gaza is rebuilt as part of a recognised, viable Palestinian state?

[Mr Falconer]

We will continue to work with our partners who are party to the Arab initiative, and indeed our partners in the United Nations Security Council, where we have called sessions and issued statements. We will continue to work along those lines in the way that my hon. Friend would expect.