Israeli Settlements: Trade Ban

Melanie Ward Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

I rise to speak in support of a UK ban on trade in goods and services from illegal Israeli settlements. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield Central (Abtisam Mohamed) for securing the debate and for all her work on the issue.

Last month I organised a letter to the Foreign Secretary, which was co-signed by more than 140 Labour colleagues, to call for such a ban. The strength of feeling among Labour Members, and across the House, is clear. I hope that the Minister has heard that.

The existence and expansion of Israeli settlements is an impediment to peace and to a two-state solution. Some Israeli Government Ministers are now helpfully clear that that is their purpose. In response, British Jewish organisation Yachad has a letter from British Jews in support of a settlement trade ban, with almost 1,000 signatures so far. As they know, Israeli settlements are not normal places, and we should not deal with them as if they were. Instead, we must follow through both on our historic recognition of the state of Palestine and on the ICJ advisory opinion. A trade ban would be one way of properly delineating between the state of Israel and the state of Palestine.

Settlements are an affront not only to international law, but to human decency. In 2013, I had the life-changing experience of serving as a human rights observer in Hebron, in the west bank. In this Palestinian city, day after day, I witnessed the routine violence against and humiliation of Palestinian civilians by Israeli settlers and soldiers alike. I do not have time to share with hon. Members all the events that I witnessed, day after day, but they included a man being harassed and held at a checkpoint for hours because he took some biscuits to a kindergarten; a family with a young child and a disabled son being attacked by settlers, who called on others to “come and attack the Arabs”; and Palestinians being barred from entering their home by neighbouring Israeli settlers while Israeli soldiers stood and watched, as we asked them to help, before attacking us—internationals who were observing the situation—and arresting one of the internationals, with settlers cheering as they took him away in a van. We also witnessed daily, on the school run, Palestinian children being tear-gassed and having stun grenades thrown at them by Israeli soldiers. The Palestinian children were terrified. And so it went on.

Which other population would we expect to put up with that day after day? Every time I have returned since, the situation has worsened. Year after year, Governments issue statements about the situation. It is time we got on with a ban on settlement trade. It is no use the Government’s dragging their feet. We have had to do that on too many issues. Can we please just get on with it?

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Davies]

I am very grateful for the hon. Lady’s intervention. I will address the point that she raises later in my speech, but our shared aim across this House, which is peace in the region, cannot be achieved without Britain maintaining an enduring relationship with Israel and with our allies in the region. It is through engagement that we will be able to achieve the resolution we all want. Engagement is vital to achieving the peace that unites the House today.

That is why I regret that, in my view and the view of the official Opposition, Britain’s influence has been diminished to such a degree due to a series of misjudged decisions. These include the decision to cancel trade talks while Hamas were still holding hostages after the 7 October attacks; the decision to impose export licence suspensions while Israel was burying hostages so barbarically taken from their loved ones; and the decision to recognise a Palestinian state when no formal peace process had been agreed. Of course we support a two-state solution, and it is right that we would recognise a Palestinian state, but recognition of a Palestinian state is only meaningful if it is part of a formal peace process. As my shadow ministerial colleagues have pointed out, the Government’s actions to date have left our relations with Israel in a deep freeze, with our ability to influence the situation in the region severely diminished.

[Melanie Ward]

The shadow Minister has been talking about the views of our allies in the region. I wonder when he last met or spoke to our allies across the Arab world, because they have been crying out for many of the actions that our Government have taken. They have been calling on us to act in support of a two-state solution, and to avoid dithering and doing nothing, which is what he is suggesting his party supports.

[Gareth Davies]

The hon. Lady is wrong to suggest that we are saying we should do nothing. If Members remember, it was a Conservative Foreign Secretary in 2024 who imposed sanctions on the settlements. The House has heard me say from this Dispatch Box that the expansion of settlements is wrong. She is being unfair. What I am talking about is a point of execution. We have to engage with our allies—Israel is a critical ally of the United Kingdom—and that is not done by banning trade with Israel.

--- Later in debate ---

[Gareth Davies]

I will make a little progress in the interests of time, because I know that Members will want to hear from the Minister. It is the official Opposition’s view that a proposed ban on the trade of Israeli settlement goods and services will bring about the same result as I have been talking about and will prove counterproductive and ineffective.

Secondly, aside from the ineffectiveness of the policy, it is not even clear that it could be implemented, according to the Labour Government. The Government have repeatedly pointed out, as have many Members today, that a ban on settlement goods would be difficult to enforce. At the Dispatch Box last week, the Minister for the Middle East, the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer), said that countries imposing such a ban are encountering “technical difficulties”. Will the Trade Minister address that point when he responds to the debate, and confirm that the Government still hold these concerns about practicality? Labour Members have been questioning that. It is all well and good making a point and arguing for an action, but the Government say that it cannot be executed, and it needs to be explained.

I realise that many anti-Israel campaigners will not be concerned with the answers to these questions that I am posing of the Minister. They may not care whether a ban is effective or having an impact, but only that it should be in place. By the way, I have heard nobody in this debate mention that one in seven medicines dispensed by the NHS comes from Israel. Those who have suggested that we should have an outright ban on Israeli trade have offered no solution to that point. I am sure that the Minister agrees that it is vital that the Government take the full impact of any policy into consideration.

[Melanie Ward]

Will the shadow Minister give way?

[Gareth Davies]

Not right now, and I have already taken an intervention from the hon. Lady.

Finally, and more broadly, we worry that the campaigners ultimately want this ban to become a gateway to a wider ban on trade with Israel. If that is the case, they simply do not accept the importance of the relationship that we have with Israel. On trade and the economy, Israel is a technology and health superpower, with the UK-Israel trading relationship worth £6 billion. When the last Government launched bilateral trade talks in 2022, we estimated that the reduction in trade barriers could benefit almost 7,000 UK businesses in all Labour Members’ constituencies, including 5,600 SMEs employing 1.7 million people. I would be grateful if the Minister updated the House on the status of the trade agreement discussions. [Interruption.]

I see that you are asking me to conclude, Madam Deputy Speaker. We firmly believe that the proposed trade embargo would have no practical effect whatever on the situation in the region. We are concerned that it is part of a broader push by Israel’s opponents to isolate the Jewish state politically and economically. The ban would be legally and administratively complex, it would have limited economic effect, and it would hinder diplomatic efforts to find a sustainable, long-term peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. No matter what Members might say or shout, the ban would not bring about peace in the middle east. We have already seen Britain’s voice marginalised and Britain’s ability to influence Israel diminished. To go further down this path would not serve British, Israeli or Palestinian interests at all, so we cannot support the proposed ban.