Syria

Monica Harding Excerpts

Monday 10th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

The reports from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that at least 1,000 Alawites have been killed over the past few days are deeply concerning. This escalation in violence undermines Syria’s fragile transition from dictatorial rule under Assad, and it harms efforts to encourage religious and sectarian tolerance.

At this stage, it is critical that we understand whether the violence represents spontaneous clashes between different sects or is the product of state-directed policy. This must inform the Government’s position on whether to lift sanctions to support Syria’s development and reintegration into the global community.

I note that the interim Syrian Government have announced the establishment of an independent committee to investigate the violent clashes, but this must be followed up with concrete steps to protect Syrians of all ethnic and religious groups and ensure they are represented in the new Administration, as well as action to bring justice to those who have perpetrated violence in this conflict.

The international community must also work with partners in the region to support Syria’s transition away from dictatorial rule, including by emphasising the importance of embedding religious and sectarian tolerance, as well as the rights of women, in the new Syrian regime. Will the Minister update the House on what he is doing to engage with partners in the region, including the Syrian Government, to promote respect and support for religious and sectarian tolerance in Syria?

It is important, too, that this Government recognise that neighbouring countries such as Jordan and Lebanon have generously welcomed Syrian refugees, but they face immense challenges in providing food, shelter and essential services. Can the Minister outline how the cuts to international aid will impact our ability to support Syria’s economic development, including the cuts to bilateral aid to neighbouring countries such as Jordan and Lebanon, where many Syrians have sought refuge?

[Mr Falconer]

The Liberal Democrat spokesperson poses many of the most vital questions. We need to very carefully the determine the nature of the violence on the coast in order to make a full assessment of the most appropriate response. We consult closely with all Syria’s neighbours—Jordan, Turkey and many others—and have raised with them the importance of Syria making this transition, which is vital for Syrians, the region and some of the global issues the shadow Foreign Secretary outlined, whether counter-terrorism or drug supply.

On aid, I can confirm that we will continue to play our full part in Syria. On Monday, there will be an international pledging conference on Syria in Brussels, and I expect we will be able to make further announcements in advance of that.

Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office

Monica Harding Excerpts

Wednesday 5th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

This month marks 10 years since the passing of the International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Act 2015, which committed this country to spending 0.7% of our national income on international development. It was a proud moment that represented the culmination of almost half a century of effort and advocacy by my party, the Liberal Democrats. However, that legislation was created through a political consensus across the House, which built on the work of the reforming Labour Government of 1997, who committed to make poverty history, and was continued by a coalition of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.

Britain is a leader in international development due to both our expertise and our generosity, and our influence on the world stage has grown as a consequence. Development opened opportunities for trade and growth, and worked alongside defence and diplomacy as a third element of our foreign policy to keep us secure at home. The Prime Minister’s cut to the international development budget last week to 0.3% of GNI puts an end to that shared consensus. Let me be clear: Liberal Democrats support the increase in defence spending. We called for the uplift to 2.5% of GDP even before the Prime Minister committed to it, but we have laid out alternative funding plans.

The world is changing fast, not least in the past six weeks, so we must adapt. But this diminishing of our development spend will make us less, not more, secure. International development serves our national and border security interests. It is our investment in a more stable world and it pays dividends. By contrast, when we retreat, actors whose values and interests are not ours seize the opportunity. Even as we watch, President Trump and Elon Musk gut USAID, which was responsible for a fifth of global development spending. China is moving to fill the gap, deepening its partnerships in the Indo-Pacific and Africa, where, in 2024 alone, Beijing agreed more than $50 billion in loans and aid. As we have heard, when budget cuts forced the closure of the BBC World Service’s Arabic radio in Lebanon, Radio Sputnik—the Russian-backed radio service—moved in.

Development spending serves our health here in the UK, and that is put at risk by the Prime Minister’s cut. Through our support for multilateral organisations, such as Gavi and the Global Fund, we have not only saved millions of lives, but prevented diseases such as Ebola from reaching pandemic proportions and causing devastation on British shores.

As Anneliese Dodds’ resignation letter makes clear, last week’s decision will make it impossible to maintain all of the UK’s development commitments. It may mean cutting strategic programmes that make vital contributions to UK security, including peacebuilding and deconfliction work in fragile states. This will only produce more violence, more failed nations and more refugees and, in the breeding grounds of instability and extremism, risks the emergence of new terrorist groups that could threaten us here at home.

The development cut will mean scaling back the climate finance that develops resilience and mitigation measures for countries on the frontline of climate change and reducing anti-poverty programmes for those very same nations. We know that for every 1% increase in food insecurity, there is a 2% increase in migration. The interaction of climate change and poverty with the high birth rates and extremely young populations in much of the global south is a recipe for the vast displacement of people. We know that in the next 10 years, 1.1 billion young people across the global south will become working-age adults, yet in those same countries we expect only 325 million jobs to be created, so supporting these economies is in our interests. More conflict will only exacerbate the situation. Last year, even as the world’s largest humanitarian catastrophe unfolded, more than 2,000 people from Sudan crossed the channel on small boats.

We already have the highest levels of refugees and migration since the end of the second world war, and the Prime Minister’s decision risks further displacement. Will the Minister clarify why no impact assessment was done in advance of these cuts? When will it be done, and when will this House see it?

In 2023, the UK spent 0.2% of GNI on official development assistance within the UK, more than £4 billion of which was used to host in-country refugees. If anything like that continues, we will be left with just 0.1% of GNI to finance our overseas aid objectives. That would make our aid spend the smallest of any of the 32 countries that comprise OECD’s Development Assistance Committee, save for Viktor Orbán’s Hungary, and lower than the rest of the G7. That is a long way to fall from being a global leader in development spending and the second biggest donor of the G7.

Will the Government reconsider their decision to count in-country refugee costs as ODA, so that what little remains after this cut can be used to advance UK interests abroad? Will the Minister confirm that, in view of the Government’s statements in the other place yesterday, the money for the Integrated Security Fund will be ringfenced? Can he also confirm that, to safeguard British soft power, the current level of ODA allocated to both the BBC World Service and the British Council will be protected?

Will the Minister clarify how much of the total 0.3% has already been assigned to multilateral commitments? Is the money still ringfenced? If it is, how much will be left available for bilateral assistance? How will this cut affect UK-run programmes in Sudan; in Gaza and the west bank; in Jordan, where UK ODA is used to support displaced people and prevent future waves of refugees; in the DRC; and in Myanmar? Most importantly, is 0.3% the floor or the ceiling?

In the past, Britain’s overseas aid spending, which has reached 13.8 million people with food aid, helped 95 million people to cope with the effects of climate change and inoculated 15 million children with lifesaving vaccines, has reflected the deep generosity of the British people—we see that again and again in just how much is donated to appeals in response to natural disasters across the world—but we should never mistake development for charity. We reap the benefits of a safer, richer world through increased trade and growth and—critically—through our security, national health and border security.

I had hoped that the Government would reset the UK’s place on the world stage, as they promised. I had hoped that they would return us to the 0.7% target, as promised in their manifesto. In the past, Labour Front Benchers, including the Prime Minister, spoke with vigour about the importance of development for security and the short-sightedness of previous Conservative cuts. Now, in dereliction of its values, Labour has gone further than the Conservatives ever did.

The world is becoming ever more dangerous. The norms of the international order have been turned on their head. Only yesterday in the UN, the United States denounced the sustainable development goals developed collaboratively in pursuit of a better world. The Liberal Democrats had hoped that the UK would step up and lead on development, recognising its vital importance to our future security. Instead, the Government have cut development to its lowest level this century. That is a short-sighted, strategically unwise decision that will leave us less safe. It is not only the millions of the world’s poorest who will feel that, but our constituents, too.

Gaza

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 4th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Catherine West]

I thank my hon. Friend for that suggestion. The UK will certainly continue to work, as it has done, ceaselessly with Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the US and regional partners to build consensus for a post-conflict Gaza governance and security framework that supports conditions for a permanent and sustainable peace. Her request has been heard in the Chamber.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

What message does the Minister think the Government send about their commitment to international aid in Gaza—and, indeed, anywhere else—by not only cutting it to 0.3%, which is its lowest level this century, but removing the ability of this House to scrutinise that cut or any remaining spend by moving ministerial responsibility for aid and development from this Chamber to the other place?

[Catherine West]

I thank the hon. Member for her question; there will be an opportunity in the estimates debates later this week for her to ask further questions. However, as I am sure she is aware given her expertise in aid and development and in soft power, it will take some time for the comprehensive spending review to come forward with a picture of the resource implications. I know that she and her party fundamentally support the decision to look at the security of Europe and to try to make that part of the balance in our foreign policy work.

Palestinian Rights: Government Support

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 4th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I thank the Father of the House, the right hon. Member for Gainsborough (Sir Edward Leigh), for bringing this critically important debate.

Late last year, I also visited the occupied territories and the west bank, and I share his and other hon. Members’ strength of feeling. I also pay tribute to our officials in East Jerusalem, who work so hard to tell and navigate the story, to all those there who are seeking peace—there are many of them—and to all those who are living under the daily horror of conflict.

In this debate, I reaffirm the Liberal Democrats’ unwavering commitment to human rights, international law and a lasting peace for both Palestinians and Israelis through a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders. First and foremost, the Liberal Democrats support the UK Government in their efforts to uphold the current ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Negotiations to move from phase 1 to phase 2 of the ceasefire deal must occur as quickly as possible. In the meantime, I urge the Government to do everything they can to secure the unconditional release of hostages, all the while ensuring that humanitarian aid flows unhindered into Gaza. They must do that.

Last weekend, Israel blocked further humanitarian aid from entering Gaza, which is a contravention of international humanitarian law. It also imperils the delicate but essential cessation of hostilities, and will impose yet more suffering on Gazan civilians, who have already suffered so much. Israel must act in line with its obligations under international humanitarian law and permit aid in.

I also note with concern developments in the west bank. Despite the ceasefire in Gaza, there are strong indications that the Israeli military are refocusing efforts on the west bank. Israel’s Defence Minister, Israel Katz, confirmed last Sunday that 40,000 residents were displaced from refugee camps in the north of the west bank, and that Israel will not allow the return of the Palestinian residents. Will the Minister condemn this forced displacement, particularly in view of the comments of Minister Katz?

Moreover, the UK must respect and act upon the ICJ’s advisory opinion on the occupation, cease all trade with illegal Israeli settlements, and work to end the arbitrary administrative detention of Palestinians by the IDF. The continued expansion of settlements in occupied territories is an obstacle to peace, and the UK must stand firm in its condemnation of those illegal actions.

On arms exports and human rights, I want to re-emphasise that it is indefensible that the UK continues to export arms to countries in which human rights violations are rampant. The Liberal Democrats have long been calling for an immediate suspension of all arms exports to Israel, in line with the Foreign Office’s own human rights priorities.

The UK must also take a stand by immediately recognising the state of Palestine. When I visited, I saw for myself the rapidly shrinking state. Before it disappears, we must recognise it. However, recognition alone is not enough; we must actively work with international partners to support democratic leadership in Palestine, invest in peacebuilding initiatives, and use trade as a tool for economic co-operation and stability. The international fund for middle east peace must be supported, and the UK should lead efforts to bring together Israeli and Palestinian peacebuilders who are dedicated to the future of co-existence and mutual security.

As we debate, leaders of the Arab world are meeting in Cairo to develop counterproposals to President Trump’s destabilising rhetoric. They intend to provide a peaceful, long-term solution for the people of Gaza. President Trump has previously advocated for the permanent resettlement of Gaza’s 2.2 million residents, calling to “clean out” the strip. Such a policy would violate international humanitarian law and severely damage relations with the Arab nations, whose support and commitment will be essential to any lasting peace agreement. Will the Minister therefore affirm that the British Government oppose President Trump’s proposal for Gaza? Will she also outline how the UK is working with partners in the region to help secure lasting peace?

I cannot leave out the humanitarian situation in Gaza. Beyond the immediate violence, the long-term effects of the conflict, if left unaddressed, will devastate generations of Palestinians. It is alarming to think that we might see that devastation start to bite far more quickly than we previously feared, now that the UK and the US have cut back on their overseas aid budgets. The UK must seriously reconsider that shameful decision to reduce overseas aid to 0.3% of GNI—the lowest level this century. In her resignation letter, the right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) made it clear that one of the areas of UK development spending potentially affected by the cut to aid is Gaza. By putting that vital work at risk, we are not only diminishing our ability to alleviate vast amounts of human suffering—in Gaza, more than 80% of hospitals have been reduced to rubble—but we are also rolling the dice on a more dangerous world. Failed states create more Hamas.

I want to include Jordan, which has for so long been a refuge for so many Palestinians fleeing their home, and who we have supported for so long. I regret that the UK follows where other countries cut aid or stop aid. I ask the Minister to outline how she intends to ensure that the UK can continue vital development work in view of these major cuts.

I share the outrage and concern of Members of this House at the violence against Israeli and Palestinian civilians. The UK has a moral duty to uphold human rights and the principles of justice on the global stage. The Government must strain every sinew to uphold the ceasefire, get the hostages out, condemn all violence and war, and they must recognise the Palestinian state. It is way overdue.

I will leave hon. Members with the words of a Palestinian Catholic priest who visited my constituency at the weekend to tell the story of the children of Bethlehem. He said to me, “I am not political, but I am here to ask you to work for peace.” He reminded me of the teaching of St James, that faith is nothing without action. The peacemakers in the region need our action. I call on the Government to act.

[Sir John Hayes (in the Chair)]

Please divide the remaining time by two, allowing Sir Edward a few moments to sum up the debate at the end. I call the shadow Minister.

Oral Answers to Questions

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Stephen Doughty)]

I am delighted that my hon. Friend has visited those incredible commandos during their training. I, too, have visited our Royal Marines and Army commandos in the high north in Norway and witnessed the vital role that they play in our strategic defence efforts. The UK and Norway work closely together as NATO and joint expeditionary force allies. Our Prime Minister signed a strategic partnership agreement in December, and, last week, the Defence Secretary visited Norway to launch a new agreement on deeper defence co-operation. I and the Foreign Secretary have also visited our counterparts, and I can tell my hon. Friend that security and defence co-operation were absolutely at the heart of our efforts and discussions with our Norwegian friends.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

T6. President Trump and Elon Musk slashing US aid was a great day for Russia and China. Will the Foreign Secretary avoid giving them another great day by committing to protect the UK’s development budget, even as we raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP? As he knows, preventing wars is cheaper than fighting them.

[Mr Lammy]

I am proud of the work that the UK has done over many decades in relation to development: the work that I have seen in Ukraine, in Gaza and in Sudan. All of that work will, of course, continue.

Ukraine

Monica Harding Excerpts

Monday 24th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Lammy]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That is why, since February 2022, the United Kingdom’s total military, economic and humanitarian support for Ukraine has amounted to £12.8 billion. That is our commitment to Ukraine so far, and that commitment will continue.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I am proud that more than 600 Ukrainians have been hosted in my constituency through the Homes for Ukraine programme. Three years on, my constituents stand with Ukraine. They know that Ukraine has protected Europe’s frontline for three years. They know that Ukraine’s fight is one that affects us all, and that if Ukraine loses, Europe loses, and they know that Ukrainians are fighting for the values of our forebears: the British values of democracy and freedom. Will the Foreign Secretary commit to stand by Ukraine steadfast, even when others do not? In his meetings in Washington tomorrow, will he ensure that he points out the folly and the danger of the US Administration’s new approach to Russia?

[Mr Lammy]

The UK, of course, supports the US-led efforts to get a lasting peace in Ukraine that deters Russia from future aggression and ensures that Ukraine is at the table as we negotiate that peace. That is the issue that we will be discussing with President Trump, just as President Macron is discussing that issue today. I am quite sure that our assessment that Putin is not ready, really, to negotiate on proper terms stands, but I admire the efforts to bring that about. Of course, the US plays a central role in achieving that.

Oral Answers to Questions

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 14th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Lammy]

I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak about Lebanon. The developments in Lebanon over the past few days could transform the region. The appointment of a new President and a new Prime Minister could provide Lebanon with the opportunity to see Hezbollah’s capability diminished, which the whole international community should grab hold of. As the right hon. Member knows from his time in office, the UK contribution to the Lebanese armed forces is important and one that the Lebanese treasure. We intend to continue with that and to go further over the coming months, which I know he will welcome.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

10. What assessment he has made of the British Council’s financial sustainability.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Mr Hamish Falconer)]

May I pay tribute to the hon. Member for her overseas work as the British Council’s former director of communications? [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] I understand that she was posted in London, Paris, Tokyo and Shanghai. I am jealous, as my assignments in my overseas postings were rather different.

The British Council’s board of trustees is responsible for the organisation’s financial sustainability. As an FCDO arm’s length body, the British Council received £162.5 million of grant in aid funding in 2024-25. My noble Friend, Baroness Chapman, oversees this as the Minister responsible. This contribution supports the British Council’s role as a soft power asset, promoting UK arts and culture, education, and the English language.

[Monica Harding]

Mr Speaker, may I declare another interest as the officer of the British Council all-party parliamentary group?

The British Council delivers more than £1 billion-worth of global impact for the UK every year. During the pandemic, it was forced to close 18 country operations, none of which has since reopened. The then Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab gave it an emergency loan, but set it out on commercial terms. The interest on this loan is costing the British Council £14 million a year. Will the Minister help the British Council keep delivering on the Government’s growth, security and soft power objectives and consider reviewing the terms of the council’s loan, extending the date for beginning repayments, reducing the commercial rate of interest, or redesignating the loan—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Nobody else will be able to get in. I call the Minister.

Northern Gaza

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 7th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I remember those words from the whiteboard, and we must and will spare no effort and will strain every sinew to try to do what we can to advance the ceasefire as quickly as possible. It is already far too late.

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

I am pleased that the Prime Minister recently met UNRWA’s Commissioner-General Lazzarini and pledged further funding, but in three weeks legislation to ban UNRWA will come into force. Lazzarini has said that

“dismantling UNRWA will collapse the United Nations’ humanitarian response”

in Gaza and that the

“entire population…fears that their only remaining lifeline will be cut.”

He also commented that:

“Since the beginning of the war in Gaza, Israeli officials have described dismantling UNRWA as a war goal.”

Will the Minister set out what consequential steps the UK will take if that comes into effect?

[Mr Falconer]

The Prime Minister was the first Prime Minister to meet the Commissioner-General of UNRWA. He did so in a week when we had announced further funding for UNRWA. We have raised those vital questions with the Israeli Government. We did so over the course of the break. I myself have met Commissioner-General Lazzarini, and I will be saying more about UNRWA in the coming weeks if we are not in a position to see that the Israelis have taken the action necessary to ensure the sustained and continued support that Palestinians require and which only UNRWA can provide.

Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and International Committee of the Red Cross (Status) Bill [Lords]

Monica Harding Excerpts

3rd reading
Wednesday 18th December 2024 Commons Chamber

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

Thank you for your forbearance, Madam Deputy Speaker. I apologise for my hasty entry into the Chamber, which does not detract from the high importance that the Liberal Democrats and I attach to this Bill.

I am pleased to welcome the Bill back to the House on Third Reading and, having listened to hon. Members over the past weeks, I acknowledge the reservoir of support across the House for both the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross.

On the Liberal Democrat Benches, we want to see Britain deepening trust and building partnerships with our allies; we want to see Britain setting an example in its support for international humanitarian law; and we want to see Britain countering the rise in global authoritarianism through our commitment to institutions such as the Commonwealth.

Set against the scale of these ambitions, the changes made by this Bill may seem comparatively narrow. They are, however, no less important. By altering the status of the CPA and the ICRC so they can be treated as international organisations, with associated privileges and immunities, we will safeguard the critical missions of both bodies while ensuring they can retain their particular relationships with the United Kingdom.

In the case of the CPA, the importance of this is readily apparent. The CPA’s present designation as a UK charity limits its participation in the work of the Commonwealth to that of a civil society organisation and fails to respect the spirit of co-operation and voluntary association that animates the Commonwealth. This Bill is an opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the Commonwealth and to continue hosting the CPA’s headquarters here in the United Kingdom.

The Commonwealth charter, signed by the late Queen Elizabeth II, lays out the 16 core values and principles of the Commonwealth. These include democracy, human rights, gender equality, protecting the environment, and the rule of law. These are all principles and values that the Liberal Democrats are pleased to champion.

I turn now to the International Committee of the Red Cross and its thousands of dedicated employees who, along with millions of volunteers in national and international Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, comprise the rest of the broader Red Cross and Red Crescent movement. The ICRC is an organisation without parallel. Its unique mandate is an exclusively humanitarian one: to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and other situations of violence, and to promote and strengthen humanitarian law.

I am sad to say that the ICRC’s mission is as indispensable now as it was at the committee’s founding in 1863 and when it was affirmed by the Geneva conventions in 1949. Today the world is racked by more than 120 armed conflicts. In Sudan, Ukraine, Gaza and across the wider world, millions have been made refugees and tens of millions have been internally displaced. The UN estimates that 87% of the casualties resulting from recent hostilities have been civilians.

Aid workers, such as those in the Red Cross and Red Crescent movement, are increasingly at risk, and even news welcomed by this House, such as the fall of the brutal Assad regime, is accompanied by urgent humanitarian need. Since the beginning of the war in Syria in 2011, the ICRC has registered more than 35,000 cases of people who have gone missing. Now, with Assad’s prisons finally cast open, the ICRC has been working to reunite families and to support ex-prisoners.

In Sudan, where some 25 million people are in urgent need of humanitarian aid, the shameful Russian veto of the UN Security Council resolution drafted by the UK and Sierra Leone, which called on both the Rapid Support Forces and the Sudanese armed forces to increase aid access, must now encourage the Government to redouble their efforts to see humanitarian law upheld.

Since the beginning of the conflict in Gaza, the ICRC has facilitated the release, transfer and return to their loved ones of 109 Israeli hostages held in Gaza. The committee also performed the same function for 154 freed Palestinian detainees. Presently, the ICRC has been denied access to the hostages even now held by Hamas in Gaza, as well as to the Palestinians in Israeli detention. The ICRC therefore has no assurance that either the hostages or the detainees are receiving humane treatment, nutrition or healthcare. Will the Minister affirm that the ICRC must be given immediate access to the hostages in Gaza and to the detainees in Israel and the occupied territories to fulfil its mandate under the third Geneva convention? Will he also inform the House of what actions the Department is taking to ensure combatants adhere to their obligations under international humanitarian law to treat prisoners and detainees humanely?

By treating the ICRC as an international organisation, we can provide it with a legal basis to protect its neutrality and continue its work in the world’s most dangerous and fraught regions, and that will be a positive step. However, we must also recognise that while changes to the ICRC’s status are necessary, they are far from sufficient to ensure that humanitarian law is upheld and humanitarian aid is delivered where, when and in the quantities that it is needed. I urge the Government to stand up to the permissive attitude in international law that we witness today in many war zones, affirm our shared values in support of international humanitarian law and impress upon warring factions the need to deliver aid without interference.

I am glad that the FCDO’s support to the ICRC this year looks likely to exceed the £133 million provided last year. However, I remain concerned that the cuts to the UK’s international development spending from 0.58% of gross national income to 0.5%, announced in the Budget, will be reflected in reduced support to the ICRC in 2025 and beyond. At this dangerous time, when support for humanitarian aid organisations is so critical, I hope the Government will commit to increasing the funding next year for the ICRC and the indispensable work it does.

We Liberal Democrats come from a long tradition of liberal internationalism, which prizes co-operation based on shared values. The efforts of both the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the International Committee of the Red Cross is of vital importance. We are proud to support them and proud to support the Bill.

Israel and Palestine

Monica Harding Excerpts

Monday 16th December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Pritchard. I am pleased to be here to discuss these two important petitions, and I thank my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) for opening the debate.

The Liberal Democrats have been calling for an immediate bilateral ceasefire since November 2023—one that will put an end to the humanitarian devastation in Gaza, get the hostages out and provide the opportunity for a political process towards a two-state solution based on the 1967 borders. A lasting peace and two states is the only way to guarantee the dignity and security that both the Palestinians and the Israelis deserve.

Petition 653509 calls for

“the United Kingdom to recognise the state of Palestine immediately.”

I can proudly say that that is something the Liberal Democrats have long been calling for, and we support immediate recognition of the state of Palestine. The UK’s allies have increasingly been recognising the state of Palestine, and we should join them, with the hope of refocusing attention on efforts to find a political solution to the war in the middle east.

The recognition of Palestine is particularly important right now, given the threats of some in Israel—noted by the ICC and the ICJ—such as Minister Smotrich, who seeks to annex the west bank. I visited the Occupied Palestinian Territories in November and saw at first hand the expanding settlements and growing violence. Recognising Palestine on 1967 lines would make clear where the United Kingdom stands.

As my hon. Friend the Member for South Cotswolds pointed out, recognising Palestine is a tool that will inject into Palestinian society the hope that having their own state is possible. They are far from hope just now, and it is essential we signal that we support statehood for them. I believe that that will wrest control back from the extremes at the edges of Palestinian society. As has been pointed out, that is not the by-product of a solution; it is the route to a solution. It must be stated that Hamas can have no part in the governance of this Palestinian state.

[Layla Moran]

My hon. Friend is entirely right that, within Palestine, recognition is seen as a prerequisite for what might come next. It is not a replacement and is not top-down. That is deeply felt—in fact, it was promised to the Palestinian people when my great-grandfather was alive. Does my hon. Friend also recognise that, alongside a state, there need to be viable, democratic elections? They would be made much easier if everyone in Palestine were allowed to vote in them. That is what stopped the last ones happening: people were not.

[Monica Harding]

I support my hon. Friend and pay tribute to her work. I agree with her.

Let me turn to the second petition, on immediately revoking all arms export licences to Israel. I fully support that proposal, which my party has been calling on the UK Government to implement since April. Tougher controls on UK arms exports are vital to ensure that those arms are not used in potential human rights breaches. I support the introduction of a presumption of denial for all Governments listed in the FCDO’s “Human Rights and Democracy” report as human rights priorities. As a result, arms exports to Israel should be halted.

The Minister has long avoided responding to calls from my colleagues for clarity on the UK’s position on ceasing all arms exports to Israel, so I hope we will hear a clearer response from him today.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

Sometimes, small actions can help. A number of my constituents were incredibly concerned that premises owned by my local council were occupied by a company that they perceived to have been administratively involved in supplying parts for the arms business. The council has now relinquished its interest in that building. Would my hon. Friend recognise that?

[Monica Harding]

I thank my hon. Friend for her intervention. I would like the Minister to note that Members have spoken about their unease at the fact that workers in the United Kingdom are making such parts. As the right hon. Member for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North (Liam Byrne) pointed out, the UK Government have made a choice to export F-35 components, which is not in line with their international commitments and obligations under international humanitarian law.

As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on international development, I must use this opportunity to emphasise my deep concern about laws passed in Israel’s Knesset banning UNRWA, in a situation that could not be more desperate. The Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator starkly warned:

“The entire population of north Gaza is at risk of dying.”

That move, if enacted, would lead to the death of innocent Palestinian civilians. UNRWA plays a critical role in distributing humanitarian aid in Gaza, and that move risks catastrophic consequences. As well as words of condemnation, I ask the Minister to set out the consequences of breaching international law, and I urge the Government to consider sanctioning Ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich for their incitement to violence against Palestinians by illegal settlers. The Government must continue to provide support to UNRWA to address the humanitarian crisis at hand, as well as ensuring that the recommendations of the Colonna report are implemented as soon as possible.

My last point is one that I hope the Minister agrees with and acts on. Increasing international development funding is a critical way in which the UK Government can tackle the humanitarian crises resulting from conflicts such as this, which are driving the cause behind the petitions being debated today. As the Liberal Democrat spokesperson on international development, I must urge the UK Government to strengthen the UK’s aid and development response. Overseas aid spending is at its lowest level in 17 years, having been cut by a further £2 billion in this fiscal year by this Government. It is now lower than under the last Conservative Government, despite the Prime Minister previously promising to reset Britain’s place in the world and return us to our status as an international development and aid superpower.

The UK’s funding for health programmes and the humanitarian relief reserve fund, both of which have been cut, urgently needs to be restored so that the UK can improve its response to conflict and support the victims of the devastating war in the middle east. Not only were the programmes eroded in the years since UK official development assistance was cut from 0.7% of gross national income to 0.58% by the Conservative Government, but this Government have slashed it again to 0.5%. United Kingdom support is needed more than ever, given global conflicts and humanitarian disasters, so I call on the Government to restore ODA to 0.7% of GNI as soon as possible to reinstate our commitment to the world’s poorest by ensuring that the UK is a global leader on aid and development.

I will end where I started: the Liberal Democrats call for the immediate recognition of a Palestinian state, the return of the hostages and a halt to all arms exports to Israel, and for the Government to bring every effort and pressure to bear on Israel to get the humanitarian assistance in now.