Nepal: UK Government Support

Monica Harding Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda) for securing this debate about our support for a country that is a friend and an ally, and one to whom we have owed gratitude over more than 200 years.

I start by adding my condolences to the families and friends of all those who lost their lives or remain missing in Nepal and Tibet, following the August floods and the floods in Nepal over the weekend. I pay tribute to the UK rapid deployment team and humanitarian crisis response specialists who have supported British nationals and the wider crisis response to the floods in Nepal. Those brave and skilled teams are a clear example of the UK’s world-leading excellence and expertise.

The news might have moved on, but the people of Nepal face rebuilding their country while experts note that such disasters might become more frequent in the region in the coming years. Indeed, the UK Government’s national security assessment of global biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse cites severe degradation or collapse of the Himalayas as particularly significant for UK national security.

The August floods were not unexpected. Nepal’s mountains are warming rapidly. In 2023, the UN Secretary-General reported that they had lost almost a third of their ice in just over three decades. The wider Hindu Kush Himalaya region is also warming significantly faster than the global average. All the while, international agreement founders when it comes to action that truly meets the moment.

Rebuilding comes at a great financial cost. The Government of Nepal have written to the UN loss and damage fund to request $20 million, which is 0.7% of the reported $2.7 billion it has estimated in physical damage to infrastructure and economic losses. The loss and damage fund itself is suffering from a lack of finance. It has reportedly already received requests totalling $2.8 billion from 119 countries, but only $400 million has been given by the international donor community. The demand vastly outstrips supply. With the impact of climate change intensifying, and with the super El Niño in the process of biting, it is deplorable that the international community continues to fail when it comes to preparing for climate shocks.

Although I welcome the rapid deployment of UK personnel and the £5 million in humanitarian aid to help with the crisis, that £5 million is not enough and does not reflect the closeness of our relationship with Nepal. I remain deeply concerned about the wider UK aid budget, which has been slashed to 0.3%. That includes the cutting of the UK humanitarian crisis reserve by 12%, from £85 million to £75 million, leaving less flexible money for rapid support in humanitarian emergencies. Cutting the humanitarian crisis reserve at a time when many of the world’s poorest countries—the ones often most vulnerable to the impact of climate change—are dealing with those impacts is strategically illiterate. I ask the Minister, as I have before: when will the Government set out a road map for a return to spending 0.7% of GNI on official development assistance, and will the Government revisit the cut to the humanitarian crisis reserve?

Climate finance has also been cut—there has been a halving of the UK commitment to the Green Climate Fund and a significant cut to our international climate finance, despite an ambitious new Government ICF strategy. The reality does not match the rhetoric. It is also a matter of national security for us here at home, as I have mentioned. The national security assessment of global biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse is brutal in its assessment of the impact on our national security and prosperity, with crop failures, intensified natural disasters and infectious disease outbreaks. It points out the critical ecosystems that support major global food production areas and impact global climate, water and weather cycles, and their importance, including in the Himalayas, and how their degradation and collapse will lead to water insecurity, severely reduced crop yields, fisheries collapse, changes to global weather patterns, release of trapped carbon exacerbating climate change, novel disease and loss of pharmaceutical responses. It will drive migration and serious and organised crime and lead to black markets in scarce food, pharmaceuticals and critical minerals, with non-state actors gaining control over scarce resources, and there are pandemic risks. As instability grows, it leads to conflict and military escalation.

Wider development finance can provide some solutions, but definitive action on debt sustainability, illicit financial flows and reform of the multilateral development banks is necessary. Given that the countries most vulnerable to climate change are often also vulnerable to debt distress, it is imperative that the Government use their upcoming G20 presidency to take real and meaningful action on the issues, as well as charting a course forward on climate finance.

This is, after all, a fairness issue—a justice issue. Nepal is responsible for only 0.1% of global emissions, yet it is bearing the consequences of runaway carbon emissions and global inaction in tackling them. As the Nepali Prime Minister recently said at the UN General Assembly, countries like Nepal are

“hit by the climate we did not warm and hit again by the wars we did not start.”

What does fairness look like? Estimates that we heard at the International Development Committee, on which I sit, put the UK’s fair share of international climate finance, as the world’s sixth-largest economy and fifth-largest historical emitter, at £9 billion a year. Add in inflation and the changes to the Government’s accounting methodology, and the ODA element of ICF4 diverges even further from the UK’s fair share. Given all those factors, our ICF allocation is roughly 50% lower than ICF3.

Failure to tackle the climate crisis will erode development gains and push more people into humanitarian need, resource competition and a vicious cycle of poverty and instability, and will damage the UK’s reputation as a leader in climate and development. With COP31 fast approaching, what will be the Government’s strategy for real and meaningful action? How will the Foreign Secretary go beyond words to action that is reflected in tangible UK commitments, both domestic and globally? The floods in Nepal have shown us what can happen and what will continue to happen if we do not act.

There is still time to take action. World Bank research estimates that climate change could force 260 million people to move within their countries by 2050, but that immediate action to reduce global emissions could reduce that number by up to 80%. I urge the Minister and the Government to take bold steps with our development and climate strategy, our aid and our G20 presidency so that the catastrophe in Nepal does not become the norm for communities everywhere. The UK has an opportunity to lead, and we should take it.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Chris Elmore)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship for the first time, Ms McVey. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central (Matt Rodda) for securing this debate to discuss the devastating floods that struck Nepal in August. I thank Members for their contributions to what has been a thoughtful and well-informed debate and for the way in which they have spoken about the impact of this tragedy on the people of Nepal and communities here in the United Kingdom. May I pay my own tribute to the British Nepali community in the UK? Our long-standing friendship is one that we are deeply proud of, and I pay tribute to not just the people here today but those across our communities in the United Kingdom.

The UK stands with Nepal in its time of grief. Our deepest condolences are with those who have lost loved ones and their livelihoods. The scale of this tragedy has been immense. Thousands of families have been affected, communities destroyed and critical infrastructure damaged across some of Nepal’s most vulnerable regions. More than 1,455 people have tragically lost their lives, including British nationals, and many more remain missing. Our thoughts are with the thousands of Nepalis living in the UK, who have watched events unfold with deep concern and personal anguish, and I join Members in acknowledging the dedication of the search and rescue teams, emergency responders and volunteers who have worked tirelessly in extremely challenging conditions.

Against that backdrop, the United Kingdom moved quickly to support those affected. An FCDO rapid deployment team supported the consular response in the region. We are co-ordinating closely with Nepali and Chinese authorities, while specialist police family liaison officers are supporting British families in the UK. As many Members have referenced, we also announced £5 million in humanitarian assistance to support the immediate relief efforts. That funding is helping trusted humanitarian partners to provide emergency shelter, clean water and sanitation services, protection support, health assistance and other lifesaving interventions for those affected by the floods. To answer one of the shadow Minister’s questions, we are tracking the funding through those trusted UN partners and ensuring that the money is going to where it is needed. Humanitarian and engineering experts have also supported the response and assessment effort.

I would like to recognise, in particular, the remarkable response from the Government and people of Nepal. Faced with one of the most devastating disasters in the country’s recent history, Nepal’s authorities mobilised rescue operations at scale, supported displaced communities and began the immense task of recovery and reconstruction. We pay tribute to their professionalism, resilience and determination.

In answering Members’ questions as I go through my speech, I start with the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). I thank him for his warm words about me; they are reciprocal. He is a constant force in this House and a constant advocate for freedom of religion and belief. He knows of my personal commitment as the Minister responsible for this particular area of policy. Nepal is officially a secular country, but I want to reassure him that we do offer support to communities, including Christian communities, to ensure that the humanitarian funding and aid we are allocating is received in the correct way in different communities.

The UK and Nepal have a long-standing partnership on climate action. Many Members, including my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) and my hon. Friends the Members for Harrow West (Gareth Thomas) and for Basingstoke (Luke Murphy), mentioned the need for us to have more collaboration in this space, both bilaterally and multilaterally.

In Nepal and globally, climate change is increasingly becoming a national security issue, and it has been at the forefront of the new Foreign Secretary’s focus. Melting Himalayan glaciers and more extreme weather across the Hindu Kush Himalaya are driving cascading disasters, threatening lives, infrastructure, energy systems and economic growth. The recent Rasuwa-Bhote Koshi floods showed how a single climate-related event can disrupt trade, hydropower, transport and livelihoods simultaneously.

To answer questions from my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East and my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow West on climate and disaster resilience, the UK Government believe that is central to how we deliver reconstruction and build our partnership with Nepal. That is not just through reconstruction but science, modelling, engineering and practical hazard intelligence and resilience.

I assure all Members that the next steps mean working bilaterally and multilaterally in a period of recovery on how we can build resilient infrastructure. Later in my speech, I will go further into how we can work multilaterally with the international financial systems to offer more support on wider reconstruction.

As climate shocks become more frequent and unpredictable, they risk eroding hard-won development gains, as has been mentioned, increasing vulnerability and imposing significant economic costs. My hon. Friends the Members for Reading Central and for Harrow West challenged me on the point that climate damage does not happen only in coastal communities but in countries impacted by melting glaciers and the wider challenges of climate change. For Nepal, that could not be more stark. Nepal is a mountainous country, and climate resilience is, therefore, not just an environmental priority but a foundation for future prosperity and stability. That is why we are repositioning elements of our development partnership to support Nepal’s recovery and resilience agenda. I pay tribute to the work of my hon. Friend the Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra) in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, as a former Indo-Pacific Minister. She is right to highlight some of the challenges that we must now put in the multilateral space.

My right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East also challenged me on multilateral development banks and international financial institutions. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding), challenged me on words to action. That is why I am pleased to confirm that on 24 September, during UN High-Level Week, the Foreign Secretary convened a multilateral meeting of Ministers from Australia, Kenya and across the European Union, and announced a specific fund from the UK Government of £333 million for climate-driven instability and resilience projects for vulnerable communities impacted by climate change. That will, of course, apply to countries such as Nepal.

No bilateral donor can finance construction at the scale required. My hon. Friend the Member for Basingstoke mentioned the World Bank; it has estimated that damage and reconstruction costs run into billions of US dollars. Our role is, therefore, not simply to provide aid but to help shape much larger flows of international finance.

The Foreign Secretary has made it clear that climate and development finance must increasingly focus on preparedness and resilience. Through our engagement with the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and other institutions, we are encouraging approaches to invest earlier in resilience with early-warning systems, disaster-risk finance and climate adaptation, which are key to how we move our work forward internationally.

[Monica Harding]

Is the Minister confident that the work of British International Investment, particularly in Nepal, is targeted on climate resilience and adaptation?

[Chris Elmore]

It is the absolute focus. I will talk further about the Foreign Secretary’s engagement with the World Bank this week, and hope to answer her in more detail. We want international financial systems to become better at helping countries at risk to prepare for foreseeable climate shocks. That was an important part of the United Kingdom’s engagement at the UN General Assembly in September. I was pleased to meet the Nepalese Foreign Minister to discuss some of the challenges they are experiencing post the climate event, and how we can work more collaboratively.

The Foreign Secretary highlighted the strong links between environmental pressures, climate vulnerability and broader security and stability challenges. The World Bank annual meetings this week provide another opportunity to advance progress on that agenda. The Foreign Secretary will speak alongside Nepal’s Finance Minister to highlight UK support for strengthening hazard intelligence and early-warning systems in Nepal, and for ensuring that crisis financing is available when countries need it most. To answer the Liberal Democrat spokesperson’s question, I do think so, because that work is being led by the Foreign Secretary at the World Bank this week with the Nepalese Finance Minister.

Alongside our work through international institutions, we have maintained close engagement with Nepal through the communities here in the United Kingdom. Many Members rightly raised that today. As has been mentioned, the Minister for Indo-Pacific visited Nepal in the immediate aftermath of the floods, becoming the first foreign ministerial visitor and demonstrating the UK’s solidarity with Nepal at a difficult moment. As our response has evolved, Ministers have maintained regular dialogue with Nepalese community leaders, group representatives and the all-party parliamentary group, to whom I pay tribute.

On 2 September, the Minister for Consular Services, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), visited the South London Sanatan Mandir in Coulsdon to convey condolences to the affected temple community. The Minister for Indo-Pacific, my noble Friend Baroness Winterton, also held an online meeting with representatives of the Nepalese diaspora in the UK on 4 September to update them on the UK’s support. Those conversations matter. The Nepalese community in the UK maintains deep family, cultural and economic ties with Nepal, and many have been personally affected by these events. Their experiences, insights and concerns continue to inform our understanding of the situation on the ground and of the support that will be required in the months and years ahead.

Many Members have paid tribute to the Gurkhas. I would like to add my own tribute for their long-standing solidarity, not just through the British military but through our shared history across conflicts since the first world war. On pensions, I will ensure that every Member, including the shadow Minister and my hon. Friend the Member for Reading Central, will get a written response from the Ministry of Defence. It is led by the Department, but I will ensure that a response is given to all hon. and right hon. colleagues.

Consular support is ongoing. UK police family liaison officers continue to support affected families in the UK where appropriate. FCDO officials continue to liaise with Nepalese and Chinese authorities to establish facts and support families, and we are aware of 36 British nationals who remain missing. As reconstruction progresses, we will continue to work through what more we can do to support families in the UK, particularly as we wait for the missing to hopefully be found.

I have some brief final points on trade and investment between Nepal and the UK. I reassure hon. Members that we are working with Nepal on what is important to them and I will keep the House updated on that work. Rather than committing to something today, it will be an ongoing piece of work that we will do with Nepal to see what works between us.

In moments of crisis, friendship is underlined not only through words of sympathy but through practical action. We will continue to use our voice in multilateral institutions and international forums to ensure that Nepal’s needs remain firmly on the international agenda. The Nepalese people have shown extraordinary courage in the face of immense tragedy and the United Kingdom stands with them as they begin to rebuild and look to the future.

Israel and Palestine

Monica Harding Excerpts

Monday 14th September 2026 Commons Chamber

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

I welcome the Minister to his place. I look forward to working with him and I pay tribute to the work of his predecessor, who was called to the Chamber to discuss this issue many times. I also pay tribute to the consulate general in East Jerusalem, which I visited with a Select Committee, that did some truly fantastic work. I regret that it has been closed and I hope that it will be reopened swiftly.

The Liberal Democrats welcomed the Foreign Secretary’s statement last week designed to protect the two-state solution and the territorial integrity of the Palestinian state, that finally brought forward a ban on trade in goods and services with the illegal Israeli settlements. This was long overdue and the Liberal Democrats have called for it for years. Many of my constituents in Esher and Walton have also called for it, as did members of my Jewish community, some of whom have been campaigning for it. The Government must now ensure this ban is comprehensive and rigorously enforced, leaving no room for doubt as to the legal consequences for businesses involved in supporting or sustaining illegal settlements, and it must be enforced urgently.

The Government must outline how they will monitor and implement this ban, and commit to ensuring that the burden of proof is placed on Israeli authorities to provide verifiable certification that imported goods originated within the internationally recognised pre-1967 “green-line” borders, denying UK entry to any uncertified items originating from those illegal settlements. The Government should draw on the legal provisions set out in schedule 1 to the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 to ensure that the ban on services is comprehensive, and they should introduce secondary legislation to amend SAMLA, placing a legal duty of due diligence on UK banks and financial institutions to verify that none of their direct operations, supply chains or customers is financing the purchase, construction or other service provision for illegal settlements.

We would like the Government to outline that any violation of these bans would result in enforcement measures under the UK-Israel trade and partnership agreement. We call on the Government to impose a comprehensive ban on all arms exports to Israel, including the sale of F-35 components, and to expand sanctions on Ministers in the Israeli Government’s security cabinet who are encouraging settlement expansion, including Prime Minister Netanyahu himself.

A two-state solution represents the only political settlement that can deliver peace, dignity and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike. But Hamas, as a brutal terror organisation that threatens the survival of the state of Israel, can have no role in the future of Palestine. The UK, together with international partners, must develop a plan to progress urgently the disarming and disbanding of this terror group.

Preserving the territory of Palestine must be a foundation stone for the building of the Palestinian state, but another must be the strengthening of the governance capabilities of the Palestinian Authority. There are vital reforms that must take place within the Palestinian Authority to ensure that they can act as an effective state-building force. These must include strengthening the rule of law and protections for freedom of expression, cracking down on corruption and following through on ending the operation of the martyrs fund. The Government must support and hold the PA to account for the implementation of these reforms.

It is critical that the upcoming Palestinian elections are free, fair and open to advance further democratic reform across Palestine, so will Ministers work with President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority to help deliver these, including ensuring access for international election monitors. We must also recognise that current Israeli restrictions are contributing to severe economic insecurity in the west bank. The Government must put pressure on the Israeli Cabinet to ensure that the Palestinian Authority have the revenues to which they are entitled and access to banking systems to support the economy.

The Israeli legislative elections in October are an opportunity to deliver a new vision for the country that reverses illegal settlement growth, prioritises diplomacy over territorial expansion and champions engagement with moderate partners in Palestine to deliver a better future for both communities. If the cycle of violence continues, it will only strengthen the voices of extremists on both sides who reject co-existence between Israelis and Palestinians. Meanwhile, the UK Government must use all the leverage they can, working with international partners and with the Israeli Government to stop the loss of civilian life in Gaza even after the ceasefire.

[Tahir Ali (Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley) (Lab)]

The UK Government need to work with all their partners, but the reality is that unless America takes action, Israel is not going to back off from the atrocities it is carrying out. We need to push all the levers available to us to make sure that America is on side. The United Nations Security Council resolutions were almost all vetoed by America on its own. Unless America gets behind this peace plan, there will be no peace in Palestine or Israel.

[Monica Harding]

The hon. Member is absolutely right that America has a critical role to play in this conflict.

To give some numbers, as of 6 August, at least 300 children have reportedly been killed in Gaza in the 300 days since the ceasefire was announced—an average of one child a day. Gazans continue to remain in the grip of a man-made humanitarian catastrophe in the strip. The UK Government must do more to alleviate the humanitarian crises there and the one growing in the west bank. Over 2 million people in Gaza are living on around 30% of the territory, sheltering in unsafe conditions among destroyed buildings, rubble and waste. Some 70% of Gaza remains under IDF control. The UK must now apply genuine pressure to Netanyahu’s Government to ensure that food, aid, medical supplies and other essentials can reach Gazans now, without impediment and under the auspices of the UN, and that children and all civilians are protected.

I have called on UK Ministers to pressure Netanyahu’s Government to lift their arbitrary restrictions on non-governmental organisations supplying humanitarian aid to the strip. Last week, I noted in this Chamber that more than 1.4 million people in Gaza are acutely food insecure, yet Israel’s current interpretation of dual-use restrictions means that Palestinians are routinely and systematically denied essential items, including those needed for rehabilitation by the tens of thousands of people who have suffered life-changing injuries during this conflict.

The Foreign Secretary agreed that blocking those goods was appalling and seemed to suggest that it was a strategy. What does the Minister think is the strategy of the Israeli Government? Will he put pressure on them to undo those dual-good restrictions to allow the Palestinians to be self-sufficient, and to ensure that aid is sustainable and that they are no longer expected to live hand to mouth?

From October, the World Food Programme will cut the number of people it can feed in Gaza from 1.1 million to 600,000—not because the need has reduced, but because the money has run out. Those are people who will go without food, in a territory where 100,000 women and children are already expected to need treatment for malnutrition in the coming year. The UK is the ninth-largest donor to World Food Programme operations in Palestine, behind the USA, Germany and France. Our annual contribution fell from $18 million in 2024 to $9.3 million last year, and to just $4 million this year. That is a reduction of 78%. The Government cannot truly speak of their commitment to the Palestinian people while presiding over cuts like those. Will the Minister explain how those two things are reconcilable?

The brutal cuts to our aid budget have meant that our response to all humanitarian crises is limited. I have asked many Ministers in this House when we should expect at the very least a road map for restoring the 0.7% aid budget—a commitment that we in this House have enshrined in law. Again, can the Minister set out that timeline? Can he confirm that his party—the party of the Department for International Development and making poverty history—is committed to seeing our aid budget returned in full?

[Jeremy Corbyn]

The hon. Member is making a very strong point about the lack of food security for the Palestinian people in Gaza. Does she recognise that Israel now occupies around 70% of Gaza, so the population is restricted to 30% of the area? Some years ago, there was a huge move to make Gaza once again a major food-growing area, which traditionally it always had been. Does she think that should be part of the development process again?

[Monica Harding]

I 100% agree. I made the point last week that the dual-use restrictions mean that people can bring an egg into Gaza, but not a chicken; and a potato, but not a potato tuber. That means Gazans are living hand to mouth and are absolutely reliant on the Israeli state for their wellbeing and health.

The Government must engage with international partners and the Israeli authorities to ensure that journalists and human rights investigators are allowed into the strip. That is essential for accountability for war crimes on both sides of the conflict. We believe that robustly challenging the illegal actions of this extremist Israeli Government is compatible both with staunch support for the rights of the states of Israel and Palestine to exist and with resolute support for the rights of British Jews to live free from the scourge of anti-Jewish hatred. Antisemitism has no place in our society. We stand in solidarity with the Jewish community and all those affected, and we reaffirm our commitment to tackling hatred in all its forms. Those who spread antisemitic hatred or incite violence against Jews—whether online, at marches or elsewhere—must be stopped. It is never acceptable.

Lastly, this is a debate on Israel and Palestine, but any serious discussion of the situation must also consider the situation in Lebanon. In Lebanon, more than 350,000 people remain displaced, and more than 1,200 civilians have been killed in the latest phase of fighting, including children and health workers. Israel has reportedly seized and occupied 230 square miles of Lebanese territory, creating a yellow line restricted zone similar to that in Gaza. The Israeli Government must cease their military operations in southern Lebanon and withdraw from the country.

[Yasmin Qureshi (Bolton South and Walkden) (Lab)]

On the point about the people displaced in Lebanon, does the hon. Member agree that if there is to be a comprehensive peace settlement between Israel and Palestine, all 700,000-odd people who were forcibly expelled from the west bank, from Gaza and from elsewhere during the Nakba must be allowed to return? At the moment they are all in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt.

[Monica Harding]

I agree. We must stand with the refugees emanating from this crisis in their plight, including with the countries that are supporting them, such as Jordan. We must ensure that our commitment to those countries is secure, including our financial commitment.

Israel’s continuing occupation violates Lebanon’s sovereignty and is exacerbating the humanitarian crisis, which we have just spoken of. This House must recognise and reaffirm that Hezbollah is a brutal terror organisation from which the Israeli Government have the right to defend themselves and their people. It must be disarmed, but that must be achieved by working with leaders in Beirut and through international organisations. Will the Minister set out what role the UK is playing in pushing for a proper ceasefire in Lebanon and for the disarmament of Hezbollah? Will he confirm that Israel must withdraw from all sovereign Lebanese territory?

Progress has been made in this last week that we on the Liberal Democrat Benches have long called for, but we must be certain that statements are followed up with robust action and that we stand up as the UK, as we always must, for international law, for international humanitarian law and for peace.

Conflict in Sudan

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Dr Allin-Khan. I thank the hon. Member for Gillingham and Rainham (Naushabah Khan) for raising the subject, which we should be talking about much more, and welcome the Minister to her place. I declare my interest as vice-chair of the APPG for Sudan and South Sudan, and I refer to a trip undertaken with Action Against Hunger to the Chad-Sudan border to witness the impact of the conflict.

I can rehearse the lines I have said over and over again during my time in the House to a range of Ministers: the world has failed Sudan, and the UK must do much more to bring about an end to the conflict and to the largest humanitarian crisis in the world today. In June, with the leader of my party, my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston and Surbiton (Ed Davey), I wrote to the former Prime Minister urging him to use his last hours in office to act to end the escalating crisis in El Obeid, which is at real risk of levels of violence against civilians similar to the El Fasher massacre in 2025. I did not receive a response.

Over the summer, El Obeid has seen thousands of people arriving in search of shelter. Foreign Ministers, including here in the UK, have made welcome statements calling for de-escalation and for the warring parties to uphold international humanitarian law, but the situation there continues to worsen. It is emblematic of the situation in Sudan today.

In May, colleagues and I visited Chad’s border with Sudan. We found a humanitarian response operating under extraordinary pressure. The town of Adré, which once had a population of 40,000, now hosts an estimated 240,000 people. Chad now hosts more than 1.5 million refugees, the majority of them from Sudan. Chad is one of the poorest countries in the world and is sharing scarce water, land and services with a vast refugee population. But as the humanitarian actors we met on our trip told us continually, the needs far outweigh the resources they have to respond.

[Anneliese Dodds]

Like the hon. Lady, I went on that trip—I declare an interest exactly as she expressed it. She talks about the hard work of humanitarian organisations; does she agree that those who received support were very grateful for it, as they kept saying to us, but were really concerned about what would happen in the future, and had already seen a reduction in that support?

[Monica Harding]

The right hon. Member is absolutely right. The overall funding to Chad for the humanitarian response had fallen to 27%. That meant that in the refugee camps we visited, food was being rationed—it may have been every other week or every other month that they were missing food parcels—and the refugees were extremely worried about what would happen.

We Liberal Democrats welcomed the Government’s announcement of £146 million of new funds for frontline aid workers to support Sudan, but the Government’s aid cuts have diminished our ability to respond to humanitarian crises and honour our international commitments. I remind the Minister that the 0.7% aid budget was a commitment that the House legislated for, and that we continue to wait for a timetable to return to 0.7%.

Meanwhile, the atrocities continue. I recently met representatives of the independent UN fact-finding mission for Sudan. Their latest report was just released and makes for tough reading, concluding that external support is sustaining and expanding the military capabilities of the SAF and RSF, particularly their drone capability; that transnational networks are supplying the RSF with

“weapons, logistics, training and foreign personnel”;

and that the SAF is using foreign-supplied drones that harm civilians.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Lady for her speech. The hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) referred to the influence of Russia. The Wagner Group in particular seems to be in the background, training and exploiting the reserves, gold and minerals in Sudan at the same time as being involved in atrocities against women, children and all the people in Sudan. Does the hon. Lady agree that when it comes to looking for culprits, Russia is at the top of the list?

--- Later in debate ---

[Monica Harding]

Absolutely. China, Russia and so many other countries are involved in the crisis.

I welcome yesterday’s statement by the UK on behalf of the coalition for atrocity prevention and justice in Sudan, which called for a stop to the continued illegal flow of weapons, but when will the UK call out the countries doing it? I have pressed and pressed successive Ministers and Foreign Secretaries, and they continually refuse to call out the UAE in particular for its widely reported bloody role in the conflict. When will they do so, and when will they take consequential action for their hand in it? Will arms licences to the named countries be reviewed and halted in the light of the reports?

With the current arms embargo on the Darfur region up for renewal at the end of this week, will the UK push for a Sudan-wide arms embargo, something that even the USA is now calling for? Will the Government use the UK’s role as UN Security Council penholder on Sudan to advance efforts to secure a ceasefire? The current road map is unrealistic; how will the Government propose a realistic de-escalation? What about the sanctions on those at the heart of the conflict? Will the Government widen the scope of their sanctions regime to ensure that those driving the conflict face further restrictions?

In Chad, I met women so traumatised by what they had experienced that their eyes were dead. Some could not speak. Those who did told us harrowing tales of rape and murder on their way across Sudan to Chad. One lady had witnessed nine male members of her family being murdered. One lady had just arrived at the border into the care of the UN with two children, aged five and seven. She had taken five months to get there, by herself, from El Fasher. Those roads are dangerous. How will the Government work to secure the safety of civilians?

What about accountability? In the absence of reprisals, belligerents and their state backers are acting with impunity. Belligerents are using rape, starvation as a weapon of war, arbitrary detention, torture and retaliation against civilian populations. International NGOs are being silenced with the threat of their access being removed if they speak out, and the UNHCR does not even have the money to spend time with victims of unbelievable violence and diagnose what has occurred. We cannot seek accountability if we cannot fund the capacity to establish it, so will the Government review their financial commitment to Sudan and encourage other nations also to fill the void?

Will the Government commit to seeking to extend the mandate of the fact-finding mission? What conversations are being had about a peacekeeping force in Sudan, perhaps with the African Union, if only to state that the world is waking up to this conflict and that the belligerents are no longer able to act with impunity, thumbing their nose at international humanitarian law and the values of humanity itself?

The UK has a unique role to play in this conflict. I have just hotfooted it from the Foreign Secretary’s statement on Palestine, which I welcome. I applaud his assertion that

“It is also the case that if we fail to stand up for the values that this country has long held and fought for, we lose credibility and influence in the world.”

He talked about

“a Britain that upholds its values at home and around the world, a Britain that fights against oppression and suffering wherever they occur, and a Britain that stands up for what is right.”

Does that apply to Sudan too?

Will the Government use every lever at their disposal to up the urgency and convince the international community to act to stop the bloodshed? For every child trapped in this terrible conflict, terrified right now, for every mother trying to protect her son, for every civilian caught up in the violence, for the humanitarian worker facing unbelievable risks, and for humanity’s sake, do more.

Israel and Palestine

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 8th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

I thank my hon. Friend for the conversations we had in the run-up to this statement. I make this open offer to people across the House: the Minister for the Middle East, the hon. Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), and I will work with Members in the run-up to the work we will do at the UN General Assembly. We have an important opportunity at UNGA to try to make a difference with the situation in Gaza. I look forward to working with him and others across the House on that question.

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

May I congratulate the Foreign Secretary on his words? They were overdue, but they are welcome. More than 1.4 million people in Gaza are acutely food-insecure, yet the flow of essential goods faces significant restrictions, and Gaza is systematically denied the essential items it needs for long-term sustainability. People can buy an egg, but not a fertilised egg. They can bring in a potato, but not a potato tuber. What assessment have the Government made of whether the current interpretation of dual-use restrictions in Gaza is compatible with Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law?

[Ed Miliband]

The hon. Lady raises such an important point. My hon. Friend the Minister for the Middle East was at the Al-Arish checkpoint, where he saw supposedly dual-use goods being blocked from going in. My answer is that the way that dual-use goods are being blocked is appalling. One’s only conclusion is that it is a strategy. It is deeply disturbing. I call on the Government of Israel to stop blocking the many entirely innocent dual-use goods that could make a difference to the people of Gaza.

Oral Answers to Questions

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 1st September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Ed Miliband]

We love Cornwall, and we love my hon. Friend for his brilliant advocacy on behalf of his constituents and for what Cornwall is doing. He is right, and I will look at his initiative, because working with Governments across the world on these issues—including state governments—is crucial. This is a collective action problem and we have to tackle it collectively.

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

May I put on record that the Liberal Democrats’ concern and thoughts are with the people of Nepal and Tibet as this tragedy unfolds? I urge the Government to stay the distance with them.

The UK’s spend on international aid and development aids our national security not only in climate change but in keeping extremism, pandemics and illegal immigration from our shores, but the Government have slashed aid brutally, and the true impact of the cuts was finally realised only in the final hours before summer recess. The cuts are deep and worrying. Will this Administration reverse them? Will the Secretary of State set out a timeline for when UK aid will return to 0.7% of GNI—a commitment that the House legislated for?

[Ed Miliband]

The hon. Lady makes an important point, but I do say to her that we inherited an incredibly difficult fiscal position, with extraordinary pressures on the public finances. We are doing everything we can on development—indeed, I associate myself with the remarks she made about Nepal and will say more about it later—which is why, as soon as the tragedy happened, we were one of the first countries to show that we would provide financial assistance to the Government of Nepal. We take these issues incredibly seriously and have a proud record.

Iran Conflict: Ceasefire

Monica Harding Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

It is important that we maintain relations with the regime in Tehran. It is important, for many of the reasons that have been alluded to this morning, that we continue to make our point of view understood forcefully and directly to Iranian representatives.

The hon. Gentleman asks about concrete steps. The Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard), alluded to one that was voted through just last night—one that was not put in place over the period of the previous Government. We are taking the steps required to ensure that Britain has the armoury necessary to take action against state threats, including those that emanate from Iran, as we heard from the judge in the case on Friday.

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

My hon. Friend the Member for Witney (Charlie Maynard) has alluded to Craig and Lindsay Foreman, who are still imprisoned in Tehran. Craig Foreman is on day 61 of his hunger strike, and Lindsay Foreman is on day 50 of her hunger strike. They clearly need to be released immediately and returned to the UK. I understand that the Minister said he did not want to be drawn on this matter, but will he tell me why the Government will not publicly and officially declare the imprisonment to be arbitrary? Why will they not provide Craig and Lindsay Foreman with diplomatic protection, work closely with allies to get them released and bring their case before the International Court of Justice?

[Mr Falconer]

The reason I am not often keen to be drawn in this Chamber on specific cases is that I have to make a judgment, as the whole Government do, about what we can do in the best interests of British nationals detained overseas. The hon. Lady references arbitrary detention—a concept that does not exist in UK law. She also mentions the ICJ—I think she is referring to a previous case, which was withdrawn—and the view held by some that that would be a helpful thing to do in other cases.

Unfortunately, the responsibilities that fall to me mean that I need to be careful publicly what I say about particular cases, particularly when they are about two named individuals who are under the jurisdiction of the Iranians. All the responsibilities for the welfare of Craig and Lindsay Foreman fall, for now, on the authorities in Tehran. Until they are released, which they should be immediately, Iran must take full care of our nationals under its control.

UK Aid Policy: Global Funding Trends

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell) for securing this debate, because we rarely talk about this subject in the Chamber.

The Government do not seem to want to talk about aid and development very much, but they must and they should, because our world is on fire, because cuts to development make it worse and because it is within the British national interest to support it. I am sure that, if my party had cut the aid budget that far, I would not want to talk about it either.

The deplorable aid cuts, from a proud 0.7% to 0.3% —the biggest cuts to aid this century, amounting to a 50% cut in bilateral aid to Africa alone—are in danger of stripping the UK of much of its proud reputation on the global stage. I must note at this point that, despite continual prompting from members of the International Development Committee, of which I am one, the Government are still yet to publish their country allocations of aid, which makes it very difficult to scrutinise the damage.

However, we do know, and the Government know, that these cuts will cost lives. Combined with those caused by the collapse of USAID—the United States Agency for International Development—the lives lost will likely be in their millions. That includes in countries where we have a legacy, such as Afghanistan, where 45% of the population needs humanitarian assistance and which is no longer prioritised within the UK’s aid budget. In 2022, we contributed $488 million; today, it is $32 million. We have also heard how global aid cuts have caused such damage to health systems in the DRC that the response to tackling the Ebola crisis has been made significantly harder.

I know the personal commitment of many Members in this room, and of the Minister, but this is where we are: the party of DFID and Make Poverty History has become a Government of aid cuts so extreme that they outstrip the Trump Administration in their brutality. A Labour Government who followed Donald Trump in cutting aid have outdone him—a Labour Government whose legacy in development, just two years into their Administration, is already far worse than the Conservatives’.

Yet once there was consensus. I agree with the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir Andrew Mitchell) on almost everything he said but particularly on leadership. It comes to a pretty pass when a Conservative Member urges Labour Members to rise up and be radical. He said that he had the best job in the world as Development Minister. The British did the best job in the world in development. There was consensus.

Building on the work of the previous Labour Government, the coalition Government delivered the commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income on development, which had been a Liberal Democrat manifesto promise since the 1970s. In coalition, we reached the UN aid target and NATO’s defence spending target at the same time, proving that investment in development and defence are not mutually exclusive; in fact, as we have heard, they are complementary.

As I and others have said, defence, diplomacy and development support each other and strengthen any coherent foreign policy. We have heard from some of the UK’s most senior former military chiefs that reducing development capacity today stores up greater instability, greater cost and greater risk for tomorrow. That means more defence spend down the line, and look how we are scrabbling about for it now.

Development brings benefits to Britain. It is strategic, and mutually beneficial because investing in peacebuilding, prosperity and stability keeps us safe here too. Take guarding against another pandemic. Covid was not so long ago, and we are told with certainty that there will be another one. Given all the pandemic’s death, its destruction of economies and its long tail of social and mental health challenges, I am sure that many hon. Friends will share my dismay at the decision by the Government to discontinue funding the Pandemic Fund.

What about climate change? When harvests fail through drought or flooding, malnutrition sets in, communities fight for pasture and people migrate. In May, the Government broke their pledge on the Green Climate Fund by announcing a cut of 50%, while their new international climate finance target of over £6 billion of public money, which I note is committed over three rather than five years, also seems to be a reduction.

[Tom Hayes]

I used to work in the international development sector for Oxfam, thinking about how to increase public support for international aid. I agree with what everybody in this room is saying, but we have a problem in our country that people in growing numbers do not support it, and I fear that we, as a Parliament, have to tackle the complacency that we are exhibiting here in the Chamber. Leadership matters, but how can we in Parliament actually grow that support to sustainably fund poverty alleviation?

[Monica Harding]

The hon. Member is 100% right, and I will come to that slightly later in my speech.

We hear a lot from the Government about migration. Each 1% increase in food insecurity in a population compels 1.9% more people to migrate. They are escaping war, too. The largest single group of unaccompanied minors in small boats has been from Sudan, the world’s greatest humanitarian disaster, in the midst of a brutal civil war. But this is just the tip. The wider Sahel is a tinderbox. Millions are expected to fall into crisis or, worse, into hunger in this lean season, as armed violence escalates across the region. Thousands of schools are closed due to insecurity, health systems are buckling under the weight of need, and still we cut.

Do the Government understand the reality of these cuts at this inflection point, when the world is on fire? Do we not need some honesty with the public on where ODA is actually spent? In 2025, £2.4 billion was spent on in-donor refugee costs, in comparison with £1.3 billion spent on humanitarian assistance. Lifesaving ODA is being spent on propping up a broken asylum system, with less and less spent on the causes that brought those people here in the first place.

We can assume that the cuts came first and the strategy second, given that the cuts announced in February 2025 seemed to take everyone, including the then Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the right hon. Member for Tottenham (Mr Lammy), by surprise. Since then, the approach has often seemed confused and incoherent. The IDC has asked for clarity on the Government’s theory of change to reach their shared objective of poverty alleviation.

Of course, upheaval like this can create opportunity and wake us up from our stupor to make the case for aid outside of our own echo chamber, and to re-imagine our aid and development spend. But tearing down the system before the plan is in place is never a good idea. The answer for many things that have failed to be funded is that they will be “mainstreamed”, which is a euphemism for “disappeared”.

British aid and development worked. Millions of children vaccinated and educated; safe births; clean water and sanitation; lives saved—all achieved by well under 1% of this country’s GNI, and it gave the UK influence and leverage on the world stage, a seat at the table in global fora and friends in trade and diplomacy. Why not celebrate that?

Instead, the Minister for Development suggested:

“The days of viewing the UK Government as a global charity are over”.

Does the Minister before us today really believe that, or does he hope, like us, that with a change in leadership and a new Prime Minister, a focus on the long term will come back, with a realisation that doing the work now will make Britain safer and more powerful down the line? Does he not agree that framing the debate to pitch defence against development is wrong, and that, as the right hon. Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds) said when she resigned as Development Minister,

“it will be impossible to raise the substantial resources needed”

to fully fund our defence capability

“just through tactical cuts to public spending”?

And so it is: there is another hole—a £4.7 billion hole—in the defence budget, despite the aid cuts that were supposedly meant to fill it. Is it not right that the new Prime Minister must lay out the urgency of the debate on funding our defence and our development spend, and the benefits that it can bring to Britain?

Great damage has been done by our retreat from aid to the reputation of our country and our shrinking influence. While we retreat, others whose values may not match ours are making a play for Africa. With rapid population growth and an emerging labour force, Africa will become one of the world’s biggest markets, and the Government should place themselves in the best position to take advantage of that.

The Government have a chance now, with a new leader in place, to take the long-term strategic view, repair the damage, return to the world stage and remember their moral responsibility and the strategic benefit to Britain. It is not too late, but it is nearly.

Israel: E1 Zone Expansion

Monica Harding Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

Well, here we are again. The Liberal Democrats have welcomed the Government’s historic decision to recognise the state of Palestine, which we have long called for. We have welcomed more recent statements of intent, including just 10 days ago in this House, but such statements are utterly hollow without action, especially when we know that the Israeli security cabinet’s stated aim is to make a future Palestinian state unviable.

We have asked these questions before, but we will ask them again. When will the Government put forward a clear plan to halt and reverse the illegal expansion into East Jerusalem and the west bank? When will they respond to the 2024 ruling of the International Court of Justice? When will they introduce a package of sanctions including fines for any UK firms that bid for contracts for settlement construction in E1 or anywhere in the Occupied Palestinian Territories? Will they expand that to cover any UK financial institution that finances or facilitates UK companies’ involvement in construction or other services? When will the UK move fast to ban all UK trade in goods and services with illegal Israeli settlements?

[Mr Falconer]

I think that I have already addressed most of those questions. I have just confirmed again, as I did in the statement, that we are in discussions about further measures in relation to west bank goods. We have set out business guidance, and the Foreign Secretary announced the fourth round of sanctions in June.

The hon. Lady referred to speed. I think she will acknowledge that we have moved rather more quickly than some of our partners and allies. I am pleased to see many of them taking some of the measures that I announced in the House in 2025, including sanctions on the Ministers that I mentioned. We are moving with alacrity in response to what we see.

The question at issue in the urgent question is about the E1 settlement expansion. It is rumoured that there is now a timetable for those tenders. I have been as clear as I can be from the Dispatch Box that we are watching very carefully who bids for those tenders. We have been clear repeatedly with the Israeli Government about our view on the E1 expansion; I have repeated it today. The question before us is whether, in the run-up to the Israeli election, commercial entities choose to bid for those tenders. That is what we will be watching carefully and taking action in response to.

Sudan

Monica Harding Excerpts

Thursday 25th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

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

The International Development Committee heard from a war crimes investigator that the UK Government failed to act on repeated warnings of the looming genocidal massacre in El Fasher because their foreign policy had been captured by the United Arab Emirates. He claimed that the FCDO prioritised its economic security and diplomatic relationships with the UAE above preventing the intentional starvation, forced displacement and genocidal slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians.

The New York Times reported that Sheikh Mansour, Vice President of the UAE and owner of Man City, played a central role in arming the RSF. Given the UAE’s manifold interests in the UK, the public would expect the Government to call that out and act. Will they do so now? Will the Government amend the Independent Football Regulator’s remit to give it power to investigate and sanction football club owners suspected of involvement in human rights abuses? We are warned that El Obeid is facing a similar onslaught imminently, so will the Government finally, in their role as penholder at the UN Security Council, move to take consequential action against the UAE and any state arming belligerents in Sudan?

[Chris Elmore]

In relation to the IDC, I am happy to repeat the point: we reject the claims that have been set out. As the penholder, the last Government and this one were at the forefront of the UN resolutions. In fact, in November 2024 this Government pushed for a further resolution that was vetoed by Russia. The Government have been at the forefront of this work for the best part of four years—whether that is the last Government or this one. The Foreign Secretary and her two predecessors ensured that Sudan remained at the forefront of the multilateral UN agenda.

In relation to the wider processes around the UAE and other countries, as I have just told the House, the Foreign Secretary raised the matter during her visit to Cairo last week, including with the UAE. We continue to raise the matter in order to bring about a peaceful resolution. That position is not going to change. We will keep leading as penholder in the UN.

Oral Answers to Questions

Monica Harding Excerpts

Tuesday 16th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

My hon. Friend is right. I raised this while I was in India, and I know how much he has been championing his constituent’s case. There is concern about the length of time without a resolution, and we will continue to raise it.

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

The world has failed Sudan. We know that the international fact-finding mission has noted evidence of a genocide following the fall of El Fasher. What is the UK doing as penholder at the UN to ensure that the belligerents responsible are being held to account, as well as the state actors aiding and abetting them?

[Yvette Cooper]

I continue to raise Sudan in every international forum. We have to keep a spotlight on what is the worst humanitarian crisis of the 21st century. That includes shining a spotlight on international arms flows—more than a dozen countries are involved—and it involves pressure on the parties involved to agree some kind of ceasefire or humanitarian truce so that we can get humanitarian support in and start to build a better future for Sudan.