Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill

Richard Foord Excerpts

Monday 26th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Doughty]

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would like to publish what costs the then Government were willing to pay for this deal.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

In answer to a recent written question, a Defence Minister confirmed that

“all decisions on whether to approve foreign nations’ use of military bases in the UK for operational purposes considers the legal basis and policy rationale for any proposed activity.”

Can the Minister confirm that this commitment on the use of military bases in the UK by allies such as the US also applies to the military base at Diego Garcia?

[Stephen Doughty]

I am afraid that I might need to write to the hon. Gentleman with the detail on that very specific point, but I can assure him that our operation of military bases, whether alone or with allies, is always in accordance with international law. That is why we have followed the process that we have in updating the different pieces of legislation and other agreements that need to be updated.

Ukraine

Richard Foord Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

I want to speak briefly about Russian intent, the coalition of the willing and sanctions on Russia, and I will of course do so using open-source reporting and analysis. First, however, I want to praise the courage and determination of the Ukrainian people, because we of course look to them for our own safety. That is not an exaggeration, and I think it is worth articulating what we mean when we say that Putin will not stop at Ukraine.

Putin has previous experience, including of invasions, in Georgia, Crimea and Moldova. In this conflict he has talked about the legacy of Kyivan Rus’, and what Russia now refers to as “Russkiy mir”—the so-called Russian world—meaning that part of the world which is Russian in culture and Russian speaking. Indeed, 25% of Estonia’s population and 25% of Latvia’s population are ethnically Russian. NATO members have ethnic Russians living in them, and it is to them that we must look for the defence of Europe.

We must think about the coalition of the willing, which the Government were talking about last week. I have frequently asked about security guarantees for Ukraine, but I am still uncertain about the purpose of this proposed deployment. We have heard the term “reassurance”, but we have also heard the word “peacekeeping”. Is this peacekeeping, peace enforcement, deterrence, defence or a tripwire? A little bit more information would be needed before this House votes on what is meant by the coalition of the willing.

The west has repeatedly called Putin’s bluff successfully. We did so when we provided armour such as the Challenger 2, fighter jets such as the F-16 and deep-strike weapons such as Storm Shadow. However, the deployment of British troops is different because of the ambiguity about what the west would do if the troops were targeted. I accept that might be intentional, and that we might practise deliberate ambiguity, but just as we have deliberate ambiguity, Russia tends to use plausible deniability. A former Defence Secretary said on the radio last week that we could see a situation in which an attack on British troops is claimed by Russia to be the work of separatists in Ukraine, or even a false flag operation.

I appreciate that if this does ever come to a vote, we will get an opportunity to have a much more extensive debate, but those are my comments for today on the coalition of the willing.

Venezuela

Richard Foord Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

My hon. Friend is exactly right. The nature of the economic crisis in Venezuela over the last decade has pushed huge numbers of Venezuelans into extreme hardship. It is one of the reasons why so many Venezuelans have left the country; an estimated one in four Venezuelans have left the country over the last 10 years as a result. This should be a country with a very strong economy. It is very important to build that economy up, but crucially it has to be to the benefit of the people of Venezuela, not criminals or corrupt regimes.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

This is about being principled. What if we were to learn from the White House that Greenland had been the source of cocaine or fentanyl flowing to the United States? Even if we do not expect a fabricated pretext on Greenland or imminent US intervention there, will the Government please condemn the unilateral action in Venezuela by the Trump Administration before we see a complete breakdown of the rules-based order?

[Yvette Cooper]

The hon. Member will have heard me setting out very strongly in my statement our position on Greenland and Denmark. We will continue to do so, because we are very clear that this is about the NATO alliance, the rules-based order and our close ally.

Sudan: Humanitarian Situation

Richard Foord Excerpts

Monday 15th December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

When the House debated the conflict in Sudan on 4 November, we heard that some British arms and equipment had been found on battlefields in Sudan, and it was alleged that the RSF has been provided with arms by the UAE, which in turn is supplied by the UK. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), said:

“The UK has one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world.”—[Official Report, 4 November 2025; Vol. 774, c. 888.]

We have heard exactly the same line repeated today. Rather than repeating these lines, will the Minister tell the House what discussions have taken place with the UAE since 4 November about UK arms exports to the UAE?

[Chris Elmore]

As I have set out to the House, there is no evidence in recent reporting of UK weapons or ammunition being used in Sudan.

Gaza and Sudan

Richard Foord Excerpts

Tuesday 18th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Yvette Cooper]

My hon. Friend has championed this issue for a long time, and I thank him for his continuing work on the Select Committee. Like him, I am deeply worried that Tawila will be next if there is not concerted action to pull the warring parties back from the brink, halt the RSF advances, and ensure a humanitarian truce that is at least long enough to get humanitarian aid in and civilians out. Frankly, though, we need an end to this horrendous conflict. As we have seen in Gaza, it is only when a huge international effort comes together that we can make progress. We urgently need to ensure that happens.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

Earlier this month, the Foreign Secretary announced additional funding for Sudan, including £2 million for survivors of rape and sexual violence. However, yesterday, this House debated ending spending £2 billion on asylum hotels in the UK—that is what they cost the UK taxpayer. When might we get back to spending less official development assistance in the UK, and more of it in the region, where it would help more people in desperate need, and keep them from fleeing to Europe?

[Yvette Cooper]

As the hon. Member knows, we have already taken steps to make savings on asylum hotels, and yesterday the Home Secretary announced further reforms to the asylum system. We clearly need to end asylum hotels altogether, and to stop spending taxpayers’ money on this broken system. We need to make sure that we can invest in aid and prevention. The Italian Prime Minister has talked about ensuring that people have a “right not to migrate” by preventing conflict closer to home. Most immediately, though, the hon. Member referred to survivors of rape and sexual violence. This has escalated in the most horrendous way in recent years, and we are funding additional action to tackle rape and its use as a weapon of war. We will need to increase that work.

Parkinson’s Disease

Richard Foord Excerpts

Monday 17th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Paul Davies]

Certainly. In the discussion I referred to earlier with the neurologist specialist, we talked quite a bit about that as well: the difficulty with diagnosis and the similarities between Parkinson’s and other neurological illnesses and issues. My hon. Friend is right: there is absolutely a need to ensure that GPs at least recognise some triggers or areas so that patients can get specialist support. Without early diagnosis, many people suffer unnecessarily for many years, and the support that could help to alleviate some of these issues is not getting to them.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

On early diagnosis, this is not just about GPs’ ability to diagnose, but about patients getting neurology appointments. Does the hon. Member agree that more people would be able to get the clinical care and support they need if they were able to get such an appointment within the first 18 weeks?

[Paul Davies]

Absolutely. One of our calls in the Parky charter is for that additional support. It is crucial that those specialists are available. We recognise that there is a shortage across the country, but we have to work hard to fill that gap as soon as possible. I totally agree with the hon. Member. Going back to the work being done in my constituency, I want to say a heartfelt thank you to everyone who has supported that effort.

Parkinson’s demands our attention, compassion and action. The Government have made some progress, but clearly the petitioners would like to see more done. I urge the Minister to work with the Parkinson’s community, particularly the petitioners, to implement the Parky charter, especially in the following areas: invest in the Parkinson’s workforce; ensure timely access to medication and specialists; and expand access to innovative treatments. I welcome the commitment shown by the Minister, who has recognised the urgency of improving care and support for people with Parkinson’s. Now is the time to turn that commitment into concrete change through funding, reform and compassion.

Financial Transparency: Overseas Territories

Richard Foord Excerpts

Wednesday 5th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Steff Aquarone (North Norfolk) (LD)]

I congratulate the hon. Member for Bolton West (Phil Brickell) on the way he has framed this discussion, because we are debating the impact of these tax arrangements in the overseas territories on UK communities. Every penny being shielded from paying the fair share in these places is a penny that is not getting into our NHS and is not going to support local schools or improve public transport.

Hard-working people in North Norfolk pay their taxes fairly, but thanks to the shady systems of places like the BVI or the Cayman Islands, the multimillionaires and multibillionaires can squirrel their money away and pay very little tax at all. With their shell corporations and subsidiaries, trusts and transfer pricing, the fat cats can get away without paying their fair share. It is a tax system that is “pay to play”, and the billionaires are playing all of us.

The BVI, the Cayman Islands and Bermuda all have something in common: up there, in the top left-hand corner of their flags, is the Union Jack. Many look at this as a legacy of centuries past, but it must actually represent the existing British responsibility for—dare I say, complicity in—tens of billions of pounds of corporate tax avoidance and abuse. We still hold power over many of these places, and we can take steps to force their hand if necessary. Orders in Council have been drafted previously, which can require our overseas territories to take this action. Governments have been understandably reluctant to take this step, not wanting to appear as the colonial hand reaching across the ocean to meddle in the affairs of its territories. But if we are to provide defence and security for them, stand up for their interests internationally and support them in their hours of need, it is not too much to ask that the Governments of those territories play fair.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

The Panama papers, released in 2016, were so-called because the company whose papers were exposed, Mossack Fonseca, was headquartered in Panama. Is my hon. Friend aware that one out of every two companies listed in the Panama papers was incorporated in the British Virgin Islands?

[Steff Aquarone]

Yes, I am frighteningly aware, because I have tried to access these registers myself, and I have relied upon reports by other organisations to tell me what is really going on. When a country’s wealth in savings is a multi-hundred-times multiple of its GDP, that brings all this into sharp focus.

But to get back to my focus, when people in North Norfolk see their health services closing down, their children’s schools unable to buy glue sticks and the cuts to public services, and then they look at the billionaires and their yachts, mansions, football clubs and private jets, they smell a rat—they know something is not working here. Something has to change. That change is real, and it is possible, if the Government have the will and the guts to stand up for it. I hope the Minister and his Government can finally be the ones to end this scandal, secure money for our public services and stop these tax havens once and for all.

Sudan: Government Support

Richard Foord Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Brian Mathew]

I completely agree with the right hon. Lady and thank her for raising that point. A third of children under five in El Fasher are suffering from acute malnutrition, and some are resorting to eating animal feed and plant waste to survive. I would hope that everything possible will be done to allow humanitarian corridors to open for civilians to leave besieged areas, and to be assured they are not going from the frying pan into the fire. The supply of weaponry and military equipment is the oxygen keeping this conflict alive, and we as penholder should lead efforts to impose a binding, enforceable arms embargo across all of Sudan.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

My hon. Friend urges an arms embargo, and for the UK to use its role as penholder at the UN Security Council, but Martin Griffiths has said that peace is likely to come out of the region through powers such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Does my hon. Friend think that the UK should be using its bilateral relations with those countries to bring peace?

Official Development Assistance Reductions

Richard Foord Excerpts

Tuesday 4th November 2025 Westminster Hall

[Edward Morello]

I agree 100%. What is so wonderful about Britain is how, time and again, communities step into the void left by Government spending, but we cannot rely entirely on the charity and good will of others.

The UK’s contribution to global health, education and nutrition, which are the foundations of our stability, is being eroded. Nutrition-focused aid has fallen by 60% and education spending has declined by 83% since 2016. Aid for reproductive health has fallen by 68%, and primary education now accounts for only £71 million of the entire ODA budget. The list goes on, and they are not just statistics. They are classrooms that will never reopen; vaccines that will never be delivered; and children who will never have a fair chance in life.

As a member of both the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, I have seen at first hand how aid and development are integral to our security. In recent weeks, we have seen the malign influence of China and Russia on our domestic politics. Those malevolent threats are already prevalent in the countries we support. We must not give them space to grow because, when we retreat, the vacuum is filled by those countries that do not share our values.

The strategic investments of Russia and China are already exploiting that space. China would have no difficulty stepping in to replace UK influence, especially in the global south, where its belt and road investments already run deep. But Beijing’s model of aid is transactional, not transformative. We should not be surprised when those nations fill the void, with motives far removed from our liberal and democratic values.

As Members of this House, we should never forget that the world watches what Britain does. When we lead, others follow. When we stand firm, others shrink back. Development and defence are not opposites; they are two sides of the same coin. Soft power—the influence we exert through compassion, diplomacy and culture—is what gives our country the moral legitimacy that has underpinned our diplomacy since the post-war era. It is what makes Britain a leader on the world stage. When we cut aid, we cut influence. When we weaken our global reach, we make ourselves less safe.

The Government have argued that the reduction is necessary to fund a rise in defence spending, to reach 2.6% of GDP by 2027. Yes, we must invest in defence, but we cannot defend Britain by turning away from the world. We cannot keep our citizens safe by cutting the very programmes that prevent conflict and suffering at source.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

My hon. Friend is making a fantastic speech. This weekend, the Government announced £5 million for Sudan and £6 million for Gaza. By contrast, the Government are spending £2.2 billion of ODA on hotels to house asylum seekers in this country. Does my hon. Friend share my view that the money would be better spent on preventing conflict and keeping people safe in their own regions?

[Edward Morello]

I agree 100% with my hon. Friend. Purely on a value-for-money basis, it is wiser to spend money where people are, to prevent them from getting on the road, than to try to house them here.

Migration and global instability do not begin at our borders. They begin when climate change destroys livelihoods, when wars displace families and when hunger drives desperation. Compassion and prevention are not opposites of security; they are the foundations of it.

Climate change remains the single greatest threat we face. Carbon knows no borders; it does not respect treaties or national boundaries. If we cut funding to those on the frontline of climate vulnerability, we are cutting our own future resilience. Whether that is in the Caribbean, the Sahel, the middle east or the Pacific, our partners need leadership, and Britain should be that leader.

The Government’s commitment to meet their £11.6 billion international climate finance pledge by 2026 is welcome, but it is increasingly hollow if other aid streams are being dismantled. We cannot claim climate leadership while simultaneously cutting the very funds that protect vulnerable nations from its impact and help them to decarbonise sooner. The UK has always been at its best when leading with principle and pragmatism. We led on eradicating smallpox, on fighting HIV/AIDS, on girls’ education, on tackling modern slavery and, of course, on the creation of the United Nations.

Today we must show that same moral courage. The cuts to the ODA budget are not only a betrayal of those values, they are a strategic mistake. Every pound we invest in aid saves far more in the long term, by preventing wars, stopping pandemics and reducing the need for emergency interventions. We live in a globalised society. Our economies, supply chains and security are inter- connected. Disease, conflict and climate crisis spread across borders with ease. To imagine that Britain can isolate itself from those realities is naive; if we fail to act abroad, we will pay the price at home.

I pay tribute to the humanitarian workers who continue to serve in some of the world’s most dangerous environments, and who risk their lives daily to deliver aid. They embody the best of British values, yet their work is getting harder. From Gaza to Sudan, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo to Ukraine, aid workers face extraordinary challenges. In 2024, one in eight people worldwide was exposed to armed conflict. Humanitarian staff have been detained, attacked and even killed, and entire operations have been halted due to insecurity. Our response to that sacrifice should not be to cut funding for their organisations—they deserve not only our gratitude but our tangible support. We must ensure that safeguards and funding are extended to humanitarian workers, who represent British values in the most fragile corners of the world.

The Government expect aid reductions to provide £500 million for defence in 2025-26, £4.8 billion in 2026-27 and £6.5 billion in 2027-28. That may satisfy Treasury spreadsheets, but it will come at the cost of lives, stability and influence. In the coming weeks, this House will debate spending priorities at the Budget. The timing of this debate could not be more important. It is a time of hardship and high costs of living for all. There are difficult decisions to be made, both domestically and abroad. But we should remember that the choices we make here ripple far beyond our own borders. They shape how the world sees us, and how safe, stable and prosperous our shared future will be.

Gaza and Hamas

Richard Foord Excerpts

Wednesday 29th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Falconer]

I think I have covered those questions already in this session, but let me be absolutely clear: all Palestinians are very clearly not part of Hamas. So many Palestinians want to see an alternative. They want to see this process succeed and to see the ceasefire hold, and that is where our focus is.

[Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)]

The Israel Defence Forces said this morning that they had

“renewed enforcement of the ceasefire”.

The strikes are reported to have killed 20 women and 46 children following the death of one IDF soldier. President Trump’s peace plan makes provision for Arab states to commit stabilisation forces. I appreciate the Minister’s point that he cannot provide a running commentary on such a stabilisation force, but does he share my view that after a ceasefire, the protagonists are the least well-placed to enforce peace?

[Mr Falconer]

I am not sure that I totally follow. The composition of the ISF is not yet determined, as I said to the hon. Gentleman’s colleague. We will no doubt discuss this matter further in the House once we are in a position to provide a fuller update. A number of states have indicated some willingness to provide troops to the ISF. I will clarify for the House that we have provided military personnel into the region, but it was into the Civil-Military Co-ordination Centre, which has a different tasking to the ISF. These are all complex questions that are very much in negotiation at the moment. When some of those matters are more clear and finalised, I am happy to return to the House.