South and South-east Asia Storms
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(4 days ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
Today, I am updating the House on the UK Government’s response to the recent storms in south Asia and south-east Asia. These storms have caused devastating floods and landslides, killing thousands of people and displacing hundreds of thousands. They have destroyed homes, infrastructure and essential services affecting millions.
The UK has responded quickly to support those most affected. The UK has provided £3 million in bilateral support: £1 million each to the Philippines and Sri Lanka, and £800,000 to Vietnam. This funding is delivering lifesaving interventions and early recovery, including emergency shelter, clean water, sanitation and other essential relief items for around 160,000 people.
UK-backed global funds have also stepped in. The United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund has provided £4.5 million to the Philippines, £1.95 million to Vietnam, and £3.4 million to Sri Lanka. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies’ emergency fund has provided approximately £930,000 each to Indonesia, Philippines and Sri Lanka, and £570,000 million to Vietnam, and Start Ready has provided £1 million to non-governmental organisations in the Philippines.
In the countries with the greatest need, British embassies and high commissions are in regular contact with the local authorities, the UN and humanitarian agencies to ensure that our assistance reaches the areas of greatest need as quickly as possible.
Alongside our humanitarian response, our consular teams are working tirelessly to support British nationals affected by the devastating storms. Travel advice for British nationals is updated regularly to reflect the evolving situation.
We remain committed to working closely with the Governments in the region, as well as international partners, to ensure that our assistance reaches the people most in need and supports recovery efforts effectively.
[HCWS1197]
US National Security Strategy
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 week, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Matt Western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on the United States national security strategy and its implications for the United Kingdom’s relationship with the United States.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
I thank my hon. Friend for his urgent question. I am sure that the whole House will agree that the UK-US relationship has delivered security and prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic for more than a century. The special relationship we share with the US is built on a foundation of deep defence, security and trading links, and unique cultural and people-to-people ties. Both the Prime Minister and President Trump have repeatedly emphasised their commitment to continuing to strengthen it.
Of course, it is for the United States to set its own national security strategy, as it is for any Government. The strategy contains many shared objectives: resolving conflicts, tackling migration and ensuring economic security. However, it will not surprise the House that on some areas we take a different view. When it comes to European security, what we see is a strong Europe coming together to defend Ukraine, with the UK helping to lead the coalition of the willing of more than 30 countries. We see a Europe that is stepping up on defence spending, with the UK committed to reach 5% of GDP on defence spending by 2035. It is right that Europe steps up. That is in our interests. Europe is united behind Ukraine and united behind our long-standing values of freedom and democracy, and we will always stand up for those values.
Our bond delivers on both sides of the Atlantic. Our trading relationship is worth over £330 billion annually, we have over £1.2 trillion in mutual investment, and our businesses support over a million jobs in each other’s countries. The UK will continue to work closely with the US to strengthen Euro-Atlantic security through NATO, to support Ukraine, and to deepen our co-operation on emerging technologies and economic security. The strength of our relationship allows us to discuss and debate areas where we disagree, so we continue to strengthen this vital and mutually beneficial relationship with the United States. During the state visit, we announced over £250 billion in two-way investment, which was a powerful demonstration of the deepening economic ties between the UK and the US, and we signed a UK-US technology prosperity deal—the first of its kind—that will supercharge our co-operation across areas including AI, quantum and nuclear.
Matt Western
Thank you, Mr Speaker, for granting this urgent question. Last weekend, the US Administration published its national security strategy, and it is the clearest articulation yet of President Trump’s ideological foundation. The whole House should be under no illusion. The United States consensus that has led the western world since the second world war appears shattered. The strategy refers to Europe facing “civilisational erasure” and states that it will be “unrecognisable in 20 years”. It vows
“to help Europe correct its current trajectory”
and to promote “patriotic European parties”.
The prospect of United States interference in the democratic politics of Europe is, I believe, chilling. The President’s comments on Tuesday further demonstrate that. He called European leaders “weak” and singled out one of the United Kingdom’s mayors as “horrible, vicious” and “disgusting”. But sometimes what is not said is as important as is what is said. In this case, the absence of condemnation of Russia is extraordinary, though not surprising. Given certain UK dependencies on the United States, this leaves the UK especially vulnerable.
I do not expect the Government to reorient their entire economic and security strategy here today, nor do I expect them to publicly condemn President Trump’s strategy, but will the Minister assure the House that the Government will continue to update their national security approach to reflect the changing strategic and geopolitical context? Will the Government prioritise sovereign capabilities, and ensure that a clear definition is provided of which capabilities the United Kingdom seeks to onshore, to provide clearer signalling to our industry?
Seema Malhotra
As my hon. Friend and the House will know, national security is our first priority. It is important that we continue to discuss all national security issues on an ongoing basis with all our allies, and particularly with the United States. Ultimately, it is for the United States to set its strategy. When it comes to Europe, there are some things in the strategy that we agree with, such as the importance of sustaining freedom and security, and there are elements that it will not surprise the House to hear that we disagree with.
It is important that we maintain our close relationship with the United States, with which we work on a whole range of issues, including our economic security and our security in terms of migration. It is also important that we recognise some of the issues raised, including on migration. It is essential that we have a migration system that is controlled, fair and managed. That is what the public rightly expect.
My hon. Friend mentioned the comments about the Mayor of London. The Mayor of London is doing a great job delivering for London, and it will not surprise the House to hear that I disagree with the comments made about him.
Mike Wood (Kingswinford and South Staffordshire) (Con)
The US strategy makes it even more important that the UK remains a cornerstone of European and global defence. With threats to us and our allies only growing, the Conservative party is clear that it would hit 3% of GDP on defence spending by the end of this Parliament. As it is abundantly clear that we need to step up against the threat posed by Russia, and that we need a Government who are serious about spending 3% of GDP on defence by the end of this Parliament, will the Minister confirm whether it is only the Government's ambition to reach 3%, or whether the Treasury has a funded plan to do so?
The US strategy is particularly clear about the nature of the Chinese Communist party regime, whereas our Government seem to be going cap in hand to Beijing, asking it to bail out their failed economic policies. We have seen reports that the Government are likely to approve China’s super-embassy spy hub. Will the Minister confirm whether the US has expressed a concern to the Government about the potential approval of that application?
On Ukraine, all of us want the war to end—it is an unjust and illegal war started by Putin—but an end to the conflict, or any potential settlement, has to involve the Ukrainian people, and secure justice and lasting peace for them. A lasting peace is not about ceding territory. Will the Minister therefore update the House on what specifically the UK Government are doing to leverage British influence, in Ukraine’s interests, at this critical time?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the shadow Minister for his contribution. He was right to say what the Prime Minister has also stated: that the UK-US relationship has been the cornerstone of our security and prosperity for over a century, and it is one that we will never turn away from. During President Trump’s historic state visit in September, he praised the “unbreakable bond” between the UK and the US.
The House has heard our commitment to increasing spend on defence as a percentage of GDP, and we stand by that. More broadly, the Prime Minister has been clear about the need for Europe to step up and increase defence spending. That is why we have committed, as part of our NATO agreements, to increase defence spending. The hon. Gentleman will have heard that on the record, and we stand by that commitment.
It is absolutely right that we seek to secure peace in Ukraine. That could be done tomorrow if Russia chose to end its illegal invasion of Ukraine. At the moment, it seems that only one side is serious about peace—Ukraine —but we commend and fully support President Trump’s efforts towards securing peace. On Monday, the Prime Minister welcomed President Zelensky, President Macron and Chancellor Merz to Dowing Street to discuss the latest progress. As Secretary of State Rubio has said, we need a just and lasting peace, and a sovereign Ukraine.
Dame Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)
I am sure that my hon. Friend is far too discreet to set out honestly her assessment of President Trump’s contribution to civilisation, but can she reassure my constituents—be they angered, insulted or just plain bemused by the pronouncements in the US national security strategy—that although we celebrate our cultural and economic ties with the United States and our relationship with its people, our sovereignty is not dependent on the US? Specifically, can she confirm that any capability that is dependent on the United States—whether it is to do with artificial intelligence, quantum or defence—is not a sovereign capability?
Seema Malhotra
I thank my hon. Friend for her comments. I am incredibly proud of my country, and migration is an essential element of Britain’s national story. We are a thriving multicultural society, and I am proud of that. We respect the US as a democracy, and friends and allies should respect each other’s choices and traditions. We must work together in a spirit of respect, recognising our mutual interests and long-standing relationship. Robust political debate can always take place in an environment of respect.
The shadow Minister mentioned the proposed Chinese embassy. The US is our closest ally, and we liaise with it closely on a wide range of issues, including China. A final decision on this case will be made in due course by Ministers in the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and the timing of the decision is a matter for them.
Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)
With this statement, Trump’s White House has driven a coach and horses through the UK’s national security strategy and strategic defence review. Trump has stated that the US has no enduring commitment to NATO, no support for fair and open international trade, and no willingness to co-operate in international organisations or abide by international law. The document shows derision for Europe, including the UK, for failing to share Trump’s divisive nationalist ideology, whereas Russia is seen as a great power with which the US intends to carve up Ukraine. No wonder the Kremlin said it was “consistent with our vision”.
Will the Government commit to an urgent review of the UK’s approach, and to making a statement to the House in January on the Government’s strategic response to this new Trump doctrine? Will the Minister take the opportunity to state clearly that her Government will not tolerate interference by America in the domestic politics of the UK, and will she commit that the forthcoming elections Bill will restrict funding to UK political parties from sources outside the UK?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Member for his comments. I disagree with some aspects of what he said. It is important to say that national security is our first priority. We discuss matters of interest around the world regularly with the US, and we work on this security partnership through NATO, Five Eyes and a range of other international institutions.
It is important to recognise President Trump’s efforts to secure peace around the world, whether it is his role in Gaza or his work, in a process that we support, to secure peace in Ukraine. While we disagree with some aspects of the national security strategy, it is for the US to set its own strategy, and for us to have our own strategy and values. Indeed, friends and allies should respect each other’s choices and traditions.
Liam Byrne (Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North) (Lab)
The language of the US national security strategy is deeply regrettable. Frankly, it is not hard to see the rhymes with some extreme right-wing tropes that date back to the 1930s.
The publication of this document came at the same time as the collapse of talks about the UK joining the European Union Security Action for Europe programme to help boost rearmament, so it is now essential that, as my hon. Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Matt Western) said, the Government specify the sovereign capabilities that we have decided to adopt in this country. It is essential that we now implement the recommendations of the Business and Trade Committee’s report on economic security. I am afraid that it is vital that we begin opening talks with our closest neighbours in the European Union about the kind of economic security union that could draw our countries closer together, and help provide the economic support and growth that rearmament will require.
Seema Malhotra
I thank my right hon. Friend for the work that he does on his Committee, which very much informs the work of Government. I agree that it is important for the UK to continue to develop its own capabilities, and to work closely with allies on security, not just to make sure that the UK is strongly defended, but in the interests of prosperity and security across the world.
Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) (Con)
I spent about five years, on and off, working in the Ministry of Defence, and we had a saying: plans without resources are hallucinations. On 8 September, the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry told my hon. Friend the Member for Huntingdon (Ben Obese-Jecty) that the Defence investment plan would be published “in the autumn.” Some people think autumn ends on 30 November; others, being generous, say it ends on 21 December. Will the Minister tell us today when the defence investment plan will be published, given that, in her words, national security is the Government’s “first priority”?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Member for his question. This matter will, I am sure, be brought to the House by the relevant Ministers. We recognise the importance of boosting our defence and security co-operation, including with European allies who are strong in their defence of Ukraine. We do that through bilateral partnership agreements with France, Germany and Poland; our security and defence partnership with the EU; and our continued leadership of the joint expeditionary force and the coalition of the willing in support of Ukraine. As I have said, I am sure that the House will be updated on this matter by the relevant Ministers.
Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)
At the heart of this strategy, laid out in black and white, is Trump’s explicit revival of the reactionary idea that Latin America is a United States backyard. We have already seen the consequences of that mindset in the US’s escalations against oil-rich Venezuela. Trump is adopting a similar approach to European countries, including our own, making it clear that he will be stirring up far-right forces here to serve US objectives. Is it not more urgent than ever that, instead of blindly following US foreign policies, as we have done so often, to disastrous effect, we forge an independent foreign policy of our own, based on peace, co-operation, mutual development, and respect for sovereignty and international law, as envisaged in the United Nations charter?
Christine Jardine (Edinburgh West) (LD)
Notwithstanding the Minister’s comments, there is profound shock and confusion not just in this place but among the public about what Trump’s statements mean for our future defence and the future defence of our democracy. We have parliamentary elections in Scotland next year. Is he going to be promoting something in Scotland that is not necessarily in our national interest? Can the Minister specifically give us guidance on whether we are sure that Trump will, after this statement, abide by article 5?
Seema Malhotra
President Trump has been clear on the US’s commitment to NATO and article 5. The United States remains a strong, reliable and vital ally for the United Kingdom. The relationship between us helps us to protect the British people every day. We and European allies have shown that we are also serious about taking greater responsibility for defence and security in Europe. That includes allies’ historic commitment to 5% of GDP on defence and security to deliver a stronger, fairer and more effective NATO.
Dr Jeevun Sandher (Loughborough) (Lab)
A century ago, Members across this House failed. They failed to prepare for war and they therefore failed to prevent one. What followed was the most destructive war in the history of humankind, with tens of millions dead and hundreds of millions more stories of unspeakable grief. Today, we once again face war in Europe, and it falls to us—this generation of politicians—to help prevent a war. To do so, and the only way to do so, is to prepare for one: to make it clear to Putin that any invasion would be so ruinous as to be unthinkable for him. Can the Minister assure me and the House that the Government, in their defence economic strategy, will scale up the production of munitions today, but also, if it came to it, that they would be able to scale up that production, allocating labour as well as energy to produce the munitions, tanks and everything else we need to win a war against Putin in Europe?
Seema Malhotra
I thank my hon. Friend for his very important question. The Prime Minister has also been clear about the need for Europe to step up and increase defence spending. We have made our own commitments in that respect. It is extremely important, too, that the UK continues to work closely with the US to strengthen Euro-Atlantic security through NATO, to support Ukraine, and to deepen our co-operation on emerging technologies and economic security. Our commitment to NATO and to European security is iron-clad.
Stephen Gethins (Arbroath and Broughty Ferry) (SNP)
The US national security strategy says in black and white what many of us have been warning about for years now. The Minister was right to say that we Europeans need to step up, so can she tell me why Canada has be able to join the SAFE—Security Action for Europe—procurement scheme, which far outstrips any resource the UK could provide and would make us more secure and provide for more jobs, but the UK cannot? Why can Ottawa reach that agreement but the UK cannot?
Seema Malhotra
What I will say is that we continue to work not just with the US and our European allies, but with allies across the world, to ensure that we have the security and defence capabilities we need not just for today but for the future. We continue to discuss all aspects of security with nations across the world, including Canada.
Graeme Downie (Dunfermline and Dollar) (Lab)
Last week, I was pleased to take part in a cross-party delegation to Washington to discuss matters of defence, security and development. At every one of those meetings, which were with both Republicans and Democrats and from across the political spectrum, the importance of the UK-US relationship was emphasised, particularly on defence and security, with a clear sense that that would outlast any one Administration or President. That was demonstrated again this week with the excellent news that, in my constituency, Virginia-class submarines for the United States will be constructed partly at Rosyth in Fife. Does the Minister agree with me that the relationship we have with the United States is so deep and so long standing that it will outlast any one Administration or President? Will she continue to work with the United States wherever possible to be constructive?
Seema Malhotra
The US is an indispensable ally. We have an enduring partnership that is built on deep security, intelligence and cultural ties, and it remains the cornerstone of our collective prosperity and security.
James MacCleary (Lewes) (LD)
The United States’ new national security strategy was smuggled out in the middle of the night, which is fitting for such a bleak and dystopian vision of the world. It contains some very sharp criticism of European allies, including of our internal democratic processes, and a prioritisation of future interference in European democratic processes to promote a specific ideology and world view. What are the Government going to do to protect the integrity of British democratic processes from a President who has a track record of denying democratic outcomes in his own country?
Seema Malhotra
Ultimately it is for the US to set its own strategy, but when it comes to Europe, there are some things with which we agree, such as the importance of sustaining freedom and security, and some with which we have disagreed. We see a strong Europe that is coming together, working together on security and prosperity, and working together to increase defence spending. That is important. It is also important that we respect the US as a democracy, and that friends and allies respect each other’s choices. We will always continue to have strong and robust relationships with our relevant counter- parts in the United States. We will work together on areas of mutual interest—our economic prosperity, our security and our work across the world—but robust political debate must always happen in a respectful environment.
Pam Cox (Colchester) (Lab)
On European security, I give my strong support to the position taken by the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary in relation to the recent Ukraine peace proposals. Does the Minister agree that there can be no deal affecting Ukraine without Ukraine, and that any deal that rewards Putin’s aggression cannot proceed?
Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)
Putin’s press secretary praised President Trump’s new national security strategy as aligned with Russia’s worldview. Meanwhile, a dark vessel was spotted in the Irish sea at around the same time as an EU satellite detected five drones near the flightpath of the plane carrying the Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, to Dublin last week. Given that the US strategy is now being welcomed by Moscow, will the Minister urgently request an assessment from her colleagues in the Ministry of Defence of the risk posed by Russian hybrid threats?
Seema Malhotra
The right hon. Member raises an important point. We will continue to do all we can to ensure the security of everyone involved in seeking to achieve peace in and for Ukraine. It is important to recognise that we must continue to work as an international community on this issue. It is a critical moment, and we must continue to ramp up support for Ukraine and economic pressure on Putin to bring an end to this barbaric war.
Johanna Baxter (Paisley and Renfrewshire South) (Lab)
Although the new US security strategy contains some elements that many across the House will find concerning, it also states that the US will seek peace everywhere. We all want to see a lasting and just peace in Ukraine—a sovereign Ukraine where the killing stops and the 20,000 stolen children are returned to their families. Does the Minister agree that we must use all the influence we have with the United States to step up financial pressure on Russia and choke off the finances that sit behind this illegal war?
Seema Malhotra
I thank my hon. Friend for all the work she does on Ukraine and for the children who have been kidnapped, who must be returned to their families. She is right: it is vital that the UK and our allies across the world continue to put economic pressure on Putin to bring an end to what is an utterly barbaric war.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
In the light of the strategy’s departure from decades of shared assumptions, will the Government revise the 2025 national security strategy, and if not, why?
Seema Malhotra
As I have said, it is for the US to put forward its own strategy. This Government’s national security strategy, which was announced by the Prime Minister earlier this year, sets out a whole-of-Government approach to secure our nation, pursue the interests of the British people and seize opportunities for growth. That is what drives our work in the UK and across the world. As the Prime Minister has said, national security is the first responsibility of any Government, and collective security remains the foundation stone of our strategy to defend and deter against aggression. As the strategic defence review sets out, we are taking a NATO-first, but not a NATO-only, approach. We will continue to work on areas of national security and economic prosperity with the US, which is a natural partner for us and with whom we have a long-standing relationship that has endured and will always stand the test of time.
Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)
The United States is a long-standing and important ally. We very much recognise that in my constituency, where there are two large American military bases on the Norfolk-Suffolk border. I invite the Minister to recognise the significant contribution that thousands of American service personnel make to our local communities socially, culturally and economically.
Seema Malhotra
I am very happy to echo my hon. Friend’s sentiments and to thank those US troops, who also make a contribution to our security. The US is the UK’s principal defence and security partner, and the depth of our defence relationship with the United States remains an essential pillar of our security. The UK is deepening defence, security and foreign policy ties with the United States to uphold those peace and security objectives, particularly in the Indo-Pacific and north Atlantic. AUKUS, the carrier strike group’s 2025 deployment and our nuclear collaboration are other examples of where we work together to respond to a more contested and volatile world.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)
Does the Minister not think that the Government’s response is extraordinarily low-key and acquiescent to a declaration by the US that it gives itself the right to interfere in the internal affairs of any country around the world with which it does not agree? This is an extraordinary state of affairs. Will she make any comment on what is actually an act of piracy in the Caribbean, where the US has seized and taken into custody an oil tanker with no basis in international law and without any kind of military threat being made to the US? This act seems to me to be wholly illegal within international law.
Seema Malhotra
The right hon. Gentleman will have heard me say that while it is ultimately for the US to decide its own strategy, there are parts of it with which we disagree. It is important that friends and allies respect each other’s choices, as we respect the US as a democracy. We can have robust political debate, but we must do so in an environment of respect. I believe the right hon. Gentleman was referring to Venezuela in his question. The act was a decision taken by the US Department of Justice in co-ordination with the FBI, the Department of Defence and other US agencies. It is for them to answer questions on that decision.
Chris Law (Dundee Central) (SNP)
Whether Trump’s White House is parroting pro-Russian narratives around the peace plan or using abhorrent language such as describing Europe as facing “civilisational erasure”, what is clear is that a strong transatlantic relationship is no longer critical to US national security. Chatham House has described this national security strategy as being about
“commercial deals and authoritarian accommodation”.
Does the Minister agree that the idea of this being a special relationship, which has endured for many decades, has now come to an end?
Seema Malhotra
We commend and fully support President Trump’s efforts towards securing peace in Ukraine. Importantly, as part of the peace process the Prime Minister welcomed President Zelensky, President Macron and Chancellor Merz to Downing Street this week. The Foreign Secretary met Secretary Rubio and others in Washington DC on Monday this week to discuss negotiations and the path to an agreement. The Defence Secretary was also in Washington this week. Our ties remain strong. We have many conversations in public, and also many in private, as the hon. Member would expect for nations working together for peace and security around the world.
We are clear that matters relating to Europe will involve Europe. That is why this week when the Prime Minister met leaders in Downing Street, it was to review and discuss how we can support Ukraine to achieve a just and lasting peace.
Bobby Dean (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD)
I do not think we should tiptoe around this issue. The section on Europe talks of “civilisational erasure”. It says that the continent will be “unrecognizable in 20 years”. It says that they want “Europe to remain European”, and that within a few decades NATO members will be “majority non-European”. We need to recognise this for what it is. It is a document rooted in racist, white supremacist ideology, and it should be called out accordingly. The Minister has talked about respect, but they are currently showing us none. Mild disagreement will not cut it. History is watching us, so will the Minister take this opportunity to call that language out?
Seema Malhotra
The hon. Member will have heard what I said in relation to the comments about civilisational erasure. I do not agree with those comments. I am proud of our country. I know that migration is an essential element of Britain’s national story. We are a thriving multicultural society, and I am proud of that. We will stand up for our values in the UK and across the world.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
The rhetoric coming out of the US is frightening people, even those in my constituency, because it is building a wedge between communities. The strategy cites “civilisational erasure” and says that several countries risk becoming “majority non-European”. They have also declared that the US must cultivate resistance within European countries. I am glad to hear that the Minister does not agree with those sentiments, but what will she do to strengthen our diversity and response in this country against this really divisive ideology?
Seema Malhotra
The hon. Member will have heard me say that, as we respect the US as a democracy, we expect that friends and allies should respect each other’s choices and traditions. It is important that we defend our democracies. It is also important that we have an environment in which we can have debate that is not divisive and that robust political debate takes place in an environment of respect.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister very much for those very careful responses encapsulating where we are. It is incredibly concerning that President Trump continues to assist in weakening Europe, and there is now a danger of the US abandoning support in the Russia-Ukraine war. Given the Prime Minister’s supposed strong relationship with the United States, and with President Trump in particular, what steps will the Minister take to ensure that we are committed to working together to deliver stronger outcomes for Ukraine and the Ukrainian people, because Russia must be held accountable for the devastation that it has caused?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Member for his question; he always asks extremely pertinent questions in relation to these matters. He will have heard me say how important it is that we continue to work closely with the United States to strengthen Euro-Atlantic security through NATO in order to support Ukraine, see an end to the war—a war that President Putin could end tomorrow if he chose to do so—and ensure that Putin is held accountable for his actions. It is also important that we deepen our co-operation on emerging technologies and economic security. Our commitment to NATO and European security and to making sure that we work together across Europe to step up on defence spending is iron-clad, and it remains a priority.
Oral Answers to Questions
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mike Reader (Northampton South) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
Modern slavery refers to horrific situations in which individuals are exploited through coercion, threats, deception, forced labour and human trafficking. We are determined collectively to do all we can to end it. That is why we work through a range of multilateral bodies, such as the United Nations, the G7 and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, to prevent exploitation and eradicate all forms of modern slavery. We convened international partners earlier this year to agree how we can work better together to address modern slavery in global supply chains and a guiding set of principles for doing so.
Mike Reader
As the chair of the international trade and investment all-party parliamentary group, I have heard at first hand how new technology is making it easier to track supply-chain risks. What is the Minister doing to support better monitoring and data sharing with our international partners to ensure that we can identify forced labour use at source in countries that support the UK economy?
Seema Malhotra
My hon. Friend is right to raise that issue. We are clear that no company in the UK should have forced labour in its supply chain. We work with our partners to promote the role that new technologies can play in reducing forced labour risks in supply chains. That includes developing an interactive tool to identify child labour risks in agricultural commodity supply chains, using satellite data to improve working conditions in south Asia’s brick industry, and creating AI-powered chatbots that can provide vulnerable workers with rights-based guidance.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
Will the Minister have discussions with some of the large retail chains in which we often see occasions of misuse of labour in overseas territories, particularly in Africa and the far east?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Member for raising that issue. He will be aware that we believe that no company in the UK should have forced labour in its supply chain. He may also be aware that in the trade strategy, the Government launched a review of their approach to responsible business conduct policy. It is important that we continue to work together to ensure that we eradicate modern slavery from any of our supply chains.
Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)
Zöe Franklin (Guildford) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
The continued erosion of democratic rights and freedoms in Hong Kong is a matter that is deeply concerning to the whole House. In October the Foreign Secretary submitted the Government’s latest six-monthly report on Hong Kong, which details how national security legislation is diminishing Hong Kong’s political autonomy. We will continue to champion the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong, including through our British national overseas visa route and by raising human rights issues at every opportunity.
Zöe Franklin
Given the marked deterioration of civil liberties and democratic freedoms in Hong Kong since the introduction of the national security law, can the Minister outline what specific steps the Government are taking to support those affected by these abuses, both in the UK and abroad? Many of my constituents are Hong Kong nationals who have made their home here through the BNO route, and they remain deeply worried about family members who are still in Hong Kong.
Seema Malhotra
We will not tolerate any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics in the UK or overseas. UK Ministers have raised directly with Hong Kong and Chinese officials our concerns about what is happening in Hong Kong, and we will continue to do so. Such actions are also damaging to Hong Kong’s reputation as an open and international city.
Dr Al Pinkerton (Surrey Heath) (LD)
David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
The UK does not currently deliver direct humanitarian assistance in Pakistan-administered Kashmir or India-administered Kashmir, but we continue to monitor the humanitarian situation, as we do elsewhere in the region.
David Williams
Stoke-on-Trent is home to one of the largest Kashmiri communities in the UK, and many of my constituents are deeply worried by the continuing restrictions on civil liberties, arbitrary detentions and the ongoing denial of meaningful political determination in Jammu and Kashmir. Will the Minister please set out what specific human rights and self-determination concerns the UK has raised with the Indian Government, and what tangible progress my constituents can expect the Government to press for?
Seema Malhotra
We strongly support individuals’ rights to freedom of assembly and expression, and peaceful political protest. We have consistently emphasised that any human rights violations should be fully investigated in line with international human rights law. We continue to monitor human rights issues and, where we have concerns, raise those with the Government of India.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
There are repeated claims by community leaders and religious freedom groups that Christians in Kashmir face harassment, social pressure, threats, discrimination, surveillance and sometimes violence. What steps is the Minister taking in conjunction with her international counterparts to support the promotion of faith—especially Christianity—in Kashmir?
Seema Malhotra
We will always continue to champion freedom of religion or belief across the world. The hon. Member will know that we consistently raise any human rights violations with Governments across the world, and will continue to do so.
Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)
Mrs Sureena Brackenridge (Wolverhampton North East) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
My hon. Friend is right. In line with our strategy, launched this year, we continue to champion every community’s right to worship, or not, without fear or discrimination. Our special envoy works with partners and alongside our diplomatic network to protect that right via multilateral fora and through targeted interventions in key countries to uphold the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)
Dr Beccy Cooper (Worthing West) (Lab)
Seema Malhotra
I would be very happy to meet my hon. Friend. The UK will continue to centre women and girls in everything that we do internationally, from our diplomacy to our development work. We will mainstream gender across the Department’s work to ensure that we deliver maximum impact. We are retaining our ODA target for gender equality, and we will share an update on further measures to strengthen our approach to mainstreaming in due course.
Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)
Prior to last week’s talks with leaders of the British overseas territories, concerning reports suggested that the Government were planning to cave in to pressure from the British Virgin Islands, the epicentre of billions of pounds of tax evasion, and allow it to restrict public access to a register of company share ownership. Will the Secretary of State inform the House of the outcome of last week’s talks and reassure the British public that the Government will force British overseas territories to comply with the law and make these registers publicly available?
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
In an earlier answer, the Foreign Secretary said that trade relations between China and the UK were “in our national interest”. To that extent, can I ask what conversations her Department had with Invest Northern Ireland prior to its signing a co-operation framework memorandum of understanding with the China Chamber of Commerce in the UK?
Seema Malhotra
This Government support UK businesses to do business with China while being open-eyed to any risks.
Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)
On Donald Trump’s threats of military action against oil-rich Venezuela, reports suggest that British military personnel are aboard the US warships heading towards Venezuela. Will the Foreign Secretary therefore make it clear that Britain will have no involvement at all, including through troops on US warships, in any Trump-led military intervention there?
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
The Elections Act 2022 expanded the franchise to over 3 million British nationals living overseas. As MPs, we have a duty to represent those who have lived in our constituencies, but we do not know who they are or where they are. How can our embassies help?
Seema Malhotra
The Foreign Secretary works closely with Cabinet colleagues on many issues, including overseas voter registration. We encourage all British nationals to register as overseas voters if they move or live abroad, and that has been the approach of successive Governments. We keep gov.uk under constant review, and British nationals abroad can contact their local embassy or high commission for further information.
Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)
Parliamentarians for Peace was set up in 2023 in the aftermath of the terror attack in Israel and the killings of innocent Gazan civilians. On International Human Rights Day next Wednesday, will the Foreign Secretary, her team and everyone here join us for the Parliamentarians for Peace vigil that we will be hosting?
Women and Girls: Isle of Wight
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley) for securing the debate, which has given us the opportunity to hear about the work he is doing and the issues his constituents, particularly the women and girls he has spoken about so powerfully, are facing. I am also grateful for the recognition that it is incredibly important to have a gender lens for our work. We should look at where there are inequalities, whether in education, health or services, and at why it is important for local health services and the Government to focus on how we tackle them.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the case he made on making work pay and making sure that equality for women and girls is a reality in terms of the challenges that are being faced. I also pay tribute to his work across a range of vital equalities issues. He has a reputation in Parliament, having championed domestic abuse services and been a steadfast voice on health inequalities, and through his commitment to social progress and tackling barriers to opportunity for his constituents.
My hon. Friend will recognise that there is so much more to be done. Along with the contributions from other Members, he outlined the issues while recognising that where we are is the consequence of how services have worked to date. Together, we must do more to confront the challenges faced by women and girls across the whole of the United Kingdom, including the Isle of Wight, and encourage more opportunities.
It comes down to this: when we get it right for women, we get it right for everyone. Others might say that when women and girls do well, it benefits everyone. Whichever way we phrase it, it is clearly incredibly important to make sure that we tackle the specific issues of inequalities. Girls should know that they are very much the building blocks of our society. They shape our workplaces, our families and all our futures. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the issues he has mentioned.
My hon. Friend made the point really powerfully that women’s equality and economic growth go hand in hand. The work to ensure access to opportunity for all young people must continue across the whole of our country, including on the Isle of Wight. On his point about statistical underachievement compared with national averages, it is important to understand the reasons for that, be they environmental or anything else, so that all our young people everywhere can access to the same opportunity. I am sure this will not be our last conversation on this range of issues, given the work he is doing in his constituency.
I will briefly discuss violence against women and girls, which my hon. Friend also raised. Work is under way to protect women and girls across the United Kingdom from violence, including in the Isle of Wight. My hon. Friend will be aware of our target to halve violence against women and girls in the next decade. We have committed £53 million of funding over four years to roll out the Drive project across England and Wales, which focuses on perpetrators, working directly with those causing harm in their relationships, to prevent abusive behaviour and protect victims. That also relates to a point raised by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) about the number of calls a woman may make to the police about domestic abuse. Earlier intervention, before abuse escalates, will be an important part of prevention and ensuring that women are protected from abuse.
Last year, we launched the new domestic abuse protection orders in selected police forces and courts. The Home Office and the Ministry of Justice recently announced that more than 1,000 victims have been protected through those protection orders since their roll-out just a year ago. We have also set out new measures to tackle stalking and spiking, to improve the support and response that victims receive. This month the Government will fund intensified police activity across the country to target spiking, reaffirming our commitment to tackling that abhorrent crime.
Victims deserve better support at every stage, which is why we will introduce domestic abuse experts in 999 control rooms, and specialist rape and sexual offences teams in every police force. We are also looking to ensure that victims get the justice they deserve. That includes fast-tracking rape cases with specialist courts in England and Wales, and providing free legal advice to support victims and ensure that their rights are upheld. It is the case that survivors on the Isle of Wight will face significantly higher financial barriers when fleeing abuse, in part due to the cost of crossing the Solent. It is useful to mention that, since 2021, local authorities in England have a duty, under part 4 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, to ensure that victims and their children can access support in safe accommodation when they need it.
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government allocated £160 million in 2025-26, this financial year, to support delivery, £30 million more than the previous year, of which the Isle of Wight received just under £400,000 through the safe accommodation grant. My hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West might already have explored that option. It would be for the Isle of Wight to allocate that funding based on local need. He may want to explore how that has been used and the extent to which it has been needed. Future funding will be determined through future business planning.
We are also making important progress in other areas. I will make a few more remarks about women in the workplace and access to opportunity. I am sure it is an issue for us all that the gender pay gap still exists. Importantly, it decreased to 12.8% in April 2025, down from 13.1% in April 2024. We are pleased to see that progress, but I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that we can and must go further. That is why, as part of the Employment Rights Bill, we are taking the first steps towards requiring employers to publish action plans alongside their gender pay gap figures. Those action plans will detail how employers are narrowing their gaps and supporting employees, particularly through the menopause.
Prevention and education are fundamental to the approach that we take to protecting women and girls from violence, which we know is happening increasingly early. We also know that it is an issue with teenagers. It is extremely important to tackle the root causes of these crimes, which are often driven by social media. That includes supporting our education system to teach children about respectful and healthy relationships and consent. We are committed to providing the right support for victims of VAWG, including domestic abuse. In May 2025, we announced £19.9 million of investment to provide vital support to victims of VAWG. That includes £6 million for helplines and £1.96 million for the flexible fund to support victims to flee abuse.
I will now make some remarks about our women’s health strategy. Supporting women’s health is also part of supporting women to be able to achieve their ambitions, to be able to work, and to be with their families and friends. We have been making progress with our 10-year NHS plan, which sets out the inequities that lead to poor health, including for women. We have also made significant progress on ensuring extra appointments to tackle the huge backlog of NHS appointments and waiting lists, which we inherited from the previous Government. We have delivered 5.2 million extra appointments in our first year of government and we have also made emergency hormonal contraception free in pharmacies across England.
Indeed, we are also adding menopause questions to the NHS health check. We are also renewing the women’s health strategy to build on these achievements—this includes substantial investment in cutting-edge research, funding of a world-leading trial in which almost 700,000 women will take part, and testing how cutting-edge Al tools can be used to catch breast cancer cases earlier. It is also important that we continue to look at ways that we can introduce new drugs, and support earlier detection and treatment of conditions such as endometriosis.
I again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West for putting the issues facing women and girls in the Isle of Wight firmly on the agenda and for the work he does in representing his constituents. I am sure that he will continue discussions with Ministers across the range of Departments that he has spoken about, in relation to health, education, local government, policing and crime, and that he will continue to make a huge impact in the Isle of Wight.
Question put and agreed to.
UNESCO: 80th Anniversary
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 month ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd, and to have the opportunity to respond to this interesting debate.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Jonathan Davies) for securing the debate and opening it with such a rich introduction to the topic. I pay tribute to his work as chair of the all-party parliamentary group on UNESCO world heritage sites. In his opening remarks he made a powerful case, as did the other speakers, for education and culture as a force for peace and progress.
I welcome the £1 billion that has been spent by the National Lottery Heritage Fund. My hon. Friend explained some examples of that and the impact that funding has had. I also acknowledge the work of my the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Chris Elmore), who would ordinarily have taken this debate but is unable to be here today.
Eighty years ago, the world gathered in London to found UNESCO, committing to peace through education, science, culture and communication. I was really privileged to visit one of the sites mentioned several times in this debate, Giant’s Causeway, earlier this summer. It is an incredible site that highlights the importance of recognising the connection with place in our history and heritage and our role in protecting that.
The mission set out at the founding of UNESCO 80 years ago remains as vital as ever. The UK maintains a permanent delegation to UNESCO and funds the UK National Commission for UNESCO, ensuring the UK is an active and influential member state. Membership allows the UK to project its strengths in education, science and cultural heritage globally and reinforced its reputation as a thought leader and trusted partner, which is important for this work across the world in multilateral forums.
I pay tribute to one of Britain’s outstanding parliamentarians and a founding force of UNESCO, Ellen Wilkinson, who has been mentioned. She was a Fabian, a co-operator and Education Secretary, who championed the idea that education and culture could be powerful agents of peace and reconciliation in the period just after the war. Contributions today paint a picture of the choices that the Labour Government made in the immediate aftermath of the war, which set the foundations for long-term institutions that still form part of the way in which we build connection and peace across the world.
I congratulate Professor El-Enany on becoming UNESCO’s director general this week and wish him well in the role. Today, the spirit of peace and co-operation that was the hallmark of the founding of UNESCO is carried forward by communities across all our four nations, our Crown dependencies, our overseas territories and many examples illustrated in the debate today. I am proud of the 35 UNESCO world heritage sites that preserve our shared history. That includes the seven biosphere reserves, 10 global geoparks, and the United Kingdom’s 13 creative cities, with 10 cities of lifelong learning and schools that embed UNESCO’s values of peace, respect and understanding.
Seema Malhotra
I am conscious of time, so I will not give way. My constituency includes schools that embed UNESCO’s values. These UNESCO designations, as we have heard, cover 170 of our constituencies and are a testament to the UK’s rich heritage and global outlook.
I could not be more delighted that Aberystwyth has joined the UNESCO creative cities network as a city of literature, becoming the first ever Welsh creative city. This celebrates its centuries-old literary tradition and vibrant bilingual cultural scene, so we congratulate the people of Aberystwyth. I also congratulate the Isle of Arran on its recent designation as a UNESCO global geopark. Often referred to as Scotland in miniature, this recognition celebrates Arran’s outstanding geological heritage. Alongside these UNESCO designations, our scientists, experts, institutions and universities are working with UNESCO to build the UK’s trust, attractiveness and reputation on the world stage.
A national strategy for UNESCO was discussed today. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire on his work on the APPG and his continuing work as he listens further to Members about the need for sites in their areas. Heritage is a devolved policy area, and a number of strategy documents cover world heritage. At the UK level, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport takes a strategic approach to a range of world heritage policies, including the development of sites and engagement with UNESCO. The UK sites range considerably in size and type, and the challenges they face are often unique. The DCMS works closely with the world heritage site co-ordinators and agencies across the UK to monitor the condition of sites and update UNESCO as and when required, to ensure that a site’s outstanding value and world heritage status are maintained.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent South (Dr Gardner) suggested that Stoke-on-Trent might become a creative city. I encourage her to speak to the UK national commission, which manages the process. Applications open every two years with the next one at the end of 2026.
On soft power, I agree that UNESCO membership allows the UK to project its strengths in education, science and culture across the world. That is an extremely important part of reinforcing our reputation as a trusted thought leader. I am pleased we participate in programmes and committees, including the intergovernmental oceanographic commission and the international hydro- logical programme, as well as networks such as UNESCO Chairs and UNITWIN.
Climate threats were mentioned a couple of times. DCMS and the UK national commission for UNESCO recently finished a pilot project to look at data and decision making in relation to climate change at UNESCO heritage sites. The learnings, the tools and the templates will be made available free of charge later this year.
Finally, I will make a small point about education. It is important to share local history. This is already a compulsory part of the national curriculum. In reforming the curriculum, we are clear that all pupils should have a robust understanding of our nation’s history. We will continue to include it and strengthen it in the national curriculum and the subject content of qualifications.
As UNESCO marks 80 years since its founding in London, its mission to build peace through education, science, culture and communication is as vital as ever. The UK remains committed to that mission and will work with partners to ensure that UNESCO reforms and delivers for today’s world.
Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill
Seema Malhotra ExcerptsMonday 17th November 2025
(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill 2024-26 View all Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill 2024-26 Debates Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: Committee of the whole House Amendments as at as at 17 November 2025 - (17 Nov 2025)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Madam Chair, and to open this debate in Committee of the whole House on the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Bill.
Before turning to the detail of the clauses and of the amendments that stand in my name, I want to underline why it is so important that this House sends a clear signal today by progressing this legislation. This Bill will, along with subsequent secondary legislation, enable the United Kingdom to implement obligations in the United Nations biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement into UK law, and enable us to move towards ratification of this historic agreement.
The House may also have seen that the BBNJ agreement was recognised by the Prince of Wales’s Earthshot Prize Council last week, which is a testament to the broad support for it. The BBNJ agreement is the culmination of nearly two decades of international negotiations. The agreement covers roughly two thirds of the world’s ocean, which is home to ecosystems that regulate our climate, support fisheries, drive weather patterns and sustain the livelihoods of millions around the world.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
It is such an important subject, and I appreciate the opportunity to ask a question on behalf of those I represent who are involved in fishing. The Bill and the international treaty it implements will affect the fishing industry primarily through the creation of marine protected areas and through the imposition of stricter environmental impact assessments. Does the Minister agree that this means engagement with our fishing sector is essential, and can she confirm that the viability of fishing and food security will be a priority for this Government?
Seema Malhotra
The hon. Member will know from previous conversations that we continue to engage with the fishing industry on all areas of policy. Fishing falls outside the scope of the Bill, but it is important that the Government maintain that dialogue.
Jeremy Corbyn (Islington North) (Ind)
I welcome and support the Bill, which is an important step forward. It is a shame that it was not passed before the election so that it could have been dealt with in the wash-up of the previous Parliament. Will the Minister assure us that the Government will provide the necessary resources, and that the UN agencies are sufficiently funded, to ensure that this law becomes an effective protection for the natural world and the oceans that we all rely on?
Seema Malhotra
As the right hon. Member will have seen—I know that he has studied the Bill closely—we are looking to implement our obligations in line with many existing obligations. It has been important for us to hear from scientists and other involved parties that there should be no extra burdens and that we should consider how to move forward together. When we ratify the agreement, we will be party to the Conference of the Parties and able to participate in how future decisions are made. That will be important to understanding how the UK can incorporate decisions efficiently, effectively and with the fewest possible resources.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
I welcome the Bill’s enhancement of biodiversity and the protection of our oceans and natural world. How will the Bill help to unlock innovation in marine science?
Seema Malhotra
I will come to that later in my remarks. My hon. Friend makes a good point. Ratifying the agreement will also make it easier to share the benefits of research more widely and efficiently. That will allow those who might not be able to carry out such research themselves to use it and consider where innovations might be made. That is an important benefit of the Bill.
The Bill is the culmination of nearly two decades of international negotiations. The agreement represents a once-in-a-generation step forward in ocean governance, to ensure that areas beyond national jurisdiction are managed sustainably, transparently and equitably. Through the Bill, the United Kingdom will be able to play its full part in that effort. It will allow our scientists, companies and research institutions to participate confidently in the new frameworks on marine genetic resources, to contribute to the development of area-based management tools, and to meet international standards on environmental impact assessments in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Royal Assent early next year—subject to time in the House—will place the UK in a strong position to ratify the agreement and to take its seat at the first Conference of the Parties, which is expected to be in the second half of 2026. It is vital that the UK is at that table.
Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)
I am grateful to the Minister for giving way as she speaks about the importance of the UK taking global leadership. I welcome the Bill, but will the Minister complement it and show global leadership by announcing a new international taskforce dedicated specifically to protecting at least 30% of the Atlantic ocean by 2030?
Seema Malhotra
The hon. Lady will know that that is outside the scope of the Bill, but the measures will protect the world’s oceans—as I have said, the agreement covers roughly two thirds of them. Indeed, in all areas of our international work, we do all we can for the environment around the world.
Seema Malhotra
I will make a bit of progress—I thank my hon. Friend for his patience.
The Bill is divided into five parts. Parts 2, 3 and 4 align directly with three operational pillars of the BBNJ agreement: marine genetic resources, area-based management tools, and environmental impact assessments. I will address the Government amendments and clauses stand part now, but I will address the Opposition amendments in my closing remarks, so that I have had an opportunity to hear the shadow Minister’s contribution.
Part 1 sets out the definitions that underpin the rest of the Bill. Given that those definitions will be discussed at some length today, I say for the benefit of the Committee that “areas beyond national jurisdiction” comprise the high seas—waters beyond exclusive economic zones—and the area, meaning the seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, and “marine genetic resources” are defined as any marine material containing functional units of heredity of actual or potential value. Those definitions mirror the agreement and ensure consistency between domestic law and our international obligations. Clause 20 provides definitions for terms that are used in the Bill but not defined elsewhere in it.
In part 2, clauses 2 to 10 implement the provisions of the agreement relating to marine genetic resources. The provisions promote transparency in the collection and utilisation of marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction and associated digital sequence information, and provide the building blocks for benefit sharing.
Clauses 2 and 3 create reporting obligations for individuals collecting marine genetic resources using UK craft and for those utilising those resources and associated digital sequence information. Information must be provided to the Secretary of State before and after collection, and information about the results of utilisation should be provided in accordance with the schedule. Clause 4 provides that the Secretary of State may transmit to the BBNJ clearing house mechanism the information provided on collection and utilisation, unless it is protected from disclosure under domestic law. Those clauses are designed to implement the UK’s obligation on information sharing, with the clearing house mechanism facilitating transparency and helping us to deliver on our obligations while protecting information that is not to be shared.
Clauses 5 to 7 impose duties on those managing repositories that hold marine genetic resources from areas beyond national jurisdiction, or databases of digital sequence information on those resources. They must ensure that samples or data can be identified as originating from areas beyond national jurisdiction, provide access, and submit biennial reports. Clause 8 sets out exceptions from the requirements of part 2 in respect of fishing and fishing-related activities, military activities, and military vessels and aircraft, as well as anything done in Antarctica, the marine genetic resources of Antarctica, and the digital sequence information of such resources. The Committee will be aware that this is because the Southern ocean is governed by the Antarctic treaty system, which was part of the debate we had on Second Reading.
Clause 9 provides the Secretary of State with regulation-making powers, including those necessary to implement the UK’s future obligations under part 2 of the agreement. Given that the conference of the parties may adopt further measures once the agreement enters into force, those powers are essential to ensure that the UK can respond in a timely and appropriate manner. The clause also allows for provision for any enforcement of those requirements imposed by or under part 2 of the Bill. We will ensure that there is ample time for scrutiny of additional measures that may be brought in under secondary legislation.
Finally, clause 10 requires guidance to be published in relation to the above-mentioned provisions on marine genetic resources. Those will be prepared by the national focal point in the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and will provide practical illustrations to help institutions and researchers understand the requirements placed on them. The guidance developed will also be laid before Parliament. Taken together, these measures create a clear, proportionate and internationally aligned system that allows UK researchers to continue their world-leading work with confidence, meeting the requirements of the Bill and, in turn, allowing the UK to meet its obligations under the BBNJ agreement.
Jeremy Corbyn
The Antarctic treaty, which was long and hard fought for in this House and other places, has been important and, generally speaking, very successful. But there are issues about the increasing access to the Antarctic, the pollution that this causes and the need to clean up after the substantial number of visitors that go there at present. Is the Minister confident that the resources will be available to ensure that the Antarctic treaty is fully adhered to?
Seema Malhotra
The right hon. Member will be aware that the UK also made a declaration upon the signature of the BBNJ agreement stating that the Antarctic treaty system comprehensively addresses the legal, political and environmental considerations that are unique to that region, and provides a comprehensive framework for the international management of the Antarctic. It is important to recognise that it is also about the international management of the Antarctic, to which we are committed as part of the international community. I thank the right hon. Member for his comments.
In part 3 of the Bill, clauses 11 to 13 implement the provisions relating to area-based management tools, including areas beyond national jurisdiction designated as marine protected areas. Clause 11 contains provision for the Secretary of State to be able to make regulations to implement decisions adopted by the BBNJ conference of the parties under part 3 of the agreement. Many activities under UK jurisdiction or control in areas beyond national jurisdiction, such as fishing, are already regulated domestically, and where existing powers suffice, the clause 11 power will not be needed. However, where new measures are adopted by the conference of the parties, where they require additional controls or restrictions, the clause ensures that the UK has the necessary legislative mechanisms to comply. Clause 12 sets out the parliamentary procedure for regulations made under clause 11.
Clause 13 provides a power for the Secretary of State to issue directions to UK craft, without the need for secondary legislation in order to implement emergency procedures adopted by the conference of the parties. As emergency procedures may require immediate action to prevent serious harm to marine biodiversity, regulations alone may not provide sufficient responsiveness. The clause enables swift operational steps, such as directing vessels to avoid a particular area. Clause 13 is modelled on existing direction-making powers available to the Secretary of State’s representative under schedule 3A to the Merchant Shipping Act 1995. Given the nature of any scenarios that could arise, it is power-limited in scope and emergency in nature.
Part 3 of the Bill ensures that the UK can meet its obligations and exercise leadership in protecting ecologically important areas beyond national jurisdiction.
Matt Rodda
The Minister is making an excellent speech, and I pay tribute to her work and that of the Government in showing UK leadership in this important environmental area. Could she also briefly touch on the importance of working in a multilateral way with partners from around the world, and—perhaps she will move on to this point later in her speech—could she outline how the UK will work with other countries to protect these areas and carry out other important work?
Seema Malhotra
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that this is an area where obviously no nation can work on its own. It has to be done through being influential on the world stage, working through and with the UN, and with our international partners and other nations. Indeed, through the course of all of our conversations, be that in the FCDO, DEFRA or other Departments, we maintain dialogue on this and other important matters in relation to our environment and climate impact around the world. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising that issue, because it is another example of where being outward facing as a nation, as this Government have chosen to do, is incredibly important for not just what we achieve at home but our responsibilities on the world stage.
I will make some progress on part 4 of the Bill. Clauses 4 to 19 implement the environmental impact assessment provisions of the agreement, where relevant to marine licencing, and ensure that UK marine-licensable activities and areas beyond national jurisdiction are subject to the appropriate level of scrutiny. Clause 14 amends the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 to ensure it can be used effectively to regulate planned UK activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Government amendment 1—a minor amendment—has been tabled to omit the heading “on the continental shelf”, which will adjust the 2009 Act so it more accurately reflects the content of this section, including the section that is amended by clause 14 in part 4 of the Bill.
Clause 15 updates the Marine Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2007 to bring them into alignment with the BBNL agreement. Government amendment 2 would add “or person” to subsection (5)(b) as a minor clarificatory amendment to the regulations. Clause 16 allows regulations to be made to implement the standards and guidelines adopted by the Conference of the Parties under article 38 of the BBNJ agreement. Clauses 17 and 18 ensure that equivalent provisions exist for Scotland, amending the Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, and enabling Scottish Ministers to make regulations where it is a devolved competence, and to implement environmental impact assessment obligations for Scottish regulated marine activities.
Clause 19 amends the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, to ensure that any future environmental outcomes reports can apply to licensable activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The BBNJ environmental impact assessment provisions closely replicate our existing domestic arrangements for marine licensing, which operators are familiar with. These are minor technical changes to align our existing regime with BBNJ processes. Together the provisions deliver a coherent and modernised framework for assessing and mitigating the environmental impact of activities linked to the United Kingdom on the high seas.
Sarah Champion (Rotherham) (Lab)
I welcome this Bill. As chair of the Channel Islands all-party group, I was interested that the Minister tabled an amendment that covered just the Isle of Man. Before the Bill goes to the other place, could her officials please consult the Channel Islands one last time to make sure that they do not also need to be included in the Bill?
Seema Malhotra
I thank my hon. Friend for her comments, and yes we will continue those conversations with the Channel Islands.
To conclude, provisions in the Bill would be extended only to British overseas territories and the Isle of Man with their agreement. Clause 25 sets out when most of the Bill’s provisions come into force, and gives the Secretary of State power to make regulations to appoint entry into force and dates for other provisions. In summary, the Bill provides the legal foundation for the United Kingdom’s participation in the new global regime for protecting biodiversity on the high seas. It will enable us to fulfil our international commitments, provide certainty to our scientific and research communities, and demonstrate once again the UK’s leadership in marine conservation. I commend the Bill to the Committee, and look forward to engaging with hon. Members during the debate.
Seema Malhotra
In the interests of time, I will do my best to come back to Members on the amendments they have spoken to. The contributions from the hon. Member for South Cotswolds (Dr Savage) and my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth North (Amanda Martin) showed the importance of a healthy marine ecosystem that underpins global fisheries and climate regulation. The BBNJ agreement is an essential step towards protecting marine biodiversity and the creation of marine protected areas in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
I will speak briefly about the amendments tabled by the shadow Minister and our reasons for not supporting them. I recognise his point about reducing burdens, which is on all our minds, and I thank him for tabling his amendments. However, the Government consider that amendment 4 is not necessary, as the ability to provide a single report already exists. If the person who controls the repository on which a report is required is the same person who controls the database on which a report is required, there is nothing in the Bill that prevents them from providing a single report covering both elements. I hope that is of some reassurance to the hon. Gentleman.
On new clause 1, I think it would be helpful to say that as we do not currently know when or if the powers in the Bill will be used, we believe that our approach of a post-implementation review after five years provides the necessary flexibility to review the implementation of the Bill at a more appropriate point. We therefore do not think that new clause 1, tabled by the shadow Minister, is needed.
On amendment 5, the purpose of the enabling provision for the charging of fees under clause 11(3)(c) is to allow for the recovery of costs associated with the carrying out of functions. This is standard practice to ensure effective use of public money, as set out in the Treasury’s “Managing Public Money” guidance. Regulations made under clause 11 that amend an Act of Parliament, create a civil sanction or vary the maximum amount of a monetary penalty, and so on, are regulations that also contain provision for the charging of fees, which are already made by the affirmative procedure. The shadow Minister may not have been aware of that detail, but I hope it will reassure him.
On new clause 2, we believe that the consequences of the various reporting requirements it would introduce would be disproportionate to the value it would provide. There is also a risk that it would duplicate existing processes, misalign with the international reporting cycle and increase the burden on entities providing information in the reports.
Finally, it may help to reassure the shadow Minister if I say that engagement with scientific stakeholders suggests that the notification and other requirements are unlikely to impose a significant burden. Indeed, the BBNJ agreement will benefit the scientific community by encouraging information sharing and supporting scientific and technological development. I hope that reassures him that we have considered his amendments and that we have reason for not supporting them.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 1 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 2 to 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 7
Supplementary provision
Amendment proposed: 4, page 5, line 4, at end insert—
“A single report may be submitted for the purposes of sections 5(2)(c) and 6(3)(c), provided that any such single report meets the requirements in sections 5(3) and 6(4).”—(Andrew Rosindell.)
This amendment would permit a single report to be provided to the Secretary of State for the purposes of fulfilling reporting requirements under clauses 5 and 6.
Question put, That the amendment be made.
Seema Malhotra
I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
If there is one message that Members should take from today’s debate, it is that this Bill is essential—essential to protecting the ocean, advancing marine science and ensuring that the UK continues to lead ocean protection efforts on the international stage. This is a landmark piece of legislation. It will, along with the subsequent secondary legislation, enable the United Kingdom to ratify the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction agreement to protect marine biodiversity in the two thirds of our ocean that lie beyond any one nation’s control.
The Bill means that the UK can play its full part in shaping a fair, science-based international system for areas beyond national jurisdiction, one that balances conservation, sustainable use and global collaboration. It delivers on our international commitments and ensures that British scientists, institutions and innovators remain at the forefront of ocean research and biotechnology.
Let me take this opportunity to thank Members across the House for their thoughtful contributions and scrutiny of the Bill at every stage. The work of the all-party parliamentary group for the ocean and of environment Committees has been crucial to keeping the Bill high on the agenda. I am grateful to those who spoke on Second Reading, have taken part in the Committee of the whole House and have engaged constructively throughout. I would also like to thank my hon. Friend the Minister for Water and Flooding for her support throughout the passage of the Bill.
I also thank officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Department for Transport, whose expertise, along with that of parliamentary draftspeople and other officials across Government, has underpinned the Bill. I thank, too, the devolved Governments for their engagement on the Bill and legislative consent processes. Finally, I acknowledge the scientific community, from the National Oceanography Centre to the National History Museum, and our universities, which have been pivotal in presenting the need for this legislation.
Let us be clear why this Bill matters. The ocean regulates our climate. It sustains global fisheries. It provides half the oxygen on Earth. Protecting it is not just an environmental choice; it is an economic, scientific and moral imperative. The previous Government began this process by signing the BBNJ agreement in 2023, but they delayed bringing forward legislation. This Government are now finishing the job, taking the necessary steps to implement their obligations in UK law and to ratify the treaty.
By passing this Bill, the House will send a clear message that the United Kingdom will continue to lead the world in the protection of our shared ocean, that we stand with our partners to deliver a healthy, sustainable ocean and that we will do so grounded in science and international co-operation. This is our responsibility today and for future generations. For those reasons, I commend the Bill to the House.
Modern Day Slavery: Pakistan
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship today, Sir Roger, and to respond to this debate. I am grateful to my good friend, the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), for securing the debate, and for his work on the issue through the all-party group and by contributing to the cross-party report that was published last year. I am also grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Newport West and Islwyn (Ruth Jones) for her contribution, and to the Opposition spokespeople, the hon. Members for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) and for Romford (Andrew Rosindell). I will endeavour to come back on all the points that have been made, and where I am unable to, I am sure we can follow up in conversations afterwards.
I am sure that the hon. Member for Strangford will want to join me as I express my deepest condolences to all affected by the tragic explosion in Islamabad earlier this week. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families, and with everyone on whom that terrible event has had an impact.
I am grateful to those who intervened in the debate, which has highlighted our shared determination to confront another grave injustice—modern slavery. I must also acknowledge the work of the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr Falconer). He is the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and he would normally have responded to this debate, but he is unavoidably unable to be here. He and I speak regularly, and I am grateful for the opportunity to respond on his behalf.
Modern slavery refers to horrific situations in which individuals are exploited through coercion, threats, deception, forced labour and human trafficking. Despite the work that we have done and the abolition of slavery, which is such an important part of our history, so many forms of modern slavery still go on in the UK and across the world. We are determined, collectively, to do all we can to end it.
Bonded labour is a specific form of modern slavery, where a person is trapped working to repay a debt, often under conditions that make escape or repayment impossible. In the debate, we heard how Pakistan has an estimated 2.3 million people in modern slavery, including bonded labour, forced marriage and child labour. We heard about the billions of bricks made annually across the estimated 20,000 kilns, which employ more than 1 million workers. Many of those workers are trapped in debt bondage, because they take loans from kiln operators—sometimes for emergencies or basic needs, but the loans come with exorbitant interest that workers may not even be able to calculate, as well as unlawful deductions and a lack of transparent records. Children and entire families work to repay the debts, which are often passed down through generations. Some 83% of kilns surveyed had children working in them, many during school hours. Religious minorities, especially Christians and Hindus, are disproportionately affected. Up to 50% of kiln workers in Punjab and Sindh are from minority communities.
Let me reaffirm the UK’s clear and unwavering commitment: we are determined to end all forms of modern slavery, forced labour and human trafficking. We are working with partners to protect the most vulnerable, especially women and children, and to help survivors to rebuild their lives. That commitment shapes our engagement with Pakistan, and precisely because of that important relationship, we can engage frankly and constructively, including on human rights.
As we have heard, bonded labour remains a significant risk, particularly for already marginalised religious minority communities, which are disproportionately affected. We have welcomed moves by Pakistan to strengthen its response to forced labour and wider trafficking issues, including through its accession to the UN trafficking protocol in 2022 and the 2025 amendments to the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act and related laws.
As the all-party group identified, and as has been said today, legal enforcement remains a challenge. The UK’s approach has been to combine diplomacy with practical programmes that strengthen laws, data, institutions and community resilience, alongside discreet advocacy in sensitive cases. We know that progress is possible, because when evidence, political will and community action come together, exploitation can be prevented.
Let me say a few words about how the UK is helping, and then I will respond to some of the comments and questions. Through the UK’s £46.5 million Aawaz II programme, we support Pakistan at both policy and community levels. Nationally, the initiative helps to improve laws, policies and systems that protect marginalised groups; locally, it raises awareness, promotes behaviour change and supports people to engage constructively with the state to access rights and services. That has included practical work on bonded and child labour in sectors such as brick kilns. Because we cannot fix what we cannot see, the UK’s support has helped to deliver some of the first child labour surveys in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab, giving policymakers the evidence they need to act.
I should also mention our work in Balochistan through our Asia regional child labour programme—the FCDO’s largest modern slavery programme—between 2018 and 2023. We helped to set up a child protection system that is already linking vulnerable children to support services. That is part of a wider preventive approach that puts survivors at its heart, and it sits alongside the UK’s wider development partnership in Pakistan: investing in girls’ education, strengthening health systems and building community resilience.
Jim Shannon
I welcome all the things that the Minister refers to—they are good steps forward, and that is what I would expect—but we have all mentioned that the young children in the brick kilns are not even getting educated. Some 80% of them have no education whatsoever. How will the Government target that issue? The hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) referred, as possibilities, to more inspections in the brick kilns and more work with the NGOs. I welcome everything that the Minister has said, but those are the key issues.
Seema Malhotra
The hon. Member has raised those issues in the report, and I can come back on a few points.
Our UK aid is delivered in Pakistan via trusted partners with rigorous safeguards. Our programmes focus on systemic change, strengthening child protection systems, improving birth registration and supporting legal reform. Through Aawaz II and the Asia regional child labour programme, which I mentioned, we have helped to register more than 3.4 million children and established referral services that connect vulnerable children to protective services. I will talk a bit more about that work. We are also doing work through some of those programmes to tackle early and forced marriages, which are a problem in this space, and raising these concerns regularly with the Government of Pakistan, including at ministerial level.
The investments that we are making in our work with Pakistan also address the underlying vulnerabilities—poverty, exclusion, lack of documentation and lack of access to justice—that traffickers and exploiters so often prey on; they believe and say that people have no option. We will continue to use our diplomatic network to encourage effective enforcement against those who profit from exploitation and to champion the rights of workers and of children to be safe, to be in school, and to be free.
We know that modern slavery thrives where rights are weak and discrimination goes unchallenged. That is why, in parallel with our work to tackle modern slavery, we consistently raise human rights issues with the Government of Pakistan, publicly and privately. We call for respect, for due process, for the rule of law, and for the upholding of the rights enshrined in Pakistan’s constitution and international obligations. That is why the Minister for the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan has regularly raised these issues with his counterparts, including most recently in a meeting with Deputy Prime Minister Dar in August when he voiced concern about the persecution of the Ahmadiyya Muslim community. I know that is a very serious matter of concern to us all.
The British high commission in Islamabad regularly raises the subject of the rights and safety of religious minorities—such as Christians, Hindus, Sikhs and Ahmadis—with the Pakistani authorities at the highest levels. We also support interfaith dialogue; we support efforts to counter hate speech, especially online; and we support sensitive parliamentary engagement on laws that are misused to persecute minorities. We will continue to press for the protection of minorities, for full investigations where violence occurs and for accountability for those who are responsible.
Hon. Members have asked about our approach to modern slavery, and I will make this point about our work and our trade strategy. The Government have launched a review of their approach to responsible business conduct policy. That review will focus on the global supply chain of businesses operating in the UK, and it will be a neutral and objective appraisal of the UK’s current responsible business conduct approach and alternative options that aim to enhance that approach. The review will consider the effectiveness of the UK’s current responsible business conduct measures and alternative policy options to support responsible business practices, including mandatory human rights due diligence and import controls, among other measures. I am sure that hon. Members will want to consider their views in relation to that work.
When it comes to the UK funding more organisations that aim to tackle bonded labour, we recognise that UK resources are finite, as I am sure the shadow Minister does. However, we can prioritise programmes that deliver systemic change, and we can do that alongside our continuing advocacy. It is important that our UK aid is channelled through trusted partners. That requires due diligence and accountability, and we must ensure that it has impact and represents value for money. We welcome the all-party group’s recommendations and share its concerns. Although direct funding for inspectors is not currently in place, I hope that our programmes that focus on systemic reform, and that support legal enforcement, data collection and community empowerment, are having an impact. We keep that work under review.
In conclusion, the UK stands with those in Pakistan who are working to end modern slavery. We will continue to combine evidence-driven programmes with principled diplomacy to help to tackle bonded labour and strengthen the rights that keep people free. That is the measure of a just society, and it is a cause that the United Kingdom will continue to champion.
Sudan: Government Support
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
I am very grateful to the hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes (Brian Mathew) for securing this debate at such a critical moment for Sudan, which I know will be a matter of concern not only to this House and to his constituents, but to all our constituents across the country. I also thank him for his contribution to this morning’s Westminster Hall debate on official development assistance —I know there are Members here who also spoke in that debate. I acknowledge his work on the International Development Committee and his work in aid prior to entering this House. I thank the other hon. Members who have contributed to this debate.
The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes will have followed the urgent question on Sudan in the House last week, to which the Minister of State at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), replied. I am responding on his behalf tonight.
I recognise the seriousness of the situation that we are witnessing. The conflict has left more than 30 million people in need of urgent help in what is the world’s worst humanitarian crisis. Supporting Sudan remains a vital and top priority for this Government. We have heard a number of contributions about freedom of religion and belief, so perhaps I can briefly speak to that issue before I continue my remarks.
Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)
The United Kingdom has always stood as a defender of human rights. I say this with deep conviction: how many burned churches and murdered worshippers in Nigeria and Sudan will it take before we call this what it is: namely, a campaign to exterminate Christians? British aid must never bankroll corruption or indifference. Will the Minister urgently press the Governments of Sudan and Nigeria to protect all citizens, but particularly Christians, and ensure that our aid goes towards addressing their needs?
Seema Malhotra
I thank the hon. Member for her contribution. Perhaps I can reassure her by saying that the UK remains extremely concerned about the persecution of individuals on the basis of their religion or belief, a point that has also been made by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) during the debate. We have strongly condemned the violence in El Fasher and north Darfur, as well as attacks on places of worship, including in other countries across the world. We also regularly use our role as leader of the core group on Sudan at the Human Rights Council to advocate for the protection of civilians in line with international law, including the right to freedom of religion and belief.
Turning to some of the other points that have been made, as has been referred to, we have recently seen advances by the Rapid Support Forces into El Fasher, accompanied by shocking reports of mass murder and rape. Last week, the Foreign Secretary condemned the horrific massacre at the Saudi maternity hospital, as well as the murder of five very courageous humanitarian workers, and called on the RSF to urgently facilitate rapid, safe and unimpeded humanitarian access across El Fasher. That point has been made extremely powerfully by my right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford East (Anneliese Dodds), who has raised this issue and the need to support action in Sudan several times in recent weeks. I thank her for her contributions.
As the United Nations Security Council penholder, we called an urgent council meeting on 30 October to respond to the worsening crisis, and penned a press statement condemning the RSF’s assault. Last week we mobilised £23 million in emergency aid for El Fasher, and on 1 November the Foreign Secretary announced a further £5 million to help get food, clean water and medical supplies to over 100,000 people in north Darfur. Our special representative to Sudan, Richard Crowder, remains in contact with the RSF and its political alliance, Tasis, pressing for restraint and reminding it of its obligations under international law. We are also talking to international partners, calling on those who have influence over the parties to use it to urge restraint and bring them to the table.
The hon. Member for Melksham and Devizes made a very important point when he said that this cannot go on—we need to find a way to establish a ceasefire and ensure that we have a political solution. As such, our approach to Sudan is based on three pillars: first, pushing for that permanent ceasefire and supporting a civilian-led transition; secondly, securing unimpeded humanitarian access in order to deliver lifesaving aid; and thirdly, protecting civilians and ensuring accountability.
In April, as has also been referred to, the UK convened the London Sudan conference, alongside co-hosts France, Germany, the EU and the African Union. That conference brought together a broad coalition of international partners to build consensus on protecting civilians, improving humanitarian access and ending the conflict.
We have sustained the momentum built by the conference, and at the UN General Assembly in September the Foreign Secretary hosted high-level events, alongside our conference co-hosts, refocusing global attention on the crisis and the urgent need for action. That call for a continuation of global attention has been echoed by a number of Members this evening. The UK special representative for Sudan has maintained regular engagement with Sudanese civil society—including the anti-war coalition Sumud—and has done so, for instance, through the Sudan stability and growth programme, which aims to support Sudan on the path to an inclusive, resilient and peaceful political settlement. UK support has helped to establish Sudan’s largest pro-democracy coalition, and has included work with 200 women to shape a national political dialogue.
Rachael Maskell
I am grateful to the Minister for what she has said, but can she tell me how the UK is approaching the UAE, especially in relation to the supply of arms and the use of mercenaries who are being deployed into Sudan?
Seema Malhotra
I should first make it clear—as the Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth, did recently—that we take very seriously allegations that UK-made military equipment may have been transferred to Sudan in breach of the UK arms embargo. The UK has one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world. There is no evidence in recent reporting of UK weapons or ammunition being used in Sudan, and there are no current export licences for the equipment reported on. However, my hon. Friend the Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) may wish to continue to raise her concerns with my hon. Friend the Minister of State.
The UK continues to emphasise that external support for warring parties only fuels the conflict, and we urge all actors to press for that vital political solution. We welcome the Quad’s efforts to secure an immediate three-month ceasefire, and to end this terrible suffering. Conversations continue with members of the Quad and others across the international community.
Seema Malhotra
I am conscious of time and will continue my speech, although I may be able to give way in due course.
On humanitarian aid, the UK remains one of the largest donors to Sudan, and the Prime Minister has made it clear that funding to Sudan will be protected for the next three years. At the London Sudan conference in April, we also announced £120 million in new funding to reach more than 650,000 people with food, cash, water, sanitation and nutritional support this year. In May, Baroness Chapman announced a further £36 million for Sudanese refugees in Chad to help to ease the regional burden of displacement, and UK aid has already reached 2.5 million people since the conflict began. Last year alone, we treated more than 98,000 children for malnutrition, gave 744,000 people access to clean water, and supported 71,000 victims of international humanitarian law violations with cash assistance.
Tessa Munt
Returning to the conference, is the Minister absolutely certain that all the actors in the region were part of the conference? There has been reference to the United Arab Emirates, and there are other actors in that region who did not seem to be on the list of people she mentioned who might have been here in April.
Seema Malhotra
We continue to work with the members of the Quad, and with others across the international community. In our role as penholder we continue to engage with the international community, because we need to see a ceasefire and a political solution.
Official Development Assistance Reductions
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Desmond, and to respond to an incredibly thoughtful and important debate. I am grateful to the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing this debate, and I thank him for his work on the Foreign Affairs Committee and multiple APPGs.
The Minister for Multilateral, Human Rights, Latin America and the Caribbean, my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgend (Chris Elmore), who covers development in the Commons, would have been here to participate in the debate, but is currently representing the UK at the world summit for social development in Doha. I am sure that the House will understand his unavoidable absence. I am grateful to respond on behalf of the Government. I will endeavour to cover a number of the points that were raised today, but I am sure that my hon. Friend will also be willing to pick up on some of those issues that hon. Members have put on the record. I also thank the Chair of the International Development Committee, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Sarah Champion), for her work, her remarks today and the Committee’s recent report, which the Department will be responding to in due course.
A number of issues were raised today, and the same very important point was made by a number of hon. Members about the connection between our security and global security. We continue to be clear-eyed about risks to security, which are at the forefront of our minds. We believe that international development is an important lever in delivering mutually beneficial outcomes, including security for us and across the world. A number of other issues were also raised, including on soft power influence in the world, long-term planning, shaping the world of tomorrow and aid matching. Let me add context to those challenges and the question of whether this Government are looking inwards more than outwards. The whole direction of our Government over the last 18 months has been to step up on the global stage. We are a Government who inherited a very difficult set of finances, but more than that, we inherited a broken Government in so many respects, which had stopped looking outwards and had lost respect and trust across the world.
I am proud that we are a Government focused on our responsibilities and place in the world. I am proud of the work that we have done to bring stability to our economy, but we are also now focusing on the long term here and abroad. That is also illustrated through some of the main trade deals and resets that we have had with the US, the EU and India, but we have been upgrading our partnerships with so many countries. I recently participated in the Aqaba process in Italy, hosted by the Italian Prime Minister and the King of Jordan, with a focus on counter-terrorism, development and support in the Sahel region. It is important that we recognise the links between security and prosperity across the world.
Earlier this year, to enable a necessary increase in defence spending, the Government made the decision to reduce our official development assistance budget. We have consistently affirmed the UK’s commitment to international development and to restoring spending of 0.7% of GNI on ODA when the fiscal circumstances allow. It is also the case—this point has been made by a number of hon. and right hon. Members—that it is not all about how much we spend, but about how we spend. It is crucial also that we modernise our approach for today. A more volatile and uncertain world demands a new development model. With less money, we must make choices and focus on the greatest impact. Every pound must deliver for the UK taxpayer and the people we support.
I note the comments about corruption and misappropriation, and I will say that from the conversations I have had with Baroness Chapman, I know that ensuring that we are spending wisely and have value for money—this has been identified as a strength of the UK by the International Development Committee—are top of her list. It is important that we keep that focus.
It is worth spending a little time on our strategy and what is at the heart of our new approach and fundamental shift. First, we are moving from donor to investor, partnering with countries to unlock growth, jobs and trade through innovative finance and private sector investment. Secondly, we are moving from service delivery to system support, helping countries build their own education, health and economic systems, so that they can thrive without aid. Thirdly, we are moving from grants to expertise, leveraging UK strengths such as our world-class universities, the City of London, the Met Office, His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs and the education, health and tech sectors. Fourthly, we are moving from international intervention to local leadership, working increasingly in partnership with local actors, rather than through internationally driven interventions. That does speak to the point that a number of Members made about partnership rather than paternalism.
Several hon. Members rose—
Seema Malhotra
I have a number of points to make, but I will come back once I have made them. On changing from donor to investor, a number of comments were made about British International Investment and other development finance institutions. These are central to the UK’s shifts. BII deploys patient capital to stimulate private-sector growth in developing countries, balancing financial returns with development impact. Indeed, we have seen our partnerships grow, such as with the Gates Foundation. Our co-investments with the Gates Foundation in breeding wheat with higher zinc and climate resilience have benefited more than 97 million people in Pakistan, positively impacting their health and quality of life. In Ghana, the UK is using its development relationship to support Ghana’s goal to move beyond aid. A Ghanaian textile factory financed by British International Investment has grown into one of west Africa’s largest, providing 6,000 jobs, mainly for women, and exporting garments globally.
Sarah Champion
It is of course the Government’s right to make whatever policy decisions and budget cuts they feel appropriate, but how are they planning to do the four priorities with a 25% cut in staffing and a £6 billion cut in the available money?
Seema Malhotra
I will go through how we will take some of the priorities forward and some of the changes that we are seeing through our strategy. I hope that helps answer my hon. Friend’s question. I want to make a point about our investment in Gavi, of which we were a founding member under the last Labour Government. It has generated £250 billion in economic benefits through reduced death and disability. It is a partnership based on the UK’s world-leading expertise in not just funding but research.
From grants to expertise, that partnership comes up in conversations that I have with countries that I work with as Minister with responsibility for the Indo-Pacific. It is important in terms of how we are working to increase the expertise of partners, including the Bank of England, the City of London and the University of Cambridge. We are helping to train financial regulators across countries, and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs’ partnership with the Ghana Revenue Authority used the UK’s expertise to increase Ghana’s tax revenue collection by £100 million last year—revenues that will help fund Ghana’s transition from aid.
I am conscious of time, but I will make a few further remarks. Reducing the overall size of our ODA budget will necessarily have an impact on the scale and shape of the work that we do. But we are sharpening our focus on three priorities, which match partner needs and the long-term needs of people in the UK, and are also in areas where we can drive real change. These priorities have been highlighted in this debate—humanitarian, health, and climate and nature—and they are underpinned by economic development. They will help maximise our impact and focus our efforts where they matter most.
I reassure the House that the UK will continue to play a key humanitarian role, including responding to the most significant conflicts of our era, in Ukraine, Gaza and Sudan. We will not let Sudan be forgotten. We are the third-largest bilateral humanitarian donor to Sudan, and in April we announced £120 million to deliver lifesaving services to over 650,000 people affected by the conflict.
David Taylor (Hemel Hempstead) (Lab)
On that point, will the Minister give way?
Seema Malhotra
I am sorry, but due to time I will be wrapping up. At the weekend, the Foreign Secretary announced a further £5 million of support to the crisis in el-Fasher. While we have seen cuts, we have avoided disproportionate negative impacts on women and girls and people living with disabilities in this year’s ODA allocations, as confirmed by the equalities impact assessment that we published. We will continue to strengthen actions to help mitigate some of the negative impacts on equalities, including by putting women and girls at the heart of everything we do.
I will make a final point in relation to the ODA budget for supporting refugees in the UK. The Government are focused on reducing asylum costs and ending the use of migrant hotels by the end of the Parliament, and we have already made progress on that. The UK remains committed to international development. We are working with our partners to shape the next stage of global development, and at the same time, we are strengthening the UK’s safety, security and prosperity—and global safety, security and prosperity—which is essential for delivering all the missions of this Government.
Sir Desmond Swayne (in the Chair)
Edward Morello, you have less than a minute.
Oral Answers to Questions
Seema Malhotra Excerpts(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
The continued erosion of democratic rights and freedoms in Hong Kong is deeply concerning. Last week, the Foreign Secretary submitted to this House the Government’s latest six-monthly report on Hong Kong, which details how national security legislation is diminishing Hong Kong’s political autonomy. The Government will continue to champion the rights and freedoms of the people of Hong Kong.
Alison Bennett
A constituent of mine, who now lives in Haywards Heath, came to the UK from Hong Kong under the British national overseas visa route after the deterioration of human rights there left her and her daughter with no choice but to seek safety. She is now deeply anxious about reports that the qualifying period for settlement and citizenship may be extended. I think the whole House can agree that the human rights violations in Hong Kong are abhorrent, so what representations has the Minister made to her Chinese counterparts, and can she explain how she will protect BNO visa holders who have made their home in the UK?
Seema Malhotra
Indeed, we agree that any attempts by foreign Governments to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics or others abroad, especially in the UK, will not be tolerated. The Government are also strengthening efforts to tackle transnational repression, including through the introduction of dedicated police training and online guidance to support victims. Indeed, we are committed to the people of Hong Kong, as exemplified by the BNO visa route. It is our historical and moral commitment, and the hon. Lady will be aware, in relation to the changes in the immigration White Paper, that the Government will bring forth more details about the consultation and work in due course.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
Two pro-democracy parties in Hong Kong have disbanded recently, activist Joshua Wong was rearrested and faces further charges under the national security law, and Jimmy Lai remains in prison. Does the Minister agree that the national security law continues to be used to erode the rights and freedoms of Hongkongers, and can she confirm that the UK continues to strongly oppose it?
Seema Malhotra
I can absolutely confirm that we continue to oppose the national security law. As outlined in the report that the Foreign Secretary presented to Parliament last week, the Hong Kong authorities continue to apply national security legislation to diminish the city’s political autonomy and political pluralism, including freedom of association, freedom of assembly and freedom of information. Indeed, Hong Kong now ranks 140th out of 180 in the 2025 world press freedom index—entering the red zone for the first time. This is indeed a very serious situation.
Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)
I recently met the family of Davinder Singh Thandi, who died in suspicious circumstances in India. This has obviously been a distressing time for my constituents, and unfortunately they have struggled to get timely advice and support from the Foreign Office. I thank the Minister for her recent letter, but will she meet me to discuss their case and how the Department can develop a victims code to better support families like Mr Thandi’s?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs (Seema Malhotra)
I thank my hon. Friend for her letter, and I am very happy to meet her to discuss this matter.
Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)
Last week the Chancellor accepted that Brexit has caused huge damage to the economy. This week sources suggest that the Prime Minister is being advised to go further in his realignment with the European Union, as the Office for Budget Responsibility is reportedly forecasting a new black hole of around £20 billion—again showing the impact of Brexit on growth. Is the Foreign Secretary ready to admit that no matter how people try to spin it, Brexit has been an all-out disaster for Scotland and these islands?